2023 Remedial Law and Ethics Syllabus Based eREVIEWER v2.01 1 - Compressed

Remedial Law and Ethics
Syllabus-based eReviewer for the 2023 Bar

Version 2 with Bar Chair Case Digests
Remedial Law, Legal and Judicial Ethics with Practical Exercises v2 Syllabus-based Reviewer for the 2023 Bar with Bar Chair Case Digests
Table of Contents procedure of special courts and quasi-judicial bodies shall remain
Substantive law vs. remedial law
e ective unless disapproved by the Supreme Court.
General Principles 2 Rule-making power of the Supreme Court Limitations to the rule-making power:
Principle of judicial hierarchy a. shall provide a simpli ed and inexpensive procedure for the
Jurisdiction 5 speedy disposition of cases;
Doctrine of non-interference/Judicial stability
b. shall be uniform for all courts of the same grade; and
Civil Procedure 22
c. shall not diminish, increase, or modify substantive rights.
A Substantive Law vs. Remedial Law
Provisional Remedies 84 C Principle of Judicial Hierarchy
1. Remedial Law — is that branch of law which prescribes the
method and procedures of enforcing rights and obtaining
Special Civil Actions 102 redress for their invasion.
1) The doctrine of hierarchy of courts guides litigants as to the
proper venue of appeals and/or the appropriate forum for the
2. Substantive Law — is that part of law which creates rights issuance of extraordinary writs. Thus, although the SC, the
Special Proceedings and Special Writs 131
concerning life, liberty or property, or the powers of CA, and the RTC have concurrent original jurisdiction
instrumentalities for the administration of public a airs. over petitions for certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo
Criminal Procedure 150 (Primicias v. Ocampo) warranto, and habeas corpus, parties are directed, as a rule, to
le their petitions before the lower-ranked court. Failure to
Evidence 182 Rule-making Power of the Supreme comply is su cient cause for the dismissal of the petition.
B
Court 2) A direct invocation of the Supreme Court's original
Legal Ethics 220 jurisdiction to issue these writs should be allowed only when
Sec 5 Art VIII, 1987 Constitution. The Supreme Court shall have
there are special and important reasons therefor, clearly and
the following powers:
Judicial Ethics 258 speci cally set out in the petition. The Diocese of Bacolod v.
xxxx Comelec summarized these circumstances in this wise:
Practical Exercises 269 5) Promulgate rules concerning the protection and enforcement of a) when there are genuine issues of constitutionality
constitutional rights, pleading, practice, and procedure in all that must be addressed at the most immediate time;
courts, the admission to the practice of law, the integrated bar, and
b) when the issues involved are of transcendental
Remedial Law legal assistance to the under-privileged. Such rules shall provide a
simpli ed and inexpensive procedure for the speedy disposition of
importance;
cases, shall be uniform for all courts of the same grade, and shall c) cases of rst impression;
I General Principles not diminish, increase, or modify substantive rights. Rules of
eCodal+Pro by RGL 2 of 279

the proper forum under the rules of procedure, or as

d) the constitutional issues raised are better decided by
the court better equipped to resolve factual questions. 1.3. When the challenged orders were patent nullities;
the Court;
(Gios-Samar v. DOTC 2019 En Banc) or
e) exigency in certain situations;
1.4. When analogous exceptional and compelling
f) the led petition reviews the act of a constitutional Villafuerte v. SEC 29 Mar 2022 EN BANC circumstances called for and justi ed the
organ; immediate and direct handling of the case.
1. The petition su ers from procedural in rmities and should
g) when petitioners rightly claim that they had no other be dismissed. 2. Leones' cause against the jurisdiction of the RTC is far too
plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary generic, personal, and non-transcendental to fall under any
2. Petitioners violated the constitutional ltering mechanism
course of law that could free them from the injurious of these four exceptions.
of hierarchy of courts.
e ects of respondents' acts in violation of their right
3. Leones also ignored the qualifying conditions for certiorari,
to freedom of expression; 2.1. They led the case directly before the SC despite
viz.
the concurrent jurisdiction of the CA and the
h) the petition includes questions that are "dictated by
RTC to issue the writs of certiorari and 3.1. one must show that the respondent tribunal,
public welfare and the advancement of public policy,
prohibition they pray for. board or o cer exercising judicial or quasi-judicial
or demanded by the broader interest of justice, or the
functions has acted without or in excess of their
orders complained of were found to be patent 3. Gios-Samar, Inc. v. DOTC clari ed that direct recourse is
jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion
nullities, or the appeal was considered as clearly an allowed only when the issues presented are purely legal.
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction; and
inappropriate remedy." 3.1. Some of the issues here are not purely legal.
3.2. there is no appeal, or any plain, speedy, and
3) Thus, the common denominator is that the issues for 3.2. The existence of monopoly is a question of fact. adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law.
resolution of the Court are purely legal.
See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 7 4. While the present petition did allege grave abuse of
4) The doctrine of hierarchy of courts as a filtering discretion, it did not demonstrate any act of whimsicality,
mechanism — The doctrine of hierarchy of courts operates arbitrariness, or untoward hostility on the part of the RTC
to: judge in denying Leones' motion to quash.
Leones v. Corpuz 17 Nov 2021
a) prevent inordinate demands upon the Court's time 5. For res judicata to bar a subsequent action, the following
and attention which are better devoted to those 1. Although the SC has concurrent jurisdiction with the CA
elements must be present:
matters within its exclusive jurisdiction; in petitions for certiorari, a direct resort is allowed only
when there are special or compelling reasons that justify the 5.1. The judgment sought to bar the new action must
b) prevent further overcrowding of the Court's docket; same, to wit: be nal;
and
1.1. When dictated by the public welfare and the 5.2. The decision must have been rendered by a court
c) prevent the inevitable and resultant delay, intended or advancement of public policy; having jurisdiction over the subject matter and the
otherwise, in the adjudication of cases which often parties;
have to be remanded or referred to the lower court as 1.2. When demanded by the broader interest of justice;

1. The Petition is dismissed for violation of the rule on The doctrine of non-interference or judicial stability is a
5.3. The disposition of the case must be a judgment on
hierarchy of courts. time-honored policy that mandates that "no court can interfere by
the merits; and
injunction with the judgments or orders of another court of
2. Under the principle of hierarchy of courts, direct recourse
5.4. There must be as between the rst and second concurrent jurisdiction having the power to grant the relief sought
to this Court is improper because the Supreme Court is a
action, identity of parties, subject matter, and by injunction." (BSP v. Banco Filipino Savings and Mortgage Bank,
court of last resort and must remain to be so in order for it
causes of action. 2020)
to satisfactorily perform its constitutional functions.
6. Here, the 4th element is lacking.
3. The invocation of the Court's original jurisdiction to issue Republic v. Tapay 2 Mar 2022
6.1. G.R. No. 169726 determined the factual and legal writs of certiorari has been allowed in certain instances on
bases of Leones' entitlement to payment of her 1. The higher interest of justice will be better served by
the ground of special and important reasons clearly stated
RATA, whereas granting respondents' prayer for a registration decree.
in the petition, such as
6.2. The Mandamus case is concerned with the manner 2. The Court agrees with petitioner that an RTC has no
3.1. when dictated by the public welfare and the
of execution of the actual payment of the RATA power to nullify or interfere with the decision of a co-equal
advancement of public policy;
judicially awarded to Leones. court pursuant to the law and the doctrine of judicial
3.2. when demanded by the broader interest of justice; stability.
7. Moreover, the compromise agreement and compromise
3.3. when the challenged orders were patent nullities; 3. However, the foregoing presupposes that Cadastral Case
judgment are valid.
or No. 33 really existed and that there actually is a decision in
8. Judgments, once nal and executory, are incontestable and
3.4. when analogous exceptional and compelling that case.
unappealable.
circumstances called for and justi ed the 3.1. No other record, including a copy of the decision,
8.1. The winning litigant receives the right to the immediate and direct handling of the case. exists to support the theory.
favorable awards contained in such executory
4. Here, Palafox, Jr. led his Petition directly to the SC despite 3.2. The doctrine of judicial stability thus nds no
judgment.
the concurrent jurisdiction of the CA. application in this case.
8.2. Rights, however, may be waived or modi ed
5. This constitutes a clear disregard of the hierarchy of courts 4. In Republic v. Heirs of Sta. Ana, the LRA reported that a
through a compromise agreement even after a nal
and merits the dismissal of the Petition. prior decree of registration had already been issued, yet the
judgment has been rendered and already settled the
rights of the contracting parties. Court still decided to allow the subsequent registration
See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 57
because there was no way to verify the truthfulness of the
See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 23 alleged prior case.
Doctrine of Non-Interference/ Judicial 4.1. Considering that it is the decree of registration that
D binds the land and quiets the title thereto, and not
Palafox, Jr. v. Mendiola 15 Feb 2021 Stability
the decision, the registration should be allowed

with much more reason here where no decree of regular orders or judgments of a co-equal court instructs Sandiganbayan
registration covering the subject land had yet been that no court can interfere by injunction with the
issued and only the existence of the supposed judgments or orders of another court of concurrent Regional Trial Courts
decision which has not yet even attained nality jurisdiction having the power to grant the relief sought by
Family Courts
bars respondents' application. the injunction.
5. In the same case, one of the key considerations for allowing 4. Settled is the rule that a judgment rendered by a court First-Level Courts
the subsequent registration was the fact that a long time without jurisdiction is null and void and may be attacked
had passed since the trial court ordered the issuance of a anytime. Aspects of Jurisdiction
registration decree.
5. Also, at the time Trackworks led its petition before the Jurisdiction vs. Exercise of Jurisdiction
5.1. Here, almost 40 years have passed since the trial RTC of Makati, there exists litis pendentia wherein another
court determined that respondents are entitled to a action is pending between the same parties for the same Jurisdiction vs. Venue
registration decree. cause of action, such that the second action, that is
Trackworks' petition before the RTC of Makati, becomes
Jurisdiction Over Cases Covered by Barangay
See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 16 Conciliation, and Cases Covered by the Rules on
unnecessary and vexatious.
Expedited Procedures in the First Level Courts
Metro Rail Transit v. Trackworks Rail Transit A Classification of Jurisdiction
Advertising 28 Jun 2021
1. The RTC Makati Decision would have rendered the II Jurisdiction 1 Original vs. Appellate
certiorari case moot but the Orders of said RTC were 1. ORIGINAL, power of the court to take judicial cognizance of
Classi cation of Jurisdiction
completely null and void. a case instituted for judicial action for the rst time;
2. Here, the RTC of Makati City obviously violated the Doctrines of Hierarchy of Courts and Adherence of
2. APPELLATE, authority of a higher-ranked court to
doctrine of judicial stability when it took cognizance of Jurisdiction
reexamine the nal order or judgment of a lower court which
Trackworks' Petition for Certiorari, Prohibition and Jurisdiction of Various Philippine Courts and tried the case now elevated for judicial review.
Mandamus despite the fact that the said case involved the Tribunals
same parties and the subject matter fell within the Supreme Court 2 General vs. Special
jurisdiction of the RTC of Pasig.
2.1. Said petition ought to have been dismissed at the Court of Appeals 1. GENERAL, power of the court to hear all cases, except those
outset for lack of jurisdiction. expressly withheld;
Court of Tax Appeals
3. The doctrine of judicial stability or non-interference in the

2. SPECIAL, court can only hear particular cases and subject to However, the rule on adherence of jurisdiction is not absolute and
limitations provided by the governing law. has exceptions. One of the exceptions is that when the change in Jurisdiction of Various Philippine
C
jurisdiction is curative in character. Courts and Tribunals
3 Exclusive vs. Concurrent
Cited in Hermosa Savings and Loan Bank v. DBP 2021
1. EXCLUSIVE, cases shall be led exclusively in that court.
1 Supreme Court
2. CONCURRENT, shared by 2 or more courts; e.g. Petitions
Mariño, Jr v. Gamilla
for certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, and habeas corpus a. Original Jurisdiction. —
shared by the SC, CA and RTC. The petition with the Med-Arbiter was led ahead of the complaint i. Over cases a ecting ambassadors, other public
in the civil case before the RTC. As such, when the petitioners led ministers and consuls, and
Doctrines of Hierarchy of Courts and their complaint a quo, jurisdiction over the injunction and
B ii. Over petitions for certiorari, prohibition,
Adherence of Jurisdiction restraining order prayed for had already been lodged with the
mandamus, quo warranto, and habeas corpus.
Med-Arbiter. The removal of padlocks and the access to the o ce
1) The rule on adherence of jurisdiction states that once the (Sec 5[1], Art VIII)
premises is necessarily included in petitioners’ prayer to enjoin
jurisdiction of a court attaches, the court cannot be ousted by respondents from performing acts pertaining to union o cers and iii. Unless otherwise provided by this Constitution or by
subsequent happenings or events, although of a character that on behalf of the union. law, any decision, order, or ruling of each
would have prevented jurisdiction from attaching in the rst Commission (COMELEC, COA, CSC) may be
instance; the court retains jurisdiction until it nally disposes In observance of the principle of adherence of jurisdiction, it
brought on certiorari by the aggrieved party within
of the case. is clear that the RTC should not have exercised jurisdiction
thirty days from receipt of a copy thereof. (Sec 7, Art
over the provisional reliefs prayed for in the complaint.
2) If at all possible, the withdrawal should be for a meritorious IX)
and justi able reason, and subject to the approval of the NB: Cases from CSC now appealable to CA. See Sec
Court. 9(3), BP 129, as amended by RA 7902.
The Wellex Group v. Urieta 2016
iv. Presidential Electoral Tribunal. Sitting en banc,
Barrameda Vda. de Ballesteros v. The argument that a third-party claim is civil in nature and may not
2010 shall be the sole judge of all contests relating to the
Rural Bank of Canaman be taken cognizance of by the Sandiganbayan is incorrect. Those
election, returns, and quali cations of the President
who claim ownership or possession of properties forfeited by virtue
Doctrine on Adherence of Jurisdiction. — When a court has or Vice-President, and may promulgate its rules for
of a plunder decision must intervene in the proceedings before the
already obtained and is exercising jurisdiction over a controversy, its the purpose. (Sec 4[7], Art VII)
Sandiganbayan.
jurisdiction to proceed to nal determination of the case is not
v. Martial Law Cases. Review, in an appropriate
a ected by a new legislation transferring jurisdiction over such Not only is this consistent with the doctrine of adherence of
proceeding led by any citizen, the su ciency of the
proceedings to another tribunal. Once jurisdiction is vested, the jurisdiction; it also prevents splitting of jurisdiction and
factual basis of the proclamation of martial law or the
same is retained up to the end of the litigation. multiplicity of suits.

suspension of the privilege of the writ or the

iii. Promulgate rules concerning the protection and En Banc
extension thereof, and must promulgate its decision
enforcement of constitutional rights, pleading,
thereon within thirty days from its ling. (Sec 18[3], The Court en banc shall exercise exclusive appellate jurisdiction to
practice, and procedure in all courts, the admission to
Art VII) review by appeal the following:
the practice of law, the integrated bar, and legal
assistance to the underprivileged. (Sec 5[5], Art VIII) a) Decisions or resolutions on motions for reconsideration or
b. Appellate Jurisdiction to review, revise, reverse, modify, or
new trial of the Court in Divisions in the exercise of its
a rm on appeal or certiorari, as the law or the Rules of Court iv. Appoint all o cials and employees of the
exclusive appellate jurisdiction over:
may provide, nal judgments and orders of lower courts in: Judiciary in accordance with the Civil Service Law.
(Sec 5[6], Art VIII) 1) Cases arising from administrative agencies – BIR,
i. All cases in which the constitutionality or validity of
BOC, DOF, DTI, DA;
any treaty, international or executive agreement, law,
presidential decree, proclamation, order, instruction, 2 Court of Appeals 2) Local tax cases decided by the RTCs in the exercise
ordinance, or regulation is in question. of their original jurisdiction; and
a. Original Jurisdiction to issue writs of mandamus,
ii. All cases involving the legality of any tax, impost, prohibition, certiorari, habeas corpus, and quo warranto, 3) Tax collection cases decided by the RTCs in the
assessment, or toll, or any penalty imposed in relation and auxiliary writs or processes, whether or not in aid of its exercise of their original jurisdiction involving nal
thereto. appellate jurisdiction; (Sec 9[1], BP 129) and executory assessments for taxes, fees, charges and
penalties, where the principal amount of taxes and
iii. All cases in which the jurisdiction of any lower court b. Exclusive Original Jurisdiction over actions for
penalties claimed is less than one million pesos;
is in issue. annulment of judgements of RTCs. (Sec 9[2], BP 129)
b) Decisions, resolutions or orders of the RTCs in local tax cases
iv. All criminal cases in which the penalty imposed is c. Exclusive Appellate Jurisdiction over all nal judgements,
decided or resolved by them in the exercise of their appellate
reclusion perpetua or higher. resolutions, orders or awards of RTCs and quasi-judicial
jurisdiction;
v. All cases in which only an error or question of law agencies, instrumentalities, boards or commission, including
the SEC, the SSC, the ECC and the CSC, except those falling c) Decisions, resolutions or orders of the RTCs in tax collection
is involved. (Sec 5[2], Art VIII)
within the appellate jurisdiction of the SC. cases decided or resolved by them in the exercise of their
c. Administrative Power — Administrative supervision over appellate jurisdiction;
all courts and the personnel thereof. (Sec 6, Art VIII) d. Orders of Adoption may be appealed before the Court of
Appeals within ten (10) days from receipt of the Order by the d) Decisions, resolutions or orders on motions for
i. Assign temporarily judges of lower courts to other interested party, or from the denial of the motion for reconsideration or new trial of the Court in Division in the
stations as public interest may require. Such reconsideration: otherwise, the same shall be nal and exercise of its exclusive original jurisdiction over tax
temporary assignments shall not exceed six months executory. (Sec 35, RA No 11642) collection cases;
without the consent of the judge concerned. (Sec 5[3],
e) Decisions of the Central Board of Assessment Appeals
Art VIII)
(CBAA) in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction over cases
ii. Order a change of venue or place of trial to avoid a 3 Court of Tax Appeals
involving the assessment and taxation of real property
miscarriage of justice. (Sec 5[4], Art VIII)

originally decided by the provincial or city board of assessment administered by the BIR, where the NaIRC or other
5) Decisions of the Secretary of Finance on customs
appeals; applicable law provides a speci c period for action:
cases elevated to him automatically for review from
f) Decisions, resolutions or orders on motions for Provided, that in case of disputed assessments, the decisions of the Commissioner of Customs adverse to
reconsideration or new trial of the Court in Division in the inaction of the CIR within the one hundred eighty the Government under Section 2315 of the Tari and
exercise of its exclusive original jurisdiction over cases day-period under Section 228 of the NIRC shall be Customs Code; and
involving criminal o enses arising from violations of the deemed a denial for purposes of allowing the taxpayer
6) Decisions of the Secretary of Trade and Industry, in
NIRC or the TCC and other laws administered by the BIR or to appeal his case to the Court and does not
the case of non-agricultural product, commodity or
BOC; necessarily constitute a formal decision of the CIR on
article, and the Secretary of Agriculture, in the case of
the tax case;
g) Decisions, resolutions or orders on motions for agricultural product, commodity or article, involving
reconsideration or new trial of the Court in Division in the Provided, further, that should the taxpayer opt to dumping and countervailing duties under Section 301
exercise of its exclusive appellate jurisdiction over criminal await the nal decision of the CIR on the disputed and 302, respectively, of the Tari and Customs
o enses mentioned in the preceding subparagraph; and assessments beyond the one hundred eighty Code, and safeguard measures under Republic Act
day-period abovementioned, the taxpayer may appeal No. 8800, where either party may appeal the decision
h) Decisions, resolutions or orders of the RTCs in the exercise of
such nal decision to the Court under Section 3(a), to impose or not to impose said duties;
their appellate jurisdiction over criminal o enses mentioned
Rule 8 of these Rules; and
in subparagraph (f). b) Exclusive jurisdiction over cases involving criminal o enses,
Provided, still further, that in the case of claims for to wit:
In Division
refund of taxes erroneously or illegally collected,
1) Original jurisdiction over all criminal o enses
The Court in Divisions shall exercise: the taxpayer must le a petition for review with the
arising from violations of the NIRC or TCC and
a) Exclusive original or appellate jurisdiction to review by Court prior to the expiration of the two-year period
other laws administered by the BIR or the BOC,
appeal the following: under Section 229 of the NIRC;
where the principal amount of taxes and fees,
1) Decisions of the CIR in cases involving disputed 3) Decisions, resolutions or orders of the RTCs in local exclusive of charges and penalties, claimed is P1M or
assessments, refunds of internal revenue taxes, fees or tax cases decided or resolved by them in the exercise of more; and
other charges, penalties in relation thereto, or other their original jurisdiction;
2) Appellate jurisdiction over appeals from the
matters arising under the NIRC or other laws 4) Decisions of the Commissioner of Customs in cases judgments, resolutions or orders of the RTCs in their
administered by the BIR; involving liability for customs duties, fees or other original jurisdiction in criminal o enses arising from
2) Inaction by the CIR in cases involving disputed money charges, seizure, detention or release of violations of the NIRC or TCC and other laws
assessments, refunds of internal revenue taxes, fees or property a ected, nes, forfeitures of other penalties administered by the BIR or the BOC, where the
other charges, penalties in relation thereto, or other in relation thereto, or other matters arising under the principal amount of taxes and fees, exclusive of
matters arising under the NIRC or other laws Customs Law or other laws administered by the charges and penalties, claimed is less than P1M or
BOC; where there is no speci ed amount claimed;

c) Exclusive jurisdiction over tax collection cases, to wit: NPC v. Municipal Govt. of Navotas, et al. 2014 Philamlife v. Sec. of Finance and CIR 2014
1) Original jurisdiction in tax collection cases involving WON the CTA Second Division has jurisdiction to review the decision Where does one seek immediate recourse from the adverse ruling of the
nal and executory assessments for taxes, fees, charges of the RTC which concerns a petition for declaratory relief involving Secretary of Finance in its exercise of its power of review under Sec. 4?
and penalties, where the principal amount of taxes real property taxes.
and fees, exclusive of charges and penalties, claimed is Sec. 7(a)(1) of RA 1125, as amended, addresses the seeming gap in
P1M or more; and YES. When the legality or validity of the assessment is in question, the law as it vests the CTA, albeit impliedly, with jurisdiction over
and not its reasonableness or correctness, appeals to the LBAA, and the CA petition as “other matters” arising under the NIRC or
2) Appellate jurisdiction over appeals from the other laws administered by the BIR.
subsequently to the CBAA, pursuant to Sections 226 and 229 of
judgments, resolutions or orders of the RTCs in tax
the LGC, are NOT necessary. Stated di erently, in the event that In the recent case of City of Manila v. Grecia-Cuerdo, the Court
collection cases originally decided by them within
the taxpayer questions the authority and power of the en banc has ruled that the CTA now has the power of certiorari
their respective territorial jurisdiction.
assessor to impose the assessment, and of the treasurer to in cases within its appellate jurisdiction.
collect the real property tax, resort to judicial action may
Lucas G. Adamson, et al. v. CA Guided by the doctrinal teaching in resolving the case at bar, the fact
prosper.
that the CA petition not only contested the applicability of Sec. 100
Whether the CTA has no jurisdiction to take cognizance of both the In fine, if a taxpayer is not satis ed with the decision of the CBAA of the NIRC over the sales transaction but likewise questioned the
criminal and civil cases here at bar. or the RTC, as the case may be, the taxpayer may le, within thirty validity of Sec. 7(c.2.2) of RR 06-08 and RMC 25-11 does not
NO. Under Republic Act No. 1125 as amended, the rulings of the (30) days from receipt of the assailed decision, a petition for review divest the CTA of its jurisdiction over the controversy.
with the CTA pursuant to Section 7(a) of R.A. 9282. In cases where
Commissioner are appealable to the CTA. The power to decide
the question involves the amount of the tax or the correctness
disputed assessments, refunds of internal revenue taxes, fees or other
thereof, the appeal will be pursuant to Section 7(a)(5) of R.A. 9282.
charges, penalties imposed in relation thereto, or other matters CIR v. V.Y. Domingo Jewellers, Inc. 2019
When the appeal comes from a judicial remedy which questions
arising under this Code or other laws or portions thereof
the authority of the local government to impose the tax, Section WON the First Division of the CTA has jurisdiction to entertain V.Y.
administered by the BIR is vested in the Commissioner, subject to
7(a)(3) of R.A. 9282 applies. Thereafter, such decision, ruling or Domingo's petition for review.
the exclusive appellate jurisdiction of the CTA.
resolution may be further reviewed by the CTA En Banc pursuant NO. V.Y. Domingo received the PCL issued by petitioner CIR
to Section 2, Rule 4 of the Revised Rules of the CTA.
informing it of Assessment Notices dated November 18, 2010. On
CIR v. Hambrecht & Quist Philippines 2010 Thus, the CTA En Banc erred in dismissing the petition for review September 12, 2011, the former sent a letter request to the BIR
en banc, and a rming the CTA Second Division’s position that the requesting for certi ed true copies of the said Assessment Notices.
The issue of prescription of the BIR's right to collect taxes may be RTC has no jurisdiction over the instant case for failure of
However, instead of ling an administrative protest against the
considered as covered by the term "other matters" over which the petitioner to exhaust administrative remedies which resulted in the
assessment notice within thirty (30) days from its receipt, V.Y.
CTA has appellate jurisdiction. nality of the assessment.
Domingo elected to le its petition for review before the CTA First
Division on September 16, 2011, ratiocinating that the issuance of

the PCL and the alleged nality of the terms used for demanding b) City mayors, vice-mayors, members of the mentioned in subsection (a) of this section in relation to
payment therein proved that its Request for Re-evaluation/ sangguniang panlungsod, city treasurers, assessors, their office.
Re-investigation and Reconsideration had been denied by the CIR. engineers, and other city department heads; c. Civil and criminal cases led pursuant to and in connection
The word "decisions" in the aforementioned provision of R.A. c) O cials of the diplomatic service occupying the with EO Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14-A, issued in 1986.
No. 9282 has been interpreted to mean the decisions of the position of consul and higher; The RTC shall have EOJ where the information:
CIR on the protest of the taxpayer against the assessments.
d) Philippine army and air force colonels, naval a) does not allege any damage to the government or any
De nitely, said word does not signify the assessment itself.
captains, and all o cers of higher rank; bribery; or
Evidently, V.Y. Domingo's immediate recourse to the CTA
e) O cers of the PNP while occupying the position of b) alleges damage to the government or bribery arising
First Division was in violation of the doctrine of exhaustion
provincial director and those holding the rank of from the same or closely related transactions or acts in
of administrative remedies.
senior superintendent and higher; an amount not exceeding P1M.
f) City and provincial prosecutors and their assistants, 2. Exclusive appellate jurisdiction over nal judgments,
and o cials and prosecutors in the O ce of the resolutions or orders of RTCs whether in the exercise of their own
4 Sandiganbayan
Ombudsman and special prosecutor; original jurisdiction or of their appellate jurisdiction.
1. Exercises exclusive original jurisdiction in all cases involving: g) Presidents, directors or trustees, or managers of 3. Exclusive original jurisdiction over petitions for the issuance of
a. Violations of RA No. 3019, RA No. 1379, and Chapter II, GOCCs, state universities or educational institutions the writs of mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, habeas corpus,
Section 2, Title VII, Book II of the RPC, where one or or foundations. injunctions, and other ancillary writs and processes in aid of its
more of the accused are o cials occupying the following NB: The abovementioned (a) to (g) are regardless of the appellate jurisdiction and over petitions of similar nature,
positions in the government, whether in a permanent, acting Salary Grade. including quo warranto, arising or that may arise in cases led or
or interim capacity, at the time of the commission of the which may be led under EO Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14-A, issued in
offense: 2) Members of Congress and o cials thereof classi ed as
1986.
Grade ’27’ and higher;
1) O cials of the executive branch occupying the positions In case private individuals are charged as co-principals, accomplices
of regional director and higher, otherwise classi ed as 3) Members of the Judiciary;
or accessories with the public o cers or employees, including those
Grade ’27’ and higher, speci cally including: 4) Chairmen and members of the Constitutional employed in GOCCs, they shall be tried jointly with said public
a) Provincial governors, vice-governors, members of the Commissions; and o cers and employees in the proper courts which shall exercise
sangguniang panlalawigan, and provincial treasurers, 5) Other national and local o cials classi ed as Grade ’27’ exclusive jurisdiction over them.
assessors, engineers, and other provincial and higher. Offenses committed in relation to the office. As a rule, the relation
department heads; has to be such that, in the legal sense, the o ense cannot exist without
b. Other offenses or felonies whether simple or complexed with
other crimes committed by the public o cials and employees the o ce. IOW, the o ce must be a constituent element of the crime as
de ned by statute.

However, even if the position is not an essential ingredient of the iv. In all matters of probate, both testate and intestate, ii. In actions a ecting ambassadors and other public
o ense charged, if the information avers the intimate connection where the gross value of the estate exceeds Php2M; ministers and consuls. (Sec 21, BP 129)
between the o ce and the o ense, this would bring the o ense within
v. In all actions involving the contract of marriage and c. Appellate Jurisdiction over all cases decided by MeTC,
the de nition of an o ense “committed in relation to the public o ce.”
marital relations; MTC, MCTC in their respective territorial jurisdictions. Such
This requires that the information contain the specific factual cases shall be decided on the basis of the entire record of the
vi. In all cases not within the exclusive jurisdiction of any
averments that would indicate the close intimacy between the proceedings in the court of origin and such memoranda
court, tribunal, person or body exercising jurisdiction
discharge of o cial duties and the commission of the o ense charged. and/or briefs as may be submitted by the parties or required by
or any court, tribunal, person or body exercising
It is NOT enough that the information contains the phrase “in relation the RTCs. (Sec 22, BP 129)
judicial or quasi-judicial functions; Catch-all
to their official duties.”
provision
before 2004 2021
5 Regional Trial Courts vii. In all civil actions and special proceedings falling
within the exclusive original jurisdiction of a Juvenile Metro Manila 200K 400K
a. Exclusive Original Jurisdiction: and Domestic Relations Court and of the Courts of 2M
Outside MM 100K 300K
i. In all civil actions in which the subject of the Agrarian Relations as now provided by law; and
litigation is incapable of pecuniary estimation; viii. In all other cases in which the demand, exclusive of
Claim cannot be quanti ed to money; e.g. action for interest, damages of whatever kind, attorney's fees, Antig v. Antipuesto 2018
specific performance. litigation expenses, and costs or the value of the
property in controversy exceeds Php2M. The limited and special jurisdiction of the RTC to hear agrarian
ii. In all civil actions which involve the title to, or
cases is limited only to the determination of just compensation
possession of, real property, or any interest If claim for damages be the principal cause of action,
and the prosecution of all criminal o enses under RA 6657.
therein, where the assessed value exceeds Php400K, then it is made the basis for calculating the value.
The RTC does not have the jurisdiction over petition for
except for forcible entry into and unlawful detainer of If damages is but incidental to another cause of
injunction over the DARAB. Thus, it does not have the authority
lands or buildings, original jurisdiction over which is action, then it is excluded from the calculation.
to issue an injunction against the DARAB to prevent it from
conferred upon the rst-level courts. (as amended by (ADMINISTRATIVE CIRCULAR NO. 09-94, June
implementing CARP. This is also expressly stated in Secs 55 and 68
RA No 11576) 14, 1994)
of RA 6657 that no TRO or injunction shall be issued by the RTC
Applicable to real actions to recover real property. b. Concurrent Original Jurisdiction: against the DAR implementing CARP.
iii. In all actions in admiralty and maritime i. In the issuance of writs of certiorari, prohibition,
jurisdiction where the demand or claim exceeds mandamus, quo warranto, habeas corpus and
Php2M; injunction which may be enforced in any part of Sps Pajares v. Remarkable Laundry 2017
their respective regions; and

kind, attorney's fees, litigation expenses, and costs, the amount

An action for “Breach of Contract with Damages” is NOT an e) Summary judicial proceedings brought under the
of which must be speci cally alleged:
action incapable of pecuniary estimation if the allegation in the provisions the Family Code of the Philippines;
complaint is really to recover liquidated damages stipulated in the Where there are several claims or causes of action between
f) Petitions for declaration of status of children as abandoned,
contract. the same or di erent parties, embodied in the same
dependent o neglected children, petitions for voluntary or
complaint, the amount of the demand shall be the
It is neither an action for speci c performance or for rescission. In involuntary commitment of children; the suspension,
totality of the claims in all the causes of action,
determining whether the action is one the subject matter of which is termination, or restoration of parental authority and other
irrespective of whether the causes of action arose out of the
not capable of pecuniary estimation, the nature of the action shall cases cognizable under Presidential Decree No. 603, Executive
same or different transactions; (Totality Rule) (Sec 33[1],
be the basis. Order No. 56, (Series of 1986), and other related laws;
BP 129)
g) Petitions for the constitution of the family home;
b. EOJ over cases of forcible entry and unlawful detainer.
h) Cases against minors cognizable under the Dangerous Drugs
6 Family Courts (Sec 33[2], BP 129)
Act, as amended;
c. EOJ in all civil actions which involve title to, or possession of,
Exclusive original jurisdiction to hear and decide the following i) Violations of Republic Act No. 7610, as amended; and
cases: real property, or any interest therein where the assessed value
j) Cases of domestic violence against women and children. of the property or interest therein does NOT exceed
a) Criminal cases Php400K exclusive of interest, damages of whatever kind,
NB: Starting January 28, 2022 when R.A. No. 11642 took
i) where one or more of the accused is below eighteen attorney's fees, litigation expenses and costs:
e ect, courts may no longer receive or accept petitions
(18) years of age but not less than nine (9) years of age Provided, That in cases of land not declared for taxation
for domestic adoption, jurisdiction over the same being
or purposes, the value of such property shall be determined by
now lodged with the National Authority for Child Care
ii) where one or more of the victims is a minor at the (NACC) the assessed value of the adjacent lots.. (Sec 33[3], BP 129)
time of the commission of the o ense; d. EOJ in admiralty and maritime actions where the demand or
Pursuant to R.A. No. 11642, adoption proceedings are
b) Petitions for guardianship, custody of children, habeas claim does NOT exceed Php2M.
now administrative.
corpus in relation to the latter;
e. Delegated Jurisdiction to hear and determine cadastral or
c) Complaints for annulment of marriage, declaration of 7 First-Level Courts land registration cases covering lots
nullity of marriage and those relating to marital status and
a. Exclusive Original Jurisdiction over civil actions and i. where there is no controversy or opposition, OR
property relations of husband and wife or those living together
under di erent status and agreements, and petitions for probate proceedings, testate and intestate, including the grant ii. contested lots the value of which does not exceed
dissolution of conjugal partnership of gains; of provisional remedies in proper cases, where the value of the P100K,
personal property, estate, or amount of the demand does not
d) Petitions for support and/or acknowledgment; such value to be ascertained by the a davit of the
exceed Php2M, exclusive of interest damages of whatever
claimant or by agreement of the respective claimants

if there are more than one, or from the corresponding

WON the CTA has jurisdiction over a special civil action for Indophil Textile Mills v. Adviento 2014
tax declaration of the real property.
certiorari assailing an interlocutory order issued by the RTC in a local
WON the RTC has jurisdiction over the subject matter of respondent’s
Their decisions in these cases shall be appealable in tax case. YES.
complaint praying for moral damages, exemplary damages,
the same manner as decisions of the RTCs. (Sec 34,
In order for any appellate court to e ectively exercise its appellate compensatory damages, anchored on petitioner’s alleged gross
BP 129)
jurisdiction, it must have the authority to issue, among others, a writ negligence in failing to provide a safe and healthy working
f. Special Jurisdiction in the absence of all the Regional Trial of certiorari. Consistent with the above pronouncement, this Court environment for respondent. YES.
Judges in a province or city, any Metropolitan, Municipal, has held as early as the case of J.M. Tuason & Co., Inc. v. Jaramillo, et
True, the maintenance of a safe and healthy workplace is ordinarily a
Municipal Circuit Trial Judge may hear and decide petitions al. that “if a case may be appealed to a particular court or
subject of labor cases. Moreover, the acts complained of appear to
for a writ of habeas corpus or applications for bail in judicial tribunal or body, then said court or judicial tribunal
constitute matters involving employee-employer relations since
criminal cases in the province or city where the absent or body has jurisdiction to issue the extraordinary writ of
respondent used to be the Civil Engineer of petitioner. However, it
Regional Trial Judges sit. (Sec 35, BP 129) certiorari, in aid of its appellate jurisdiction.”
should be stressed that respondent’s claim for damages is speci cally
The authority of the CTA to take cognizance of petitions for grounded on petitioner’s gross negligence to provide a safe, healthy
Estacion v. Sec of DAR, et al 2014 certiorari questioning interlocutory orders issued by the RTC in a and workable environment for its employees — a case of
local tax case is included in the powers granted by the Constitution quasi-delict.
It is settled that jurisdiction over the subject matter is
as well as inherent in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction.
determined by the law in force at the time of the In this case, a perusal of the complaint would reveal that the subject
commencement of the action. At the time the petitioners led matter is one of claim for damages arising from quasi-delict,
their case for just compensation in 1995, P.D. No. 946, which which is within the ambit of the regular court's jurisdiction.
reorganized the Court of Agrarian Relations (CAR) and Tumpag v. Tumpag 2014
streamlined its procedure, has already been superseded by R.A. No. Generally, the court should only look into the facts alleged in
6657, which created, among others, the SACs. the complaint to determine whether a suit is within its Demegillo v. Lumampao 10 Feb 2021
In this case, the RTC of Negros Oriental, Branch 30, was acting as a jurisdiction. In Marcopper Mining Corp. v. Garcia, we allowed the
1. Demavivas Lumampao, Fanconbila, and Babaan have a
SAC. The Rules of Court, therefore, was the rule of procedure RTC to consider, in addition to the complaint, other pleadings
better right of possession over the disputed 3-hectare
applicable to the cases led before it. A motion to dismiss is not a submitted by the parties in deciding whether or not the complaint
portion of Lot 3106.
prohibited pleading. Consequently, the SAC had every right to should be dismissed for lack of cause of action. In Guaranteed
admit and resolve the motions to dismiss led by respondents LBP Homes, Inc. v. Heirs of Valdez, et al., we held that the factual 2. The propriety of the Decision of the PARAD, as a rmed
and PNB. allegations in a complaint should be considered in tandem with the by the DARAB, may not be inquired into by the RTC.
statements and inscriptions on the documents attached to it as
3. Centeno v. Centeno recognized that the DARAB, as the
annexes or integral parts.
adjudicating arm of the DAR, has exclusive jurisdiction to
City of Manila v. Grecia-Cuerdo, et al 2014 try and decide agrarian disputes or any incident involving
the implementation of the CARP under RA 6657.

accion publiciana. The RTC in e ect allowed c. Coercive powers of court, usually through service of
4. Philippine Veterans Bank v. CA has held that the DARAB
Demegillo to collaterally attack the OCT contrary summons.
has the primary and exclusive jurisdiction over agrarian
to Section 48 of P.D. No. 1529.
reform matters, which necessarily comprise cases involving 3. May be acquired if party signed a compromise agreement
cancellation of CLOAs. 7.2. Demegillo has no personality to le the suit. Being made as basis of the judgment rendered by the court.
a mere applicant of a homestead patent and not an
5. Here, while the RTC could rule on the parties' dispute as to
who among them has the better right of possession over the
owner of Lot 3106, he cannot be considered as a 2 Jurisdiction over the subject matter
party-in-interest with personality to le an action
property in issue, it cannot go so far as to conclude that the
for reconveyance. The proper party to bring Conferred by law and not by agreement of parties, nor by silence.
CLOA was secured by fraud, and adjudge as void the
actions for the cancellation of the title and/or
resulting OCT. 3 Jurisdiction over the issues
recovery of the disputed 3-hectare portion of Lot
5.1. This is in line with the doctrine of primary 3106 belonged to the government, to which the Conferred by
jurisdiction which precludes the regular courts property would revert.
from resolving a controversy over which 1. Pleadings;
8. Thus, the title has already become incontrovertible and is
jurisdiction has been lodged with an administrative 2. Agreement in a pretrial order or stipulation;
conclusive evidence of respondents' ownership over the
body of special competence.
whole area of Lot 3106. 3. Implied consent, as by failure to object to evidence not covered
6. Heirs of Cullado v. Gutierrez has held that a public land by the pleadings
patent, when registered in the corresponding Register of See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 59
Deeds, is a veritable Torrens title, and becomes as
Jurisdiction over the res or the property in
indefeasible upon the expiration of one (1) year from the 4
litigation
date of issuance thereof. D Aspects of Jurisdiction
1. Acquired by the actual or constructive seizure by the court of
6.1. Lands covered by such title, such us Lot 3106, may
the thing in question, thus placing it in custodia legis, as in
no longer be the subject matter of a cadastral
1 Jurisdiction over the parties attachment or garnishment.
proceeding, nor can it be decreed to another
person. 2. Also acquired by provision of law, as in land registration
1. Over the plainti or petitioner — acquired by the ling of the
proceedings or suits involving civil status or real property in
7. The RTC was without any power or jurisdiction to order complaint or petition.
PH of a nonresident defendant.
the reconveyance of the land in dispute.
2. Over the defendant or respondent — acquired by
7.1. The mere prayer by Demegillo for the Willy v. Julian 1 Dec 2021
a. Voluntary appearance;
reconveyance of the disputed property does not
vest the RTC with jurisdiction to grant the same in b. Submission of defendant or respondent to the court; or 1. The MCTC correctly exercised jurisdiction over Ricardo's
his favor where the original complaint involves an action for partition and damages.

3. Where there is jurisdiction of the person and subject matter, A. Cases Covered
2. Here, the primary relief sought by Ricardo is the recovery
the decision of all other questions arising in the case is but an
of purchased property (Lots 1 and 2) which had long been GR: ALL disputes are subject to Barangay conciliation pursuant to
exercise of that jurisdiction. (Herrera v. Barretto)
identi ed, separated, and segregated from a larger parcel of the Revised Katarungang Pambarangay Law, and prior
property, the herein subject property. recourse thereto is a pre-condition before ling a complaint
F Jurisdiction vs. Venue in court or any government o ces.
3. An action "involving title to real property" is de ned as an
action where the plainti s cause of action is based on a JURISDICTION is the power of the court to hear and decide EXC: in the following disputes:
claim of ownership of property or the holding of legal cases. It is derived from the words JURIS which means law and 1. Where one party is the government, or any subdivision or
rights to have exclusive control, possession, enjoyment, or DICO which means to speak. Thus, it is the authority to speak. instrumentality thereof;
disposition thereof. And, it is conferred only by law.
2. Where one party is a public o cer or employee, and the
4. Sections 19 and 33 of BP 129, as amended by RA 7691,
Jurisdiction Venue dispute relates to the performance of his o cial functions;
provide that in cases involving title to real property, original
and exclusive jurisdiction belongs to either the RTC or the 3. Where the dispute involves real properties located in di erent
Is the authority to hear and The place where the case is to be
MTC, depending on the assessed value of the subject cities and municipalities, unless the parties thereto agree to
decide a case. tried.
property. submit their di erence to amicable settlement by an
A matter of substantive law A matter of procedural law appropriate Lupon;
4.1. Since the alleged assessed value of Lots 1 and 2 is
P19.1K, the MCTC properly exercised jurisdiction 4. Any complaint by or against corporations, partnerships or
Fixed by law and can not be May be conferred by the parties
over Ricardo's complaint. juridical entities, since only individuals shall be parties to
conferred by the parties
Barangay conciliation proceedings either as complainants or
See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 22 Establishes a relation between Establishes a relation between respondents (Sec. 1, Rule VI, Katarungang Pambarangay
the court and the parties the parties Rules);
5. Disputes involving parties who actually reside in barangays of
E Jurisdiction vs. Exercise of Jurisdiction di erent cities or municipalities,
1. Jurisdiction is the authority to hear and determine a cause Jurisdiction Over Cases Covered by except where such barangay units adjoin each other and the
Barangay Conciliation, and Cases
—the right to act in a case. Since it is the power to hear and G parties thereto agree to submit their di erences to amicable
determine, it does not depend either upon the regularity of the Covered by the Rules on Expedited settlement by an appropriate Lupon;
exercise of that power or upon the rightfulness of the decisions Procedures in the First Level Courts
6. O enses for which the law prescribes a maximum penalty of
made.
imprisonment > one (1) year or a ne >P5K;
2. The authority to decide a cause at all, and not the decision Katarungang Pambarangay Law
7. O enses where there is no private o ended party;
rendered therein, is what makes up jurisdiction. Guidelines on Katarungang Pambarangay Conciliation Procedure

before trial motu propio refer the case to the lupon concerned for
8. Disputes where urgent legal action is necessary to prevent The amicable settlement or arbitration award may be enforced by
amicable settlement.
injustice from being committed or further continued, execution by the lupon within six (6) months from the date of
speci cally the following: C. Venue the settlement. After the lapse of such time, the settlement may
be enforced by action in the appropriate city or municipal court.
a. Criminal cases where accused is under police custody a) Disputes between persons actually residing in the same
or detention; barangay shall be brought for amicable settlement before the F. Repudiation
lupon of said barangay.
b. Petitions for habeas corpus; Any party to the dispute may, within ten (10) days from the
b) Those involving actual residents of di erent barangays within date of the settlement, repudiate the same by ling with the
c. Actions coupled with provisional remedies such as
the same city or municipality shall be brought in the barangay lupon chairman a statement to that e ect sworn to before him,
preliminary injunction, attachment, delivery of
where the respondent or any of the respondents actually where the consent is vitiated by fraud, violence, or intimidation.
personal property and support during the pendency
resides, at the election of the complaint. Such repudiation shall be su cient basis for the issuance of the
of the action; and
certi cation for ling a complaint as hereinabove provided.
c) All disputes involving real property or any interest therein shall
d. Actions which may be barred by the Statute of
be brought in the barangay where the real property or the
Limitations. Ngo v. Gabelo 24 Aug 2020
larger portion thereof is situated.
9. Any class of disputes which the President may determine in
d) Those arising at the workplace where the contending parties 1. The RTC gravely abused its discretion in remanding the
the interest of justice or upon the recommendation of the
are employed or at the institution where such parties are case for barangay conciliation and for revoking the dismissal
Secretary of Justice;
enrolled for study, shall be brought in the barangay where of the complaint.
10. Where the dispute arises from the CARL; such workplace or institution is located. 2. RA 7160 provides that barangay conciliation proceedings is
11. Labor disputes or controversies arising from D. When parties may directly go to court a precondition to ling a complaint in court between
employer-employee relations; persons actually residing in the same barangay to explore
The parties may go directly to court in the following instances:
12. Actions to annul judgment upon a compromise, which possible amicable settlement.
1) Where the accused is under detention;
may be led directly in court. 3. Subject to the exemptions enumerated in Administrative
2) Where a person has otherwise been deprived of personal Circular No. 14-93, a party's failure to comply with the
B. Subject matter for amicable settlement
liberty calling for habeas corpus proceedings; requirement of prior barangay conciliation before ling a
The lupon of each barangay shall have authority to bring together case in court would render his complaint dismissible on the
3) Where actions are coupled with provisional remedies;
the parties actually residing in the same city or municipality for ground of failure to comply with a condition precedent,
and
amicable settlement of all disputes except: pursuant to Section 1 (j), Rule 16.
4) Where the action may otherwise be barred by the statute
See Exception nos. 1,2 3, 5, 6, 7, and 9 in (A) 4. As a general rule, grounds for dismissal must be invoked by
of limitations.
The court in which non-criminal cases not falling within the the party-litigant at the earliest opportunity, as in a motion
E. Execution to dismiss or in the answer; otherwise, such grounds are
authority of the lupon under this Code are led may, at any time

deemed waived. b) All civil actions, except probate proceedings, A “small claim" is an action that is purely civil in nature
admiralty and maritime actions, and small claims where the claim or relief raised by the plainti is solely for
4.1. However, such non-compliance of the condition
cases, where the total amount of the plainti 's claim the payment or reimbursement of a sum of money. It
precedent is not jurisdictional.
does NOT exceed Php2M, exclusive of interest, excludes
5. Here, the following circumstances justify the dismissal of damages of whatever kind, attorney's fees, litigation
a) actions seeking other claims or reliefs aside from
Ngo's complaint. expenses and costs.
payment or reimbursement of a sum of money
5.1. Ngo failed to submit the matter to prior barangay c) Complaints for damages where the claim does NOT and
conciliation before the ling of his complaint in exceed Php2M, exclusive of interest and costs.
b) those coupled with provisional remedies.
court.
d) Cases for enforcement of barangay amicable
The claim or demand may be:
5.2. The case is not among those exempted from the settlement agreements and arbitration awards
requirement of prior conciliation. where the money claim exceeds Php1M, provided a) For money owed under any of the following:
5.3. Gabelo, et al., timely and consistently raised such that no execution has been enforced by the barangay i) Contract of Lease;
omissions and vigorously invoked the dismissal of within six (6) months
ii) Contract of Loan and other credit
the complaint. i) from the date of the settlement or date of accommodations;
receipt of the award or
See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 72 iii) Contract of Services; or
ii) from the date the obligation stipulated or
iv) Contract of Sale of personal property,
adjudged in the arbitration award becomes
excluding the recovery of the personal
Rules on Expedited Procedures in the First Level Courts due and demandable.
property, unless it is made the subject of a
e) Cases solely for the revival of judgment of any compromise agreement between the parties.
A. Scope and Applicability of the Rules
rst-level court;
These Rules shall govern the procedure in actions before the b) The enforcement of barangay amicable settlement
f) The civil aspect of a violation of BP 22, if no agreements and arbitration awards, where the
MeTCs, MTCCs, MTCs and MCTCs
criminal action has been instituted therefor. money claim does NOT exceed Php1M.
a. Civil Cases:
Should a criminal action be later instituted for the b. Criminal Cases:
1) Summary Procedure cases same violation, the civil aspect shall be consolidated
1) Violations of tra c laws, rules and regulations;
a) All cases of forcible entry and unlawful detainer, with the criminal action and shall be tried and
irrespective of the amount of damages or unpaid decided jointly under the Rule on Summary 2) Violations of the rental law;
rentals sought to be recovered. Where attorney's fees Procedure. 3) Violations of municipal or city ordinances;
are awarded, the same shall not exceed P100K. 2) Small Claims Cases. — where the claim does NOT 4) Violations of BP 22; and
exceed Php1M, exclusive of interest and costs.

All other criminal cases where the penalty prescribed f) Motion for extension of time to le pleadings, a davits or All cases requiring prior referral to barangay conciliation
by law for the o ense charged is imprisonment not any other paper; must contain a statement of compliance. Where there is
exceeding one (1) year, or a ne NOT exceeding g) Memoranda;
no showing of compliance, the complaint shall be
Php50K, or both, regardless of other imposable dismissed without prejudice, on the court's own
penalties, accessory or otherwise, or of the civil h) Petition for certiorari, mandamus, or prohibition against initiative or upon motion by the defendant, and may be
liability arising therefrom. any interlocutory order issued by the court; re- led only after the requirement has been complied
i) Motion to declare the defendant in default; with.
In o enses involving damage to property through
criminal negligence, this Rule shall govern where the j) Dilatory motions for postponement. Any motion for ii. Summons. —Within ve (5) calendar days from receipt
imposable ne does NOT exceed Php150K. postponement shall be presumed dilatory unless of a new civil case.
If the prescribed penalty consists of imprisonment grounded on acts of God, force majeure, or physical iii. Motu proprio dismissal. — If from an examination of
and/or a ne, the prescribed imprisonment shall be inability of a counsel or witness to personally appear in the allegations in the initiatory pleading and such evidence
the basis for determining the applicable procedure. court, as supported by the requisite a davit and medical as may be attached thereto, a ground for the outright
proof; dismissal of the case is apparent, the court may dismiss the
B. Prohibited pleadings and motions
k) Rejoinder; case on its own initiative. These grounds include
The following pleadings, motions, or petitions shall not be
l) Third-party complaints; 1. lack of subject matter jurisdiction,
allowed in the cases covered by this Rule:
m) Motion for and Complaint in Intervention; 2. improper venue,
a) In civil cases, a motion to dismiss the complaint or the
statement of claim, and n) Motion to admit late judicial a davit/s, position papers, 3. lack of legal capacity to sue,
in criminal cases, a motion to quash the complaint or or other evidence, except on the ground of force majeure 4. litis pendentia,
information, except on the ground of or acts of God;
5. res judicata,
1. lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter or o) Motion for judicial determination of probable cause in
6. prescription,
criminal cases.
2. failure to comply with the requirement of barangay 7. failure to state a cause of action,
conciliation; C. The Rule on Summary Procedure
8. non-submission of a certi cation against forum
b) Motion to hear and/or resolve a rmative defenses; a. Civil Cases
shopping, and
c) Motion for a bill of particulars; i. Allowed pleadings. — The only pleadings allowed to be
9. lack of compliance with a condition precedent
led are the complaint, compulsory counterclaim,
d) Motion for new trial, or for reconsideration of a judgment such as absence of barangay conciliation, among
cross-claim pleaded in the answer, and reply.
on the merits, or for reopening of proceedings; others.
All pleadings shall be veri ed.
e) Petition for relief from judgment; iv. Answer. — Within thirty (30) calendar days from
service of summons.

A rmative defenses not pleaded in the answer shall be Any amount pleaded in a counterclaim in excess of 3. Judicial Dispute Resolution, in the court's
deemed waived, except for Php2M, excluding interests and costs, shall be deemed discretion (within an inextendible period of 15
waived. calendar days from notice of failure of the CAM).
1. lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter,
vi. Reply. — All new matters alleged in the answer shall be ix. Preliminary Conference Brief. — The parties shall le
2. litis pendentia,
deemed controverted. with the court and serve on the adverse party in such a way
3. res judicata, and as to ensure receipt, at least three (3) calendar days before
The plainti may le a reply to a counterclaim only when
4. prescription. the scheduled Preliminary Conference, their respective
an actionable document is attached to the answer. The
Preliminary Conference Briefs
Cross-claims and compulsory counterclaims NOT reply shall be led within ten (10) calendar days from
asserted in the answer shall be considered barred. receipt of the answer. x. Non-appearance. — The non-appearance of a party
and/or counsel may be excused only for
v. Counterclaims. —If at the time the action is vii. Effect of failure to answer. — The court, on its own
commenced, the defendant possesses a claim against the initiative, or upon manifestation by the plainti that the 1. acts of God,
plainti that period for ling an answer has already lapsed, shall render
2. force majeure, or
judgment as may be warranted by the facts alleged in the
1. is within the coverage of this Rule, exclusive of 3. duly substantiated physical inability.
complaint and its attachments, limited to what is prayed
interest and costs;
for therein. The failure despite notice of the plainti and/or his or
2. arises out of the same transaction or event that is her counsel to appear at the Preliminary Conference shall
viii. Preliminary Conference. — Within ve (5) calendar
the subject matter of the plainti 's claim; be a cause for the dismissal of the complaint. The
days after the last responsive pleading is led, the Branch
3. does not require for its adjudication the joinder Clerk of Court shall issue a Notice of Preliminary defendant who appears in the absence of the plainti
of third parties; and Conference, which shall be held within thirty (30) shall be entitled to judgment on the counterclaim. All
calendar days from the date of ling of such last cross-claims shall be dismissed.
4. is not the subject of another pending action,
responsive pleading. If a sole defendant and/or his or her counsel fail to
the claim shall be led as a counterclaim in the answer;
The Notice of Preliminary Conference shall include the appear at the Preliminary Conference, the plainti shall be
otherwise, the defendant shall be barred from suing on
dates respectively set for: entitled to judgment.
such counterclaim.
1. Preliminary Conference (within 30 calendar xi. What are deemed as non-appearance?
The defendant may also elect to le a counterclaim against
the plainti that does not arise out of the same transaction days from the ling of the last responsive 1. Non-appearance at the Preliminary conference,
or occurrence, provided that the amount and nature pleading); CAM and JDR;
thereof are within the coverage of this Rule and the 2. Court-Annexed Mediation (within an 2. Failure to submit a Preliminary Conference Brief
prescribed docket and other legal fees are paid. inextendible period of 30 calendar days from date within the period;
of referral for mediation); and

notice, whenever required by the court. Release of the

3. If a representative appears without being fully Any postponement granted by the court for the
person arrested shall either be
authorized. authorized causes shall not extend the period for
1. on bail, or presentation of a party's evidence.
xii. Representative. — A representative may appear on
behalf of a party, but must be fully authorized through a 2. on his or her own recognizance, or that of a vii. Judgment. — Shall be rendered and promulgated not
SPA or a board resolution, as the case may be, to: responsible citizen acceptable to the court. later than thirty (30) calendar days from the court's
action on the last presenting party's o er of evidence.
1. enter into an amicable settlement, iv. Arraignment and pre-trial. — the court shall set the
within c. Appeals
2. to submit to alternative modes of dispute
resolution, and 1. ten (10) calendar days for detained accused and i. to the appropriate RTC exercising jurisdiction over the
territory under Rule 40 for civil cases and Rules 122 for
3. to enter into stipulations or admissions of facts 2. thirty (30) calendar days for non-detained
criminal cases;
and documents. accused.
ii. The judgment of the RTC on the appeal shall be nal,
An authority which fails to include all these acts shall be v. Trial and Offer. —The prosecution and defense shall
ine ective and the party represented shall be deemed have sixty (60) calendar days each to complete its executory, and unappealable.
absent. evidence presentation. D. Small Claims
b. Criminal Cases They shall orally o er the evidence on the last day of its a. Scope. — payment or reimbursement of a sum of money
i. How commenced. — The ling of criminal cases shall presentation. where the value of the claim does not exceed Php1M.
either be by complaint or by information. If the prosecution decides to present rebuttal evidence, it b. Commencement of small claims action. — A small claims
ii. Determination of probable cause. — Upon receipt of shall have fteen (15) calendar days from the court action is commenced by ling with the court
the accused's judicial counter-a davit and/ or the judicial action on the o er of defense evidence to complete the
1. an accomplished and veri ed Statement of Claim (Form
a davits of his or her witnesses, or the lapse of the period same.
1-SCC) in duplicate,
given for the submission thereof, the court shall determine vi. Postponement. — A motion for postponement of any
2. accompanied by a Certification Against Forum Shopping,
if probable cause exists to hold the accused for trial. trial date shall be presumed dilatory and denied outright,
Splitting a Single Cause of Action, and Multiplicity of Suits
If the court nds that NO probable cause exists, it shall unless grounded on
(Form 1-A SCC), and
order the dismissal of the case and the immediate release of 1. acts of God,
3. two (2) duly certi ed photocopies of the actionable
the accused, if in custody.
2. force majeure, or document/s subject of the claim,
If the court nds that probable cause exists, the court
3. duly substantiated physical inability of the 4. as well as the a davits of witnesses and other evidence to
shall set the case for arraignment and pre-trial.
counsel or witness. support the claim.
iii. Arrest. — The court shall NOT issue a warrant for the
arrest of the accused, except for failure to appear despite

No evidence shall be allowed during the hearing which was vi. Venue is improperly laid; the court shall render judgment within twenty-four (24)
not attached to or submitted together with the Statement of hours from the termination of the hearing
vii. Plainti has no legal capacity to sue;
Claim, unless good cause is shown for the admission of
h. Appearances. — The parties shall personally appear on the
additional evidence. viii. The Statement of Claim/s states no cause of action;
designated date of hearing.
The plainti must state in the Statement of Claims ix. That a condition precedent for ling the claim has not
Appearance through a representative must be for a valid cause.
been complied with; and
1. if he/she/it is engaged in the business of lending, banking The representative of an individual-party
and similar activities, and x. Plainti failed to submit the required a davits, as
1. must NOT be a lawyer and
provided in Section 7 of this Rule.
2. the number of small claims cases led within the calendar
2. must be related to or next-of-kin of the individual-party.
year regardless of judicial station. The order of dismissal shall state if it is with or without
prejudice. Juridical entities shall not be represented by a lawyer in
c. Venue. — if the plainti is engaged in the business of lending,
any capacity.
banking and similar activities, and has a branch within the Other instances where the court may motu proprio
municipality or city where the defendant resides or is holding dismiss The representative must be authorized under a Special Power
business, the Statement of Claim/s shall be led in the court of of Attorney (Form 7-SCC) to enter into an amicable
1) If, during the hearing, the court is able to determine
the city or municipality where the defendant resides or is settlement of the dispute and to enter into stipulations or
that there exists a ground for dismissal;
holding business. admissions of facts and of documentary exhibits.
2) If the plainti misrepresents that he/she/ it is not
d. Joinder of Claims. — Plainti may join in a single statement i. Appearance of Attorneys Not Allowed. — No attorney
engaged in the business of lending, banking, or similar
of claim one or more separate small claims against a defendant shall appear in behalf of or represent a party at the hearing,
activities when in fact he/she/it is so engaged. —
provided that the total amount claimed, exclusive of interest unless the attorney is the plainti or defendant.
WITH prejudice + sanctions;
and costs, does not exceed Php1M. If the court determines that a party cannot properly present
f. Summons and Notice of Hearing. — within twenty-four
e. Dismissal. — the Court may, on its own initiative, dismiss his/her claim or defense and needs assistance, the court may, in
(24) hours from receipt of the Statement of Claim/s.
the case outright on any of the following grounds: its discretion, allow another individual who is not an attorney
g. Response. — The defendant shall le with the court and serve to assist that party upon the latter's consent.
i. The court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter; \ on the plainti a duly accomplished and veri ed Response
j. Non-appearance of Parties. — Failure of the plainti to
ii. There is another action pending between the same parties (Form 3-SCC) within a non-extendible period of ten (10)
appear shall be cause for the dismissal of the Statement of
for the same cause; calendar days from receipt of Summons.
Claim/s without prejudice. The defendant who appears in the
iii. The action is barred by prior judgment; Should the defendant absence of the plainti shall be entitled to judgment on a
1) fail to le his/her/its Response within the required permissive counterclaim.
iv. The claim is barred by the statute of limitations;
period, AND Failure of the defendant to appear shall have the same e ect as
v. The court has no jurisdiction over the person of the
2) likewise fail to appear on the date set for hearing, failure to le a Response under Section 14 of this Rule. This
defendant;

shall not apply where one of two or more defendants who are
sued under a common cause of action and have pleaded a Heirs of Julao v. Sps De Jesus 2014 The decision of COA in disallowing a claim to enforce a nal &
common defense appears at the hearing. executory judgment of RTC was made with grave abuse of
In an action for recovery of possession led with the RTC, the
discretion. COA has no jurisdiction to set aside RTC’s nal
Failure of both parties to appear shall cause the dismissal failure to allege the assessed value of the land meant that the RTC
judgment against the government for just compensation.
WITH prejudice of both the Statement of Claim/s and the did not acquire jurisdiction. The failure to allege the assessed value
counterclaim. may be raised even in the CA as lack of jurisdiction may be raised at Concorde Condominium v. PNB 2018
any time.
k. Postponement. — may be granted only upon proof of the HLURB has jurisdiction over cases for annulment of REM over
physical inability of the party to appear before the court on Gabrillo v. Heirs of Pastor 2019 subdivision lot and condominium unit made by developer without
the scheduled date and time. A party may avail of only one (1) HLURB approval.
RTC is without jurisdiction over real action if what was alleged is
postponement. market value, not assessed value. First Sarmiento v. PBCom 2018 En Banc
l. Decision. — The decision shall be nal, executory and Gonzales v. GJH Land 2015 En Banc Complaint for annulment of a REM is incapable of pecuniary
unappealable. estimation, even if the property had been foreclosed when the
If an ordinary civil case led with the RTC is mistakenly ra ed to a
m. Non-applicability. — The rules on mediation and judicial complaint was led, where the certi cate of sale was not yet
Special Commercial Court, the latter should refer the case to the
dispute resolution shall not apply, as the parties may enter into registered.
Executive Judge for re-docketing as an ordinary civil case rather than
compromise at any stage of the proceedings. dismissing the same. ICTSI v. City of Manila 2018
Secretary of DAR v. Heirs of Redemptor 2019 En Banc Where the RTC did not require payment of the docket fee for the
Relevant Jurisprudence
increased amount in the amended complaint, the court still retains
Cancellation of emancipation patents, CLOA, and certi cates of
Sebastian v. Lagmay 2015 jurisdiction. The docket fee for the increased amount is considered a
titles issued under agrarian reform program is within exclusive
MTC has exclusive jurisdiction over action for enforcement of an lien on the judgment award.
original jurisdiction of the DAR Secretary.
amicable settlement executed before the Barangay regardless of Estacion v. Sec of DAR, et al 2014
MMDA v. DM Consunji 2019
amount involved pursuant to Sec 417 of the LGC.
Plainti must pay docket fee on interests, penalties, and attorney’s
Liquidated claims against the government are within the primary
Padlan v. Dinglasan 2013 fees which have accrued as of the time of the ling of the complaint.
jurisdiction of the COA, not the courts.
Action for cancellation of TCT is a real action and jurisdiction Heirs of Dragon v. Manila Banking 2019
Taisei Shimizu JV v. COA 2020 En Banc
depends upon assessed value.
Plainti must pay docket fee on interests, penalties, and attorney’s
The jurisdiction of COA over nal money judgments rendered by
Heirs of Bautista v. Lindo 2014 fees which have accrued as of the time of the ling of the complaint.
courts and tribunals pertains only to the execution stage; COA
An action to redeem land subject of a free patent pursuant to Sec cannot modify the nal and executory judgment of CIAC.
119 of the Public Land Act is incapable of pecuniary estimation and
Star Special Corp. Security Mgmt v. COA 2020 En Banc
not a real action. Civil Procedure
III

1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, as amended by Demurrer to Evidence EXC: Rules on reglementary period to le pleadings or
A.M. No. 19-10-20-SC appeals.
Judgments and Final Orders
General provisions 4. May the Rules of Court be suspended? YES. Jurisprudence
Post-Judgment Remedies cite important factors that would warrant such suspension:
Kinds of action
a. The existence of special or compelling circumstances;
Execution, Satisfaction, and E ect of Judgments
Cause of action b. The merits of the case;
Parties to civil actions General provisions c. A cause not entirely attributable to the fault or negligence
A of the party favored by the suspension of rules;
Rule 1
Venue d. A lack of any showing that the review sought is merely
1. To what actions NOT applicable. — These Rules shall not frivolous and dilatory; and
Pleadings
apply to
e. The rights of the other party will not be unjustly
Filing and Service a. election cases, prejudiced thereby.
Summons b. land registration, cadastral, Litigants invoking liberality should exert an e ort to explain
the failure to abide by the rules and must hurdle the heavy
Motions c. naturalization
burden of proving that they deserve an exceptional treatment.
d. insolvency proceedings, and
Dismissal of Actions
e. other cases not herein provided for, except by analogy or B Kinds of action
Pre-trial in a suppletory character and whenever practicable and 1. Action In Personam — judgment is binding only upon
convenient. the parties and their successors-in-interest;
Intervention
2. Commencement of action. — A civil action is commenced 2. Action In Rem — judgment is binding upon the whole
Subpoena by the ling of the original complaint in court. world.
However, payment of docket fees is what really commences an 3. Action Quasi In Rem — like an action to foreclose a
Computation of time
action. REM against a non-resident defendant. Here, the
Modes of Discovery 3. Liberal construction. — To promote the objective of jurisdiction of the court over the res, which is the property
securing a just, speedy and inexpensive disposition of every mortgaged, is su cient for the court to order the
Trial foreclosure. Summons must be served, however, upon the
action and proceeding.
mortgagor-debtor to comply with due process.
Consolidation or Severance

regardless of which party is successful, amount to res

Cause of action Butuan Development Corp. v. CA 2017
C judicata on the case on hand.
Rule 2 Failure to state a cause of action refers to the insu ciency of the
6. Joinder and misjoinder of causes of action
pleading. The remedy is to move for the dismissal of the pleading.
1. Meaning of cause of action. — the act or omission by a. Joinder. — A party may in one pleading assert, in the
(NB: Now as an affirmative defense)
which a party violates a right of another. Elements: alternative or otherwise, as many causes of action as he
On the other hand, lack of cause action refers to a situation where
a. A right pertaining to the plainti ; may have against an opposing party, subject to the
the evidence does not prove the cause of action alleged in the
following conditions:
b. A correlative obligation of the defendant to respect that pleading. The remedy is a demurrer to evidence.
i. The joinder shall not include special civil actions
right of the plainti ;
4. Test of the sufficiency of a cause of action. — Admitting or actions governed by special rules;
c. Violation of plainti ’s right by the defendant; AND the truth of the facts alleged, can the court render a valid
ii. Where the causes of action are between the same
d. Damage. judgment in accordance with the prayer?
parties but pertain to di erent venues or jurisdictions,
2. Distinguish: right of action and cause of action The su ciency of the statement of the cause of action must the joinder may be allowed in the RTC provided one
appear on the face of the complaint. It is error to consider of the causes of action falls within the jurisdiction of
Cause of Action Right of Action other matters aliunde. said court and the venue lies therein; and
5. Splitting a single cause of action and its effects iii. Totality Rule. — Where the claims in all the causes
The delict or wrong The right of plainti to le of action are principally for recovery of money, the
action a. Splitting a cause of action — is the practice of dividing
aggregate amount claimed shall be the test of
one cause of action into di erent parts and making each
jurisdiction.
Created by substantive law Regulated by procedural law part a subject of a di erent complaint.
b. Rules in Determining the Singleness of a Cause of
Imprescriptible May be lost by prescription b. Effect — Dismissal of the case on the ground of litis
Action:
pendentia or res judicata.
a. Right of Action — is the right of the plainti to bring an i. A contract embraces only one cause of action, even if
c. Lis pendens as a ground for the dismissal of a civil action
action and to prosecute that action until nal judgment. it contains several stipulations;
refers to that situation wherein another action is pending
Elements: between the same parties for the same cause of action. ii. A contract which provides for several stipulations to
i. A good cause of action; AND be performed at di erent times gives rise to as many
d. To constitute the defense of lis pendens, it must appear
causes of action as there are violations;
ii. Performance of all conditions precedent to the that not only are the parties in the two actions the same
ling of the action. but there is substantial identity in the cause of action and iii. All obligations that have already matured must be
relief sought. integrated in ONE complaint;
3. Distinguish: failure to state a cause of action and lack of
cause of action Further, it is required that the identity be such that any iv. Failure to comply with one of several stipulations in a
judgment which may be rendered in the other would, continuing contract constitutes total breach and a

single cause of action for damages, actual as well as

causes of action.
prospective, arises from such breach. 8.2. there was absence of proof that there was full
4. Here, the subject case satis es all the requisites of res payment of the purchase price of the property in
c. Misjoinder. — Is NOT a ground for dismissal of an
judicata under the rst concept of bar by prior judgment. dispute.
action. A misjoined cause of action may, on motion of a
party or on the initiative of the court, be SEVERED and 4.1. The rst 3 elements are present because the rst 9. The grant of the relief prayed for by petitioners in the
proceeded with separately. case on Annulment of Deed is a nal judgment on instant case would e ectively result in the reexamination of
the merits rendered by a court that had jurisdiction the abovementioned documents, and a reversal of a nal
Villaroman v. Estate of Arciaga 28 Jun 2021 over the subject matter and over the parties. and executory decision involving the same issues, parties,
and subject matter.
4.2. As to the 4th element, the cases involve the same
1. The complaint for speci c performance is barred by res
parties and relate to the same subject matter. 10. Splitting of causes of action. — Section 4, Rule 2 of the
judicata.
Rules of Court expressly states that if two or more suits are
4.3. There is also identity of causes of action. — a cause
2. Res judicata is de ned as "a matter adjudged; a thing instituted on the basis of the same cause of action, the ling
of action is the delict or wrongful act or omission
judicially acted upon or decided; or a thing or matter settled of one or a judgment upon the merits in any one is available
committed by the defendant in violation of the
by judgment." The two concepts of res judicata are: as a ground for the dismissal of the others.
primary rights of the plainti .
2.1. bar by prior judgment. — identity of parties, 11. Here, petitioners cannot split their cause of action by ling
5. In both cases herein, petitioners impute the same wrongful
subject matter, and causes of action be shown; and a case in court to recognize them as lawful owners of a
act on respondents – their failure to recognize petitioners'
2.2. conclusiveness of judgment. — only identity of property, and thereafter le another separate complaint for
title over the 300-sqm portion despite the existence of
parties can be shown, but not identical causes of speci c performance that ultimately seeks to determine
perfected contracts of sale in their favor.
action. with nality their title or ownership over the same property.
6. Further, under the same test evidence, if the same evidence
3. The elements of res judicata are: ultimately support and establish the causes of action in the See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 37
3.1. the judgment sought to bar the new action must rst and second cases, then there is likely an identity of
be nal; causes of action.
Asset Pool A (SPV-AMC) v. Sps Berris 26 Apr 2021
3.2. the decision must have been rendered by a court 7. Here, petitioners presented the same documentary evidence
having jurisdiction over the subject matter and the to prove their claims in the two cases. 1. Asset Pool cannot split its cause of action on the
parties; 8. The Decision of the CA in relation to the rst Annulment Discounting Line by rst ling a petition for extrajudicial
case made a de nitive nding that: foreclosure of the REM on the 2 PNs and then institute a
3.3. the disposition of the case must be a judgment on
personal action for the collection of the other four PNs
the merits; and 8.1. the two documents relied upon by petitioners are
without violating the proscription against splitting a single
3.4. there must be as between the rst and second insu cient bases of ownership over the property
cause of action.
action, identity of parties, subject matter, and in dispute; and
2. Thus, petitioner may institute two alternative remedies

against the Sps Berris: either The case is founded on EO Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14-A s. 1986. in uence, or relationship resulting in unjust enrichment
and causing grave damage and prejudice to the Filipino
2.1. a personal action for the collection of the A. The Freedom Constitution and EO Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14-A
people and the Republic.
promissory notes issued under the Discounting con rm the authority and duty given to the PCGG to le
Line or the instant action against Disini for recovery of his alleged 1. The alleged subject commissions may not have been
ill-gotten wealth relative to the BNPP project. sourced directly from the public funds but it is beyond
2.2. a real action to foreclose the mortgage, but not
cavil that Disini would not have amassed these
both, simultaneously or successively. B. The allegations in the Amended Complaint show that
commissions had he not exerted undue in uence on
Disini is being sued for amassing ill-gotten wealth.
3. However, the foregoing rule against splitting of cause of President Marcos.
action is not applicable to the collection suit covering the C. Thus, the Republic, through the PCGG, has a clear-cut
G. There is no doubt that the Republic has a valid cause of
PN which was drawn against the Loan Agreement. cause to le the present suit against Disini in view of his
action founded in EO Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14-A (1986).
alleged involvement in the BNPP project through receipt of
4. Being separate and distinct contracts, FEBTC, as the
substantial commissions from Westinghouse and B&R for See Political Law Case Digest No. 10
mortgage creditor, may institute either a personal action for
in uencing President Marcos in their favor.
the collection of debt, or a real action to foreclose the
mortgage under the Loan Agreement. D. In order to be considered as ill-gotten wealth, they must
4.1. FEBTC chose to elect a personal action to recover
have: Parties to civil actions
D
the amount due on PN drawn against the Loan 1. originated from the government; and Rule 3
Agreement by ling the herein complaint as it is
2. been taken by former President Marcos, his immediate
not barred. 1. Real parties in interest
family, relatives, and close associates by illegal means.
5. Sps Yu v. Philippine Commercial International Bank a. A real party in interest is the party who stands to be
E. Here, the BNPP is· a government project the construction
explained that the rule on indivisibility of mortgage bene ted or injured by the judgment in the suit, or the
of which was awarded to Westinghouse as the main
contracts means that the mortgage obligation cannot be party entitled to the avails of the suit. Every action must be
contractor and B&R as the architect-engineer, allegedly
divided among the di erent lots, that is, each and every prosecuted or defended in the name of the real party in
through undue advantage of Disini's in uence and close
parcel under mortgage answers for the totality of the debt. interest.
association with President Marcos.
6. Thus SPs Berris are liable to pay the outstanding balance on b. Who may be real parties in interest?
1. In exchange, Disini allegedly received substantial
the principal due under the Loan Agreement. i. Indispensable Parties;
commissions based on 3% and 10% of the total contract
See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 52 price from Westinghouse and B&R, respectively. ii. Necessary Parties;
F. Contrary to the contention of Disini, ill-gotten wealth also iii. Representative Parties;
encompasses those that are derived indirectly from
EN BANC iv. Pro forma Parties.
Disini v. Republic 15 Jun 2021 government funds or properties through the use of power,
2. Compulsory and permissive joinder of parties

a. Compulsory joinder of indispensable parties. — Parties may be dropped or added by order of the court on
The real party in interest which may le a case, questioning the
Parties in interest without whom no final determination motion of any party or on its own initiative at any stage of
validity of a contract entered into by the city mayor, who is alleged
can be had of an action shall be joined either as plainti s the action and on such terms as are just. Any claim against a
to have no authority to do so, is the city itself. It is the LGU which
or defendants. misjoined party may be severed and proceeded with separately.
stands to be injured or bene ted by any judgment that may be made
b. Non-inclusion or failure to implead an indispensable 4. Class suit. — Conditions: in this case. The city councilors as representatives of the city have
party shall NOT be a ground for the dismissal of the the standing to le the case.
a. The subject matter of the controversy is one of common
case. The remedy is to implead the indispensable party.
or general interest to many persons; Meralco v. Nordec PH 2018
c. Permissive Joinder of Parties. —
b. The parties are so numerous that it is impracticable to The bene cial users of an electric service have a cause of action
i. There is a right to relief in favor of or against or bring them all before the court (Taxpayers Suit); against Meralco even though the service contract was registered in
against the parties joined in respect to or arising out of the name of another person.
c. A number of them which the court nds to be
the same transaction or series of transactions; and
su ciently numerous may sue or defend for the bene t Crisologo v. JEWM Agro-Industrial 2014
ii. There is a question of law or fact common to the of all.
In an action for the cancellation of memorandum annotated at the
parties joined in the action.
back of a certi cate of title, the persons considered as indispensable
Soquillo v. Tortola 2012
d. Non-joinder of necessary parties to be pleaded. — include those whose liens appear as annotations pursuant to Section
In an action for declaration of nullity of a free patent by a private 108 of PD 1529.
i. Whenever in any pleading in which a claim is asserted
person who alleges prior ownership of the property covered thereby,
a necessary party is not joined, the pleader shall set
it is the private person and not the State who is the real
forth his name, if known, and shall state why he is
party-in-interest. This should be distinguished from a reversion case East West Banking v. Cruz 12 Jul 2021
omitted.
wherein the purpose is to revest title in the State not a private
ii. Should the court nd the reason for the omission person. 1. Complainant's failure to state a cause of action in its
unmeritorious, it may order the inclusion of the initiatory pleading is a ground for the dismissal of the case
Resident Marine Mammals v. Reyes 2015 En Banc
omitted necessary party if jurisdiction over his person pursuant to Section 1, Rule 16.
may be obtained. Stewards may be allowed to le a petition for certiorari to enforce
2. Also, a reading of the Complaint reveals that the Bank is
environmental laws not in representation of marine mammals but in
iii. The failure to comply with the order for his inclusion, not actually the real party-in-interest, since Alvin and
their own right by way of a citizen suit which allows any Filipino
without justi able cause, shall be deemed a waiver Francisco were the ones who would stand to be bene tted
citizen, as a steward of nature, to bring suit to enforce environmental
of the claim against such party. or injured by the debiting of their respective deposits
laws.
without their consent, as well as the issuance and
3. Misjoinder and non-joinder of parties. — Neither
Lao, Jr v. LGU of Cagayan de Oro City 2017 subsequent denial of the demand to collect from the
misjoinder nor non-joinder of parties is a ground for
supposed spurious FEFCs.
dismissal of an action.

pooling of resources by the DTI, TESDA,

3. The Bank also did not take into consideration Section 10, C. Thus, the tenants cannot be cursorily excluded from a
Provincial Government of Bulacan, and MAP, a
Rule 3 as to unwilling co-plainti . court determination of the validity of the partition, and
careful review of the records fails to show that the
consequent change in ownership, of the subject property.
3.1. It arbitrarily impleaded Francisco and Alvin as MOA Parties represented that the Center had its
unwilling co-plainti s without securing their See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 42 own juridical personality in its dealings with
consent, and did not bother to explain in the respondent or third persons.
Complaint why their permission was not obtained.
5.2. In fact, the employment contract submitted by
3.2. Francisco and Alvin should have been impleaded TESDA v. Abragar 17 Mar 2021 respondent in evidence was with MAP
as defendants in the Complaint instead, absent Multi-Purpose Cooperative Incorporated.
1. The Center has no juridical personality and thus has no
their express consent.
legal capacity to be sued. 6. The proper remedy in this case is the joinder of the proper
See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 36 2. Sections 1 and 2, Rule 3 of the Rules of Court mandate parties.
that only natural or juridical persons, or entities authorized 7. Indispensable parties are parties whose legal presence in the
by law may be parties in a civil action and every action must proceeding is so necessary that 'the action cannot be nally
Silva v. Lo 23 Jun 2021 be prosecuted and defended in the name of the real determined' without them because their interests in the
parties-in-interest. matter and in the relief are so bound up with that of the
Respondent should have impleaded the new title holders, the
tenants, as indispensable or necessary parties to the petition for 3. Here, the Center which respondent seeks to hold liable has other parties.
certiorari before the CA. no juridical personality nor is it an entity authorized by law 8. An indispensable party is a party who has an interest in the
to be a party to any action; it has no legal capacity to sue or controversy or subject matter that a nal adjudication
A. The tenants are not strangers or third parties to the subject
be sued and should not have been impleaded as defendant cannot be made, in his absence, without injuring or
property.
in the instant case. a ecting that interest, a party who has not only an interest
1. In relation to the subject property, as tenants who are in the subject matter of the controversy, but also has an
4. The Court, in the interest of preventing injustice and
quali ed bene ciaries thereof under the CARL and to interest of such nature that a nal decree cannot be made
unfairness, has previously prevented non-existent
whom new titles had been issued, they are palpably real without a ecting his interest or leaving the controversy in
corporations from raising its lack of juridical personality as
parties-in-interest. such a condition that its nal determination may be wholly
a means to avoid ful llment of its contracts or obligations
2. The tenants are not indispensable parties but, at the by applying the doctrine of corporation by estoppel. inconsistent with equity and good conscience.
least, are necessary parties. 8.1. A person in whose absence there cannot be a
5. However, the attendant circumstances do not call for the
B. Reyes v. Mauricio has ruled that a tenancy relationship application of the said doctrine. determination between the parties already before
cannot be extinguished by the sale, alienation or the the court which is e ective, complete, or equitable.
5.1. While the Center appears to be managed by
transfer of legal possession of the landholding. 8.2. One who must be included in an action before it
TESDA in collaboration with MAP and involves a

may properly go forward. title.

9. Here, the MOA Parties are indispensable parties as their PNB-Republic Bank v. Sian-Limsiaco 08 Feb 2021 G. Here, since the lifting of the encumbrance is a bene t that
interest in the controversy is such that a nal adjudication would free the owners of the risk of losing their properties,
Respondent acted on behalf of the mortgagors-principals when she
cannot be made in their absence, without injuring or it is only a matter of course that the special power to
initiated the action to cancel the mortgages.
a ecting their interest. mortgage includes the authority to discharge it from the
A. There was no need to join such principals as the subject burden.
10. There are two consequences of a nding on appeal that
mortgage contracts were merely accessory contracts that
indispensable parties have not been joined. H. Article 1882 of the Civil Code expressly provides that the
were entered into for the purpose of securing respondent's
limits of the agent's authority shall not be considered
10.1. First, all subsequent actions of the lower courts are loans and merely involved the right to foreclose upon the
exceeded should it have been performed in a manner more
null and void for lack of jurisdiction; lands speci ed therein upon the ful llment of certain
advantageous to the principal than that speci ed by him.
10.2. Second, the case should be remanded to the trial contingencies, such as when there is default.
I. Thus, the ling of the instant case to cancel the mortgage
court for the inclusion of indispensable parties. B. The Rules allow agents to bring actions for the principals in
liens, which were annotated in the mortgagor-principals'
11. The failure to implead TESDA and the other parties to the their own name without joining their principals, provided
respective titles through the special authority granted by
MOA renders the proceedings void, which may be that the contract does not involve things belonging to the
them to respondent, should be considered within the limits
questioned at any time. principal.
of respondent's authority since disencumbering the
12. The joinder of all indispensable parties is a condition sine C. Here, the mortgage contract itself does not involve real mortgagors-principals' titles of the same mortgage liens are
qua non for the exercise of judicial power. property, but merely the right to foreclose upon such real obviously advantageous to the latter.
property should the necessary legal pre-conditions are met,
13. The absence of an indispensable party renders all See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 62
such as a breach in the principal contract to which the
subsequent actions of the court null and void for want of
mortgage is merely an accessory of.
authority to act, not only as to the absent parties but even
as to those present. D. Jurisprudence has already held that the action to cancel the
Nagaño v. Tanjangco 12 May 2021
mortgage is a personal action, as compared to an action to
14. A void judgment is in e ect no judgment at all, and all acts
foreclose such mortgage, which is a real action that involves Petitioners are NOT real parties in interest.
performed under it and all claims owing out of it are void.
real property. A. The transfers to petitioners of the subject lots were made in
15. Thus, the failure to implead petitioner and the other parties
E. Therefore, since neither the subject mortgage contracts nor violation of PD 27, which prohibited any transfer of title to
to the MOA renders the Decision of the LA, writ of
the instant case involved the mortgagors-principals' real covered lands except by hereditary succession or to the
execution, and break-open order null and void for want of
property rights, there was no need to join them. Government.
authority, which may be attacked in any way at any time,
even when no appeal is taken. F. The authority to encumber one's land title naturally B. Any transfer made by a tenant-bene ciary in violation of
includes the authority to perform acts to disencumber such PD 27 is void.

3. Actions against non-residents. — Actions that may be

C. Petitioners, who are strangers to this case, have no right to The added stipulation that the subscriber “expressly waives any
led against a nonresident defendant who does not reside
oppose respondents' application for retention. other venue” should indicate, clearly enough, the intent of the
and not found in the Philippines — Actions that a ect
parties to consider the venue stipulation as being preclusive in
The October 1, 2009 Resolution of the DAR Secretary which
a. the personal status of the plainti ; or character.
granted respondents' application for retention has become nal and
executory, and therefore immutable. b. the property, or any portion thereof, of said defendant Villanueva v. Mosqueda
located here in the Philippines.
A. Petitioners moved for reconsideration of the Resolution, An agreement as to venue in a contract of lease is valid and binding.
instead of appealing directly to the O ce of the President 4. When the rules on venue do not apply. — Thus, even if the real property is located in Manila but the parties
within 15 days, as provided under Section 32, Rule V of have agreed on a venue at Masantol, Pampanga, the same has to be
a. In those cases where a speci c rule or law provides
DAO 03-03. followed and the ling of the ejectment case in Masantol is proper.
otherwise; E.g. Libel cases; Sec 5(4) Art VIII, 1987
1. Consequently, when the 15-day period lapsed without Constitution — SC may order a change of venue to avoid ⭐Hygienic Packaging v. Nutri-Asia 2019
petitioners ling an appeal thereto, the Resolution a miscarriage of justice.
The sales invoices, if viewed to be a contract on venue stipulation,
became nal and executory.
b. Where the parties have validly agreed in writing before were not signed by petitioner's agent to be bound by such
See Labor Law Case Digest No. 27 the ling of the action on the exclusive venue thereof. stipulation. The signature has to do with the receipt of the
purchased goods "in good order and condition." Petitioner did not,
5. Effects of stipulations on venue
therefore, agree to be restricted to a venue in Manila and was never
obliged to observe this unilateral statement in the sales
Venue Polytrade v. Blanco
E invoices.
Rule 4 Qualifying or restrictive words which would indicate that Manila
Cabrera v. PSA 2019
and Manila alone is the venue are totally absent therefrom. The
1. Complaint for nulli cation of the deed of sale of land is a parties solely agreed to ADD the courts of Manila as tribunals to RTC cannot motu proprio dismiss on ground of improper
personal action since there was no allegation that the which they may resort. They did not waive their right to pursue venue a R108 petition.
possession and title to the property were transferred to the remedy in the courts speci cally mentioned in Section 2(b) of Rule
defendant. (Racpan v. Barroga-Haigh 2018) 4.
2. An action to recover the de ciency after extrajudicial Sweet Lines v. Teves F Pleadings
foreclosure of a real estate mortgage is a personal action since
Although venue may be changed or transferred from one province Kinds
it does not a ect title to or possession of real property or any
to another by agreement of the parties in writing, such an agreement
interest therein. (BPI Family Savings Bank v. Sps Yujuico
2015)
will not be held valid where it practically negates the action of Parts and Contents of a pleading
the claimants.
Manner of making allegations
Pilipino Telephone Corp v. Tecson

E ect of failure to plead c. Counterclaims. — any claim which a defending party may The dismissal shall be without prejudice to the right of the
have against an opposing party. defendant to prosecute his or her counterclaim in a
Amended and supplemental pleadings separate action unless within 15 calendar days from
i. Compulsory counterclaim. — if not raised in the same
notice of the motion he or she manifests his or her
When to le responsive pleadings action is BARRED, unless otherwise allowed by these
preference to have his or her counterclaim resolved in the
Rules. Elements:
same action.
Kinds 1. It is cognizable by the regular courts of justice;
1 d. Cross-claims. — any claim by one party against a co-party
Rule 6 2. It arises out of or it is connected with a arising out of the transaction or occurrence that is the subject
transaction or occurrence constituting a subject matter either of the original action or of a counterclaim
a. Complaint. — is the pleading alleging the plainti 's or matter of the opposing party’s claim; (LOGICAL therein. Such cross-claim may cover all or part of the original
claiming party’s cause or causes of action. The names and RELATIONSHIP TEST) claim.
residences of the plainti and defendant must be stated in the
3. It does not require for its adjudication the presence A cross-claim may also be led against an original
complaint.
of third parties whom the court cannot acquire cross-claimant.
b. Answer. — a pleading in which a defending party sets forth jurisdiction;
his or her defenses. Counterclaim Cross-claim
4. It is within the jurisdiction of the court, both as to the
i. Negative defenses. — is the speci c denial of the amount and the nature thereof,
material fact or facts alleged in the pleading of the Complaint by defendant against Defendant against
except that in an original action before the RTC, the plainti co-defendant
claimant essential to his cause or causes of action.
counterclaim may be considered compulsory
ii. Affirmative defenses. — an allegation of a new matter regardless of the amount; and Survives even if main action is Life depends on the main action
which, while hypothetically admitting the material extinguished
5. The defending party has a counterclaim at the time
allegations in the pleading of the claimant, would
he les his answer. (Sec 8 Rule 11) Should arise out of the same Does not need to arise out of the
nevertheless prevent or bar recovery.
ii. Permissive counterclaim. — if one of the elements of a transaction or occurrence that is same transaction or occurrence
iii. Negative pregnant. — Where a defendant desires to
compulsory counterclaim is absent. the subject matter of the action that is the subject matter of the
deny only a part of an averment, he shall specify so much
action
of it as is true and material and shall deny only the iii. Effect on the counterclaim when the complaint is
remainder. dismissed. — If a counterclaim has been pleaded by a e. Third (fourth, etc.) party complaints. — a claim that a
defendant prior to the service upon him or her of the defending party may, with leave of court, le against a
What is only denied is the quali cation to the
plainti 's motion for dismissal, the dismissal shall be person NOT a party to the action, called the third (fourth,
averment. The substance of the allegation is actually
limited to the complaint. etc.)-party defendant for contribution, indemnity,
admitted.

subrogation or any other relief, in respect of his opponent's

GR: Intervention also dismissed. A motion for extension to file any pleading, other than an
claim.
answer, is prohibited and considered a mere scrap of paper.
EXC: If the intervention can stand on its own, it should
i. Bringing new parties. — When the presence of parties The court, however, may allow any other pleading to be filed
continue.
other than those to the original action is required for the after the time fixed by these Rules.
granting of complete relief in the determination of a g. Reply. — a pleading, the o ce or function of which is to
counterclaim or cross-claim, the court shall order them to deny, or allege facts in denial or avoidance of new matters PNTC Colleges v. Time Realty 27 Sep 2021
be brought in as defendants, if jurisdiction over them can alleged in, or relating to, said actionable document.
1. An assessment of the records a rms the nding that
be obtained. i. Optional. All new matters alleged in the answer are
PNTC is liable to Time Realty for rental arrears and service
ii. It shall be DENIED admission, and the court shall require deemed controverted. If the plaintiff wishes to interpose any
charges.
the defendant to institute a separate action, where: claims arising out of the new matters so alleged, such claims
shall be set forth in an amended or supplemental 2. The lease contract provides that Time Realty has the
1. the third-party defendant cannot be located within prerogative to take control or possession of PNTC's
complaint.
thirty (30) calendar days from the grant of such leave; properties in the event the latter violates a provision of the
ii. However, the plaintiff may file a reply only if the
2. matters extraneous to the issue in the principal case are contract, including non-payment of rent and other charges.
defending party attaches an actionable document to
raised; or 3. Even while Time Realty exercised its right under the
his or her answer.
3. the effect would be to introduce a new and separate contract, PNTC still led a Complaint to recover its
iii. In the event of an actionable document attached to the reply,
controversy into the action. properties.
the defendant may file a REJOINDER if the same is based
iii. Four Tests to Determine Propriety of 3rd-Party solely on an actionable document. 3.1. Hence, Time Realty led an Answer with
Complaint (any will do) Counterclaim instead.
Reply Answer to Counterclaim 3.2. Nonetheless, as Time Realty was forced to resort
1. It arises out of the same transaction on which
complaint is based; to the measures speci ed in the contract to protect
Response to the defenses in Response to the causes of action
its interests, its counterclaims should be granted.
2. Is connected with the plainti ’s claim; the Answer raised by defendant against plainti
3.3. This is because these counterclaims are intimately
3. Third party defendant would be liable to the original Generally, optional Mandatory under Rule 11 related to the subject matter of the Complaint,
plainti 's claim; OR
particularly the personal properties of PNTC,
h. Extensions of time to file. — A defendant may, for
4. Third party defendant may assert any defense which which have been withheld and stored by Time
meritorious reasons, be granted an additional period of not
the third party plainti has or may have against Realty.
plainti ’s claim. more than thirty (30) calendar days to file an answer. A
defendant is only allowed to file one (1) motion for extension 4. A compulsory counterclaim is a defendant's claim for
f. Complaint-in-intervention. — E ect of Dismissal of of time to file an ANSWER. money or other relief which arises out of, or is necessarily
Main Action connected with, the subject matter of the complaint.

See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 27 c. The factual contentions have evidentiary support; iv. Veri cation is generally OPTIONAL, except:
and
1. Rule 8 — when you deny the due execution of an
d. The denials of factual contentions are warranted actionable document;
Parts and Contents of a pleading on the evidence
2 2. Summary Rules — all pleadings under summary
Rule 7
iv. If the court determines, on motion or motu proprio and rules should be veri ed;
a. Caption. — sets forth the name of the court, the title of the after notice and hearing, that this rule has been violated, it
3. Special Civil Actions — petitions for certiorari,
action, and the docket number if assigned. may impose an appropriate sanction or refer such violation
prohibition and mandamus;
to the proper office for disciplinary action, on any attorney,
b. Signature and address law firm, or party that violated the rule, or is responsible for 4. Petition for Relief from Judgment under Rule 38;
i. Every pleading and other written submissions to the court the violation. 5. Petitions for Review under Rules 42 and 43;
must be signed by the party or counsel representing him v. Absent exceptional circumstances, a law firm shall be 6. Appeal by Certiorari under Rule 45;
or her. held jointly and severally liable for a violation
7. Petition for Annulment of Judgment of the RTC
ii. The signature of counsel constitutes a certi cate by him committed by its partner, associate, or employee.
under Rule 47.
or her that he or she has read the pleading and document; vi. The lawyer or law firm CANNOT pass on the monetary
that to the best of his or her knowledge, information, and d. Certification against forum shopping
penalty to the client.
belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under the i. The plainti or principal party shall certify under oath in
circumstances. c. Verification. — Except when otherwise speci cally required
the complaint or other initiatory pleading asserting a
by law or rule, pleadings need not be under oath, veri ed or
iii. Implied Certi cation in a Pleading and Document claim for relief, or in a sworn certi cation annexed thereto
accompanied by a davit.
means that when a lawyer signs a pleading he is certifying and simultaneously led therewith xxx
that i. A pleading is verified by an affidavit of an affiant duly
ii. The authorization of the affiant to act on behalf of a
authorized to sign said verification. The authorization of
1. He has read it, party, whether in the form of a secretary’s certificate or a
the affiant to act on behalf of a party, whether in the form of
special power of attorney, should be attached to the
2. To the best of his knowledge, information and belief, a secretary’s certificate or a special power of attorney,
pleading.
formed after an inquiry reasonable under the should be attached to the pleading.
circumstances: iii. Failure to comply with the foregoing requirements shall
ii. The signature of the affiant shall further serve as a
NOT be curable by mere amendment of the complaint
a. It is not being presented for any improper certification of the truthfulness of the allegations in the
or other initiatory pleading but shall be cause for the
purpose; pleading.
dismissal of the case without prejudice, unless
b. The claims, defenses, and other legal contentions iii. Lack of veri cation in a pleading is a formal defect, not otherwise provided, upon motion and after hearing.
are warranted by existing law or jurisprudence; jurisdictional, and can be cured by amendment. (Phil.
Bank of Commerce v. Macadaeg)

or a davit shall be heard or admitted by the court;

iv. The submission of a false certi cation or non-compliance certify under oath that he or she has not commenced any-
and
with any of the undertakings therein shall constitute action involving the' same issues in any court.
indirect contempt of court, xxx. iii. Documentary and object evidence in support of the 4. The elements of forum shopping are:
v. If the acts of the party or his counsel clearly constitute allegations contained in the pleading.
4.1. identity of parties, or at least such parties
willful and deliberate forum shopping, the same shall
Brown-Araneta v. Araneta 2013 representing the same interest;
be ground for summary dismissal WITH prejudice and
shall constitute direct contempt, as well as a cause for There can be forum shopping even if the violator was a respondent 4.2. identity of rights asserted and relief prayed for, the
administrative sanctions. in the earlier case and the petitioner in the latter case where she had latter founded, on the same facts; and
sought the same relief in both cases. 4.3. any judgment rendered in one action will amount
Santo Tomas University Hospital v. Sps Surla to res judicata in the other action.
De Guzman v. Chico 2016
The certi cation applies ONLY to permissive counterclaims and 5. The requisites of litis pendentia are:
Petition for writ of possession to buyer in local tax delinquency sale
NOT to compulsory counterclaims.
does NOT require CFS since it is NOT an initiatory pleading. 5.1. the identity of parties, or at least such as
Far Eastern Shipping Co. v. CA representing the same interests in both actions;
It must be stressed that the certi cation against forum shopping is to 5.2. the identity of rights asserted and relief prayed for,
be executed by the petitioner, and NOT by counsel. Santos Ventura Hocorma Foundation v. the relief being founded on the same facts; and
Mabalacat Institute 29 Sep 2021
e. ⭐Contents of a pleading. — Every pleading stating a 5.3. the identity of the two cases such that judgment in
Doctrinal Rule one, regardless of which party is successful, would
party’s claims or defenses shall, in addition to those mandated
by Section 2, Rule 7, state the following: There is no forum shopping when plaintiff files an unlawful detainer amount to res judicata in the other.
case and a collection of sum of money case for unpaid rentals. 6. On the other hand, the elements of res judicata, also
i. Names of witnesses who will be presented to prove a
party’s claim or defense; 1. SVHFI did not violate the rule on forum shopping when it known as bar by prior judgment, are:
led the Ejectment Case while the Collection Case has been 6.1. the former judgment must be nal;
ii. Summary of the witnesses’ intended testimonies,
pending for four years.
provided that the judicial a davits of said witnesses shall 6.2. the court which rendered it had jurisdiction over
be attached to the pleading and form an integral part 2. The determinative factor in violations of the rule against the subject matter and the parties;
thereof. forum shopping is whether the elements of litis pendentia
6.3. it must be a judgment on the merits; and
are present, or whether a nal judgment in one case will
Only witnesses whose judicial a davits are attached to the 6.4. there must be, between the rst and second
amount to res judicata in another.
pleading shall be presented by the parties during trial. actions, identity of parties, subject matter, and
Except if a party presents meritorious reasons as basis for 3. Section 5, Rule 7 of the Rules of Court prohibits forum
causes of action.
the admission of additional witnesses, no other witness shopping by requiring the plainti or principal party to

the joinder of an ordinary action, such as an action

7. Here, the second and third elements of forum shopping The nality of RTC of Burauen's decision constitutes res judicata
for collection of sum of money and a special civil
and litis pendentia are lacking. in the instant case.
action, such as an ejectment suit.
8. There is no identity of rights asserted and reliefs prayed for A. The ndings of the RTC of Tacloban City and the
11. Here, the Collection Case requires a full-blown trial for the
between both actions. appellate court as to the validity of the Deed of Donation,
parties to show evidence on the propriety of paying rent
involved the same issue which was already resolved with
8.1. The only issue that must be settled in an ejectment and its rightful amount. These may not be accomplished in
nality by the RTC of Burauen.
proceeding is physical possession of the property. an ejectment proceeding which is summary in nature.
B. Res judicata by conclusiveness of judgment is availing in
8.2. On one hand, the purpose of the Collection Case
See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 26 this case.
was to compel MII to pay its rent in view of its
occupancy on the subject lot. 1. the decision of the RTC of Burauen had already
attained nality;
8.3. In the Ejectment Case, SVHFI's cause of action Asis v. Heirs of Calignawan 15 Sep 2021
stemmed from the prejudice it su ered due to the 2. said RTC of Burauen acquired jurisdiction over the
loss of possession of its property. Rosello indeed committed forum-shopping. However, raising said lots as well as jurisdiction over the parties when Rosello
issue on appeal is already too late in the day. led his Complaint for Recovery of Ownership.
9. Any judgment rendered in ejectment cases of forcible entry
or unlawful detainer will not amount to res judicata in a A. Pursuant to Section 1, Rule 9 of the Rules of Court, 3. the disposition of the RTC of Burauen as to the
civil case of collection of sum of money for unpaid rent of defenses and objections are deemed waived when they are validity of the Deed of Donation was based on the
the same property and vice versa. not pleaded in the answer or in a motion to dismiss. merits; and
9.1. In forcible entry or unlawful detainer cases, the The CA essentially found that the counsel for respondents was 4. both the Complaints for Declaration of Nullity and
only damage that can be recovered is the fair rental grossly negligent in handling the a airs of the latter who should not Recovery of Ownership involved the petitioners and
value or the reasonable compensation for the use be prejudiced by the same. respondents or their predecessors at the outset and had
and occupation of the leased property. B. Levi Strauss & Co v. Blancaflor enunciated that motions for similar causes of action.
9.2. In a civil suit for collection of sum of money, what extension of time are not granted as a matter of right but
is sought to be recovered is the payment of rentals are left to the sound discretion of the court.
only without regard to the unlawfulness of the 1. There must be a good and su cient cause as required
occupancy. by said provision, or a compelling reason as case laws CIR v. Standard Insurance 28 Apr 2021
10. Also, an action for collection of sum of money may not be explain.
Petitioner is not guilty of forum shopping and has complied with
joined with an ejectment suit, otherwise a misjoinder of C. Here, the withdrawal of respondents' counsel due to his
the certi cation against non forum shopping requirement under
causes of action would ensue. gross negligence, was satisfactory as to justify the relaxation
Section 4, Rule 45.
10.1. Section 5, Rule 2 of the Rules of Court prohibits of the rules of procedure.

Commissioner of Customs v. PTT Philippines Trading erroneous customs duties assessment.

A. There is forum shopping when the elements of litis
15 Feb 2021
pendencia are present or where a nal judgment in one case D. CTA Case Nos. 8002 and 8023 are claims for refund of the
will amount to res judicata in another. They are as follows: Given that the issues raised and the reliefs prayed for in CTA Case amount that respondent paid under protest to the BoC
Nos. 8002 and 8023 are closely related, if not intertwined, with representing its assessment balance pursuant to the demand
1. identity of parties, or at least such parties that represent
those raised in CTA Case No. 7707, the CTA-EB properly ordered letter it was contesting in CTA Case No. 7707.
the same interests in both actions,
their consolidation. 1. The logical conclusion is to regard both petitions as
2. identity of rights or causes of action, and
A. Forum shopping can be committed in three ways, to wit: supplements to CTA Case No. 7707 despite being led
3. identity of reliefs sought. and docketed as separate petitions.
1. ling multiple cases based on the same cause of action
B. Forum shopping does not exist where di erent orders were and with the same prayer, the previous case not having See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 58
questioned, two distinct causes of action and issues were been resolved yet (litis pendentia);
raised, and two objectives were sought.
2. ling multiple cases based on the same cause of action
C. Here, petitioner assailed di erent orders of the RTC – the and with the same prayer, the previous case having Heirs of Casiño, Sr. v. DBP 11 Mar 2020
rst pertaining to interlocutory orders of the RTC in been nally resolved (res judicata); or
connection with the grant of the WPI and the other which 1. Auria is barred to le the quieting of title case due to res
decided the main action. 3. ling multiple cases based on the same cause of action judicata.
but with di erent prayers (splitting of causes of action,
1. Petitioner, in assailing the RTC orders which granted 2. The Heirs of Aurio mainly argues that the issues raised in
where the ground for dismissal is also either litis
and upheld the WPI in favor of respondent, merely Civil Case No. 1465 are not identical with the instant case,
pendentia or res judicata).
sought the dissolution of the said writ which prevented as the land mortgaged by Baldomero to DBP and
petitioner from implementing Sections 108 and 184 B. Hence, to constitute forum shopping, the following subsequently sold to Green River is covered by a di erent
against respondent. elements must be present: tax declaration with boundaries not identical to the subject
1. identity of parties, or at least such parties as represent property being claimed by Aurio.
2. On the other hand, the RTC Order and RTC Decision
assailed in the instant Petition were in the nature of a the same interests in both actions; 3. While the landholdings respectively claimed by respondents
nal judgment or order which disposed of the main 2. identity of rights asserted and reliefs prayed for, the and petitioners have di erent technical particulars, the
case on the merits. This is so since the Petition for relief being founded on the same facts; and evidence on record would clearly reveal that the property
Declaratory Relief was granted. subject of the writ of possession is part and parcel of the
3. the identity of the two preceding particulars, such that property being claimed by petitioners.
See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 49 any judgment rendered in the other action will,
regardless of which party is successful, amounts to res 4. There is also substantial identity of parties in this case.
judicata in the action under consideration. 4.1. Aurio is not only an heir of Baldomero, but may
C. Here, CTA Case No. 7707 is a protest to an alleged also be considered a successor-in-interest by virtue

of the Kasabotan. of the writ of possession, which is part and parcel of identity of parties in both SP Nos. 113939 and 114001, the
petitioners' claimed property. causes of action are not identical.
4.2. There is identity of parties not only where the
parties are the same but also those in privity with See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 75 See Labor Law Case Digest No. 42
them, as between their successor-in-interest by title
subsequent to the commencement of the action,
litigating for the same thing and in the same
Angono Medics Hospital v. Agabin 09 Dec 2020 Land Bank v. Del Moral, Inc. 14 Oct 2020
capacity, or where there is substantial identity of
parties. There is no con ict between the two CA rulings. 1. When the Court dismissed the DAR's Petition for Review
on Certiorari, the Decision of the RTC became the law of
5. Both Civil Case No. 1465 and the instant case have causes A. What is being assailed in the case at bench is the
the case and constituted a bar to any relitigation of the same
of action that inevitably deal with quieting of title over the computation of Agabin's separation pay and backwages
issues in any other proceeding under the principle of res
subject property. and no longer the nding of illegal dismissal.
judicata.
6. One test of identity of causes of action is the "absence of B. Res judicata means 'a matter adjudged; a thing judicially
2. All the elements of res judicata are present in the case at bar.
inconsistency test" where it is determined whether the acted upon or decided; a thing or matter settled by
judgment sought will be inconsistent with the prior judgment.' 2.1. First, there is a nal judgment or order, that is, the
judgment. RTC Decision as a rmed by the CA had already
C. There is bar by prior judgment when, as between the rst
become nal and executory by virtue of the
6.1. If no inconsistency is shown, the prior judgment case where the judgment was rendered and the second case
Court's Resolution which denied the DAR's
shall not constitute a bar to subsequent actions. that is sought to be barred, there is identity of parties,
Petition for Review on Certiorari.
subject matter, and causes of action.
7. Here, Aurio alleged that he is the true, lawful, and absolute
2.2. Second, both the CA and the RTC have
owner of the property being subjected to a writ of 1. Here, the judgment in the rst case constitutes an
jurisdiction over
possession. absolute bar to the second action.
2.2.1. the subject matter, that is, the
7.1. Any a rmative relief that the Court may grant on D. There is conclusiveness of judgment when there is identity
computation of just compensation of the
said cause of action would necessarily a ect the of parties in the rst and second cases, but no identity of
subject properties and the awards for
validity of the real estate mortgage foreclosure causes of action.
temperate and nominal damages as well as
proceedings and the resulting sale of the property 1. The rst judgment is conclusive only as to those legal interest; and
subject of Civil Case No. 1465; issues which could matters actually and directly controverted and
no longer be revived, as the same have already been 2.2.2. the parties, namely, LBP, DAR and Del
determined and not as to the matters merely involved
settled. Moral.
therein.
8. Thus, it is clear that the Decision in Civil Case No. 1465, 2.3. Third, the RTC and CA Decisions are judgments
E. The instant case should be resolved on the basis of the rule
constitutes res judicata to the extent of the property subject on the merits, the rights and obligations of the
on "conclusiveness of judgment" since although there is

parties with respect to the causes of action and the ii. How to Plead an Actionable Document? 3. When the document to be denied is not classi ed as
subject matter of the case having been an actionable document but merely an evidentiary
1. The substance shall be set forth in the pleading and
unequivocally determined and resolved. matter.
the original or a copy thereof shall be attached to the
2.4. Lastly, both appeals to the CA refer to the same pleading as an exhibit; OR d. ⭐Affirmative defenses
subject matter, raise the same issues and involve the
2. Copy of the document may with like e ect be quoted i. A defendant shall raise his or her a rmative defenses in his
same parties.
in verbatim in the pleading in which case, there is no or her ANSWER, which shall be limited to the reasons
3. Applying the principle of res judicata or bar by prior need to attach the copy. set forth under Sec 5(b) R6
judgment, the present case becomes dismissible.
iii. E ect of violation: Ground for Motion to Dismiss. 1. fraud,
See Labor Law Case Digest No. 47 c. Specific denials 2. statute of limitations,
i. Effect of failure to make specific denials. — Material 3. release, payment,
averments in a pleading asserting a claim or claims,
Manner of making allegations 4. illegality,
3 other than those as to the amount of unliquidated
Rule 8 damages, shall be deemed admitted when not speci cally 5. statute of frauds,
denied. 6. estoppel,
a. Manner of making allegations
ii. When a specific denial requires an oath. — When an 7. former recovery,
General Averment Speci c Averment action or defense is founded upon a written instrument,
8. discharge in bankruptcy, and
copied in or attached to the corresponding pleading, the
Conditions precedent Capacity to sue or be sued 9. any other matter by way of confession and avoidance.
genuineness and due execution of the
Malice, intent, knowledge Legal existence instrument shall be deemed admitted unless the A rmative defenses may also include grounds for the
Condition of the mind Fraud or mistake adverse party, under oath speci cally denies them, and dismissal of a complaint, speci cally,
sets forth what he claims to be the facts. But the
Judgment 10. that the court has no jurisdiction over the subject
requirement of an oath does not apply
matter,
O cial act or document
1. When the adverse party does not appear to be a party
11. Litis pendentia — that there is another action
b. Pleading an actionable document to the instrument; or
pending between the same parties for the same cause,
i. An ACTIONABLE DOCUMENT is one which is the 2. When compliance with an order for an inspection of or
basis or the foundation of the cause of action or defense the original instrument is refused.
12. Res judicata — that the action is barred by a prior
and not merely an evidence of the cause of action or judgment.
defense.
and the following grounds (Sec 12[a] R8):

13. That the court has no jurisdiction over the person b. A compulsory counterclaim and cross-claim. — A
Failure to attach or set forth an actionable document does not
of the defending party; compulsory counterclaim, or a cross-claim, NOT set up shall
preclude its subsequent o er in evidence.
be BARRED.
14. That venue is improperly laid;
Titan Construction v. David, Sr 2010
15. That the plainti has no legal capacity to sue; Amended and supplemental pleadings
Implied admission rule under §8 R8 does not apply to a plainti
16. That the pleading asserting the claim states no cause who les a reply not under oath if the veri ed complaint already
5
Rule 10
of action; and traverses the actionable document attached to the answer.
a. As a matter of right. — Once as a matter of right at any
17. That a condition precedent for ling the claim has Mercene v. GSIS 2018
time
not been complied with.
Conclusions of fact and law stated in the complaint are not
i. before a responsive pleading is served or,
ii. Failure to raise the a rmative defenses at the earliest deemed admitted by the failure to make a speci c denial.
opportunity shall constitute a waiver thereof. ii. in the case of a reply, at any time within ten (10)
The fact that GSIS had not instituted any action within ten years
calendar days after it is served.
iii. The court shall motu proprio resolve the above a rmative after the loan had been contracted is insu cient to hold that
defenses (Nos. 13-17) within thirty (30) calendar days prescription had set in. There was no judicial admission on the part Matter of Right
from the ling of the answer. of GSIS with regard to prescription because treating the obligation
as prescribed, was merely a conclusion of law. 1) Before an Answer is led (Complaint);
iv. As to the other a rmative defenses under the rst
paragraph of Section 5(b) Rule 6 (Nos. 1-9), the court 2) Before a reply is led or before the period for ling a reply
may conduct a summary hearing within fteen (15) expires (Answer);
calendar days from the ling of the answer. Such E ect of failure to plead
4 3) Any time within 10 calendar days after it is served (Reply);
a rmative defenses shall be resolved by the court within Rule 9
thirty (30) calendar days from the termination of the 4) Formal amendment.
summary hearing. a. Defenses and objections. — Defenses or objections not
pleaded in an answer are deemed waived. EXC b. By leave of court. — Substantial amendments may be made
v. A rmative defenses, if denied, shall NOT be the subject only upon leave of court. But such leave SHALL be refused if
of a motion for reconsideration or petition for i. Court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter; it appears to the court that the motion was made with
certiorari, prohibition or mandamus, but may be ii. Litis pendentia; i. intent to delay or
among the matters to be raised on appeal after a judgment
iii. Res judicata; or ii. confer jurisdiction on the court, or
on the merits.
iv. Prescription. By statute of limitations. iii. the pleading stated no cause of action from the beginning
Keihin-Everett v. Tokio Marine Malayan Insurance 2019 which could be amended.

c. Formal amendment. — provided no prejudice is caused insured's action for indemnity should be reckoned from the
The fact that a tax declaration showing assessed value of realty
thereby to the adverse party. " nal rejection" of the claim.
subject of action was o ered without objection by defendant will
d. Effect of amended pleading. — An amended pleading not cure jurisdictional defect. §5 R10 cannot cure jurisdictional 4.1. It should be construed as the rejection in the rst
supersedes the pleading that it amends. However, admissions defects. instance.
in superseded pleadings may be received in evidence against the
5. Here, respondents' rejection of petitioner's claim was
pleader, and claims or defenses alleged therein not
embodied in a Letter received by petitioner on 24 January
incorporated in the amended pleading shall be deemed waived. Alpha Plus International Enterprises v. Philippine 2009.
i. The reason why a superseded pleading may still be Charter Insurance 10 Feb 2021
5.1. Thus, petitioner's prescriptive period to le its
received as an evidence against the pleader is because such Doctrinal Rule insurance claim ends on January 24, 2010.
is in the nature of a judicial admission. Thus, the party
The settled rule is that the filing of an amended pleading does NOT 6. Although petitioner led its original complaint on 20
relying thereon may still prove the admissions therein by
retroact to the date of the filing of the original pleading. January 2010, it led an amended one on 9 February 2010.
formal o er in evidence of such original pleading.
An exception is when the amended complaint does not introduce new 6.1. An amended complaint supersedes an original one.
e. Supplemental pleadings. — A supplemental complaint
issues, cause of action, or demands. Then, the suit is deemed to have
must be based on matters arising subsequent to the original 6.2. As a consequence, the original complaint is
commenced on the date the original complaint was filed.
complaint RELATED to the claim presented therein and deemed withdrawn and no longer considered part
founded on the same cause of action. 1. Petitioner's insurance claim had already prescribed and that of the record.
Amended Supplemental the RTC should dismiss the complaint before it based on
6.3. The settled rule is that the ling of an amended
said ground.
pleading does NOT retroact to the date of the
As to Already occurred during Happened after ling of 2. Prescription is a ground for the dismissal of a complaint ling of the original pleading.
allegations ling of original complaint original complaint without going into trial on the merits.
6.4. As an exception, when the amended complaint
As to effect Supersedes the original Appends the original 2.1. When it appears from the pleadings or the does not introduce new issues, cause of action, or
evidence on record that an action is barred by demands, the suit is deemed to have commenced
Matter of Always upon judicial prescription, the court is mandated to dismiss the
Could be on the date the original complaint was led.
Right? discretion same.
7. Here, the general rule applies. The Amended Complaint
Only if substantial, or 3. The 12-month period in Condition No. 27 of the parties' introduced new demands, particularly the P300M claim for
Leave of
after defendant has led Always required re insurance policies should refer to the period of one (1) actual damages, that were not speci ed and averred
Court
his Answer. year, or 365 days, in line with Section 63 of the Insurance expressly in the original complaint.
Code and prevailing jurisprudence.
8. Thus, when petitioners led the Amended Complaint on 9
Cabrera v. Clarin 2016 4. Case law teaches that the prescriptive period for the February 2010, prescription had already set in.

counsel's residence, if known, with a person of

See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 61 6. Reply 10 15 days
su cient age and discretion then residing therein.
7. Answer to supplemental complaint 10 20 days ii. Service by registered mail. — If no registry service
When to le responsive pleadings is available in the locality of either the senders or the
6 8. Summons served through PUBLICATION 60 60 days addressee, service may be done by ordinary mail.
Rule 11
c. Manner of filing iii. Service by accredited courier.
a. Distinguish: filing and service of pleadings
i. Personal filing. — Submitting personally the original iv. Service by electronic mail, facsimile
i. Filing is the act of submitting the pleading or other thereof, plainly indicated as such, to the court. transmission, or other electronic means. — Shall
paper to the clerk of court. be made if the party concerned consents to such
ii. Filing by registered mail
ii. Service is the act of providing a party with a copy of the modes of service.
iii. Filing by accredited courier.
pleading or any other court submission. v. Service as provided for in international
iv. Transmittal by electronic mail or other electronic means. conventions.
b. Periods of filing of pleadings
b. Service of judgments, final orders or resolutions; service
Pleading Old New Filing and Service
G of court-issued orders and other documents
Rule 13
1. Answer 15 30 days i. Judgments, nal orders or resolutions shall be served
Rules on payment of docket fees; e ect of non-payment either personally or by registered mail.
2. Answer of a private foreign corporation
E cient use of paper rule; E- ling ii. Upon ex parte motion of any party in the case, a copy
a) with designated PH representative 15 30 days of the judgment, final order, or resolution may be
a. Modes of service delivered by accredited courier at the expense of such
b) without 30 60 days i. Personal service. — Court submissions may be served party.
by personal delivery of a copy iii. When a party summoned by publication has failed
3. Answer to an amended complaint
1. to the party or to the party’s counsel, or to their to appear in the action, judgments, nal orders or
a) if as a matter of right 15 30 days authorized representative named in the resolutions against him shall be served upon him also
appropriate pleading or motion, or by publication at the expense of the prevailing party.
b) if as a matter of judicial discretion 10 15 days
2. by leaving it in his o ce with his clerk or with a c. Conventional service or filing of orders, pleadings, and
4. Answer to counterclaim or cross-claim 10 20 days person having charge thereof. other documents. — Notwithstanding the foregoing, the
following must be served or led personally or by registered
3. If no person is found in his o ce, or his o ce is
5. Answer to 3rd (4th, etc) party complaint 15 30 days mail when allowed, and shall NOT be served or led
not known, or he has no o ce, then by leaving
the copy, between 8AM - 6PM, at the party's or

electronically, unless express permission is granted by the

1. at the time of the electronic transmission of the a davit of electronic
Court:
document, or ling of the ling party
i. Initiatory pleadings and initial responsive pleadings, + paper copy of the
2. when available, at the time that the electronic Electronic
such as an answer; Electronic pleading or a written or
noti cation of service of the document is sent. mail
service stamped acknowledgment a davit of service
ii. Subpoenae, protection orders, and writs;
not e ective or complete if the party serving the of its ling by the clerk of executed by the person
iii. Appendices and exhibits to motions, or other document learns that it did not reach the addressee court. who sent the email,
documents that are not readily amenable to electronic or person to be served. facsimile, or other
scanning may, at the option of the party ling such, Facsimile N/A electronic transmission,
be led and served conventionally; and Facsimile upon receipt by the other party together with a printed
a davit of electronic proof of transmittal.
iv. Sealed and con dential documents or records. e. Proof of filing and service Other
ling + copy of the
authorized
d. When service is deemed complete electronic
Mode Proof of Filing Proof of Service electronic
acknowledgment of its
means
Mode Deemed Complete 1. a written admission ling by the court.
of the party served,
Personal written or stamped
upon actual delivery or
service acknowledgment of its ⭐Presumptive Service. — There shall be presumptive notice to a
Personal 2. the o cial return of
service ling by the clerk of party of a court setting if such notice appears on the records to
Ordinary upon the expiration of ten (10) calendar days after the server, or
court have been mailed
mail mailing
3. the a davit of the
a) at least twenty (20) calendar days prior to the scheduled
1. upon actual receipt by the addressee, OR party serving
date of hearing and if the addressee is from within the same
Registered
2. after ve (5) calendar days from the date he Ordinary a davit of the person judicial region of the court where the case is pending, or
mail N/A
received the rst notice of the postmaster mail mailing b) at least thirty (30) calendar days if the addressee is from
outside the judicial region.
1. upon actual receipt by the addressee, or registry receipt + a davit mentioned
Registered
2. after at least two (2) attempts to deliver by the a davit of the person above + the registry
mail
Accredited who mailed it receipt Rules on payment of docket fees; e ect of
courier service, or 1
courier non-payment
3. upon the expiration of ve (5) calendar days Accredited a davit of service + courier’s o cial receipt +
after the rst attempt to deliver, courier document tracking number. 1. It is not simply the ling of the complaint or appropriate
initiatory pleading, but the payment of the prescribed docket
fee, that vests a trial court with jurisdiction over the subject

matter or nature of the action. Where the ling of the not be deemed to have curtailed the court's jurisdiction. date and time of the transmission of the electronic
initiatory pleading is not accompanied by payment of the (ICTSI v. City of Manila 2018) copy;
docket fee, the court may allow payment of the fee within
b. when the manner of ling of the paper or other court
a reasonable time but in no case beyond the applicable E cient use of paper rule; E- ling submission is made online, the date of the electronic
prescriptive or reglementary period. 2 A.M. No. 10-3-7-SC and A.M. No. 11-9-4-SC, as revised, transmission shall be considered as the date of ling,
2. The same rule applies to permissive counterclaims, third-party approved on February 22, 2022 provided that an EXPRESS PERMISSION IS
claims and similar pleadings, which shall not be considered GRANTED BY THE COURT for the online ling
1. The E cient Use of Paper Rule applies to all courts and
led until and unless the ling fee prescribed therefor is paid. of the following:
quasi-judicial bodies under the administrative supervision of
The court may also allow payment of said fee within a
the Supreme Court. i. Initiatory pleadings and initial
reasonable time but also in no case beyond its applicable
responsive pleadings, such as an Answer to
prescriptive or reglementary period. 2. The Revised Guidelines on Submission of Electronic
a Complaint or a Comment to a Petition;
Copies of Supreme Court-Bound Papers Pursuant to the
3. Where the trial court acquires jurisdiction over a claim by the
E cient Use of Paper Rule shall govern the submission of ii. Appendices and exhibits to motions, or other
ling of the appropriate pleading and payment of the
electronic copies of all Supreme Court-bound papers and their documents that are NOT readily amenable
prescribed ling fee but, subsequently, the judgment awards a
annexes. to electronic scanning; and
claim not speci ed in the pleading, or if speci ed the same has
been left for determination by the court, the additional 3. Manner of Transmittal. — Electronic copies of all iii. Sealed and con dential documents or
ling fee therefor shall constitute a lien on the judgment. Supreme Court bound papers and their annexes must be records.
It shall be the responsibility of the Clerk of Court or his duly submitted within twenty-four (24) hours from the ling of the In the absence of the express permission from the
authorized deputy to enforce said lien and assess and collect hard copies ( led personally, by registered mail, or by Court to le the foregoing online, the date of ling
the additional fee. accredited courier) by transmitting them through electronic shall be the date when the hard copy was led in
mail. person, sent by registered mail, or delivered to the
4. Should the docket fees paid be found insu cient considering
the value of the claim, the ling party shall be required to pay 4. Date and Time of Filing. — It must be understood, accredited courier.
the de ciency, but jurisdiction is not automatically lost. The however, that 5. Proof of Filing of Hard Copy. — The electronic copy
clerk of court involved, or his or her duly authorized deputy, is a. when the paper or hard copy is led submitted should be the EXACT COPY of the paper led in
responsible for making the de ciency assessment. Court personally, by registered mail, by accredited
i. in person,
5. If a party pays the correct amount of docket fees for its original courier, by e-mail or other means of electronic
ii. by registered mail, or transmission. Thus, the following shall be considered as
initiatory pleading, but later amends the pleading and
increases the amount prayed for, the failure to pay the iii. by accredited courier, proof of ling:
corresponding docket fees for the increased amount should the same shall be deemed to have been led on the a. For paper led in person, the electronic copy shall
date and time of ling of the hard copy, NOT the

shall, within five (5) calendar days from receipt of the

i. contain the o cial receiving stamp of the Nature and purpose of summons in relation to actions in
personam, in rem, and quasi in rem initiatory pleading and proof of payment of the requisite
docketing o ce, clearly showing the date and
legal fees, direct the clerk of court to issue the
time of ling of the hard/paper copy and Who May Serve Summons corresponding summons to the defendants.
ii. must be duly signed by the receiving clerk or
records o cer;
Validity of Summons and Issuance of Alias Summons b. Contents of summons. — When authorized by the court
Personal Service upon ex parte motion, an authorization for the
b. For paper sent by registered mail or by accredited plaintiff to serve summons to the defendant; among
courier, the electronic copy shall include the scanned Substituted Service others.
copy of the following:
Constructive Service
c. ⭐ Duty of counsel. — Where the summons is
i. proof of mailing clearly showing the date improperly served and a lawyer makes a special
and time of mailing or delivery to the post appearance on behalf of the defendant to, among others,
Extraterritorial Service
o ce/accredited courier, and question the validity of service of summons, the counsel
ii. proof of payment of fees, when applicable; Proof of Service shall be deputized by the court to serve summons on his
or her client.
c. For paper led online via electronic mail or other
electronic means, the electronic copy shall include the Nature and purpose of summons in relation to d. ⭐ Return. — Within thirty (30) calendar days from
1
following documents: actions in personam, in rem, and quasi in rem issuance of summons and receipt thereof, the sheri shall
complete its service.
i. PDF copy of the A davit of Electronic 1. In an action in personam, jurisdiction over the person of the
Filing of the Supreme Court-bound defendant is necessary for the court to validly try and decide Within ve (5) calendar days from service, the server
paper and its annexes (if any), with an the case. shall le with the court and serve a copy of the return to
undertaking that the ler will submit the the plainti ’s counsel.
2. Summons on the defendant in actions in personam must be
exact paper/hard copy to the Court in person Should substituted service have been e ected, the return
served by handing a copy thereof to the defendant in person,
or by registered mail or by accredited courier, shall state the following:
or, if he refuses to receive it, by tendering it to him.
within 24 hours from the date of the
3. In a proceeding in rem or quasi in rem, the service of i. The impossibility of prompt personal service within a
electronic transmission;
summons or notice to the defendant is not for the purpose of period of thirty (30) calendar days;
ii. Express authority from the Court to le the
vesting the court with jurisdiction but merely for satisfying ii. The date and time of the three (3) attempts on at
initiatory pleadings and initial responsive
the due process requirements. least (2) two di erent dates; and
pleadings, etc.
4. Nature and purpose of summons iii. The name of the person at least eighteen (18) years
Summons a. When summons are issued. — Unless the complaint is
of age and of su cient discretion residing thereat,
H name of competent person in charge of the
Rule 14 on its face dismissible under Section 1, Rule 9, the court

defendant’s o ce or regular place of business, or

i. the case shall be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, a. By leaving copies of the summons at the defendant's
name of the o cer of the homeowners’
residence to a person at least 18 years of age and of
association or condominium corporation or its chief ii. the proceedings shall be nullified, and
sufficient discretion residing therein;
security o cer in charge of the community or iii. the plaintiff shall be meted appropriate sanctions.
building where the defendant may be found. b. At the defendant's o ce or regular place of business with
d. Failure to comply with the order shall cause the dismissal of the some competent person in charge thereof.
5. Voluntary appearance. — Shall be equivalent to service of initiatory pleading without prejudice.
summons. The inclusion in a motion to dismiss of other A competent person includes, but is not limited to, one
grounds aside from lack of jurisdiction over the person of who customarily receives correspondences for the
Validity of Summons and Issuance of Alias
the defendant shall be deemed a voluntary appearance. 3 defendant;
Summons
This means that if the motion to dismiss is solely grounded on c. If refused entry upon making his or her authority and
Summons shall remain valid until duly served, unless it is recalled purpose known, with any of the officers of the homeowners’
lack of jurisdiction over the person of the defendant, then it is
by the court. In case of loss or destruction of summons, the court association or condominium corporation, or its chief
NOT deemed a voluntary appearance.
may, upon motion, issue an alias summons. security officer in charge of the community or the building
2 Who May Serve Summons There is failure of service after unsuccessful attempts to where the defendant may be found; and
personally serve the summons on the defendant in his or her d. By sending an electronic mail to the defendant’s electronic
a. The sheri , his deputy, or other proper court o cer, and address indicated in the complaint. mail address, if allowed by the court.
b. Plaintiff. —
4 Personal Service 6 Constructive Service
i. in case of failure of service of summons by the sheri ,
his deputy, or other proper court o cers, the court may Whenever practicable, the summons shall be served by handing a a. Service upon a defendant where his identity is unknown
authorize the plainti to serve the summons — together copy thereof to the defendant in person and informing the or where his whereabouts are unknown. — Within 90
with the sheriff; defendant that he or she is being served, or, if he or she refuses to calendar days from the commencement of the action, service
There is failure of service after unsuccessful attempts receive and sign for it, by leaving the summons within the view and may, by leave of court, be e ected upon him by publication.
to personally serve the summons on the defendant in the in the presence of the defendant.
Any order granting such leave shall specify a reasonable time, which
address indicated in the complaint.
5 Substituted Service shall not be less than 60 calendar days after notice, within
ii. summons is to be served outside the judicial region of which the defendant must answer.
the court where the case is pending; If, for justi able causes, the defendant cannot be served personally
b. Service upon residents temporarily outside the
after at least three (3) attempts on two (2) different dates,
iii. If the summons is returned without being served on Philippines. — Service may, by leave of court, be also e ected
service may be e ected:
any defendant. out of the Philippines, as with Extraterritorial service.
c. If the plaintiff MISREPRESENTS that the defendant was
served summons, 7 Extraterritorial Service

a. when the action a ects the personal status of the plainti ; iii. general manager, ii. By publication once in a newspaper of general circulation
in the country where the defendant may be found and by
b. when the action relates to, or the subject of which is, property iv. corporate secretary,
serving a copy of the summons and the court order by
within the Philippines, in which the defendant has or claims a
v. treasurer, or registered mail at the last known address of the
lien or interest, actual or contingent;
vi. in-house counsel of the corporation wherever they may be defendant;
c. when the relief demanded in such an action consists, wholly or
found, or iii. By facsimile;
in part, in excluding the defendant from any interest in
property located in the Philippines, and vii. in their absence or unavailability, on their secretaries. iv. By electronic means with the prescribed proof of service; or
d. when defendant nonresident's property has been attached If such service cannot be made upon any of the foregoing persons, v. By such other means as the court, in its discretion, may
within the Philippines. it shall be made upon direct.
The service of summons may, with leave of court, be e ected out viii. the person who customarily receives the correspondence
of the Philippines in four ways: for the defendant at its principal office. 8 Proof of Service
a. by personal service; ix. In case of receivership or liquidation — receiver or a. Shall be made in writing by the server and shall set forth the
liquidator, as the case may be. manner, place, and date of service;
b. by publication, in which case a copy of the summons and
order of the court should be sent by registered mail to the x. Electronically. — if there is failure of service, if allowed b. Shall specify any papers which have been served with the
last known address of the defendant, and by the court. process and the name of the person who received the same;
b. Foreign. — Service may be made on and
c. in any other manner which the court may deem sufficient.
i. its resident agent designated in accordance with law for c. Shall be sworn to when made by a person other than a sheri
d. as provided for in international conventions to which the
that purpose, or, or his deputy.
Philippines is a party.
ii. if there be no such agent, on the government o cial If summons was served by electronic mail,
GR: Service of summons by mail is NOT allowed.
designated by law to that e ect, or i. a printout of said e-mail,
EXC: If the summons was sent abroad and was actually
received by the defendant, then the service will be iii. on any of its o cers or agents, directors or trustees ii. with a copy of the summons as served, and
considered substantial compliance (Cariaga v. within the Philippines.
iii. the affidavit of the person mailing,
Malaya) If it is not registered in the Philippines, or has no resident
shall constitute as proof of service.
Service upon domestic or foreign private juridical entities agent but has transacted or is doing business in it, such
service may, with leave of court, be effected outside of the d. Proof of service by publication. —
a. Domestic. — Service may be made on the
Philippines: i. by the a davit of the publisher, editor, business or
i. president, advertising manager, to which a davit a copy of the
i. By personal service coursed through the appropriate court
ii. managing partner, in the foreign country with the assistance of the DFA; publication shall be attached and

ii. by an a davit showing the deposit of a copy of the voluntary appearance when he sought the lifting of the extraterritorial service, or by publication in accordance with
summons and order for publication in the post o ce, TPO and the denial of the issuance of PPO in his Sections 7, 15 and 16, Rule 14.
postage prepaid, directed to the defendant by registered opposition, without raising the issue of lack of jurisdiction
8.1. None of these modes of service were resorted to by
mail to his last known address. over his person.
Tina.
2. Firstly, there was improper service of summons.
Ramos-Yeo v. Spouses Chua 18 Apr 2022 9. GCP-Manny Transport Services, Inc. v. Prinsipe teaches that
3. Summons is a writ by which the defendant is noti ed that notice sent to counsel of record is binding upon the client.
1. Contrary to the Spouses Chua's claim, the determination an action was brought against him or her.
9.1. Here, Atty. Palmero was Jay's counsel in a separate
of the propriety of substituted service e ected on the Gos is
4. A protection order is not a procedural mechanism, which is criminal case.
a question of law.
imperative for the progression of an initiated action.
9.2. Jay had no counsel of record yet at the time Atty.
1.1. It is a question of what and how the law should be
5. Pavlow v. Mendenilla clari ed that summons and Palmero received the copy of the order and TPO.
applied, hence, within the purview of an appeal by
temporary protection orders are entirely di erent judicial
certiorari under Rule 45. 10. Jurisdiction over the person of the defendant cannot be
issuances.
acquired notwithstanding his knowledge of the pendency
2. The Court reiterates that the amended complaint of accion
5.1. At no point does the Anti-VAWC Law intimate of a case against him, unless he was validly served with
reivindicatoria is a disguise to review a nal decree of
that the TPO is the means for acquiring summons.
registration in the names of the Gos and Multi-Realty in
jurisdiction over the person of the respondent.
violation of Section 108 of PD 1529. 10.1. Thus, serving the order and TPO to Atty. Palmero
6. In an action in personam such as a petition for TPO/PPO cannot be considered a valid service of summons.
2.1. The trial court's judgment in favor of the Chuas
under RA 9262, the purpose of summons is two-fold:
materially altered the boundaries of the properties 11. However, Jay voluntarily submitted himself to the
owned by the Gos and Multi-Realty, a ecting the 6.1. to notify the defendant that an action has been jurisdiction of the trial court when he led the Entry of
integrity of their title over their respective lands. brought against him; and Appearance with Opposition.
2.2. It is, therefore, the trial court sitting as a land 6.2. to acquire jurisdiction over the person of the 11.1. In e ect, this cured the invalid service of summons.
registration court which has jurisdiction over the defendant.
11.2. In a catena of cases, the Court has ruled that
case under PD 1529. 7. Here, records show that Jay was out of the country due to voluntary appearance by the defendant results to
his overseas employment when the sheri attempted to his submission to the court's jurisdiction.
personally serve the summons, petition, and TPO in his
residence and place of employment as per the Sheri s See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 45
Return.
Sabado v. Sabado 12 May 2021
8. Since personal service could not be e ected upon him,
1. The RTC acquired jurisdiction over Jay through his Gesolgon v. CyberOne PH 14 Oct 2020
summons should be served through substituted service,

1. CyberOne AU is to be classi ed as a non-resident Arrieta v. Arrieta 2018 place of business. Hence it is not applicable against a
corporation not doing business in the Philippines. It may non-resident.
The Court, in De Pedro, held that circumstances which negate the
be served with summons by extraterritorial service, to wit:
court's acquisition of jurisdiction – such as defective service of
1.1. when the action a ects the personal status of the summons – are causes for an action for annulment of judgment.
plainti s; Motions
Personal service of summons is the preferred mode of service of I
1.2. when the action relates to, or the subject of which summons. However, other modes of serving summons may be done Rule 15
is property, within the Philippines, in which the when justi ed. Notably, publishing a copy of the summons does not
In general
defendant claims a lien or an interest, actual or necessarily mean that the trial court intended to direct
contingent; extraterritorial service of summons under the second mode of Non-litigious motions
service.
1.3. when the relief demanded in such action consists,
wholly or in part, in excluding the defendant from Pedro Santos, Jr v. PNOC abandoned Citizens Insurance
Litigious Motions
any interest in property located in the Philippines;
Since petitioner could not be personally served with summons Prohibited Motions
and
despite diligent e orts to locate his whereabouts, respondent sought
1.4. when the defendant non residents property has and was granted leave of court to e ect service of summons upon Bill of Particulars
been attached within the Philippines. him by publication in a newspaper of general circulation. Thus,
petitioner was properly served with summons by publication. 1 In General
2. Here, service of summons may be e ected by
The present rule expressly states that it applies "[i]n any action
2.1. personal service out of the country, with leave of a. Distinguish: motions and pleadings
where the defendant is designated as an unknown owner, or the like,
court;
or whenever his whereabouts are unknown and cannot be i. Pleadings are the written statements of the respective
2.2. publication, also with leave of court; or ascertained by diligent inquiry." Thus, it now applies to ANY claims and defenses of the parties submitted to the court
2.3. any other manner the court may deem su cient. action, whether in personam, in rem or quasi in rem. for appropriate judgment.
3. Extraterritorial service of summons applies only where the Moreover, even assuming that the service of summons was defective, ii. The main di erence is as to form wherein pleadings are
action is in rem or quasi in rem but not if an action is in the trial court acquired jurisdiction over the person of always written, whereas motions may be done orally in
personam as in this case; hence, jurisdiction over CyberOne petitioner by his own voluntary appearance in the action open court.
AU cannot be acquired unless it voluntarily appears in against him. b. Contents and form of motions. — All motions shall be in
court. Express Padala v. Ocampo 2017 writing except those made in open court or in the course of a
hearing or trial. A motion shall state
See Labor Law Case Digest No. 48 Substituted service presupposes that the place where the summons
is being served is defendant's current residence or o ce or regular i. the relief sought to be obtained and
ii. the grounds upon which it is based, and

then available, and all objections not so included shall be

iii. if required by these Rules or necessary to prove facts 5. Motion for execution pending appeal;
deemed waived.
alleged therein, shall be accompanied by supporting
6. Motion to amend after a responsive pleading has been
a davits and other papers.
led; 4 Prohibited Motions
2 Non-litigious Motions 7. Motion to cancel statutory lien;
The following motions shall not be allowed:
8. Motion for an order to break in or for a writ of
Motions which the court may act upon without prejudicing the rights i. Motion to dismiss except on the following grounds:
demolition;
of adverse parties are non-litigious motions. These motions include:
1. That the court has no jurisdiction over the subject
9. Motion for intervention;
1. Motion for the issuance of an alias summons; matter of the claim;
10. Motion for judgment on the pleadings;
2. Motion for extension to le answer; 2. That there is another action pending between the same
11. Motion for summary judgment; parties for the same cause; and
3. Motion for postponement;
12. Demurrer to evidence; 3. That the cause of action is barred
4. Motion for the issuance of a writ of execution;
13. Motion to declare defendant in default; and a. by a prior judgment or
5. Motion for the issuance of an alias writ of execution;
14. Other similar motions. b. by the statute of limitations;
6. Motion for the issuance of a writ of possession;
ii. The opposing party shall le his or her opposition to a ii. Motion to hear a rmative defenses;
7. Motion for the issuance of an order directing the sheri to
litigious motion within ve (5) calendar days from receipt
execute the nal certi cate of sale; and iii. Motion for reconsideration of the court’s action on the
thereof. No other submissions shall be considered by the
affirmative defenses;
8. Other similar motions. court.
iv. Motion to suspend proceedings without a TRO or
These motions shall NOT BE SET FOR HEARING and shall be iii. The motion shall be resolved by the court within fteen (15)
injunction issued by a higher court;
resolved by the court within ve (5) calendar days from receipt. calendar days from its receipt of the opposition thereto, or
upon expiration of the period to le such opposition. v. Motion for extension of time to le pleadings, a davits or
3 Litigious Motions iv. Notice of hearing on litigious motions; discretionary. —
any other papers, except a motion for extension to le an
answer; and
i. Litigious motions include: The court may, in the exercise of its discretion, and if deemed
necessary for its resolution, call a hearing on the motion. vi. Motion for postponement intended for delay, except if it is
1. Motion for bill of particulars; based on
v. Proof of service necessary. — No written motion shall be
2. Motion to dismiss; acted upon by the court without proof of service thereof. 1. acts of God,
3. Motion for new trial; vi. Omnibus motion rule. — A motion attacking a pleading, 2. force majeure or
4. Motion for reconsideration; order, judgment, or proceeding shall include all objections 3. physical inability of the witness to appear and testify.

more de nite statement ordered by the court may be led either in

If the motion is granted, the presentation of evidence must c. that the claim on which the action is founded is
a separate or in an amended pleading, serving a copy thereof on
still be terminated on the dates previously agreed upon. unenforceable under the provisions of the statute of
the adverse party.
Payment of the postponement fee is at all times frauds,
required. Effect of non-compliance. — If the order is not obeyed, or in case
shall bar the re ling of the same action or claim.
of insu cient compliance therewith, the court may order the
Bill of Particulars striking out of the pleading or the portions thereof to which the
5 Dismissals Which Have an E ect of an
order was directed or make such other order as it deems just. 2
Rule 12 Adjudication on the Merits
3. Stay of period to le responsive pleadings
A bill of particulars is a more de nite statement of any matter 1. Dismissal upon notice by plaintiff. — By ling a notice of
After service of the bill of particulars or of a more de nite dismissal at any time before service of the answer or of a
which is not averred with su cient de niteness or particularity in a
pleading, or after notice of denial of his motion, the moving party motion for summary judgment.
pleading so as to enable the opposing party to prepare his
may le his responsive pleading within the period to which he was
responsive pleading. GR: The dismissal is without prejudice.
entitled at the time of ling his motion, which shall not be less
1. When applied for than ve (5) calendar days in any event. EXC:
Before responding to a pleading, a party may move for a de nite A bill of particulars becomes part of the pleading for which it is a. When in the notice of dismissal itself, the plainti
statement or for a bill of particulars of any matter which is not intended himself stated that he is dismissing his own complaint
averted with sufficient definiteness or particularity to enable him with prejudice; OR
properly to prepare his responsive pleading. Dismissal of Actions
J b. TWO-DISMISSAL RULE. — When a notice
If the pleading is a reply, the motion must be led within ten (10) Rule 17 operates as an adjudication upon the merits when
calendar days from service thereof. Such motion shall point out led by a plainti who has once dismissed in a
the defects complained of, the paragraphs wherein they are competent court an action based on or including the
1 With prejudice vs. Without prejudice
contained, and the details desired. same claim.
2. Action by the court, compliance with order, e ect of 1. Dismissal with prejudice. — Subject to the right of appeal,
How to re-file action?
non-compliance an order granting a motion to dismiss or an affirmative
defense a. If within 15 days from the time it is ordered
Upon the ling of the motion, the clerk of court must immediately dismissed, all that you have to do is to ask the court to
bring it to the attention of the court which may either deny or a. that the cause of action is barred by a prior judgment or by
set aside the order of dismissal and revive the
grant it outright, or allow the parties the opportunity to be heard. the statute of limitations;
case because the order of dismissal have not yet
Compliance with order. — If the motion is granted, either in b. that the claim or demand set forth in the plaintiff’s become nal.
whole or in part, the compliance therewith must be e ected within pleading has been paid, waived, abandoned or otherwise
b. However, if the order of the court dismissing the
ten (10) calendar days from notice of the order, unless a extinguished; or
complaint based on your own notice has become
di erent period is xed by the court. The bill of particulars or a

nal after 15 days, then the only way you can revive
Pre-trial 2. Notice of pre-trial. — shall include the dates respectively set
it is to le an entirely new action. K for:
Rule 18
2. Dismissal due to the fault of plaintiff. — Upon motion of
a. Pre-trial;
the defendant or upon the court's own motion, the case may Concept of pre-trial. — After the last responsive pleading has
be dismissed if the plainti fails to: b. Court-Annexed Mediation; and
been served and led, the branch clerk of court shall issue, within
a. Appear on the date of the presentation of his five (5) calendar days from filing, a notice of pre-trial which shall c. Judicial Dispute Resolution, if necessary.
evidence-in-chief on the complaint; be set not later than sixty (60) calendar days from the filing of the Non-appearance at any of the foregoing settings shall be deemed
last responsive pleading. as non-appearance at the pre-trial.
b. Prosecute his action for an unreasonable length of time;
As per AM 03-01-09, failure of plainti to move for the 1 Nature and Purpose
setting of case for pre-trial is no longer a ground for
Appearance of Parties; E ects of Failure to
2
dismissal. 1. The pre-trial is mandatory and should be terminated Appear
promptly. The court shall consider:
c. Comply with the Rules of Court or any order of the court a. The non-appearance of a party and counsel may be excused only
for no justi able reason or cause. a. The possibility of an amicable settlement or of a for
submission to alternative modes of dispute resolution; i. acts of God,
GR: The court should not dismiss the case upon its own
initiative, because the grounds for dismissal are b. The simpli cation of the issues; ii. force majeure, or
waivable. If the defendant fails to move for dismissal,
c. The possibility of obtaining stipulations or admissions iii. duly substantiated physical inability.
he is waiving the defect.
of facts and of documents to avoid unnecessary proof;
EXC: The court may dismiss the complaint motu propio: b. A representative may appear on behalf of a party, but must be
d. The limitation of the number and identification of fully authorized in writing
a. Section 3, Rule 17 (Plainti ’s fault); witnesses and the setting of trial dates;
i. to enter into an amicable settlement,
b. When on its face, the complaint shows that the court e. The advisability of a preliminary reference of issues to a
has no jurisdiction over the subject matter; ii. to submit to alternative modes of dispute resolution, and
commissioner;
c. When there is litis pendentia; or res adjudicata; or iii. to enter into stipulations or admissions of facts and
f. The propriety of rendering judgment on the pleadings, or
when the action has prescribed; documents.
summary judgment, or of dismissing the action
d. Under the Summary Rules, the court is empowered should a valid ground therefor be found to exist; c. When duly notified, the failure of the plainti and counsel
to dismiss immediately without any motion. to appear without valid cause when so required shall be
g. The requirement for the parties to: xxxx cause for dismissal of the action. The dismissal shall be
h. Such other matters as may aid in the prompt disposition WITH prejudice, unless otherwise ordered by the court.
of the action.

d. A similar failure on the part of the defendant and counsel a. The contents of the pre-trial order shall control the When the party-defendant is present, the absence of his counsel
shall be cause to allow the plainti to present his evidence ex subsequent proceedings, unless modified before trial to during pre-trial shall not ipso facto result in the plainti 's ex parte
parte within ten (10) calendar days from termination of prevent manifest injustice. presentation of evidence.
the pre-trial, and the court to render judgment on the basis
2. Distinguish: pre-trial in civil cases and pre-trial in A. Paredes v. Verano categorically concluded that the absence
of the evidence offered.
criminal cases of defendants' counsel would not ipso facto authorize the
e. The failure without just cause of a party AND counsel to appear CIVIL CRIMINAL judge to declare the defendant in default and cause the ex
during pre-trial, despite notice, shall result in a waiver of any parte presentation of plainti 's evidence.
objections to the faithfulness of the reproductions marked, or Set Not later than sixty (60) After arraignment, and B. Here, the Espejo's ex parte presentation of evidence
their genuineness and due execution. calendar days from the within 30 days of following the non-appearance of Gemina's counsel was
f. The failure without just cause of a party and/or counsel to bring ling of the last acquiring jurisdiction unwarranted.
the evidence required shall be deemed a waiver of the responsive pleading. over the person
presentation of such evidence. See Civil Law Case Digest No. 19
Purpose Compromise, alternative An o er of compromise
g. Remedy of defendant if he failed to attend the pre-trial modes of dispute = implied admission of
— Motion for Reconsideration, NOT a motion to lift default. resolution (Sec 2[a] Rule guilt, except in
Intervention
h. A second pre-trial cannot be granted. The remedy instead 18) quasi-o enses, or those L
allowed by law. Rule 19
is to go to trial, unless the parties themselves had voluntarily
agreed that the case be set anew for pre-trial. 1. Requisites for intervention
Non- Sanction upon Sanction upon defense
appearance non-appearing party counsel, or prosecutor a. The intervenor has a legal interest on the matter under
3 Pre-Trial Brief; E ect of Failure to File
litigation;
Briefs Required Not required
The parties shall le with the court and serve on the adverse party b. The intervenor has a legal interest in the success of
at least three (3) calendar days before the date of the pre-trial, Record Required either of the parties;
their respective pre-trial briefs.
No strict warning Shall be reduced in c. The intervenor has a legal interest against both; OR
Failure to le the pre-trial brief shall have the same writing and signed by d. The Intervenor is so situated as to be adversely a ected by
e ect as failure to appear at the pre-trial. accused or counsel, a distribution or other disposition of property in the
1. Pre-trial order. — Upon termination of the pre-trial, the otherwise they cannot be custody of the court or of an o cer thereof.
court shall issue an order within ten (10) calendar days used against the accused.
The interest must be direct, immediate, actual, existing
which shall recite in detail the matters taken up.
as distinguished from expectant, inchoate or contingent
interest.
Gemina v. Heirs of Espejo, Jr. 13 Sep 2021

2. Time to intervene. — The motion to intervene may be led 1. Subpoena duces tecum. — witness is directed to bring with To File a responsive Appear in court to
at any time before rendition of judgment by the trial him any books, documents, or other things under his control. pleading to a complaint testify and/or bring
court. led against him documents
2. Subpoena ad testificandum. — witness is required to
3. Remedy for the denial of motion to intervene. — attend and to testify. Otherwise A judgment of default He will be cited in
Mandamus is NOT a remedy as one cannot compel the court 3. Service of subpoena. — Shall be made in the same manner will be rendered against contempt or be arrested
to do a discretionary act. But, if there is grave abuse of as personal or substituted service of summons. him
discretion, mandamus or certiorari may be resorted to.
GR: A person can not be compelled to testify if he has not Applicable In civil cases Both civil and criminal
been served with a subpoena.
COA v. Pampilo, Jr. 30 Jun 2020 EN BANC
Viatory right Inapplicable Applies
EXC: If he is present in court before a judicial o cer.
Pasang Masda failed to satisfy all the requirements for intervention.
4. Quashing of subpoena. — if it is
A. Section 1, Rule 19 requires that:
a. unreasonable and oppressive, or Computation of time
1. the movant must have a legal interest in the matter N
being litigated; b. the relevancy of the books, documents or things does Rule 22
not appear, or
2. the intervention must not unduly delay or prejudice 1. How to compute time. — The day of the act or event from
the adjudication of the rights of the parties; and c. if the person in whose behalf the subpoena is issued
which the designated period of time begins to run is to be
fails to advance the reasonable cost of the production
3. the claim of the intervenor must not be capable of excluded and the date of performance included.
thereof.
being properly decided in a separate proceeding. 2. If the last day of the period, as thus computed, falls on a
The court may quash a subpoena ad testificandum on the
B. Here, Pasang Masda's allegation that its members consume Saturday, a Sunday, or a legal holiday in the place where the
ground that the witness is not bound thereby. court sits, the time shall not run until the next working day.
petroleum products is not su cient to show that they have
legal interest in the matter being litigated considering that In either case, the subpoena may be quashed on the ground 3. Effect of interruption. — Should an act be done which
there are other oil players in the market aside from the Big that the witness fees and kilometrage allowed by these Rules e ectively interrupts the running of the period, the allowable
3. were not tendered when the subpoena was served. period after such interruption shall start to run on the day
VIATORY RIGHT. A witness is not bound to appear to after notice of the cessation of the cause thereof.
testify if his residence is more than 100 km from the place of 4. The day of the act that caused the interruption shall be
trial. excluded in the computation of the period.
Subpoena Summons Subpoena
M O Modes of Discovery
Rule 21 Directed at Defendant Witness

Depositions 27); and

4. The court may determine whether the deposition should be
f. Physical and mental examination of persons (Rule taken upon oral examination or written interrogatories to
Interrogatories to parties
28); prevent abuse or harassment (De los Reyes vs. CA, et al,
Admission by adverse party L-27263, Mar. 17, 1975).
Rule 29 provides for the legal consequences for the refusal
of a party to comply with such modes of discovery lawfully Is the prosecution's resort to Rule 23 of the Rules of Court in taking
Production or inspection of documents or things
resorted to by the adverse party. Mary Jane's testimony as a prosecution witness proper?
Physical and mental examination of persons 2. In criminal cases, the taking of the deposition of witnesses YES. The Rules are silent as to how to take a testimony of a witness
for the prosecution was formerly authorized by Sec. 7, who is unable to testify in open court because he is imprisoned in
Refusal to comply with modes of discovery Rule 119 for the purpose of perpetuating the evidence to another country. Although the rule on deposition by written
be presented at the trial, without a similar provision for interrogatories is inscribed under the Rules on Civil Procedure, the
Depositions defense witnesses. Court holds that it may be applied suppletorily in criminal
1 proceedings so long as there is compelling reason.
Rules 23 and 24 However, in the 1985 Rules on Criminal Procedure, only
the conditional examination, and NOT a deposition, of In a catena of cases, the Supreme Court had relaxed the procedural
a. DEPOSITION is the written testimony of a witness given in prosecution witnesses was permitted (Sec. 7, Rule 119) and rules by applying suppletorily certain provisions of the Rules on
the course of a judicial proceeding, in advance of the trial or this was followed in the latest revision (Sec. 15, Rule Civil Procedure in criminal proceedings.
hearing, upon oral examination or in response to written 119).
interrogatories, and where an opportunity is given for The conditions with respect to the taking of the testimony of Mary
3. Depositions are classi ed into: Jane that were laid down by the Indonesian Government support
cross-examination.
a. Depositions on oral examination and depositions upon the allowance of written interrogatories under Rule 23.
People v. Sergio 2019 Hernando, J written interrogatories; or
b. Scope of Examination — The deponent may be examined
1. Rules 23 to 28 provide for the di erent modes of discovery b. Depositions de bene esse and depositions in perpetuam
i. regarding any matter, not privileged,
that may be resorted to by a party to an action, viz rei memoriam.
ii. which is relevant to the subject of the pending action,
a. Depositions pending action (Rule 23); i. Depositions de bene esse are those taken for
purposes of a pending action and are regulated by iii. whether relating to the claim or defense of any other
b. Depositions before action or pending appeal (Rule
Rule 23, while party,
24);
ii. Depositions in perpetuam rei memoriam are those iv. including the existence, description, nature, custody,
c. Interrogatories to parties (Rule 25);
taken to perpetuate evidence for purposes of an condition, and location of any books, documents, or
d. Admission by adverse party (Rule 26); anticipated action or further proceedings in a case other tangible things and
e. Production or inspection of documents or things (Rule on appeal and are now regulated by Rule 24.

deponent becomes the witness of the party introducing

v. the identity and location of persons having knowledge Interrogatories to parties
the deposition, but this shall not apply to the use by an 2
of relevant facts. Rule 25
adverse party of a deposition.
c. Use of Deposition. —
e. LETTERS ROGATORY is an instrument whereby the 1. When may be taken. — Upon ex parte motion, any party
i. Any deposition may be used by ANY party for the foreign court is informed of the pendency of the case and the desiring to elicit material and relevant facts from any
purpose of contradicting or impeaching the name of the foreign witnesses, and is requested to cause their adverse parties shall le and serve upon the latter written
testimony of the deponent as a witness; depositions to be taken in due course of law, for the interrogatories to be answered by the party served or, if the
furtherance of justice, with an o er on the party of the court party served is a public or private corporation or a partnership
ii. The deposition of a party may be used by an adverse
making the request, to do the like for the other, in a similar or association, by any o cer thereof competent to testify in its
party for any purpose;
case. behalf.
iii. The deposition of a witness may be used by f. Disquali cation of deposition o cer. — No deposition 2. Consequences of refusal to answer. — If the party being
any party for any purpose if the court finds: shall be taken before a person who is served with interrogatories fails to serve answers, the court, on
1. that the witness is dead, or i. a relative within the sixth degree of consanguinity motion and notice, may
2. that the witness resides at a distance more than or a nity, or i. strike out all or any part of any pleading of the
one hundred (100) kilometers from the place ii. employee or counsel of any of the parties, or who is a refusing party, or
of trial or hearing, or is out of the Philippines, relative within the same degree, or ii. dismiss the action or proceeding or any part thereof,
unless it appears that his absence was procured by
iii. employee of such counsel; or or
the party o ering the deposition, or
iv. who is nancially interested in the action. iii. enter a judgment by default against that party, and
3. that the witness is unable to attend or testify
because of age, sickness, in rmity, or g. Depositions pending appeal. — the court in which the iv. in its discretion, order him or her to pay reasonable
imprisonment, or judgment was rendered may allow the taking of depositions expenses incurred by the other, including attorney's
of witnesses to perpetuate their testimony in the event of fees.
4. that the party o ering the deposition has been
unable to procure the attendance of the witness further proceedings in the said court. 3. Effect of failure to serve written interrogatories. — A
by subpoena. h. Veri ed petition, where to le. — A person who desires to party not served with written interrogatories may not be
perpetuate his own testimony or that of another person compelled by the adverse party
iv. If only part of a deposition is o ered in evidence by a
party, the adverse party may require him to introduce regarding any matter that may be cognizable in any court of a. to give testimony in open court, or
all of it which is relevant to the part introduced, and the Philippines may le a veri ed petition in the court of the
b. to give a deposition pending appeal.
any party may introduce any other parts. place of the residence of any expected adverse party.
d. Effect of using depositions. — if for any purpose other than As to R23 Sec 25 R25
that of contradicting or impeaching the deponent, the

NOT be permitted to present evidence on such facts.

Before whom Deposition o cer No need 3) The motion must su ciently describe the document or
EXC
thing sought to be produced or inspected;
Preparation Questions prepared Questioning is direct i. Unless otherwise allowed by the court for good cause
4) The document or thing sought to be produced or inspected
beforehand shown, AND
must constitute or contain evidence material to the pending
To whom Any person Parties only ii. To prevent a failure of justice. action;
5) The document or thing sought to be produced or inspected
Production or inspection of documents or must not be privileged; and
Admission by adverse party 4 things
3 6) The document or thing sought to be produced or inspected
Rule 26 Rule 27
must be in the possession of the adverse party or, at least,
1. What can be inspected — Upon motion of any party showing under his control.
a. Implied admission by adverse party
good cause therefor, the court in which an action is pending may 2. Exception: Con dential or Privileged matter
i. At any time after issues have been joined, a
party may le and serve upon any other party a written a) order any party to produce and permit the inspection and As to R21 subpoena duces tecum R27
request for the admission by the latter copying or photographing, by or on behalf of the moving
party, of any designated documents, papers, books, accounts, Means of compelling
1. of the genuineness of any material and relevant Nature production of evidence which Mode of discovery
letters, photographs, objects or tangible things, not privileged,
document described in and exhibited with the request must be brought to court
which constitute or contain evidence material to any matter
or
involved in the action and which are in his possession, custody
Upon
2. of the truth of any material and relevant matter of or control, or Any person Limited to parties
whom
fact set forth in the request.
b) order any party to permit entry upon designated land or
ii. Each of the matters of which an admission is requested other property in his possession or control for the purpose of motion with notice to
Upon Application ex parte
shall be deemed admitted unless denied. inspecting, measuring, surveying, or photographing the the adverse party
property or any designated relevant object or operation
b. Effect of admission. — Any admission made by a party
thereon.
pursuant to such request is for the purpose of the pending
Physical and mental examination of persons
action only. REQUISITES 5
Rule 28
c. Effect of failure to file and serve request for admission. 1) A motion (leave of court) must be led by a party showing
— If you did not serve a request for admission on the adverse good cause therefor; 1. When examination may be ordered
party of material or relevant facts at issue which are, or ought
2) Notice of the motion must be given to all other parties; In an action in which the mental or physical condition
to be, within the personal knowledge of the latter, you will
of a party is in controversy, the court in which the action is

pending may in its discretion order him to submit to a physical

If the application is granted, the court shall require the refusing b) An order refusing to allow the disobedient party to support or
or mental examination by a physician.
party or deponent to answer the question or interrogatory and if it oppose designated claims or defenses or prohibiting him
REQUISITES also nds that the refusal to answer was without substantial from introducing in evidence designated documents or
justi cation, it may require the refusing party or deponent or the things or items of testimony, or from introducing evidence of
1) The physical or mental condition must be a subject of
counsel advising the refusal, or both of them, to pay the physical or mental condition;
controversy of the action;
proponent the amount of the reasonable expenses incurred in
c) An order striking out pleadings or parts thereof, or staying
2) A motion showing good cause must be led; and obtaining the order, including attorney's fees.
further proceedings until the order is obeyed, or dismissing the
3) Notice of the motion must be given to the party to be If the application is denied and the court nds that it was led action or proceeding or any part thereof, or rendering a
examined and to all other parties. without substantial justi cation, the court may require the judgment by default against the disobedient party; and
2. Report of ndings, e ect if the person examined request for proponent or the counsel advising the ling of the application, or
d) In lieu of any of the foregoing orders or in addition thereto, an
a copy of the report or ndings both of them, to pay to the refusing party or deponent the amount of
order directing the arrest of any party or agent of a party for
the reasonable expenses incurred in opposing the application,
If requested by the party examined, the party causing the disobeying any of such orders except an order to submit to a
including attorney's fees.
examination to be made shall deliver to him a copy of a detailed physical or mental examination.
written report of the examining physician setting out his ndings 2. Contempt of Court
4. Reimbursement of expenses for refusal to admit
and conclusions. If a party or other witness refuses to be sworn or refuses to answer
If a party after being served with a request under Rule 26 serves a
If the party examined refuses to deliver such report, the court on any question after being directed to do so by the court of the place
sworn denial thereof and if the party requesting the admissions
motion and notice may make an order requiring delivery on such in which the deposition is being taken, the refusal may be
thereafter proves the genuineness of such document or the truth of
terms as are just, and if a physician fails or refuses to make such a considered a contempt of that court. any such matter of fact, he may apply to the court for an order
report the court may exclude his testimony if o ered at the 3. Other consequences requiring the other party to pay him the reasonable expenses
trial. incurred in making such proof, including attorney's fees.
If any party or an o cer or managing agent of a party refuses to
obey an order, the court may make such orders in regard to the 5. E ect of failure to attend or serve answers to deposition
Refusal to comply with modes of discovery
6 refusal as are just, and among others the following: If failure is WILLFUL, the court on motion and notice, may
Rule 29
a) An order that the matters regarding which the questions were a) strike out all or any part of any pleading of that party, or
1. Refusal to answer asked, or the character or description of the thing or land, or
the contents of the paper, or the physical or mental condition b) dismiss the action or proceeding or any part thereof, or
The examination may be completed on other matters or adjourned
of the party, or any other designated facts shall be taken to be c) enter a judgment by default against that party, and
as the proponent of the question may prefer. The proponent may
established for the purposes of the action in accordance
thereafter apply to the proper court of the place where the d) in its discretion, order him to pay reasonable expenses
with the claim of the party obtaining the order;
deposition is being taken, for an order to compel an answer. incurred by the other, including attorney's fees.

INSTANCES WHEREIN DEFENDANT MAY Trial c. Plainti presents REBUTTAL;

BE DECLARED IN DEFAULT: P
Rule 30 d. Defendant presents SUR-REBUTTAL;
1) Failure to le an ANSWER;
e. Parties submit their ARGUMENTS through
TRIAL is an examination before a competent tribunal of the facts
2) Failure to appear at the pre-trial conference (Rule 18); and MEMORANDA.
or law put in issue in a case, for the purpose of determining such
3) Failure to cooperate in the mode of discovery (§5, Rule 29). issue. When the court may allow the party to present additional
evidence in chief during rebuttal to prove his cause of action.
Sibayan v. Alda 2018 1 Schedule of Trial a. When it is newly discovered;
Recourse to the discovery procedure, such as written interrogatories
b. When the evidence was omitted through inadvertence or
and production or inspection of a document or things is NOT
mistake;
mandatory in administrative proceedings.
c. When the purpose is to correct evidence previously
Santamaria v. Cleary 2016
o ered;
Deposition of non-resident plainti may be taken abroad pursuant
d. When the additional evidence o ered is material and not
to S4(c)(2) R23 since plainti is “out of the Philippines.”
merely cumulative or impeaching.
Malonzo v. Sucere Foods 2020
2. Delegation of reception of evidence. — The judge of the
No requirement in R23 that the speci c purpose of the deposition court where the case is pending shall personally receive the
be stated in order to ensure that matters are relevant and not evidence to be adduced by the parties. Delegation of
privileged. reception of evidence to clerk of court REQUIRES:
Duque v. Sps Yu 2018 a. Defendant is already in default or in ex parte hearing;
Implied admission rule under R26 admits of an exception, that is, b. The parties agree in writing;
when the party to whom such request for admission is served had
c. The clerk of court is a lawyer.
already denied or controverted the matter subject of the request.
1. The parties shall strictly observe the scheduled hearings as
Here, the plainti had already stated in his veri ed complaint that agreed upon and set forth in the pre-trial order. 2 Adjournments and Postponements
the deed of donation was forged. To request from the plainti an
2. Order of trial; reversal of order. — SIMPLY PUT:
admission as to the genuineness of such deed is superfluous. GR: Not more than one (1) month for its adjournment BUT a
a. Plainti presents EVIDENCE-IN-CHIEF to prove his maximum of three (3) postponements. In e ect, it will be
cause of action; exactly 90 days.
b. Defendant presents his EVIDENCE-IN-CHIEF in EXC: When authorized in writing by the court administrator.
support of his defense;

on appeal the court reverses the order of dismissal, the

The party who caused the postponement is warned that the a. By recasting the cases already instituted, conducting
appellate court renders judgment immediately in favor of
presentation of its evidence must still be terminated on the only one hearing and rendering only one decision;
the plainti .
remaining dates previously agreed upon.
b. By consolidating the existing cases and holding only
4. Waiver of right to present evidence. — If the motion is
one hearing and rendering only one decision;
Requisites of Motion to Postpone Trial for granted but on appeal the order of dismissal is reversed, he or
3 c. By hearing only the principal case and suspending the
Illness of Party or Counsel she shall be deemed to have waived the right to present
hearing on the others until judgment has been evidence.
A motion to postpone a trial on the ground of illness of a party or rendered in the principal case.
counsel may be granted if it appears upon a davit or sworn 5. Action on demurrer to evidence. — A demurrer to
4. Consolidation of criminal and civil cases is ALLOWED, but evidence shall be subject to the provisions of Rule 15.
certi cation that the
the degree of proof will di er. (Caños v. Peralta)
1. presence of such party or counsel at the trial is indispensable The order denying the demurrer to evidence shall not be
5. Separate trials. — The court, in furtherance of convenience subject of an appeal or petition for certiorari, prohibition
and
or to avoid prejudice, may order a separate trial of any or mandamus before judgment.
2. that the character of his illness is such as to render his claim, cross-claim, counterclaim, or third-party complaint, or
non-attendance excusable. 6. Distinguish: demurrer to evidence in a civil case and
of any separate issue or of any number of claims, cross-claims,
demurrer to evidence in a criminal case
counterclaims, third-party complaints or issues.
Consolidation or Severance Civil Criminal
Q
Rule 31 Demurrer to Evidence
R Failure of plainti to
Insu ciency of
Rule 33 Basis show that he is
1. Consolidation. — When actions evidence
entitled to relief
a. involving a common question of law or fact
1 Grounds
Leave of Court Not required With or without
b. are pending before the court,
1. Ground. — Upon the facts and the law the plaintiff has
c. it may order a joint hearing or trial of any or all the shown no right to relief. Effect of denial,
Lost if done without
matters in issue in the actions; it may order all the to present Not lost
leave.
actions consolidated; and it may make such orders evidence
2 E ect of Order Denying Demurrer to Evidence
concerning proceedings therein as may tend to avoid
unnecessary costs or delay. 2. Effect of denial. — the defendant will now present his If granted Plainti may appeal No appeal is allowed
evidence to prove his defense because the defendant does not
2. In consolidation of cases, the case bearing the higher docket Motion of defendant.
waive his right to present in the event the demurrer is denied. Court may act motu
number is consolidated with the case having the lower docket Upon Court can not act
proprio
number. 3. Effect of grant. — If the demurrer is granted and the case is motu proprio
dismissed and the plainti appeals to the appellate court and
3. Three ways of consolidating cases

on the pleadings if it is apparent that the answer fails to tender

iv. Certi ed true copies of all papers of parts thereof
an issue, or otherwise admits the material allegations of the
referred to in the a davit shall be attached thereto or
S Judgments and Final Orders adverse party’s pleadings. Otherwise, the motion shall be
served therewith.
subject to the provisions of Rule 15 of these Rules.
Judgment on the Pleadings
d. ANY action of the court on a motion for judgment on the R34 Judgment on
As to R35 Summary Judgment
Summary Judgments pleadings shall not be subject of an appeal or petition for the Pleadings
certiorari, prohibition or mandamus. Applies also to
Rendition and Entry of Judgments and Final Orders there is no issue of no genuine issue of fact to be
motion for summary judgment. Ground
fact at all to be tried tried
Judgment on the Pleadings
1 Summary Judgments How on the basis of facts appearing in
Rule 34 2 Based on the
Rule 35 judgment the pleadings, a davits,
pleadings
rendered depositions and admissions
Where an ANSWER fails to tender an issue, or otherwise
A method for promptly disposing of actions in which there is no
admits the material allegations of the adverse party's pleading, the Available
court may, on motion of that party, direct judgment on such
genuine issue as to any material fact. Plainti only Both plainti and defendant
to
pleading. a. For the claimant. — at any time after the pleading in answer
thereto has been served, move with supporting a davits, Which order or action shall not be subject of an appeal or petition for
a. How is it done
depositions or admissions for a summary judgment in his certiorari, prohibition or mandamus?
i. By motion of plainti ; favor. Action or Order Before Judgment?
ii. By the court’s own volition or motu proprio. b. For the defendant. — A party against whom xxx
Order
b. Does not apply c. Affidavits and attachments. — Requisites of supporting Demurrer ✔
DENYING
i. in actions for declaration of nullity or annulment of or opposing a davits to a motion for Summary
marriage; or Judgment. Judgment on Pleadings ANY ✗
ii. in actions for legal separation; i. The a davit shall be made based on personal
knowledge; Summary Judgment ANY ✗
iii. when the issue is the amount of unliquidated damages
because there must always be evidence to prove such ii. It shall set forth such facts as would be admissible in
amount (Sec 11 R8); evidence;
Aljem's Credit Investors Corp. v. Spouses Bautista
iv. when only conclusions of law are being alleged. iii. The a ant is competent to testify to the matters stated 25 Apr 2022
therein; and
c. Action on Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. — 1. The RTC properly denied the Motion for Summary
The court may motu proprio or on motion render judgment

Judgment. e. the judgment must be rendered after lawful

6.1. The question of whether forgery exists is a
hearing, meaning that due process must be observed.
2. Summary judgment is a procedural device that allows question of fact.
parties to avoid long litigation and delays, where the f. Formal Requisites
7. Thus, there are still genuine issues of fact that need to be
pleadings show that there are no genuine issues of fact to be
resolved in the trial. i. The judgment shall be in writing;
tried.
See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 2 ii. It shall be personally and directly prepared
2.1. A genuine issue of fact is such issue of fact which
by the judge;
requires the presentation of evidence as
distinguished from a sham, ctitious, contrived, or iii. It shall state clearly and distinctly the
false claim. Rendition and Entry of Judgments and Final facts and the law on which it is based; and
3 Orders iv. It shall be signed by the judge and
3. Here, petitioner's argument that the spouses Bautista
admitted that the TCT is already in its name is just one of Rule 36
v. Filed with the clerk of court.
the pieces of evidence for the trial court to assess in making
1. Judgment is the nal consideration and determination by a 3. Entry of judgment and final order. — The date of
a ruling for this case.
court of the rights of the parties as those rights presently exist, nality of the judgment or nal order shall be
4. A speci c denial is made by specifying each material upon matters submitted to it in an action or proceeding. deemed to be the date of its entry.
allegation of fact, the truth of which the defendant does
2. Requisites for a valid judgment
not admit, and whenever practicable, setting forth the
TIDCORP v. PVB 2019
substance of the matters upon which he relies to support a. the court rendering judgment must have jurisdiction
his denial. over the subject matter; A summary judgment which did not make any determination as to
damages is a nal judgment and thus appealable.
4.1. Here, spouses Bautista made speci c denials of the b. the court rendering judgment must have jurisdiction
allegations in the Complaint. over the person of the defendant, and in case the
defendant is a non-resident, the court rendering
5. Next, the question of whether a contract is an equitable
judgment must have jurisdiction over the res; T Post-Judgment Remedies
mortgage is a question of fact.
c. the court rendering judgment must have jurisdiction
5.1. The same goes with the existence of pactum Motion for New Trial or Reconsideration
over the issues, that is, the judgment shall decide
commissorium: it is a question of fact as the trial
only the issues raised by the parties in their pleadings; Appeals
court needs to look into the contractual
stipulations, and the intent of the parties to d. the court rendering judgment must be validly
constituted and the judge thereof, a judge de jure or
Petition for Relief from Judgment
determine, if there is such.
de facto;
6. Lastly, the spouses Bautista raise the defense that Porferio's Annulment of Judgment
signature in the contract to sell is forged.

Collateral Attack on Judgments b. When to file. — Within the period for taking an appeal. 2 Appeals
c. Denial of the motion; effect
Appeal from MTC to RTC (Rule 40)
Motion for New Trial or Reconsideration i. A davit of merit, when required. An AFFIDAVIT
1 Appeal from the RTC (Rule 41)
Rule 37 OF MERIT is one which recites the nature and character
of FAME.
a. Grounds. — Petition for Review from the RTC to the CA (Rule 42)
ii. Pro forma motion, e ect of. The period to appeal is
i. For New Trial NOT interrupted. Appeals from the CTA, CSC, and Quasi-Judicial Agencies
1. FAME. Fraud, accident, mistake or excusable iii. Two Types of Pro forma Motion for New Trial (Rule 43)
negligence which ordinary prudence could not have
guarded against and by reason of which such 1. An MNT which is not supported by a davits of Appeals by Certiorari to the SC (Rule 45)
aggrieved party has probably been impaired in his merits – one which does not comply in substance or
rights; OR in form with Section 2; and Review of Judgments or Final Orders of the COA and
2. NDE. Newly discovered evidence, which 2. A second MNT on a ground available to the party COMELEC (Rule 64)
when the rst motion was led.
a. he could not, with reasonable diligence, have Dismissal, Reinstatement, and Withdrawal of Appeal
discovered and produced at the trial, AND d. Grant of the motion; effect
i. If the ground is FAME, there will be a trial de novo; a) Nature of the right to appeal. — The right to appeal is
b. which if presented would probably alter the
NOT a natural right and is NOT part of due process. It is
result. ii. If the ground is NDE, the evidence admitted which is
merely a statutory privilege, and may be exercised only in
FRAUD. To be a ground for new trial, must be based on the same decision will remain. The case will be
accordance with the law. The party who seeks to avail of the
EXTRINSIC — where the aggrieved party was opened only for the purpose of admitting the new
same must comply with the requirements of the Rules. Failing
misled by the adverse party, and by reason thereof, he evidence.
to do so, the right to appeal is lost. (Sps Bergonia v. CA)
was prevented from presenting his case properly. iii. If the MR is granted, the court will simply amend its
b) Judgments and Final Orders Subject to Appeal. — An
IOW, he was deprived of his day in court. judgment.
appeal may be taken from a judgment or nal order that
ii. For Motion for Reconsideration An order denying a motion for new trial or reconsideration is not completely disposes of the case, or of a particular matter
1. the damages awarded are excessive, appealable, the remedy being an appeal from the judgment or therein when declared by these Rules to be appealable.
nal order. Movant has 15 days from receipt of order denying c) Matters Not Appealable; Available Remedies. — No
2. the evidence is insu cient to justify the decision or
his motion to appeal and not just for the balance of the period appeal may be taken from:
nal order, OR
(Neypes Rule).
3. the decision or nal order is contrary to law. i) An order denying a petition for relief or any similar
motion seeking relief from judgment;

for lack of jurisdiction, including the entire

ii) An interlocutory order;
proceedings held for that purpose. 2. nunc pro tunc entries that cause no prejudice to any
iii) An order disallowing or dismissing an appeal; party;
EXC
iv) An order denying a motion to set aside a 3. void judgments; and
a) if there is a need to correct clerical errors which cause
judgment by consent, confession or compromise on
no prejudice to any party, 4. whenever circumstances transpire after the nality of
the ground of fraud, mistake or duress, or any other
the decision that render its execution unjust and
ground vitiating consent; b) void judgments, and;
inequitable.
v) An order of execution; c) if circumstances transpire after the nality of the
D. The ruling as to 2007 onwards is VOID since the COA
decision which render its execution unjust and
vi) A judgment or nal order for or against one or more exceeded its jurisdiction in rendering judgment as to
inequitable.
of several parties or in separate claims, counterclaims, transactions which have not yet occurred.
cross-claims and third-party complaints, while the
Bangko Sentral v. COA 12 Oct 2021 EN BANC 1. By ruling on future dividend payments or transactions
main case is pending, unless the court allows an
which have yet to occur or which have not yet been
appeal therefrom; and The COA has the power to resolve questions of law in the exercise submitted for review, the COA clearly acted in excess
vii) An order dismissing an action without prejudice. of its audit jurisdiction. This is in line with its constitutional powers of its jurisdiction, making the ruling in such respect
under Section 2, Article IX-D of the Constitution. void.
In any of the foregoing circumstances, the aggrieved
party may le an appropriate special civil action as A. However, its rulings do not create legal precedent nor
provided in Rule 65. preclude judicial review.
B. The ruling in Resolution No. 2011-007 as regards the e) Modes of Appeal (Period, Perfection, Issues to be Raised)
d) Doctrine of Finality/Immutability of Judgment. —
understated dividends for the years 2003 to 2006 has
i) It is an elementary principle of procedure that the i) Appeal from Municipal Trial Courts to
attained nality. Regional Trial Courts (Rule 40)
resolution of the court in a given issue as embodied in
the dispositive part of a decision or order is the 1. However, the ruling as regards the dividends for 2007
controlling factor as to settlement of rights of the onwards failed to attain the same nality because the 1. Where — To the RTC which has territorial jurisdiction over
parties. ruling thereon is VOID. the place where the MTC sits.
ii) Once a decision or order becomes nal and executory, C. The doctrine of nality or immutability of judgment 2. When
it is removed from the power or jurisdiction of the provides that when a decision has attained nality, it may a. 15 days; or
court which rendered it to further alter or amend it. no longer be modi ed in any respect even if the
modi cation is meant to correct erroneous conclusions of b. 30 days if the records on appeal is required
iii) It thereby becomes immutable and unalterable and
fact and law. However, it admits of exceptions: period is interrupted by MR or MNT.
any amendment or alteration which substantially
a ects a nal and executory judgment is null and void 1. the correction of clerical errors; 3. How

memorandum. Failure of the appellant to le a

a. By Notice of Appeal — for ordinary civil actions; Direct appeal to the SC of the decision of the RTC in its
memorandum shall be a ground for dismissal of the
original jurisdiction based on pure question of law.
within 15 days from receipt of adverse decision in the court appeal.
a quo. 2. Period of appeal
c) Upon the ling of the memorandum of the appellee, or the
MATERIAL DATA RULE: expiration of the period to do so, the case shall be considered a. 15 or 30 days for Ordinary Appeal;
1. The date decision is received; submitted for decision. The RTC shall decide the case on the b. 48 hours for habeas corpus cases.
basis of the entire record of the proceedings held in the
2. The date notice of appeal is led.
court of origin and such memoranda as are led. Neypes v. CA
b. By Records on Appeal — for special proceedings and cases
6. Appeal from orders dismissing case without trial This "fresh period rule" shall apply to Rule 40 governing
involving multiple appeals.
f) If MTC has no JD, RTC has, RTC will treat the case as appeals from the Municipal Trial Courts to the Regional Trial
4. Duty of the Clerk of Court upon perfection of appeal Courts; Rule 42 on petitions for review from the Regional Trial
originally led;
Appeal is deemed perfected as to the appellant the moment he Courts to the Court of Appeals; Rule 43 on appeals from
g) If MTC has JD, RTC will remand case to MTC; quasi-judicial agencies to the Court of Appeals and Rule 45
les the notice of appeal. But it is not yet deemed perfected as to
the whole case until after the lapse of the period of appeal for h) If both MTC and RTC have no JD, RTC will dismiss governing appeals by certiorari to the Supreme Court. The new
the other party. appeal without prejudice to the ling of case in the rule aims to regiment or make the appeal period uniform, to be
appropriate body, e.g. DARAB. counted from receipt of the order denying the motion for new
Once the appeal is already perfected as to both of them, the
trial, motion for reconsideration (whether full or partial) or any
MTC will forward the records of the case to the RTC for review.
nal order or resolution.
The Clerk of Court of the RTC will then notify both parties i) Appeal from the Regional Trial Courts
(Rule 41) NB: Applies only to nal orders and NOT to interlocutory
that the records are now in the RTC.
orders. (Rubio v. MTCC of CDO)
5. Procedure in the RTC
1. Modes of appeal from RTC 3. Where to pay appellate court docket fees — In the court a
a) Upon receipt of the complete record or the record on
A. Ordinary Appeal quo.
appeal, the clerk of court of the RTC shall notify the parties
of such fact. Either by Notice of Appeal or Records on Appeal. 4. Notice of appeal — shall indicate
b) Within fteen (15) days from such notice, it shall be the B. Petition for Review under Rule 42 a. the parties to the appeal,
duty of the appellant to submit a memorandum which Appeal from the decision of the RTC in its appellate b. specify the judgment or nal order or part thereof appealed
shall brie y discuss the errors imputed to the lower court, a jurisdiction. from,
copy of which shall be furnished by him to the adverse
C. Appeal by Certiorari under Rule 45 c. specify the court to which the appeal is being taken, and
party. Within fteen (15) days from receipt of the
appellant's memorandum, the appellee may le his

d. state the material dates showing the timeliness of the c. permit appeals of indigent litigants, Sps Huang v. LBP 2016
appeal.
d. order execution pending appeal in accordance with 2 Where the respondent failed to pay the docket fee, the RTC still
5. Record on appeal, when required of Rule 39, and retains jurisdiction over the case even though it had given due
a. special proceedings and e. allow withdrawal of the appeal. course to the appeal and may dismiss the appeal for failure to
prosecute.
b. other cases of multiple or separate appeals 7. Dismissal of appeal
BPI v. Sps Co 2015
6. Perfection of appeal, residual jurisdiction of court Prior to the transmittal of the original record or the record on
appeal to the appellate court, the trial court may motu propio or In an extrajudicial foreclosure sale, the issuance of the writ of
A party's appeal by notice of appeal is deemed perfected as to him
on motion dismiss the appeal possession to the purchaser after consolidation is ministerial. The
upon the ling of the notice of appeal in due time.
order for the issuance of the writ being nal, appeal is the proper
a) for having been taken out of time;
A party's appeal by record on appeal is deemed perfected as to remedy.
him with respect to the subject matter thereof upon the b) non-payment of docket fee.
Palma v. Galvez 2010
approval of the record on appeal led in due time.
United Interior Manggahan HA v. De Luna 2017 Availment of the special civil action for certiorari was proper since
In appeals by notice of appeal, the court loses jurisdiction over
the dismissal order is in the nature of a several judgment under
the case A board resolution authorizing the representative to initiate the
§1(g) R41 which may not be the subject of appeal.
appeal is not required for the purpose of ling a notice of appeal.
a. upon the perfection of the appeals led in due time and
Mamba v. Bueno 2017 En Banc
Heirs of Sadhwani v. Sadhwani and Soller v. Singson 2020
b. the expiration of the time to appeal of the other parties.
Neypes Rule applicable to a Writ of Amparo case.
Remedy from order dismissing a case
In appeals by record on appeal, the court loses jurisdiction
only over the subject matter thereof 1. for failure to state a cause of action; (Sadwhani)
a. upon the approval of the records on appeal led in due 2. for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. (Soller)
CIR v. Standard Insurance 28 Apr 2021
time and is R65, since the dismissal is without prejudice.
b. the expiration of the appeal of the other parties. The instant petition raises only questions of law that are cognizable
PBCom v. CA 2017
through a Rule 45 petition.
In either case, prior to the transmittal of the original record RTC cannot dismiss an appeal on the ground that it was not the
or the record on appeal, the court may A. A question of law exists when the doubt or controversy
proper remedy. There are only 2 grounds to dismiss appeals.
concerns the correct application of law or jurisprudence to
a. issue orders for the protection and preservation of Bernardo v. Soriano 2019 a certain set of facts; or when the issue does not call for an
the rights of the parties which do not involve any examination of the probative value of the evidence
matter litigated by the appeal, A party can le a notice of appeal even if there is a pending
presented, the truth or falsehood of facts being admitted.
motion for reconsideration by the adverse party.
b. approve compromises,

B. A question of fact exists when the doubt or di erence 2.3. the appeal by certiorari under Rule 45, is brought The petition shall be led and served within fteen (15) days
arises as to the truth or falsehood of facts or when the query to the Supreme Court and resolves only questions from notice of the decision sought to be reviewed or of the
invites calibration of the whole evidence. of law. denial of petitioner's motion for new trial or reconsideration
led in due time after judgment.
C. Here, petitioner is challenging the RTC's grant of the 3. A question of law arises when there is doubt as to what
petition for declaratory relief on the premise that a petition the law is on a certain state of facts, while there is a question Upon
for declaratory relief is inapplicable to contest tax of fact when the doubt arises as to the truth or falsity of the
a. proper motion and
assessments; that the petition for declaratory relief failed to alleged facts.
comply with the basic requisites of Rule 63; and the b. the payment of the full amount of the docket and other
4. For a question to be one of law, its resolution must not
constitutionality of Sections 108 and 184 of the NIRC lawful fees and
involve an examination of the probative value of the
vis-à-vis the equal protection clause. c. the deposit for costs
evidence presented by the litigants, but must solely rely on
D. These are clearly questions of law. what the law provides on the given set of facts. before the expiration of the reglementary period, the CA may
5. Here, the issue of whether there is a failure to state a cause grant an additional period of fteen (15) days only within
of action or not is undoubtedly a question of law, as one which to le the petition for review.
needs only to look at the allegations in the Complaint and No further extension shall be granted except for the most
its annexes. compelling reason and in no case to exceed fteen (15)
East West Banking v. Cruz 12 Jul 2021
days.
1. The CA correctly dismissed the Bank's appeal because the See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 36
issues involved are pure questions of law which cannot be 2. Action of the CA on the petition
appealed through a notice of appeal under Rule 41. ii) Petition for Review from the Regional
a. Require respondent to comment within 10 days; OR
Trial Court to the Court of Appeals (Rule
2. Under the Rules of Court, there are three modes to appeal 42) b. Dismiss outright.
a decision or nal judgment of the RTC
i. Petition is patently without merit;
2.1. the ordinary appeal under Rule 41, is brought to 1. How appeal taken and time to le
ii. Prosecuted manifestly for delay;
the CA from the RTC, in the exercise of its
a. File a veri ed petition for review with the CA,
original jurisdiction, and resolves questions of fact iii. Questions raised therein are too unsubstantial to
or mixed questions of fact and law; b. Paying at the same time to the clerk of said court the require consideration.
corresponding docket and other lawful fees,
2.2. the petition for review under Rule 42, is brought 3. Due course
to the CA from the RTC, acting in the exercise of c. Depositing the amount of P500.00 for costs, and
If the Court of Appeals nds prima facie that the lower court
its appellate jurisdiction, and resolves questions of d. Furnishing the RTC and the adverse party with a copy of has committed an error of fact or law that will warrant a reversal
fact or mixed questions of fact and law; and the petition. or modi cation of the appealed decision.

4. Perfection of appeal, e ect thereof e. Social Security Commission, c. Appeals from Ombudsman (Fabian v. Desierto)
GR: The RTC loses jurisdiction over the case upon the f. Civil Aeronautics Board,
St Martin Funeral Homes v. NLRC
perfection of the appeals led in due time and the
g. Bureau of Patents, Trademarks and Technology Transfer,
expiration of the time to appeal of the other parties. All references in the amended Section 9 of B.P. No. 129 to
h. National Electri cation Administration, supposed appeals from the NLRC to the Supreme Court are
EXC: Residual Jurisdiction of RTC.
i. Energy Regulatory Board, interpreted and hereby declared to mean and refer to petitions
Except in civil cases decided under the Rule on Summary
j. National Telecommunications Commission,
for certiorari under Rule 65. Consequently, all such
Procedure, the appeal shall stay the judgment or nal
petitions should henceforth be initially led in the Court of
order unless the Court of Appeals, the law, or these Rules shall k. Department of Agrarian Reform under Republic Act No.
Appeals in strict observance of the doctrine on the hierarchy of
provide otherwise. 6657,
courts as the appropriate forum for the relief desired.
5. Submission for decision l. Government Service Insurance System,
Remember: R65 from NLRC to CA; then R45 from CA to
If the petition is given due course, the Court of Appeals may set m. Employees Compensation Commission, SC.
the case for oral argument or require the parties to submit n. Agricultural Invention Board,
memoranda within a period of fteen (15) days from notice. 3. Where to appeal — To CA, even on pure question of law.
The case shall be deemed submitted for decision upon the ling o. Insurance Commission,
4. Period of appeal
of the last pleading or memorandum required by these Rules or p. Philippine Atomic Energy Commission,
a. 15 days from receipt of judgment OR order denying
by the court itself.
q. Board of Investments, motion for recon or new trial (fresh period of 15 days
r. Construction Industry Arbitration Commission, and applicable);
iii) Appeals from the Court of Tax Appeals,
Civil Service Commission, and s. Voluntary Arbitrators. b. Only one MR is allowed;
Quasi-Judicial Agencies (Rule 43)
2. Cases not covered c. Motion for extension of time to le petition can be granted
only for 15 days after payment of required fees.
1. What Quasi-Agencies are covered by this rule a. RA 9282 (CTA) — direct to SC;
d. No further extension shall be granted except for the most
a. Civil Service Commission, The following are already appealable to the CA under R43
compelling reason and in no case to exceed fteen (15)
b. Central Board of Assessment Appeals, a. RA 8799 (Commercial Courts) days.
Securities and Exchange Commission, RTC decision acting as a corporate court, in its delegated 5. Action on the petition (See R42)
jurisdiction, is appealable to the CA under Rule 43 and
c. O ce of the President, a. Require the respondent to le a comment on the petition
not under Rule 41.
not a motion to dismiss, within ten (10) days from notice,
d. Land Registration Authority,
b. NLRC and DOLE decisions; or

be filed not before the CA, but before the Supreme Court.
b. Dismiss the petition if it nds the same to be
Metro Bottled Water v. Andrada Construction 2019
1. The proper mode to assail the OMB's nding of probable
i. patently without merit,
Arbitral awards by CIAC may be reviewed via R43 but ONLY on cause in criminal cases is by ling a petition for certiorari
ii. prosecuted manifestly for delay, or questions of law. before the SC— which petitioners failed to do.
iii. that the questions raised therein are too Mandagan v. Dela Cruz 2018 2. The remedy to assail the OMB's ndings of probable cause
unsubstantial to require consideration. in criminal or non-administrative cases Is still by ling a
The remedy from the OMB’s ruling exonerating respondents
6. Due course (See R42) from administrative liability is not R43, since ruling is nal & petition for certiorari with the SC, and not with the CA.
unappealable, but R65. 3. It follows then that petitioners have lost their right to assail
The ndings of fact of the court or agency concerned, when
supported by substantial evidence, shall be binding on the Yatco v. Deputy OMB 2020 the OMB's nding of probable cause against them when
Court of Appeals. they elevated the case before the wrong forum.
Respondent’s remedy from the consolidated ruling of the
7. E ect of appeal Ombudsman (administrative and criminal case) is R43 from the See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 28
administrative aspect and R65 to SC from the criminal. Each of
The appeal shall not stay the award, judgment, nal order or
these remedies remains viable only with respect to the aspect it is
resolution sought to be reviewed unless the Court of Appeals
directed to. Philhealth v. Urdaneta Sacred Heart Hospital 11 Jan 2021
shall direct otherwise upon such terms as it may deem just.
OMB v. Chipoco 2019
NB: Petition must be accompanied with TRO or 1. The hospital and its personnel involved in the cataract
Preliminary Injunction since the decision to be Ombudsman may appeal CA decision in administrative case. screenings and subsequent operations or treatments had
appealed is immediately executory. Fil-Estate Properties v. Reyes 2019 indirectly violated the PHIC's rules prohibiting the
conduct of cataract operations during medical missions.
8. Submission for decision Remedy from decisions or nal orders of the DAR Secretary is
R43 not R65. 2. Firstly, the non-exhaustion of administrative remedies was
If the petition is given due course, the CA may set the case for
justi ed.
oral argument or require the parties to submit memoranda
within a period of fteen (15) days from notice. The case shall 3. USHH's ling of the complaint with the RTC without rst
be deemed submitted for decision upon the filing of the last exhausting available administrative remedies is justi able in
Patdu, Jr v. Carpio-Morales 27 Sep 2021 light of the denial of its claims by the PHIC's Board itself,
pleading or memorandum.
Doctrinal Rule the body superior to the RO or the PARD where USHH
De Lima v. City of Manila 2018 was supposed to le an MR or appeal.
With respect to criminal charges, the Court has settled that the remedy
Decision of SOJ on legality of tax ordinance may be reviewed of an aggrieved party from a resolution of the Ombudsman finding 4. The instant case may also fall under the following
under R43 since it is an exercise of quasi-judicial power. the presence or absence of probable cause is to file a petition for exceptions:
certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court and the petition should 4.1. when to require exhaustion of administrative

remedies would be unreasonable;

B. Here, there is no law granting the PRC exclusive appellate G. The doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies
4.2. when there are circumstances indicating the jurisdiction over cases decided by the Board, nor is there any is grounded on practical reasons, including allowing the
urgency of judicial intervention; and law excluding such cases from being taken cognizance by administrative agencies concerned to take every
the CA through a petition for review under Rule 43. opportunity to correct its own errors, as well as a ording
4.3. on the basis of strong public interest.
the litigants the opportunity to avail of speedy relief
C. Rule 43 is consistent with Section 9 (3) of BP 129, which
5. However, a judicious review of the merits of the case reveals through the administrative processes and sparing them of
grants the CA exclusive appellate jurisdiction over all nal
that the hospital and its personnel involved in the cataract the laborious and costly resort to courts.
judgments, decisions, resolutions, orders or awards of
screenings and subsequent operations or treatments had
RTCs and quasi-judicial agencies, instrumentalities, boards H. Alo led the petition for review with the CA without any
indirectly violated the PHIC's rules prohibiting the
or commissions. justi cation or reason on why she did not le an appeal
conduct of cataract operations during medical missions.
with the PRC.
1. It has been ruled that the list of quasi-judicial entities
6. PHIC Circular No. 17, series of 2007 expressly provides
found in Section 1, Rule 43 of the Rules of Court is 1. This is de nitely contrary to the rule on exhaustion of
that "Philhealth shall thereby discontinue the
not exclusive. administrative remedies.
compensability of claims for cataract operations performed
during medical missions and other recruitment schemes for D. The question now is whether the Board is considered a 2. Thus, the CA should have dismissed the petition for
cataract surgery." quasi-judicial agency that exercised quasi-judicial powers. lack of cause of action.
7. Thus, PHIC's denial of USHH's claims was justi ed since 1. A quasi-judicial agency or body is an organ of See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 20
the hospital actively employed means or methods to recruit government other than a court and other than a
cataract patients under conditions which are prohibited in legislature, which a ects the rights of private parties iv) Appeals by Certiorari to the Supreme Court
Circular No. 19, series of 2007. through either adjudication or rule-making. (Rule 45)
See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 67 E. The Board, by virtue of the power vested in it by Sec 9(c) of
RA 8981, exercised its quasi-judicial functions when it 1. What cases may be brought to the SC on Certiorari
investigated the case, held a hearing, and issued a decision
A judgment, nal order or resolution of the
that a ected the rights of a private party, herein respondent
PRC v. Alo 14 Feb 2022
Alo. a. Court of Appeals,
The CA has jurisdiction of the case. b. the Sandiganbayan,
F. Thus, the Board is covered by the jurisdiction of the CA
A. Jurisdiction over the subject matter is the power to hear and and can be subject of a Rule 43 petition. c. the Court of Tax Appeals,
determine the general class to which the proceedings in
While the CA has jurisdiction, Alo failed to exhaust all d. the Regional Trial Court or
question belong; it is conferred by law and not by the
administrative remedies, and thus, under the doctrine of exhaustion
consent or acquiescence of any or all of the parties or by e. other courts, whenever authorized by law.
of administrative remedies, her case must be dismissed for lack of
erroneous belief of the court that it exists.
cause of action. Including as well that of:

sanctioned such departure by a lower court, as to call for an

a. Commission on Audit; 3. Period to le
exercise of the power of supervision.
b. Commission on Elections. a. Within 15 days from receipt of the judgment appealed
7. Sanction for not ling pleadings required by the SC
2. What question may be raised from or from denial of motion for reconsideration or new
trial; The SC may require or allow the ling of such pleadings, briefs,
Only questions of law may be raised except writs of memoranda or documents as it may deem necessary within such
b. On motion duly led and served, with full payment of the
a. Amparo, periods and under such conditions as it may consider
docket and other lawful fees and the deposit for costs before
appropriate, and impose the corresponding sanctions in case of
b. Habeas Corpus, and the expiration of the reglementary period, the Supreme
non- ling or unauthorized ling of such pleadings and
Court may for justi able reasons grant an extension of
c. Kalikasan. documents or non-compliance with the conditions therefor.
thirty (30) days only within which to le the petition.
Exceptions: 8. Rule applicable to both civil and criminal cases
4. Where to pay docket fees — To the clerk of SC.
a. When conclusion is a nding grounded entirely on The mode of appeal prescribed in this Rule shall be applicable
5. Dismissal or denial of petition
speculations, surmises or conjectures; to both civil and criminal cases, except in criminal cases where
a. Failure to comply with the requirement regarding payment the penalty imposed is death, reclusion perpetua or life
b. When inference made is manifestly mistaken, absurd, or
of docket and other lawful fees, and deposit for cost; imprisonment.
impossible;
b. Failure to show proof of service;
c. When there is grave abuse of discretion in the appreciation 2019
Park Developers v. Daclan
of facts; c. Failure to observe contents of petition and the documents
that must accompany it. Appeal from RTC decision on ground of lack of jurisdiction over
d. When the judgment is based on misapprehension of facts;
action to rescind memorial park lot purchase raises only a question
d. Appeal is without merit;
e. When the ndings of fact of the court of appeals are of law and should have been taken to the SC and not to the CA.
con icting; e. Prosecuted manifestly for delay;
f. When the Court of Appeals went beyond the issues of the f. Question is too unsubstantial.
case and the same is contrary to the admissions of both 6. Review discretionary Caranto v. Caranto 02 Mar 2020
parties;
a) When the court a quo has decided a question of substance,
g. When the CA manifestly overlooked certain relevant facts 1. The Court dismissed the Petition and refused to discuss the
not theretofore determined by the Supreme Court, or has
not disputed by the parties, which if considered would other issues raised by Rodolfo as it sees no reason to
decided it in a way probably not in accord with law or
justify a di erent conclusion; warrant the exercise of its judicial discretion to review the
with the applicable decisions of the Supreme Court; or
same.
h. When ndings of fact of CA are contrary to the trial court’s b) When the court a quo has so far departed from the accepted
ndings. 2. The allegations of Rodolfo are a mere rehash of his
and usual course of judicial proceedings, or so far
arguments before the CA and essentially raise questions of

invocations of that appellate jurisdiction; it will refuse to

fact as to be beyond the ambit of a petition for review on based;
accept appeals which are:
certiorari under Rule 45.
5.9. When the facts set forth in the petition as well as in
a) "without merit, or
3. Rule 45 lays down the rule that only questions of law the petitioner's main and reply briefs are not
should be raised in petitions led under the said rule since disputed by the respondents; and b) prosecuted manifestly for delay," or
factual questions are not the proper subject of an appeal by
5.10. The nding of fact of the CA is premised on the c) which raise questions too unsubstantial to require
certiorari.
supposed absence of evidence and is contradicted consideration";
4. A question of law arises when there is doubt as to what the by the evidence on record.
and will grant review "only when there are special and
law is on a certain state of facts, while there is a question of
6. Here, Rodolfo's arguments are essentially questions of fact. important reasons therefor."
fact when the doubt arises as to the truth or falsity of the
alleged facts. 6.1. They are simply a mere rehash of his claims in his
Section 2. Mode of review. — A judgment or nal order or resolution of
appeal before the CA which it already thoroughly
5. Medina v. Mayor Asistio recognized 10 exceptional the Commission on Elections and the Commission on Audit may be
passed upon.
circumstances wherein the Court admits and reviews brought by the aggrieved party to the Supreme Court on certiorari under
7. All told, considering that the issues were factual in nature as Rule 65, except as hereinafter provided.
questions of fact as follows:
it involved the determination of whether Rodolfo
5.1. When the conclusion is a nding grounded 1) REMEDY AGAINST COA AND COMELEC IS RULE
su ciently proved his claim by preponderance of evidence,
entirely on speculation, surmises or conjectures; 65. Article IX-A, Section 7 of the Constitution provides that
the Court sees no reason to warrant the exercise of its
decisions, orders or rulings of the COA may be brought to the
5.2. When the inference made is manifestly mistaken, judicial discretion to review the same.
SC on certiorari by the aggrieved party.
absurd or impossible;
See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 76 2) GR: The decision must be a FINAL decision or resolution
5.3. Where there is a grave abuse of discretion;
of the COMELEC en banc. The Supreme Court has no power
5.4. When the judgment is based on a misapprehension v) Review of Judgments or Final Orders of the to review via certiorari an interlocutory order or even a nal
of facts; Commission on Audit and Commission on
resolution of a Division of the COMELEC. Failure to abide
Elections (Rule 64)
5.5. When the ndings of fact are con icting; by this procedural requirement constitutes a ground for
Section 1. Scope. — This Rule shall govern the review of judgments and
DISMISSAL of the petition.
5.6. When the CA, in making its ndings, went beyond
the issues of the case and the same is contrary to nal orders or resolutions of the Commission on Elections and the EXC: To prevent a miscarriage of justice,
the admissions of both appellant and appellee; Commission on Audit.
a) when the issue involves the principle of social justice
5.7. The ndings of the CA are contrary to those of the 1) Discretion of SC to Review Cases. It is the Supreme Court's or the protection of labor,
trial court; prerogative under the law to determine whether or not it shall b) when the decision or resolution sought to be set aside
5.8. When the ndings of fact are conclusions without consent to exercise its appellate jurisdiction to accept or refuse is a nullity, or
citation of speci c evidence on which they are

c) when the need for the relief is extremely urgent and vi) Dismissal, Reinstatement, and Withdrawal circulars, ordirectives of the court without justi able cause;
certiorari is the only adequate and speedy remedy of Appeal and
available.
i) The fact that the order or judgment appealed from is not
1. Grounds appealable.
Section 3. Time to file petition. — The petition shall be led within
thirty (30) days from notice of the judgment or nal order or Motu proprio or upon motion: 2. Dismissal of improper appeal
resolution sought to be reviewed. An appeal under Rule 41 taken from the RTC to the CA
a) Failure of the record on appeal to show on its face that the
The ling of a motion for new trial or reconsideration of said judgment or appeal was taken within the period xed by these Rules; raising only questions of law shall be dismissed, issues purely of
nal order or resolution, if allowed under the procedural rules of the law not being reviewable by said court.
Commission concerned, shall interrupt the period herein xed. If the
b) ⭐Failure to le the notice of appeal or the record on
appeal within the period prescribed by these Rules; Similarly, an appeal by notice of appeal instead of by petition for
motion is denied, the aggrieved party may le the petition within the
remaining period, but which shall not be less than ve (5) days in any
review from the appellate judgment of a RTC shall be dismissed.
c) Failure of the appellant to pay the docket and other
event, reckoned from notice of denial. lawful fees as provided in section 5 of Rule 40 and section An appeal erroneously taken to the CA shall not be transferred
4 of Rule 41; to the appropriate court but shall be dismissed outright.
1) The ling of a motion for new trial or reconsideration of said
judgment or nal order or resolution, if allowed under the d) Unauthorized alterations, omissions or additions in the 3. Withdrawal of appeal
procedural rules of the commission concerned, shall approved record on appeal as provided in section 4 of Rule An appeal may be withdrawn as of right at any time before the
interrupt the period herein xed. 44; filing of the appellee’s brief.
2) NB: The Neypes Rule will not apply herein since said rule is e) Failure of the appellant to serve and file the required Thereafter, the withdrawal may be allowed in the discretion of
meant to reconcile the di erent periods to appeal. Take note number of copies of his brief or memorandum within the the court.
that R64 in relation to R65 is not a mode of appeal governed time provided by these Rules;
by the rules on ordinary civil action, but is a special civil f) Absence of specific assignment of errors in the
action. appellant’s brief, or of page references to the record as
required in section 13, paragraphs (a), (c), (d) and (f) of Brual v. Contreras 7 Mar 2022
Section 8. Effect of filing. — The ling of a petition for certiorari shall
Rule 44; 1. The remedy of appeal in special proceedings is not limited
not stay the execution of the judgment or nal order or resolution sought
to be reviewed, unless the Supreme Court shall direct otherwise upon such g) Failure of the appellant to take the necessary steps for the to appealable orders and judgments rendered in the main
terms as it may deem just. correction or completion of the record within the time case, but extends to other orders or dispositions that
limited by the court in its order; completely determine a particular matter in the case.
h) Failure of the appellant to appear at the preliminary 1.1. This includes the denial of a motion for
conference under Rule 48 or to comply with orders, intervention as in the case at bar.
2. Under Section 3 of Rule 41, a party who wants to appeal a

judgment or nal order in special proceedings has 30 days See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 12 ii. he was prevented by fraud, accident, mistake or excusable
from notice of the judgment or nal order within which to negligence from ling such motion or taking the appeal;
perfect an appeal because he will be ling not only a notice
iii. he must comply with the double period.
of appeal but also a record on appeal that will require the Petition for Relief from Judgment
approval of the trial court with notice to the adverse party. 3 d. The above-stated rule will not apply when a petition for
Rule 38
relief which is grounded on extrinsic fraud ultimately results in
3. Here, considering that the respondents intended to appeal
a. Grounds for availing of the remedy. — the court's lack of jurisdiction over the defendant, and which
the nal order of the denial of their motion for intervention
consequently makes the judgment rendered by the trial court
in the special proceedings case, they should have led both a i. Petition for Relief from Judgment. — FAME.
void. In such a case, the petition for relief should not be
notice of appeal and a record on appeal within the period ii. Petition for Relief from Denial of Appeal dismissed for failure of one to avail himself of the remedy of an
prescribed by the rules.
1. by FAME, has been prevented from taking an appeal and for untimeliness. (Duremdes v. Jorilla 2020)
3.1. Here, respondents had until December 15, 2010 appeal.
within which to le their notice and record on Annulment of Judgment
appeal. 2. Where the denial of an appeal is set aside, the lower 4
Rule 47
court shall be required to give due course to the
3.2. Since they led their MR on November 26, the appeal and to elevate the record of the appealed case a. Grounds for annulment
period for ling of the appeal was duly as if a timely and proper appeal had been made.
interrupted. i. Extrinsic Fraud, if have not been availed of in
b. Time to file petition. — motion for new trial or petition for relief from
3.3. When they received the nal order denying their
i. within sixty (60) days after the petitioner learns of the judgment;
MR on January 24, 2011, the period to appeal,
applying the fresh period rule, resumed and they judgment, nal order, or other proceeding to be set aside, ii. Lack of Jurisdiction.
had 30 days thereafter or until February 23 to and
b. Period to file action. — If the remedies of new trial, relief
perfect their appeal. ii. not more than six (6) months after such judgment or from judgment and appeal have not or could not have been
3.4. They led their notice of appeal on February 3 nal order was entered, or such proceeding was taken. availed of.
without a record on appeal. c. Petitioner must satisfy the following requirements i. When to file annulment? Lapse of 6 months
3.5. It was only on June 27 that they led their i. he has no adequate remedy available to him, which is from nality of judgment until barred by laches.
omnibus MR with motion to admit record on either ii. Annulment of judgment of MTC decision, where
appeal.
1. a motion for new trial or to le. — in the RTC having jurisdiction over the
4. Hence, the Court nds no error when the RTC denied former. It shall be treated as an ordinary civil action.
2. appeal from adverse decisions of the lower court,
respondents' notice of appeal.
iii. If based on extrinsic fraud, the action must be led
within four (4) years from its discovery; and

iv. If based on lack of jurisdiction, before it is barred course to the petition.

3.1. Lack of jurisdiction means absence of or no
by laches or estoppel.
jurisdiction, that is, the court should not have 4. Under Section 2, Rule 4, the only grounds for annulment
c. Effects of judgment of annulment. — shall set aside the taken cognizance of the petition because the law of judgment are extrinsic fraud and lack of jurisdiction.
questioned judgment or nal order or resolution and render does not vest it with jurisdiction over the subject
4.1. Lack of jurisdiction as a ground for annulment of
the same null and void, without prejudice to the original matter.
judgment refers to either lack of jurisdiction over
action being re led in the proper court.
3.2. The concept of lack of jurisdiction as a ground to the person of the defending party or over the
However, where the judgment or nal order or resolution is annul a judgment does NOT embrace grave abuse subject matter of the claim.
set aside on the ground of extrinsic fraud, the court may of discretion amounting to lack or excess of
5. The reconstitution of a certi cate of title denotes
on motion order the trial court to try the case as if a jurisdiction.
restoration in the original form and condition of a lost or
timely motion for new trial had been granted therein.
4. Here, the then CFI had jurisdiction over the petition for destroyed instrument attesting the title of a person to a
reconstitution at inception. piece of land.
Heirs of Borras v. Heirs of Borras 25 Apr 2022
5. Jurisdiction is not the same as the exercise of jurisdiction. 6. From Section 109 of PD 1529, for an order of
Doctrinal Rule reconstitution to be issued, it must be clearly shown that
5.1. As distinguished from the exercise of jurisdiction,
The concept of lack of jurisdiction as a ground to annul a judgment the certi cate of title had been lost or destroyed.
jurisdiction is the authority to decide a cause, and
does NOT embrace grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or not the decision rendered therein. 6.1. If a certi cate of title has not been lost, but is in
excess of jurisdiction. fact in the possession of another person, then the
See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 3 reconstituted title is void and the court that
1. Petitioners erroneously led a petition for annulment of
judgment based on the ground of the trial court's exercise rendered the decision had no jurisdiction.
in excess of its jurisdiction, which is not a ground in an 7. Here, petitioner clearly alleged in her petition before the
Gaoiran v. CA 7 Mar 2022
action for annulment of judgment. CA that, contrary to the claim of Mary in the
2. Annulment of judgment may either be based on the 1. The CA erred in denying petitioner's petition for reconstitution proceeding, the owner's duplicate copy was
ground that a judgment is void for want of jurisdiction or annulment of judgment. not really lost, as the same was surrendered to her by
that the judgment was obtained by extrinsic fraud. 2. Preliminarily, the Court notes that petitioner should have Timoteo and was in her possession all along.
2.1. It may be availed of only when other remedies are led a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45, not a 8. Ergo, the RTC did not validly acquire jurisdiction over the
wanting. petition for certiorari under Rule 65 since the CA acted subject matter of the reconstitution proceeding.
within its jurisdiction when it rendered the assailed
3. In a petition for annulment of judgment based on lack of Decision. See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 13
jurisdiction, petitioner must show not merely an abuse of
jurisdictional discretion but an absolute lack of jurisdiction. 3. In the interest of justice and to prevent further prolonging
the proceedings in this case, the Court resolved to give due

Magdalena v. Heirs of Sps Somis 03 May 2021 annulment of judgment is grounded on lack of jurisdiction, grounds, namely, extrinsic fraud and lack of
the petitioner need not allege that the ordinary remedy of jurisdiction.
1. Section 2, Rule 47 provides that an annulment of judgment
new trial or reconsideration of the judgment sought to be
may be based only on the grounds of extrinsic fraud and 3. None of the grounds are present in this case.
annulled are no longer available through no fault of her
lack of jurisdiction. 3.1. the RTC acted within its jurisdiction when it
own.
2. Here, the CA correctly held that jurisdiction over the resolved the motion for execution led by Aceron
3.1. This is because a judgment rendered without
spouses Somis was acquired by the trial court when and consequently issued the Resolution which
jurisdiction is fundamentally void.
summonses were duly served on them. divested Oliver of his ownership over the subject
3.2. Thus, it may be questioned any time unless laches property and directed the Register of Deeds to
2.1. With regard to Celso, jurisdiction was likewise
has already set in. issue a new title in the name of Aceron. It further
acquired over his person when he voluntarily
declared petitioner Calubad's real estate mortgage
appeared before the court by signing and ling the 4. Here, while Ancheta had previously availed of the remedy
and foreclosure sale as null and void.
Compromise Agreement. of a petition for relief with the RTC, she is not precluded
from ling with the CA a petition for annulment of 3.2. Neither is there extrinsic fraud in the case at bar
3. As to Maria’s allegation of extrinsic fraud, Maria actively
judgment – one that is essentially anchored on the ground which would deprive Calubad to intervene. Oliver,
participated in the proceedings and was properly assisted by
of lack of jurisdiction. admittedly, mortgaged the subject property to
her counsel both in the RTC and the appellate court.
Calubad after the decision had become nal and
5. Lack of jurisdiction being a valid ground for annulment of
3.1. Thus, Maria was accorded with due process to executory.
a judgment, and one which may negate the court's
defend her case.
acquisition of jurisdiction, including defective service of 4. Moreover, a judgment that has become nal is immutable
See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 48 summons, it is a well-founded cause for an action for and unalterable and can no longer be modi ed in any
annulment of a judgment. respect even if the modi cation is meant to correct an
erroneous conclusion of fact or of law, and whether the
See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 65 modi cation is made by the court that rendered the
Ancheta v. Cambay 18 Jan 2021
decision or by the highest court of the land.
1. Ancheta is not precluded from ling a petition for
5. Section 47 (b), Rule 39 explicitly provides that a judgment
annulment of judgment with the CA. Calubad v. Aceron 02 Sep 2020
of the court is conclusive and binding only upon the parties
2. Jose v. Intra Strata Assurance Corporation has held that it is 1. The CA properly dismissed the Petition for Annulment. and those who are their successors in interest by title after
only extrinsic fraud, not lack of jurisdiction, which is the commencement of the action in court.
2. Annulment of judgment is a recourse equitable in
excluded as a valid ground for annulment if it was availed
character, allowed only in exceptional cases as where there is 5.1. While it is true that Calubad is not a party to the
of, or could not have been availed of, in a motion for new
no available or other adequate remedy. case, the Resolution is conclusive and binding
trial or petition for relief.
2.1. In addition, it may be invoked only on two upon him being the successor-in-interest of Oliver
3. Coombs v. Castañeda held that when a petition for

who acquired title to the subject property after the b. A person who is NOT a part of the judgment may sue for its
Judgment which did not implead indispensable party may be
case has become nal and executory. annulment PROVIDED that he can prove
nulli ed under R47 on ground of lack of jurisdiction.
6. Furthermore, Calubad's resort to the remedy of annulment i. that the judgment was obtained through fraud and
Sps Manila v. Sps Manzo 2011
of judgment under Rule 47 is unnecessary as the same collusion and
extends only to a party in whose favor the remedies of new In an appealed ejectment case, the RTC acted in excess of its
ii. that he would be adversely a ected thereby.
trial, reconsideration, appeal, and petition for relief from jurisdiction when instead of simply dismissing the ejectment
judgment are no longer available through no fault of said complaint, it ordered the lessors to execute a deed of sale in favour of
Duremdes v. Jorilla 2020
party. the lessees. The remedy however of the lessors is to appeal the RTC
The petition for relief grounded on extrinsic fraud meant that the judgment NOT to le an action for annulment under R47.
6.1. As a non-party, Calubad could not bring the
court did not acquire personal jurisdiction. Hence, petition for relief
action for annulment of judgment considering Lack of jurisdiction as a ground for annulment of judgment refers
can be led at any time unless barred by laches or estoppel.
that the remedies of new trial, reconsideration, to either lack of jurisdiction over the person of the defending party
appeal or setting the judgment aside through a Ancheta v. Ancheta also in Alvarez v. Domantay 2019 or over the subject matter of the claim.
petition for relief are not available to him in the If the ground is extrinsic fraud, the petitioner must allege that he Heirs of Cullado v. Gutierrez 2019 En Banc
rst instance. failed to avail of new trial, appeal, or petition for relief through no
In an accion publiciana led by plainti registered owner against
fault of his own.
See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 71 defendant, the RTC judgment awarding ownership to defendant
However, if the ground of lack of jurisdiction is ALSO included, was VOID since ownership cannot be adjudicated in an accion
then there is no need to allege said condition precedent. publiciana. Judgment may be set aside via R47.
5 Collateral Attack on Judgments Coombs v. Castañeda 2017 Mejia-Espinoza v. Cariño 2017
a. A nal and executory judgment may be set aside in three (3) A judgment ordering a reconstitution of title is null and void if the R47 is for nullifying only judgments or nal orders, NOT writs or
ways, to wit: title is not really lost but in the possession of the rightful owner. If processes issued pursuant to a nal and executory judgment.
the title was not lost, the RTC does not have jurisdiction to grant the
i. By petition for relief from judgment under Rule Imperial v. Armes 2017
reconstitution of title.
38; R47 not available against judgments or nal orders of
Thus, the judgment of the court ordering reconstitution can be
ii. When the judgment is void for want of jurisdiction, quasi-judicial bodies, such as the SEC.
assailed by Annulment of Judgment under Rule 47 on the ground
by direct attack, by certiorari, annulment of judgment Malabanan v. Republic 2018
of lack of jurisdiction and there is no need anymore to state in the
or by collateral attack; and
petition that petitioner failed to avail of appeal, petition for relief Action for reversion proper, instead of R47, where Republic’s
iii. When the judgment was obtained by fraud and Rule through no fault of his own. position is that there was no CFI judgment in the rst place ordering
38 cannot be applied anymore. issuance of decree. Court distinguished this case from Yujuico
Fernando v. Paguyo 2019
where there was in fact a CFI judgment.

1. If a judgment has disposed already of the action 2. When the judgment was novated by subsequent
Aquino v. Estate of Aguirre 2019
or proceeding then it can be executed; AND agreement of the parties;
Petition for reconstitution NOT proper to cancel TCT since it is a
2. The period to appeal has expired and no appeal 3. When a petition for relief from judgment is led
proscribed collateral attack. R47 available.
has been led/taken from the judgment. and a writ of preliminary injunction is issued;
Heirs of Sps Ramirez v. Abon 2019
ii. Are there other instances when execution 4. When the judgment has become dormant, the
Judgment of court granting petition for issuance of duplicate becomes a matter of right? Judgments in action for ve year period to enforce it by a mere motion
certi cate of title, led by transferee in deed of sale, is VOID where having expired;
no notice given to heirs of registered owner. Judgment may be 1. Injunction,
5. When the judgment is incomplete.
nulli ed under R47. 2. Receivership,
v. Grounds for Quashal of Writ of Execution
3. Accounting and
1. the controversy has never been submitted to the
Execution, Satisfaction, and E ect of 4. Support, judgment of the court;
U Judgments and such other judgments as are now or may hereafter 2. improvidently issued;
Rule 39 be declared to be immediately executory.
3. defective in substance;
The stay of execution shall be upon such terms as to
When execution shall issue 4. issued against the wrong party;
BOND or otherwise as may be considered proper for
How a judgment is executed the security or protection of the rights of the adverse 5. the judgment debt has been paid or otherwise
party. satis ed.
Terceria 6. issued without authority;
iii. Is there another instance when execution
Rules on Redemption becomes a matter of right? Under Rule 70 — a 7. change of situation of parties;
judgment of the MTC in a forcible entry or unlawful
detainer case is immediately executory even if it is not 8. varies the terms of judgment;
E ect of judgment or nal orders
yet nal and executory. 9. enforced against property exempt from
Enforcement and e ect of foreign judgments or nal orders execution.
iv. When may the court refuse to issue the writ
despite nality b. Discretionary execution
1. When execution shall issue 1. Supervening Fact Doctrine. — When there has i. Before expiration of period to appeal OR during
a. Execution as a matter of right been a change in the situation of the parties, the pendency of appeal. — What are the requisites
which makes the execution inequitable; for discretionary execution?
i. What are the conditions for compulsory
execution?

1. There must be a motion led by the prevailing iv. Stay of discretionary execution: Supersedeas iii. The petitioner for revival of judgment is entitled to
party; Bond another 10 years from the date of the revived
judgment.
2. There must be a notice of the motion given to GR: When a defendant puts up a supersedeas bond,
the adverse party; and the court shall recall the execution pending appeal
because discretionary execution is the exception Pineda v. Miranda 04 Aug 2021
3. There must be good reasons to execute to be
rather than the general rule. 1. The Complaint for Revival of Judgment should be granted.
stated in a special order after due hearing.
EXC: Notwithstanding the ling of the supersedeas 2. An action for revival of judgment is an action with the
ii. Where can you file your motion for execution
bond by the appellant, execution pending appeal exclusive purpose of enforcing a judgment which could no
pending appeal?
may still be granted by the court IF THERE longer be enforced by a motion.
1. TRIAL COURT — while it has jurisdiction over ARE SPECIAL AND COMPELLING
the case and the court is still in possession of the 3. Once a judgment becomes nal and executory, the
REASONS justifying the same outweighing the
records of the case. prevailing party has two remedies:
security o ered by the supersedeas bond.
2. APPELLATE COURT — after the trial court 3.1. To have the judgment executed as a matter of right
v. Judgment not stayed by appeal. — Judgment for
has already lost jurisdiction. by mere motion within 5 years from the date of
SUPPORT. The same may be executed pending
entry of judgment; or
iii. Grounds. — Good Reasons and contained in a appeal even notwithstanding the ling of a
special order supersedeas bond by the appellant. 3.2. If the prevailing party fails to have the judgment
enforced by motion after the lapse of 5 years, to
1. When there is danger of the judgment becoming 2. How a judgment is executed have the judgment enforced as a right of action by
INEFFECTUAL.
a. Execution by motion or by independent action the institution of a complaint in a regular court
2. Where the prevailing party is of ADVANCE within 10 years from the time the judgment
i. How is the execution enforced?
AGE; became nal.
1. Execution by motion — within ve (5) years
3. Where the appeal is for the purpose of DELAY; 4. The revival action is a new action altogether; it is di erent
from the date of its entry or nality of
4. Where the judgment is for SUPPORT; and distinct from the original judgment sought to be
judgment; and
revived or enforced.
5. Where the article subject of the case would 2. Execution by independent action through
DETERIORATE; 4.1. It is a new and independent action, wherein the
revival of judgment — within 5 to 10 years.
cause of action is the decision itself and not the
6. Where the defendants are exhausting their ii. The only exception is the judgment for SUPPORT merits of the action.
income; which does not become dormant, nor does it
5. Revival of judgment is premised on the assumption that
7. Where the judgment debtor is in imminent prescribe.
the decision to be revived, either by motion or by
danger of INSOLVENCY.

obligor in such property at the time of the levy, subject to claimant who led a frivolous or plainly spurious
independent action, is already nal and executory.
liens and encumbrances then existing. claim.
5.1. Here, the RTC Br 42 Decision became nal and
c. The remedies of a third person whose property was
executory. 3. Terceria
seized by the sheri to answer for the obligation of a
6. The Court nds that the CA correctly ruled that the RTC Proceedings where property is claimed by third persons;
judgment obligor are the following:
Branch 42 Decision can still be revived as the respondents in relation to third party claim in attachment and
replevin i. Invoke the supervisory power of the court which
properly led a Complaint for Revival of Judgment in
authorized such execution;
accordance with existing law and jurisprudence. a. If the property levied on is
ii. Terceria — third party claim (Sec 16 R39); and
See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 32 i. claimed by any person other than the judgment
obligor or his agent, and iii. Any proper action to vindicate his claim to the
b. Execution of judgments for money property, meaning a separate civil action —
ii. such person makes an AFFIDAVIT of his title
i. Immediate Payment on Demand reivindicatory action.
thereto or right to the possession thereof, stating the
ii. Satisfaction by levy. — LEVY is the act whereby a grounds of such right or title, and 4. Rules on Redemption
sheri sets apart or appropriates, for the purpose of iii. serves the same upon the o cer making the levy a. Who may redeem
satisfying the command of the writ, a part or the and a copy thereof upon the judgment obligee,
whole of the judgment-debtor’s property. It is a i. The judgment obligor, or his successor in interest in
prerequisite to the auction sale. In order that an iv. the o cer shall not be bound to keep the property, the whole or any part of the property;
execution sale may be valid, there must be a previous v. unless such judgment obligee, on demand of the ii. REDEMPTIONER. — A creditor having a lien
valid levy. A sale not preceded by a valid levy is VOID o cer, les a BOND approved by the court to by virtue of an attachment, judgment or mortgage on
and the purchaser acquires no title. indemnify the third-party claimant in a sum not less the property sold, or on some part thereof,
iii. Garnishment of debts and credits. — The o cer than the value of the property levied on. subsequent to the lien under which the property was
may levy on debts due the judgment obligor and sold.
No claim for damages for the taking or keeping of the
other credits, including bank deposits, nancial property may be enforced against the bond unless the TN: Redemptioners cannot redeem if the judgment
interests, royalties, commissions and other personal action therefor is led within 120 days from the date of debtor redeems.
property not capable of manual delivery in the the ling of the bond. b. Period of redemption
possession or control of third parties.
b. Nothing herein contained shall prevent i. ONE YEAR from the date of registration of the
c. Effect of levy on third persons. — The levy on
i. such claimant or any third person from vindicating certi cate of sale;
execution shall create a lien in favor of the judgment
his claim to the property in a separate action, or ii. All subsequent redemptioners are given 60 days.
obligee over the right, title and interest of the judgment
ii. the judgment obligee from claiming damages in the
same or a separate action against a third-party

c. Usage of the property pending redemption. — Until

5. E ect of judgment or nal orders
the expiration of the time allowed for redemption, the
a. Res judicata PNB v. Daradar 28 Jun 2021
court may, as in other proper cases, restrain the
commission of waste on the property by i. The judgment or order invoked as res adjudicata must 1. The complaint should not have been reinstated.
INJUNCTION, on the application of the purchaser or be nal;
2. The First Order provisionally dismissing the complaint is
the judgment obligee, with or without notice.
ii. The court rendering the same must have jurisdiction VOID for lack of legal basis. There is nothing in the Rules
It is not waste for a person to continue to over the subject matter and of the parties; of Civil Procedure which provides for a provisional
dismissal of a civil case.
i. use it in the same manner in which it was previously iii. The judgment or order must be upon the merits; and
used; or 3. A judgment must be de nitive; the decision itself must
iv. There must be, between the two cases, identity of
purport to decide nally the rights of the parties upon the
ii. to use it in the ordinary course of husbandry; or parties, identity of subject matter, and identity of
issue submitted by speci cally denying or granting the
cause of action.
iii. to make the necessary repairs to buildings thereon remedy sought by the action.
while he occupies the property. b. There is identity of parties for the purpose of res
4. Here, the provisional dismissal fails to meet this standard
judicata:
All rents, earnings and income derived from the property of de nitiveness and hence should not be sanctioned.
pending redemption shall belong to the judgment obligor i. When the parties in the second action are the same as
5. A void judgment or order has no legal and binding e ect
until the expiration of his period of redemption. the parties in the rst action; or
for any purpose. In contemplation of law, it is non-existent
d. Upon the expiration of the right of redemption, the ii. When the parties in the second action are and may be resisted in any action or proceeding whenever it
purchaser or redemptioner shall be substituted to and successors-in-interest of the parties in the rst action, is involved. It is not even necessary to take any steps to
acquire all the rights, title, interest and claim of the such as heirs or purchasers who acquired title after the vacate or avoid a void judgment or nal order; it may simply
judgment obligor to the property as of the time of the commencement of the rst action. be ignored.
levy.
Bar by a Former Judgment Conclusiveness of Judgment 6. The Second Order already attained nality and is beyond
e. The possession of the property shall be given to the the courts' power to amend or revoke.
purchaser or last redemptioner by the same o cer unless a absolute bar to all matters the rst judgment is conclusive 7. Respondent did not move for the reconsideration of the
third party is actually holding the property adversely to directly adjudged as well as only on matters actually litigated Second Order nor appeal the same, thus allowing it to
the judgment obligor. matters that might have been and adjudged in the rst action become nal and executory.
f. In an extrajudicial foreclosure, there is no need for a deed adjudged.
8. In any event, the question of whether a case should be
of sale. Only an a davit of consolidation is needed
dismissed for failure to prosecute is mainly addressed to the
under the mortgage law. there must be identity of parties, not necessary that there is
sound discretion of the trial court.
subject matter, and cause of identity of causes of action.
action 9. The Second Order bars the revival of the case through a

new complaint. Republic v. Claro Yap 2018 employer, which shall be automatically remitted directly to the
woman “notwithstanding other laws to the contrary.”
10. All elements of res judicata are present in the instant case. The statute of limitations and Sec 6 R39 DO NOT apply in
land registration proceedings. Anama v. Citibank N.A. 2017
11. Thus, the trial court did not err in granting PNB's motion
to dismiss on the ground of res judicata. This provision refers to civil actions and is not applicable to special The RTC has original and exclusive jurisdiction over an action for
proceedings. This is so because a party in civil action must revival of judgment since it is incapable of pecuniary estimation.
See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 38 immediately enforce a judgment that is secured as against the adverse
PSALM v. Maunlad Homes 2017
party, and his failure to act to enforce the same within a reasonable
6. Enforcement and e ect of foreign judgments or time makes the decision unenforceable against the losing party. The remedy from a denial of a third-party claim is neither appeal
nal orders nor certiorari. The reason is that there is an adequate remedy of
⭐Perez v. Manotok Realty 2019 ling a separate reivindicatory action.
a. Cannot be enforced by execution;
There are instances where the Court allowed execution by motion
b. Recognition of foreign judgment; Central Visayas Finance v. Sps Adlawan 2019
even after the lapse of five years upon meritorious grounds.
c. Allow the losing party an opportunity to challenge it Where action for replevin contained alternative prayer for collection
In computing the time limited for suing out of an execution,
of loan, a separate case for recovery of de ciency after the foreclosure
i. In case of a judgment or nal order upon a specific although there is authority to the contrary, the general rule is that
sale is barred by res judicata.
thing, the judgment or nal order is conclusive upon there should not be included the time when execution is stayed, either
the title to the thing; and Ligtas v. People 2015
a) by agreement of the parties for a de nite time,
ii. In case of a judgment or nal order against a Finding by DARAB that Petitioner was a bona fide tenant meant
b) by injunction,
person, the judgment or nal order is presumptive that the RTC in a criminal case cannot convict him of theft because
evidence of a right as between the parties and their c) by the taking of an appeal or writ of error so as to operate as of conclusiveness of judgment.
successors in interest by a subsequent title. a supersedeas,
Ang v. Sps Bitanga 2019
d. In either case, the judgment or nal order may be repelled d) by the death of a party or otherwise.
In an indirect contempt case, MGCCI was absolved from liability
by evidence of a Any interruption or delay occasioned by the debtor will because no notice of garnishment was served on it. The validity of
i. want of jurisdiction, extend the time within which the writ may be issued. the garnishment cannot be relitigated in another case even if it
involves a di erent cause of action.
ii. want of notice to the party, Republic v. Daisy Yahon 2014
Denila v. Republic 2020
iii. collusion, Section 8(g) of RA 9262, being a later enactment, should be
construed as laying down an exception to the general rule Unsigned resolution is neither reported nor doctrinal but constitutes
iv. fraud, or
above-stated that retirement bene ts are exempt from execution. res judicata as among the parties.
v. clear mistake of law or fact. The law itself declares that the court shall order the withholding of a
Eizmendi, Jr v. Fernandez 2019
percentage of the income or salary of the respondent by the

to "repurchase" the property, the fact remains that this

Unsigned resolution can still be considered as binding precedent if it 4. Nagtalon v. United Coconut Planters Bank enumerated the
allegation cannot be addressed in an ex parte proceeding
states clearly the facts and law on which it is based. This is in contrast following jurisprudential exceptions:
involving the issuance of a writ of possession.
to a minute resolution which dismisses a case without discussing its
4.1. gross inadequacy of the purchase price;
merits. 8.1. If indeed she should be considered as the true
4.2. third party claiming right adverse to the owner of the property, she can fully assert her
Paterno v. Paterno 2020
mortgagor/debtor, and rights in a separate full-blown trial and not merely
LAW OF THE CASE. Ruling in declaration of nullity of marriage through her opposition to the issuance of the writ.
4.3. failure to pay the surplus proceeds of the sale to the
case that Art 147 applies only to properties acquired by the parties
mortgagor. 8.2. This is because her perceived right no longer stems
during the cohabitation is binding in the subsequent partition case
5. Spouses Rosario v. GSI expounded on the second exception, from her position as a mortgagor but as an alleged
between the same parties.
stating that the ministerial duty of the court to issue an ex "repurchaser" of the subject property.
parte writ of possession ceases when there are third-parties 9. Alma also argues that her right to due process was violated
who are actually holding the mortgaged property adversely as she was not noti ed of PNB's petition for the issuance of
Philippine National Bank v. Fontanoza 2 Mar 2022
to the judgment debtor. a writ of possession.
1. PNB is entitled to the issuance of a writ of possession.
6. To emphasize, a third party should hold possession of the 9.1. To be sure, no hearing is necessary prior to the
2. Once title to the property has been consolidated in the subject property adversely to the judgment debtor or issuance of a writ of possession, as it is a
buyer's name upon failure of the mortgagor to redeem the mortgagor. proceeding wherein relief is granted without giving
property within the one-year redemption period, the writ the person against whom the relief is sought an
6.1. Here, Alma cannot be considered as a third party
of possession becomes a matter of right belonging to the opportunity to be heard.
since she herself was the mortgagor who failed to
buyer.
redeem the property during the foreclosure 10. An ex-parte petition for issuance of a writ of possession is a
2.1. Consequently, the buyer can demand possession of proceeding and the redemption period. non-litigious proceeding.
the property at any time.
7. Jurisprudence teaches that not even any question regarding 10.1. It is a judicial proceeding for the enforcement of
2.2. Its right of possession has then ripened into the the validity of the mortgage or its foreclosure is a legal one's right of possession as purchaser in a
right of a con rmed absolute owner and the ground for refusing the issuance of a writ of execution/writ foreclosure sale.
issuance of the writ becomes a ministerial function of possession.
that does not admit of the exercise of the court's See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 15
7.1. Hence, she cannot insist on the recall of the writ of
discretion.
possession solely because she led a separate case
3. However, there are exceptions to the rule that the trial which questioned the foreclosure and advanced
The Linden Suites v. Meridien Far East Properties
court's duty to issue the writ of possession in favor of the her claim of repurchase.
04 Oct 2021
purchaser is ministerial.
8. Notwithstanding Alma's claim that PNB accepted her o er

such as, but not limited to, the submission of documents aside its Resolution and entry of judgment declaring the
1. The RTC as the judgment court has supervisory control
consisting of a list of properties and income of respondent CA Decision to be nal and executory.
over the execution of its judgment.
and the a davits of concerned o cers in relation thereto.
2. A nal and executory decision is immutable.
2. A judgment obligee is entitled, as a matter of right, to an
7. The doctrine of separate juridical personality is inapplicable
order of the court which rendered judgment if the writ of 2.1. A decision or order becomes nal and executory if
in the case at bench.
execution issued against the judgment obligor was returned the aggrieved party fails to appeal or move for a
unsatis ed, in whole or in part. 7.1. Petitioner wanted the o cers to be examined not reconsideration within 15 days from his or her
for the purpose of passing unto them the liability receipt of the court's decision or order disposing of
3. The general rule is that it is the ministerial duty of the court
of respondent as its judgment obligor. the action or proceeding.
to order the execution of its nal judgment.
7.2. The sole objective of the examination of the 3. Thus, under the doctrine of immutability of judgment, a
3.1. However, Rule 135, Section 5(g) of the Rules of
o cers was to ascertain the properties and income decision or order that has attained nality can no longer be
Court provides that the trial court may amend and
of respondent which can be subjected for modi ed in any respect, even if the modi cation is meant to
control its process and orders so as to make them
execution in order to satisfy the nal judgment. correct erroneous conclusions of fact and law.
conformable to law and justice.
See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 25 4. The only exceptions to the rule on the immutability of nal
3.2. It has the inherent power to control, in furtherance
judgments are
of justice, the conduct of its ministerial o ces, and
of all other persons in any manner connected with 4.1. the correction of clerical errors,
a case before it, in every manner appertaining Magdalena v. Heirs of Sps Somis 03 May 2021
4.2. the so-called nunc pro tunc entries which cause no
thereto.
1. In view of the nality of the trial court's Decision which prejudice to any party, and
4. Here, the writ of execution was returned unserved, as upheld the Compromise Agreement, the latter is binding 4.3. void judgments.
shown in the Sheri 's Return. between and among the parties.
5. Here, petitioners received a copy of the Decision of the CA
4.1. It was therefore imperative for the judgment court 2. When a decision becomes nal and executory, it becomes on April 8, 2013. Despite receipt thereof, they failed to le
to issue an order for examination of respondent valid and binding upon the parties and their successors in a motion for reconsideration within the 15-day
after the writ of execution was returned interest. Such decision or order can no longer be disturbed reglementary period.
unsatis ed. or reopened no matter how erroneous it may have been.
6. Therefore, the appellate court's Decision became nal and
5. The trial court should have proceeded to conduct a
See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 48 can no longer be assailed by then for being immutable and
permissible examination of respondent, through its o cers,
unalterable.
so as to disclose the properties which can be subjected to
execution. See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 69
Taningco v. Fernandez 09 Dec 2020
6. The RTC should have employed other allowable means
1. The CA did not err in denying petitioners' motion to set

IV Provisional Remedies 3) Receivership; Section 1. Grounds upon which attachment may issue. — At the
commencement of the action or at any time before entry of judgment, a
4) Replevin;
plainti or any proper party may have the property of the adverse party
Nature, purpose, and jurisdiction over provisional attached as security for the satisfaction of any judgment that may be
5) Support pendente lite. — cognizable only by the RTC;
remedies recovered in the following cases:
all others may be taken cognizance by the MTC for as long as
Preliminary Attachment a) In an action for the recovery of a speci ed amount of
the main action is also under said court.
money or damages, other than moral and exemplary, on a
Preliminary Injunction Prov Rem JD When available? Bond
cause of action arising from law, contract, quasi-contract, delict or
Receivership quasi-delict against a party who is about to depart from the
Preliminary
Attachment
✓ Philippines with intent to defraud his creditors;
Replevin At any stage but before
b) In an action for money or property embezzled;
nal judgment.
Preliminary
Injunction
✓ c) In an action to recover the possession of property
Nature, purpose, and jurisdiction over unjustly or fraudulently taken, detained or converted, when
A
provisional remedies MTC
At any time or stage of the property, or any part thereof, has been concealed, removed, or
or disposed of to prevent its being found or taken by the applicant or
Provisional Remedies are: Receivership action or even after nal ✓ an authorized person;
RTC
judgment.
a. Those to which parties litigant may resort for the d) In an action against a party who has been guilty of a
preservation or protection of their rights or interest, and double the fraud in contracting the debt (dolo causante) or incurring
for no other purpose during the pendency of the action. Before defendant les value of the the obligation upon which the action is brought, or in the
Replevin
his answer. personal performance (dolo incidente) thereof;
b. They are applied to a pending litigation, for the purpose
property
of securing the judgment or preserving the status quo, and in e) In an action against a party who has removed or
some cases after judgment, for the purpose of preserving or Support RTC At any stage or even for disposed of his property, or is about to do so, with intent
disposing of the subject matter. pendente lite only the rst time on appeal
✘ to defraud his creditors; or
Also known as ancillary or auxiliary remedies, they are writs and f) In an action against a party who does not reside and is
processes available during the pendency of the action. They are Lifetime of Bond — from approval until the main action is not found in the Philippines, or on whom summons may
ancillary because they are mere incidents and dependent on the result decided, unless the court directs otherwise. be served by publication.
of the main action.
Preliminary Attachment NOTES
What are the different provisional remedies? B
Rule 57 1) Definition. A writ of preliminary attachment is a
1) Preliminary Attachment;
provisional remedy issued upon order of the court where an
2) Preliminary Injunction; action is pending to be levied upon the property or properties

of the defendant therein, the same to be held thereafter by the

Moreover, a writ of preliminary attachment is only a 2) Three Stages.
Sheri as security for the satisfaction of whatever judgment
provisional remedy issued upon order of the court where an
might be secured in said action by the attaching creditor a) first, the court issues the order granting the
action is pending; it is an ancillary remedy. Attachment is
against the defendant. application;
only adjunct to the main suit. Therefore, it can have no
2) Purpose. The chief purpose of the remedy of attachment is to independent existence apart from a suit on a claim of the b) second, the writ of attachment issues pursuant to the
secure a contingent lien on defendant's property until plainti against the defendant. order granting the writ; and
plainti can, by appropriate proceedings, obtain a judgment c) third, the writ is implemented.
Any relief against such attachment could be disposed of
and have such property applied to its satisfaction, or to make
only in that case. (Yu v. Miranda 2019)
some provision for unsecured debts in cases where the means Section 3. Affidavit and bond required. — An order of attachment
of satisfaction thereof are liable to be removed beyond the Section 2. Issuance and contents of order. — An order of attachment
shall be granted only when it appears by the a davit of the applicant, or
jurisdiction, or improperly disposed of or concealed, or of some other person who personally knows the facts, that
may be issued either ex parte or upon motion with notice and hearing
otherwise placed beyond the reach of creditors. by the court in which the action is pending, or by the CA or the SC, and 1. a su cient cause of action exists,
must require the sheri of the court to attach so much of the property in
Another purpose is to enable the court to acquire
the Philippines of the party against whom it is issued, not exempt from 2. that the case is one of those mentioned in section 1 hereof,
jurisdiction over the person or property of the defendant
execution, as may be su cient to satisfy the applicant's demand, unless
who cannot be personally served with summons. 3. that there is no other sufficient security for the claim
such party makes deposit or gives a bond as hereinafter provided in an
sought to be enforced by the action, and
3) To sustain an order of attachment, it is incumbent, upon amount equal to that xed in the order, which may be the amount
plainti to establish either of these two facts, to wit: su cient to satisfy the applicant's demand or the value of the property to 4. that the amount due to the applicant, or the value of the
be attached as stated by the applicant, exclusive of costs. Several writs may property the possession of which he is entitled to recover, is
a) that the obligation had not been secured be issued at the same time to the sheri s of the courts of di erent judicial
as much as the sum for which the order is granted above all
originally, or regions.
legal counterclaims.
b) that, if secured at its beginning, the security later
NOTES The a davit, and the bond required by the next succeeding section, must
became valueless.
be duly led with the court before the order issues.
1) The Rule on Prior or Contemporaneous Jurisdiction. “A
4) Attachment is intended to confer jurisdiction by the
writ of preliminary attachment may issue even before NOTE
court over the res. In that event, the jurisdiction over the
summons is served upon the defendant. However the writ
person of said defendant is not essential. 1) Requisites for Issuance of Writ May Be Issued Ex Parte.
cannot bind and a ect the defendant until jurisdiction over his
5) Under Rule 57, Section 14, if the property attached is claimed person is eventually obtained. Therefore, it is required that a) A davit;
by any third person, who then makes an a davit of his title when the proper o cer commences implementation of the
b) Bond of applicant.
thereto, or right to the possession thereof, the sheri shall not writ of attachment, service of the writ of attachment, service
be bound to keep the property under attachment, unless the of the summons should be simultaneously made.” Cuartero
Section 5. Manner of attaching property. — xxxx
attaching party or his agent, on demand of the sheri , shall le v. CA
a BOND approved by the court. The requirement of prior or contemporaneous service of summons shall

not apply where 4) How levy on personal property made. To constitute a valid It is a settled rule that upon service of the writ of garnishment,
1. the summons could not be served personally or by levy of an attachment, the o cer levying it must take actual the garnishee becomes a “virtual party” or “forced intervenor”
substituted service despite diligent e orts, or possession of the property attached as far as x x x practicable. to the case and the trial court thereby acquires jurisdiction to
bind the garnishee to comply with its orders and processes.
2. the defendant is a resident of the Philippines temporarily 5) Attachment — How done
(BPI v. Lee 2012)
absent therefrom, or a) Real property — thru the records in the RD;
7) Property levied and attached pursuant to a writ of
3. the defendant is a non-resident of the Philippines, or b) Personal property — by taking and keeping it in the attachment annotated in the books of the Register of
4. the action is one in rem or quasi in rem. custody of the sheri ; Deeds is in custodia legis. Consequently a writ of possession
c) Stocks or shares — by leaving the writ of attachment issued by another court in favor of a third party, such as a
NOTES with the president or managing agent thereof; purchaser in foreclosure under Act 3135 is null and void
1) Counterbond. A counterbond equal to the value of the because it interferes with the jurisdiction of a coordinate and
d) Debts and credits — by leaving the writ to the person
property is su cient to prevent the levy, it must however be co-equal court.
in possession of said credit with notice of its
made prior to the return otherwise the sheri loses attachment. 8) Continuity of Attachment. An attachment lien continues
authority. until
If property is in custodia legis, a copy of the writ of attachment
Several writs may be issued at the same time by the court shall be led with the proper court, and the notice of a) the debt is paid, or
addressed to Sheri s of the courts of di erent judicial regions. attachment shall also be served upon the custodian of such b) sale is had under execution issued on the judgment or
2) Properties which cannot be attached. property.
c) judgment is satis ed, or
a) Those statutorily exempt from attachment; Attachment of salary. This is allowed, but only at the end of
d) the attachment discharged or vacated.
the month or on a pay day, as prior thereto, the same is not
b) Title is not in the name of defendant (unless it is
considered due to the debtor. 9) Attachment is in the nature of a proceeding in rem. It is
shown that he has bene cial interest in property);
against the particular property. The attaching creditor thereby
6) Garnishment. A species of attachment by means of which
c) The laborer's wages shall not be subject to attachment acquires speci c lien upon the attached property which ripens
plainti seeks to subject his claim over the property of the
except for debts incurred for food, shelters, clothing into a judgment against the res when the order of sale is made.
defendant in the hands of a stranger to the litigation or money
and medical attendance.
owed by such stranger to the defendant. Such stranger is called 10) The lien obtained by attachment stands upon as high
3) Preference of Preliminary Attachment to Lis Pendens. the garnishee. equitable grounds as a mortgage lien. The lien or security
Preference is given to a duly-registered attachment over a obtained by an attachment even before judgment, is a vested
Obligation of Garnishee — By means of the citation the
subsequent notice of lis pendens, even if the bene ciary of the interest, an actual and substantial security.
stranger becomes a forced intervenor required to pay his debt
notice acquired the subject property before the registration of
not to his former creditor, but to the new creditor, who is the 11) Sequestration is de ned as the process, which may be
the attachment. Under the torrens system, the auction sale of
creditor in the main litigation. The garnishee has no choice employed as a conservatory writ whenever the right of the
an attached realty retroacts to the date the levy was registered.
but to obey the garnishment. property is involved, to preserve, pending litigation, speci c

property subject to con icting claims of ownership or liens without the permission of the proper court, this rule is
c) If the attachment is excessive, the discharge shall be
and privileges. Sequestration, freezing and provisional takeover con ned to cases where the property belongs to the defendant
limited to the excess;
are akin to the provisional remedy of preliminary attachment or one in which the defendant has proprietary interests. But
or receivership. d) Property attached is exempt from execution; when the Sheri , acting beyond the bounds of his o ce seizes
e) Attaching creditor lost the case. a stranger's property, the rules do not apply and interference
12) Effect of Attachment or Garnishment. There will be
with his custody is not interference with another court's
forced novation and the applicant will be substituted to the 3) Garnishment order may be lifted. If it is established:
order of attachment.
right of the debtor over the property or money being attached.
a) that the party whose accounts has been garnished has
The garnishee shall hold the money for the applicant until 2) Sale and Attachment of Properties of Third Person Null
posted a counterbond or has made the requisite
judgment is rendered. and Void. The sale of the disputed properties at the public
deposit;
auction, in satisfaction of a judgment of a co-equal court does
If what is attached is the interest of the debtor over the estate
b) the order was improperly or irregularly issued, as not render the case moot and academic. Attachment and sale
of his deceased predecessor, the power of the administrator or
there is no ground for garnishment or a davit and or of properties belonging to a third person is void because such
executor is not impaired.
bond led therefor are defective or insu cient. properties cannot be attached and sold at public auction
Section 11. When attached property may be sold after levy on judgment against the judgment debtor.
attachment and before entry of judgment. — Whenever it shall be
4) Burden of Proof. Where, however, a petition to dissolve is
made to appear to the court applied for, the attaching creditor must prove that the NOTES ON SATISFACTION OF JUDGMENT
attachment was not irregularly issued. He should prove his
a) that the property attached is perishable, or 1) How Judgment is satisfied. A Judgment is satis ed by:
allegation of fraud. There must be notice of motion to lift.
b) that the interests of all the parties to the action will be a) Payment of proceeds of sale of perishable property.
5) Necessity of Hearing of Motion to Discharge. When the
subserved by the sale thereof,
attachment is challenged for having been illegally or b) Sale of property if there is a balance.
the court may order such property to be sold at public auction, and the improperly issued, there must be a hearing with the burden of c) Collection of property of garnishee without need of
proceeds of such sale to be deposited in court to abide the judgment in the proof to sustain the writ being on the attaching creditor. prior permission to le action, but may be enforced in
action.
6) In a complaint for damages based on fraud, the defendant may same action.
NOTES ON DISCHARGE move to dissolve writ of attachment by showing not the falsity d) Return must be made within ten (10) days from
1) Bond for issuance of writ vs. bond for lifting of writs. of the allegations but by showing that Plainti failed to receipt of writ.
The rst is for damages by reason of the issuance of the writ particularly allege any circumstance amounting to fraud.
(Sec 4) while the second is to secure the payment of the (Watercraft Venture v. Wolfe 2015) Section 17. Recovery upon the counter-bond. — When the judgment
judgment to be recovered (Secs 5 and 12). NOTES ON THIRD-PARTY CLAIM has become executory, the surety or sureties on any counter-bond given
pursuant to the provisions of this Rule to secure the payment of the
2) Discharge of Attachment on other grounds 1) Authority of Another Court to Issue Writ of judgment shall become charged on such counter-bond and bound to pay
a) It was improperly or irregularly issued or enforced; Attachment Over Property Attached. While it is true that the judgment obligee upon demand the amount due under the judgment,
property in custody of the law may not be interfered with, which amount may be recovered from such surety or sureties after notice
b) The bond is insu cient;

and summary hearing in the same action. excessive attachment. — An application for damages on account of 2. A judgment for the defendant is tantamount to a
improper, irregular or excessive attachment must be led before the trial declaration that plainti has no cause of action and,
NOTES ON RECOVERY or before appeal is perfected or before the judgment becomes executory, therefore not entitled to attachment. The phrase "not
with due notice to the attaching party and his surety or sureties setting
1) Requisites for recovery upon counter-bond: To recover entitled thereto" means no cause of action, no fraud,
forth the facts showing his right to damages and the amount thereof. Such
upon counter-bond, the following requisites must be present: or has other security.
damages may be awarded only after proper hearing and shall be included in
1. The creditor demands upon the surety for satisfaction of the judgment on the main case. 3. Damages must be awarded before judgment becomes
the judgment. If the judgment of the appellate court be favorable to the party against nal.
whom the attachment was issued he must claim damages sustained 4. Claims for damages against the bond must be led in
2. The surety be given notice and a summary hearing in
during the pendency of the appeal by ling an application in the the same action which issued the writ of attachment.
the same action as to his liability for judgment under the
appellate court, with notice to the party in whose favor the attachment was
counterbond. Otherwise, it is barred.
issued or his surety or sureties, before the judgment of the appellate
a. The Bondsmen are not liable on the bond when the court becomes executory. The appellate court may allow the application 3) Exceptions to the rule that claim must be filed in the
obligation assumed is premised upon the issuance of a to be heard and decided by the trial court. same case:
writ of attachment by a court which was not actually Nothing herein contained shall prevent the party against whom the 1. Where the principal case was dismissed for lack of
issued. attachment was issued from recovering in the same action the damages jurisdiction and no claim for damages could have
awarded to him from any property of the attaching party not exempt from
b. The motion by the surety to quash the writ of been presented in the said case.
execution should the bond or deposit given by the latter be insu cient or
execution is su cient notice. fail to fully satisfy the award. 2. A separate case for damages resulting from the
c. After demand, the amount may be recovered from the attachment may be consolidated if it is still pending.
surety in the same action. There is no need for a NOTES ON CLAIM FOR DAMAGES
3. Where a writ of attachment was declared illegal,
separate action. 1) Remedy is Exclusive. The foregoing remedy has been said to the defendant against whom it was issued may le his
d. The rule of exclusion cannot be invoked by a be exclusive such that no claim for recovery of damages may be claim for damages in the CA before the latter decides
bondsman of a counterbond against an attachment led after the judgment has become nal and executory. the appeal on the merits. The CA must hear the
writ where there is already a nal and executory 2) Requisites. To claim for damages upon the bond, the motion and not dismiss the appeal for not ling
judgment sentencing the bondsman as solidarity following requisites must be present: appellants' brief whose deferment was requested.
liable pro indiviso. 4) The nal reckoning is when "the court shall nally adjudge
1. There must be an application before the trial court
e. The bond answers for the judgment even if not either by motion or counterclaim with notice to surety that the attachment creditor was not entitled to the issuance of
expressly stipulated. The law under which this bond is who must be given opportunity to present such the attachment writ in the rst place."
issued shall be considered as part of the bond. defense as he may have with the principal and to 5) Requisites for application for damages: As laid down in
cross-examine witnesses if he so desires. Malayan Insurance v. Salas:
Section 20. Claim for damages on account of improper, irregular or

consideration, malice is an essential ingredient

a. That the defendant-claimant has secured a favorable b) the presentation thereof before the judgment
thereof. However, malice or lack of good faith is not
judgment in the main action — (plainti has no becomes executory (or before the trial or before
an element of recovery on the bond.
cause of action); appeal is perfected);
g. The damages — against the bond includes exemplary
b. That the application for damages showing claimant's c) the statement in said application of the facts showing
damages and attorney's fees.
right thereto and the amount thereof, be led in the the applicant's right to damages and the amount
same action before trial or before appeal is perfected thereof; 9) When Damages may be granted for issuance of writ of
or before the judgment becomes executory; preliminary attachment. Actual or compensatory damages
d) the giving of due notice of the application to the
may be recovered for wrongful, though not malicious,
c. That due notice be given to the other party and his attaching creditor and his surety or sureties; and
attachment. Lazatin also held that attorney's fees may be
surety or sureties, notice to the principal not being
e) the holding of a proper hearing at which the recovered under Article 2208 of the Civil Code.
su cient; and
attaching creditor and the sureties may be heard on
d. That there should be a proper hearing and the the application. Dumaran v. Llamedo 04 Aug 2021
award for damages should be included in the nal
Applies also in cases under Rules 58, 59 and 60.
judgment. Non-payment of a debt does not automatically equate to a
8) Measure of Damages fraudulent act.
e. Exception Where defendant seasonably les his
application for damages in the CA it was not his fault a. It is not the value of property attached but the extent A. Fraud may be characterized as the voluntary execution of a
that the damages claimed by him against the surety, of actual damages that is the measure of damages. wrongful act or a willful omission, while knowing and
were not included in the judgment of the CA b. If the property levied upon remained in possession of intending the e ects that naturally and necessarily arise
a rming the trial court's award of damages payable by defendant, depreciation, deterioration or damage from that act or omission.
the principal in the replevin bond. must be borne by him and cannot be charged to the B. Here, the Complaint and A davit did not speci cally
6) Favorable Judgment against whom attachment issued plainti . show wrongful acts or willful omissions that Llamedo,
NOT Required. A party against whom an attachment was c. Attorney's fees for service rendered in securing the Magallanes and Cubeta knowingly committed to deceive
issued may apply for damages under the rule, it is not necessary release of the property cannot be allowed. Dumaran to enter into the contract or to perform the
that the judgment is favorable to him. obligation.
d. Surety is not answerable for all costs and damages
7) To hold a surety on a counterbond liable what is adjudged against its principal in excess of that C. To di erentiate when the factual circumstances of a case
entailed is: adjudged in the decision. lead to fraud under Section 1 (d) of Rule 57, Tsuneishi
Heavy Industries (Cebu), Inc. v. MIS Maritime Corporation
a) the ling of an application therefor with the Court e. Even if in good faith liability for damages is there. If compared and contrasted two di erent cases:
having jurisdiction of the action; there is bad faith moral damages may be awarded.
1. The factual circumstances surrounding the parties'
f. In order that moral damages may be recovered in transaction in Metro, Inc. v. Lara's Gifts and Decors,
connection with the writ of attachment under

Inc. clearly showed fraud. Respondents' allegation that be discharged without ling a cash bond or counter-bond attachment is Section 1(d), Rule 57, i.e., "in an action
the petitioners undertook to sell exclusively through only if the writ of preliminary attachment itself has already against a party who has been guilty of a fraud in contracting
respondents but then transacted directly with been proven to be improperly or irregularly issued or the debt or incurring the obligation upon which the action
respondents' foreign buyer is su cient allegation of enforced, or the bond is insu cient. is brought, or in the performance thereof."
fraud to support the issuance of a writ of preliminary
C. Here, the CA found that the writ of preliminary 4.1. To constitute a ground for attachment in Section
attachment.
attachment had been irregularly issued, thus, a motion to 1(d), Rule 57, fraud should be committed upon
2. In contrast, there was no fraud in PCL Industries discharge the writ under Rule 57, Section 13 was the contracting the obligation sued upon.
Manufacturing Corporation v. CA, where the mere fact proper remedy. A counter-bond under Section 12 is not
4.2. A debt is fraudulently contracted if at the time of
of failure to pay after the obligation to do so has necessary.
contracting it the debtor has a preconceived plan
become due and despite several demands is not enough
See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 35 or intention not to pay.
to warrant the issuance of a writ of preliminary
attachment. 5. A perusal of the allegations in the a davit reveals fraud in
the violation of trust receipt agreements.
D. Same as in this case, non-payment of a debt or
Chua v. China Banking 04 Nov 2020
non-performance of an obligation does not automatically 5.1. The goods are considered highly saleable thus
equate to a fraudulent act. 1. The issuance of a writ of preliminary attachment is regular China Bank naturally expected immediate and
and proper. regular remittance of the sales proceeds.
A counter-bond is not necessary for the discharge of a writ of
preliminary attachment that was found to be irregularly issued. 2. Through the writ of preliminary attachment, the property 5.2. However, instead of remitting the sales proceeds to
or properties of the defendant may be levied upon and held China Bank, Interbrand misappropriated the same
A. Under Rule 57, there are two remedies a party can avail of
thereafter by the sheri as security for the satisfaction of by deliberately diverting the delivery of the goods
to discharge their attached property:
whatever judgment might be secured by the attaching covered by the L/Cs to a location di erent from
1. Under Section 12, make a cash deposit equal to the creditor against the defendant. that indicated in the sales invoice.
claim or give a counter-bond which will take the place
3. Under Sections 12 and 13, Rule 57, there are two ways to 5.3. This act of misappropriation demonstrates a clear
of the attached property; or
secure the discharge of an attachment: intent of fraud.
2. Under Section 13, le a motion to discharge the
3.1. the party whose property has been attached or a 6. Chua, having signed the surety agreement, bound himself
attachment on the following grounds:
person appearing on his/her behalf may post a to jointly and solidarily ful ll the obligation of Interbrand
a) that it was improperly or irregularly issued; or security. to China Bank.
b) that it was improperly or irregularly enforced; or 3.2. said party may show that the order of attachment 7. On the face of the allegations, the issuance of a writ of
was improperly or irregularly issued. preliminary attachment is regular and proper.
c) that the bond of the plainti is insu cient.
B. For the second remedy to apply, a writ of attachment may 4. China Bank's basis in applying for the writ of preliminary See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 70

NOTES A restraining order, on the other hand, is issued to preserve

the status quo until the hearing of the application for
Banco de Oro v. Ypil, Sr. 12 Oct 2020 1) Kinds. 1. Prohibitory — commands a party to refrain from a
preliminary injunction which cannot be issued ex parte.
particular act.
1. Garnishment has been de ned as a specie of attachment
4) Purpose. In order to preserve and protect certain rights and
for reaching credits belonging to the judgment debtor and 2. Mandatory — commands the performance of some
interests during the pendency of an action. It is issued to
owing to him from a stranger to the litigation. positive act to correct a wrong in the past.
preserve the status quo ante, the last actual, peaceful, and
1.1. A writ of attachment is substantially a writ of What are the requisites for the issuance of a uncontested status that preceded the actual controversy.
execution except that it emanates at the beginning, preliminary MANDATORY injunction?
5) The doctrine of non-jurisdiction is limited merely to
instead of at the termination, of a suit. a) The invasion of the right is material and substantial; injunctive or prohibitory writs. The jurisdiction or
1.2. It places the attached properties in custodia legis, b) The right of the complainant is clear and authority of the RTCs to control or restrain acts by means of
obtaining pendente lite a lien until the judgment unmistakable; the writ of injunction is limited only to acts which are being
of the proper tribunal on the plainti 's claim is committed within the territorial boundaries of their respective
c) There is an urgent and paramount necessity for the
established, when the lien becomes e ective as of regions except where the sole issue is the legality of the
writ to prevent serious damage;
the date of the levy. decision of the administrative o cials.
d) The e ect would not be to create a new relation
2. Hence, after service and receipt of the Notice of 6) Where the sole issue in court is the legality of the
between the parties which was arbitrarily interrupted
Garnishment, contrary to the Bank's view, the deposits of decision of administrative officials, the power of judicial
by the defendant.
CSTC were placed under custodia legis, under the sole review should not be con ned to the RTC of the locality
control of the trial court. 2) Distinguished from Prohibition and Mandamus where the o ces of respondents are maintained, to the
1. Injunction is directed only to the parties litigant, etc. exclusion of the RTCs in those localities where the plainti s
See Civil Law Case Digest No. 44 reside, and where the questioned decisions are being enforced.
2. Prohibition is directed to a court, commanding it to
cease from exercising a jurisdiction to which it has no 7) Power Exists Even if Person Who Issued Order Holds
Office Outside of Court's Jurisdiction. On the other hand,
Preliminary Injunction legal claim.
C where the principal o ce of the corporation is within the
Rule 58 3. Mandamus is a remedial writ to redress past court's territorial jurisdiction, the writ may issue even if the act
grievances. sought to be restrained is to be carried outside of its
Section 1. Preliminary injunction defined; classes. — A preliminary 3) Distinguished from TRO. Injunction is a judicial writ, jurisdiction.
injunction is an order granted at any stage of an action or proceeding prior process or proceeding whereby a party is ordered to do or 8) Injunctions to Restrain Extrajudicial Foreclosure
to the judgment or nal order, requiring a party or a court, agency or a refrain from doing a certain act. It may be the main action or Involving Several Parcels Located in Different Provinces.
person to refrain from a particular act or acts. It may also require the merely a provisional remedy for and as an incident in the
performance of a particular act or acts, in which case it shall be known as a Separate injunction suits may be led without violating the
main action.
preliminary mandatory injunction.

rule against forum shopping since injunction is enforceable dismantling is not a government infrastructure project.
2) Issuance of injunction to be avoided to dispose of merits.
only within the territorial limits of the trial court. (DPWH v. City Advertising Ventures 2016)
The prevailing rule is that courts should avoid issuing a WPI
9) Authority of Any Member of the Court to Issue a TRO. 13) A status quo ante order may NOT be used to extend the which would in e ect dispose of the main case without trial.
Only in case of extreme urgency. e ectivity of a TRO. (First Sarmiento Holdings v. PBCom
3) Fait accompli. An injunction suit becomes moot and
2018 En Banc)
10) Jurisdictional Rules on Injunction academic after the act sought to be enjoined had already been
consummated.
a) SC can issue WPI on cases appealed before it or in original Section 3. Grounds for issuance of preliminary injunction. — A
actions commenced therein; preliminary injunction may be granted when it is established: However, even if the act had already been committed, but such
acts are continuing in nature and were in derogation of
b) CA can now issue WPI even if it is not in aid of its a) That the applicant is entitled to the relief demanded, and the
whole or part of such relief consists in restraining the commission plainti ’s rights, preliminary mandatory injunction may be
appellate jurisdiction;
or continuance of the act or acts complained of, or in requiring availed of to restore the parties to the status quo. (Dayrit v. De
c) RTC can issue WPI in cases pending before it and those in the performance of an act or acts either for a limited period or los Santos) Applicable in:
lower courts under its territorial jurisdiction. It now has perpetually;
a) Forcible entry cases;
the power to issue WPI within the judicial region;
b) That the commission, continuance or non-performance of the act
b) Reconnection of electricity if the act is assailed in the
d) RTC cannot issue WPI against DOLE, SSS, SEC, Patent or acts complained of during the litigation would probably
main case.
O ce, Comelec, as the remedy lies in either the CA or SC. work injustice to the applicant; or
c) That a party, court, agency or a person is doing, threatening, or is 4) An injunction to stay a nal and executory decision is
This is an example wherein the court has jurisdiction over
attempting to do, or is procuring or su ering to be done some act unavailing except only after a showing that facts and
the subject matter of the case, but not over the remedy.
or acts probably in violation of the rights of the applicant circumstances exist which would render execution unjust or
e) The RTC may grant WPI in unlawful detainer cases respecting the subject of the action or proceeding, and tending to inequitable, or that a change in the situation of the parties
appealed before it where the appeal appears to be frivolous render the judgment ineffectual. occurred. (COCLAI v. CA)
or dilatory.
NOTES 5) Clear Legal Right. Means one clearly founded in or granted
f) No injunction can be issued by the courts except the SC, by law or is enforceable as a matter of law. In its absence, the
that would adversely a ect the expeditious 1) Essential Requisites. —
issuance of the writ constitutes grave abuse of discretion.
implementation of government projects. a) First: That the petitioner applicant must have a clear
Petitioner's rights under the MOA have already been declared
11) Action for injunction against government infrastructure and unmistakable right; right in esse inferior or inexistent in relation to respondent in the RTC
project is not barred by P.D. No. 1818 since the preclusion case, under a judgment that has become nal and executory. At
b) Second: That there is a material and substantial
applies only to TRO and WPI. (Sps Soller v. Singson 2020) the very least, their rights under the MOA are precisely
invasion of such right;
12) Hazardous billboards although public nuisances cannot be disputed by respondent. Where the complainant’s right or
c) Third: That there is an urgent and permanent title is doubtful or disputed, injunction is not proper.
dismantled without compliance with law. Preliminary
injunction available. R.A. 8975 is not applicable since necessity for the writ to prevent serious and
irreparable damage.

(Australian Professional Realty, Inc. v. Municipality of Padre more than to maintain the status quo and should not issue powers, courts have no jurisdiction to restrain Congress from
Garcia, Batangas 2012) without hearing EXCEPT: performing its constitutionally vested function to conduct
investigations in aid of legislation and from requiring
6) There Must Be Showing of Irreparable Injury. A writ of a) in cases of extreme urgency;
respondent to appear and testify before it.
injunction should never issue when an action for damages
b) where the right is clear;
would adequately compensate the injuries caused. As a rule, a court cannot issue an injunctive writ against the
c) where considerations of relative inconvenience bear decision of a co-equal court. However, if the property of a
7) Injury is irreparable where there is no standard by which
strongly in complainant's favor; third person was erroneously levied on execution pursuant to
their amount can be measured with reasonable accuracy, that
d) where there is a willful and unlawful invasion of the decision of a court, and the third party les an
is, it is not susceptible of mathematical computation. It
plainti 's right against his protest and remonstrance; independent action or terceria to recover his property in
has been held that an injury is irreparable where it is
another court, the said court may issue a writ of injunction to
continuous and repeated since from its constant and frequent e) the injury being a continuing one;
prevent the sale which was intended to satisfy the judgment of
recurrence, no fair and reasonable redress can be had therefor
f ) and the e ect is to re-establish and maintain a the rst court. (Abiera v. CA)
by petitioner insofar as his goodwill and business reputation as
pre-existing relationship recently and arbitrarily
sole distributor are concerned. 14) Injunction IMPROPER:
interrupted by defendant rather than to establish a
Foreclosure of mortgaged property is NOT an irreparable new relation. a) Labor Disputes. It is the NLRC that issues an
damage that will merit for the debtor-mortgagor the injunction in labor disputes.
10) GR: A court should NOT, by means of a preliminary
extraordinary provisional remedy of preliminary injunction.
injunction, transfer property in litigation from the possession b) Disposition of Natural Resources. Prohibition of
(Solid Builders, Inc. v. China Banking 2013)
of one party to another. Injunction involving Concessions, licenses and other
8) Nature of Evidence. While the evidence to be submitted at permits issued by public administrative o ce or
EXC: When there is a clear nding of ownership and
the hearing on the motion for preliminary injunction need not bodies for the exploitation of natural resources.
possession of the land or unless the subject property is
be conclusive and complete, there must be a showing, at least
covered by a torrens title pointing to one of the parties c) Infrastructure and Public Utilities. The
tentatively of irreparable injury. While merely a sampling of prohibitions under PD 605 and PD 1818 pertain to
as the undisputed owner. (COCLAI v. CA)
the evidence is required, such evidence must, however, rest on the issuance of injunction or restraining order by
solid grounds and not on mere hearsay or unfounded fears. 11) GR: Grant or denial of an injunction rests on the sound
courts against administrative acts in controversies
discretion of the lower court in the exercise of which the SC
The Rules provide that a TRO may be issued not only based involving facts or the exercise of discretion in
will not intervene
on a davit, but also based simply on the veri ed application technical cases. However, on issues de nitely outside
and its supporting documents, provided there is notice and EXC: in a clear case of abuse. of their dimension and involving questions of law, like
hearing. (Sps Crisologo v. Judge Omelio 2012) 12) Since injunction is the strong arm of equity, he who must non-compliance with the rules on bidding, courts
should not be prevented by PD 605 from exercising
9) Mandatory injunction NOT to be issued ex parte; apply for it must come with equity or with clean hands.
their power to restrain or prohibit administrative acts.
exceptions. A writ of preliminary mandatory injunction does 13) Injunction Against Courts or Tribunals of Co-Equal
Rank Prohibited. Under the doctrine of separation of

d) Government Financing Institutions. Prohibition i) To a ord adequate protection to the 16) The complaint must be veri ed. Absence of veri cation
to issue injunction against any government nancing constitutional rights of the accused. makes an application or petition for preliminary injunction
institution in any action taken by such institution in patently insu cient both in form and substance.
ii) When necessary for the orderly
connection with the mandatory foreclosure where
administration of justice or to avoid 17) GR: No preliminary injunction shall be granted without
arrears amount to at least 20% of the total
oppression or multiplicity or actions; hearing and prior notice to the party or person sought to be
outstanding obligations including interest and other
enjoined.
charges as appearing in the book of accounts and/or iii) When there is a prejudicial question;
related records of the nancial institutions concerned. EXC: If it shall appear from facts shown by a davits or by
iv) When the acts of the o cer are without or
the veri ed application that great or irreparable
e) Agrarian Reform. No court in the Philippines shall in excess of authority;
injury would result to the applicant before the matter
have jurisdiction to issue any restraining order or writ v) Where the prosecution is under an invalid can be heard on notice, the court may issue a TRO
of preliminary injunction against PARC or any of its law, ordinance or regulation e ective for 20 days from service on the party or
duly authorized or designated agencies in any case,
vi) When double jeopardy is clearly apparent; person sought to be enjoined.
dispute or controversy arising from, necessary to, or in
connection with the application, implementation, vii) Where the court has no jurisdiction over 18) Procedure in a multi-sala court.
enforcement, or interpretation of this Act and other the o ense; a) Veri ed application and bond for preliminary injunction
pertinent laws on agrarian reform. viii) Where it is a case of persecution rather than or TRO;
f ) Assets Privatization Trust. prosecution; b) Determination that great or irreparable injury would
EXC (for a-f): ix) Where the charges are manifestly false and result to the applicant before the matter can be heard on
motivated by the lust for vengeance; notice;
A court should issue a WPI only when the petitioner
assailing a statute or administrative order has made x) When there is clearly no prima facie case c) If the matter is of extreme urgency and the applicant
out a case of unconstitutionality. against the accused and a motion to quash on will su er grave injustice and irreparable injury, the
that ground has been denied; and executive judge of a multiple-sala court or the presiding
g) Collection of Taxes.
judge of a single-sala court may issue ex parte a TRO
xi) Preliminary injunction has been issued by the
EXC: e ective for only 72 hours from issuance;
Supreme Court to prevent the threatened
Where there are special circumstances that bear the unlawful arrest of petitioners. d) The case shall be ra ed only after notice to and in the
existence of irreparable injury. CTA has exclusive presence of the adverse party or the person to be enjoined.
15) GR: Filing of necessary bond MANDATORY.
jurisdiction to issue in proper cases, a WPI. Such notice shall be preceded, or contemporaneously
EXC: Unless exempted. accompanied, by service of summons, together with a
h) Restrain Criminal Prosecution.
copy of the complaint or initiatory pleading and the
EXC: applicant's a davit and bond, upon the adverse party in

the Philippines. However, the requirement of prior or restraint on him until the propriety of granting a temporary may su er as a result of the dissolution of the
contemporaneous service of summons shall NOT apply: injunction can be determined, and it goes no further than to injunction.
preserve the status quo until that determination. Its issuance is
1. where the summons could not be served personally or 2) Summary Denial Without Adequate Hearing
IMPROPER to transfer possession.
by substituted service despite diligent e orts, or Improper. Courts should not just summarily issue an order of
20) Lifetime of Preliminary Injunction. A preliminary denial without an adequate hearing and judicious evaluation
2. the adverse party is a resident of the Philippines
injunction issued in an action to enforce a contract, which of the merits of the application.
temporarily absent therefrom or is a non-resident
prohibits an employee from working in a competing enterprise
thereof; 3) When Summary Denial Allowed. If the ground is the
within two years from resignation, has the same lifetime as the
e) Application for TRO shall thereafter be acted upon only insu ciency of the complaint, the same is apparent from
prohibition — two years also. Therefore, upon the expiration
after all parties are heard in a summary hearing which the complaint itself.
of the said period, a suit questioning the validity of the
shall be conducted within 24 hours after the sheri 's issuance of the writ becomes functus officio and therefore 4) Necessity of Hearing. If there is a prima facie showing that
return of service and/or the records are received; moot. preliminary injunction is proper, a hearing should be
f ) Within the aforesaid 72 hours, a summary hearing is conducted, since under such circumstance, only in cases of
NOTES ON OBJECTING OR DISSOLVING WPI
conducted to determine whether the TRO shall be extreme urgency will the writ issue prior to a nal hearing.
1) Grounds for Objection or Dissolution of Injunction or
extended until the application for preliminary injunction 5) The Mere Filing of Counterbond does NOT Necessarily
TRO
can be heard; In no case shall the period of e ectivity Warrant Dissolution. The preliminary injunction may be
exceed 20 days; a) Upon showing of the insu ciency of the complaint; dissolved, if it appears after hearing that although the applicant
g) Determination within 20 days from service of the TRO b) By a davit of the party enjoined; is entitled to the injunction or restraining order, the issuance
on the party sought to be enjoined whether a preliminary or continuance thereof, as the case may be, would cause
e.g. when the bond posted by the applicant is irreparable damage to the party or person enjoined while the
injunction shall issue or not;
insu cient or ine ective. applicant can be fully compensated for such damages as he
h) The e ectivity of a TRO is NOT extendible without need may su er.
c) If it appears after hearing that although the applicant
of any judicial declaration to that e ect and no court shall
is entitled to the PI or TRO, the issuance thereof a) Under the Central Bank Act. Upon ling of a
have authority to extend or renew the same on the same
ground for which it was issued. Another restraining order i) Would cause irreparable damage to the party bond by the BSP, the court is under obligation to
may, therefore, be issued provided it is not based on the same enjoined dissolve the injunction once the counterbond in the
ground. required amount is posted.
ii) While the applicant can be fully
However, the period of e ectivity in CA is 60 days, while compensated for such damages as he may FINAL NOTES
in the SC, until further orders. su er; and 1) Need For Application in Same Case. In order that the
19) Temporary Restraining Orders. Is generally granted iii) The enjoined party les a counterbond to judgment should include the damages against the party and
without notice to the opposite party, and is intended only as a answer for whatever damage the applicant sureties it must be applied for in the same case before
judgment becomes executory, otherwise, it is barred forever.

2) Limit of Recovery. Recovery of damages is limited to the RTC, would be tantamount to an injunction order issued
4.1. However, the De Jesus couple already abandoned
amount of the bond. without the bene t of a hearing, contrary to the express
their application when they moved for the conduct
requirement of Section 5, Rule 58.
3) Penalty for Refusal to Comply. Under Section 1, Rule 71, of the pre-trial of the main case, instead of
if the contempt consists in the violation of a writ of proceeding with the originally scheduled hearing See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 40
injunction, temporary restraining order or status quo order, he on their application for WPI and when it took
may also be ordered to make complete restitution to the them two years to nally move for the conduct of
party injured by such violation of the property involved or such hearing.
Bureau of Customs v. CA-CDO Station 26 Apr 2021
such amount as may be alleged and proved.
4.2. Consequently, Land Bank's commitment not to
1. Contrary to its ndings, the trial court actually acted with
consolidate ceased to be e ective from the moment
Land Bank v. Sps De Jesus 28 Jun 2021 grave abuse of discretion as Reta was not entitled to a WPI.
the spouses De Jesus abandoned their application
1. The CA erred in reversing the RTC's Orders. for preliminary injunction. 2. A writ of preliminary injunction is a preservative remedy
for the protection of substantial rights and interests.
1.1. The trial court did not commit any grave abuse of 5. Atty. Latosa's commitment not to consolidate was only for
discretion when it denied the Sps De Jesus' motion the period of the hearing on the application for preliminary 3. The purpose of injunction is to prevent threatened or
for issuance of a status quo order and when it no injunction, and not for the entire duration of the main case continuous irremediable injury to the parties before their
longer conducted the hearing on their application as claimed by the Sps De Jesus. claims can be thoroughly studied, and its sole aim is to
for WPI. preserve the status quo until the merits of the case are fully
6. The act of the spouses moving to set the main case for
heard.
2. A status quo order is "in the nature of a cease and desist pre-trial constitutes a clear case of abandonment of their
order," and is "intended to maintain the last, actual, application for WPI. It goes against the very nature of 4. A right to be protected by injunction means a right clearly
peaceable and uncontested state of things which preceded preliminary injunction. founded on or granted by law or is enforceable as a matter
the controversy." of law.
7. There was no violation of the spouses De Jesus' right to due
2.1. Here, if the RTC granted the prayer for such process. 5. Injury is irreparable where there is no standard by which its
order, Land Bank will be prevented from amount can be measured with reasonable accuracy.
8. The trial court was not duty-bound to conduct a hearing
consolidating its ownership over the properties for on their application since it construed the spouses' motion 5.1. Golding v. Balatbat held that the writ of
the duration of such order. to set the main case for pre-trial as an abandonment of their injunction should never issue when an action for
3. However, there is no legal impediment to prevent Land application. damages would adequately compensate the injuries
Bank from consolidating its ownership. caused.
8.1. In any event, a hearing is not even required should
4. The only possible hindrance to consolidation is Land the trial court deny an application for preliminary 6. Here, the requisites for the issuance of a WPI were not met.
Bank's commitment not to consolidate during the hearing injunction. 6.1. Reta has no clear and unmistakable right on the
on the Sps De Jesus' application for WPI. 9. On the other hand, a status quo order, if issued by the conduct of examination in ACY.

property or fund is in danger of being lost, removed, Under Article 101 of the Family Code, if a spouse without
6.2. The conduct of examination in ACY premises is
or materially injured unless a receiver be appointed to just cause abandons the other or fails to comply with his or her
governed by the MOA between Reta and the
administer and preserve it; obligations to the family, the aggrieved spouse may petition
BOC.
b) When in an action by the mortgagee for the foreclosure of a the court for receivership.
6.2.1. The parties consented to the MOA which
mortgage that the property is in danger of being wasted or Under Section 41, Rule 39 on Execution of Judgments, the
stipulated that any of the parties may
dissipated or materially injured, and that its value is probably judge may, by order, appoint the sheri or other proper o cer
revoke it for cause at any time before the insu cient to discharge the mortgage debt, or that the parties
or persons, receiver of the property of the judgment debtor.
end of its term. have so stipulated in the contract of mortgage;
2) Requisites. When the applicant has:
7. As the BOC is empowered to revoke the MOA, Reta has no c) After judgment, to preserve the property during the
clear and unmistakable right on the continuation of pendency of an appeal, or to dispose of it according to the 1. an actual interest in it; and
customs operations in ACY premises. judgment, or to aid execution when the execution has been 2. that such property is in danger of being lost, removed or
returned unsatis ed or the judgment obligor refuses to apply his
8. Also, the damage or injury allegedly sustained by Reta is materially injured; OR
property in satisfaction of the judgment, or otherwise to carry the
not irreparable as he was able to state in his Complaint an
judgment into e ect; 3. whenever it appears to be the most convenient and
amount pertaining to the loss of earnings he su ers for each
feasible means of preserving or administering the
day the BOC is not conducting examinations in ACY. d) In other cases where the appointment of a receiver is the most
property in litigation.
convenient and feasible means of preserving,
9. In sum, the Court reverses the trial court's issuance of the
administering, or disposing of the property in 3) Receivership in Partition Proceedings. While in a partition
WPI.
litigation. proceeding it is generally unnecessary for the court to appoint
See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 50 During the pendency of an appeal, the appellate court may allow an
a receiver, however,
application for the appointment of a receiver to be led in and decided by a) where the relations among the co-owners are strained, and
the court of origin and the receiver appointed to be subject to the control of
said court. b) no satisfactory arrangement for administration can be
Receivership accomplished,
D
Rule 59 NOTES
the appointment of a receiver is not an abuse of discretion.
1) Concept of a Receiver. A receiver is a person appointed by 4) Residual jurisdiction applicable. While the perfection of
Section 1. Appointment of receiver. — Upon a veri ed application, one the court in behalf of all the parties to the action for the an appeal deprives the trial court of jurisdiction over the case,
or more receivers of the property subject of the action or proceeding may purpose of preserving and conserving the property in litigation
be appointed by the court where the action is pending or by the CA or by
the trial court can appoint a receiver since this does not involve
and preventing its possible destruction or dissipation, if it were any matter litigated by the appeal.
the SC, or a member thereof, in the following cases:
left in the possession of any of the parties.
a) When the applicant has an interest in the property or fund This is part of the residual power of the RTC. The appellate
GR: Neither party to a litigation should be appointed as a court may allow the application for the appointment of a
which is the subject of the action or proceeding, and that such
receiver without the other's consent. receiver to be led in and decided by the trial court.

5) Unlike other provisional remedies which can be availed of only a) WON the injury resulting from such appointment
b) to take and keep possession of the property in controversy;
before judgment, receivership may be resorted to even after would probably be greater than the injury ensuing if
judgment has become nal and executory. the status quo is left undisturbed; and c) to receive rents;
6) When appointment of receiver improper? b) WON the appointment will imperil the interest of d) to collect debts due to himself as receiver or to the fund,
others whose rights deserve as much a consideration property, estate, person, or corporation of which he is the
a) When the action is a simple collection of sum of money
from the court as those of the person requesting for receiver;
case and not to enforce a lien upon speci c property;
receivership. e) to compound for and compromise the same;
b) In an action for possession of or title to real property, if
c) Clerk of Court NOT to be Appointed as f) to make transfers;
there is no clear showing of necessity to protect the
Receiver. The practice of appointing as receiver the
applicant from grave or irreparable damage; g) to pay outstanding debts;
Clerk of Court is frowned upon.
c) In an action where the rights of the parties, one of whom h) to divide the money and other property that shall remain
is in possession of the property, depend on the Section 4. Oath and bond of receiver. — Before entering upon his among the persons legally entitled to receive the same; and
determination of their respective claim to the title, unless duties, the receiver shall be sworn to perform them faithfully, and shall le a
i) generally to do such acts respecting the property as the
such property is in danger of being materially lost or bond, executed to such person and in such sum as the court may direct, to
court may authorize.
injured. the e ect that he will faithfully discharge his duties in the action or
proceeding and obey the orders of the court. However, funds in the hands of a receiver may be invested only by order
7) Receivership shall be commenced by a veri ed petition if as a
of the court upon the written consent of all the parties to the action.
main action. But it can be done by a veri ed motion where it NOTES
is only an incident to the main action. No action may be led by or against a receiver without leave of the
1) Distinction Between Bond and Counterbond. The court which appointed him.
8) Grounds for Denial of application or Discharge of applicant's bond answers for damages that the adverse party
receiver may su er by reason of the appointment of a receiver. NOTE
a) If the adverse party will put up a counterbond; The counterbond by the oppositor is conditioned upon the 1) Custodia Legis. Property under receivership is property
b) The receiver appointed may be discharged if it is shown payment of all damages which the applicant may su er by under custodia legis and is under the administration and
that his appointment was obtained without su cient reason of the acts, omission or other matters in the application control of the court.
cause; for receivership.
Section 7. Liability for refusal or neglect to deliver property to
c) The bond is insu cient in amount. Section 6. General powers of receiver. — Subject to the control of the receiver. — May be punished for contempt and shall be liable to the
9) Discretion to be exercised with Extreme Caution. Among court in which the action or proceeding is pending a receiver shall have the receiver for the money or the value of the property and other things so
the consequences and e ects considered by the courts before power refused or neglected to be surrendered, together with all damages that
may have been sustained by the party or parties entitled thereto as a
appointing a receiver are: a) to bring and defend, in such capacity, actions in his own
consequence of such refusal or neglect.
name;

Statutory Under general principles of law "To replevy" means "to redeliver goods which have been
Section 8. Termination of receivership; compensation of receiver. —
distrained to the original possessor of them, on his giving
May be caused before the pledges in an action of replevin."
Whenever the court, motu proprio or on motion of either party, shall
receiver quali es or takes
determine that the necessity for a receiver no longer exists, it shall,
possession of the property Replevin Attachment
a) after due notice to all interested parties and hearing,
liability rests on statute rests on the negligence or Can be availed of only when Can be availed of even if the
b) settle the accounts of the receiver,
misconduct of the receiver the principal action is for recovery of personal property is
c) direct the delivery of the funds and other property in his
recovery of personal property only incidental to the main action
possession to the person adjudged to be entitled to receive the person obtaining the person obtaining the
them and appointment of the receiver is appointment is not responsible Can be asked only if the Even if the personal property is in
responsible for the damages in any event defendant is in actual the custody of a third person
d) order the discharge of the receiver from further duty as
such. possession of the subject
property
The court shall allow the receiver such reasonable compensation as the
Replevin
circumstances of the case warrant, to be taxed as costs against the defeated E Extends only to personal Applies to ANY property,
party, or apportioned, as justice requires. Rule 60
property capable of manual whether real, personal or
delivery incorporeal
NOTES
Section 1. Application. — A party praying for the recovery of possession
1) Recovery of damages in same action. Damages on account of personal property may, at the commencement of the action or at any Can be availed of even if the Presupposes that the subject
of the appointment without cause of a receiver, must be time before answer, apply for an order for the delivery of such property to property is not being property is concealed or disposed
recovered in the same action in which the receiver was him, in the manner hereinafter provided. concealed, removed or disposed of to prevent its being found
appointed, and the question should be determined in the nal of
NOTES
judgment. It cannot be litigated in a separate action.
1) Concept and Definition. Replevin is a proceeding by 2) Who May Avail of Remedy.
Where the damages were not for unlawful appointment of a
which the owner or one who has a general or special property 1. plainti — where the complaint prays for recovery of
receiver, but for the receiver's mismanagement, the liability of
in the thing taken or detained seeks to recover possession in possession of personal property.
the sureties on the bond could only be enforced by a separate
specie, the recovery of damages being only incidental.
action and not by a mere motion in the receivership 2. defendant — where a counterclaim was set out in the
proceedings. It is the return to or recovery by a person of goods or chattels answer for the recovery of personal property. Reason:
claimed to be wrongfully taken or detained upon the Counterclaim is rather in the nature of cross-claim.
Damages resulting from Damages arising after person's giving security to try the matter in court and return
3) Subject Matter. Replevin is applicable only to personal
appointment of receiver appointment the goods if defeated in the action.
property.

4) Nature of Action. The provisional remedy of replevin is in recover from the applicant in the action. b) furnish the plainti with a copy of the undertaking.
the nature of possessory action and the applicant who seeks OR
immediate possession of the property involved need not be the NOTES
c) object to the su ciency of the bond, without need of
holder of the legal title to the property. It su ces, if he is 1) Statement of the actual value is REQUIRED because the ling a counterbond.
entitled to the possession thereof. actual value will be the basis of the replevin bond.
7) Motion to dissolve or discharge writ not allowed. The law
5) Jurisdiction. A writ of replevin may be served and enforced 2) The defense of lack of proper a davit of merit is no longer does not allow the defendant to le a motion to dissolve or
anywhere in the Philippines. Moreover, the jurisdiction of a available where the defendant failed to raise it either in a discharge the writ of seizure (or delivery) — on the ground of
court is determined by the amount of the claim alleged in the motion to dismiss or in the answer as required by Section 1, insu ciency of the complaint or of the grounds relied upon
complaint, not by the value of the chattel seized in ancillary Rule 9. therefor, as in proceedings on preliminary attachment or
proceedings. 3) Replevin against DENR for seized lumber is not likewise injunction, and thereby put at issue the matter of the title or
available. There must be exhaustion of administrative remedies right of possession over the speci c chattel being replevied, the
Section 2. Affidavit and bond. — The applicant must show by his own
before the DENR. The complaint was dismissed for lack of policy apparently being that said matter should be ventilated
a davit or that of some other person who personally knows the facts:
cause of action. and determined only at the trial on the merits.
a) That the applicant is the owner of the property 8) Five-day period from actual seizure. Begins from the
4) Property Seized by Virtue of Search Warrant not
claimed, particularly describing it, or is entitled to the Subject to Replevin. The remedy for questioning the validity taking of the property by the Sheri and not from the service
possession thereof; of a search warrant may be sought in the court that issued it, of summons.
b) That the property is wrongfully detained by the adverse not in the sala of another Judge, and not through replevin. 9) Substantial compliance on furnishing plaintiff with
party, alleging the cause of detention thereof according to EXC: if the seizure is illegal even if the article is delivered to copy. Justice Narvasa in Tillson v. Court of Appeals,
the best of his knowledge, information, and belief; the custody of the Court. stressed:
c) That the property has not been distrained or taken 5) Rule deemed written into bond. The failure of the replevin There is no provision in Rule 60 imposing the requirement
for a tax assessment or a ne pursuant to law, or seized bond to state expressly that it was "conditioned for the return that service of the counterbond on the plainti must be made
under a writ of execution or preliminary attachment, or of the property to the defendant, if the return thereof be within ve (5) days after the taking of the property by the
otherwise placed under custodia legis, or if so seized, that it adjudged." is not fatal to the validity of the replevin bond. o cer.
is exempt from such seizure or custody; and
6) Remedy for Return of Seized Property. If a defendant in a 10) Intervention Allowed. In lieu of, or in addition to the ling
d) The actual market value of the property. replevin case wants to have the property returned to him, he of a terceria, the third party may, as Section 7 points out,
must within ve days from the date the Sheri took vindicate "his claim to the property by any proper action."
The applicant must also give a bond, executed to the adverse party in
possession of the property: This e ort at vindication may take the form of a separate
double the value of the property as stated in the a davit aforementioned,
action for recovery of the property, or intervention in the
for the return of the property to the adverse party if such return be a) put up a bond in double the value of the chattel; and
adjudged, and for the payment to the adverse party of such sum as he may
replevin action itself.

should be litigated in the replevin suit and not by

11) Prior demand is NOT a condition precedent to an action action on behalf of the corporation may be cured by
independent action.
for a writ of replevin, since there is nothing in §2 R60 that rati cation through the subsequent issuance of a board
requires the applicant to make a demand on the possessor of 5. Redelivery may be refused where the property is not in the resolution.
the property before an action for a writ of replevin could be same condition as taken and the party may go after the
An order dismissing an action for lack of jurisdiction over the
led. (Sps Agner v. BPI Family Savings 2013) redelivery bond.
parties to the case is cognizable under a special civil action for
12) Where replevin suit was dismissed because of failure to certiorari, NOT an ordinary appeal under Rule 41.
prosecute but the movable cannot be returned by plainti , the Jorgenetics Swine Improvement Corp v. Thick & Thin
Agri-Products 05 May 2021 A. A petition for certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of
plainti is liable only for the value of the movable and not the
Court is the proper remedy to question the trial court's
full amount of the bond. (Enriquez v. Mercantile The instant Petitions have not been mooted despite the issuance of a order dismissing the replevin case on the ground of lack of
Insurance 2018) decision on the merits in the main case. jurisdiction.
13) Requisites for Recovery on replevin bond. To allow A. An issue becomes moot when it ceases to present a B. Section 1, Rule 41 clearly provides that an order dismissing
recovery against the replevin bond, the following requisites justiciable controversy such that a determination thereof an action without prejudice may not be appealed via a Rule
must be present: would be without practical value. 41 petition, and must instead be assailed through a petition
1. Application showing right to damage. Must be made B. Here, should the Court rule in favor of petitioner, the for certiorari under Rule 65.
before judgment is executory; if there is an appeal, the complaint for replevin will be dismissed and all proceedings C. Here, TTAI's timely ling of a MR over the order of
application may be made in the appellate court before the conducted, including the decision on the merits invoked by dismissal and thereafter, a Rule 65 petition before the CA,
judgment of appellate the court becomes nal and respondent in its Manifestation and Motion, will be clearly prevented the 2010 Order from becoming nal and
executory. considered null and void. executory.
2. Notice given to plainti and his surety. C. A void judgment is in e ect no judgment at all. D. Since the 2010 Order did not attain nality, the trial court
3. There must be a hearing in case recovery is opposed. D. Thus, the Petitions are not moot as a favorable ruling to acted in grave abuse of discretion in ordering the
EXC: Where by the terms of the contract, the surety has Jorgenetics will entail the setting aside of the trial court's implementation of the 2010 Order.
promised to abide by the judgment against the principal. judgment on the merits in view of lack of jurisdiction over Jorgenetics is deemed to have voluntarily submitted to the
4. Award for damages must be included in judgment of the its person. jurisdiction of the court.
court. Jorge, the chairperson and president of petitioner, had authority to A. Even without valid service of summons, a court may still
It was pointed out in Maningo v. CA that an action for le the Petition in G.R. No. 201044 on behalf of Jorgenetics. acquire jurisdiction over the person of the defendant if the
damages against the person obtaining the writ of replevin E. The chairperson and president of a corporation may sign latter voluntarily appears before it.
and the sheri who enforced the writ of replevin, the veri cation and certi cation without need of board 1. A defendant is deemed to have voluntarily submitted
assuming that the seizure of the property was unlawful, resolution. themselves to the jurisdiction of the court if they seek
1. Lack of authority of a corporate o cer to undertake an a rmative relief from the court.

disposition by this Court on the validity and e cacy of the RTC value of the property property is
2. This includes the ling of motions to admit answer, for
writ of replevin, which was merely ancillary to the main located
additional time to le answer, for reconsideration of a
action, serves no practical purpose.
default judgment, and to lift order of default with
motion for reconsideration. If for
Declaratory Quieting of
3. A special appearance operates as an exception to the Exclusive original
Relief RTC title - depends
general rule on voluntary appearance, but only when jurisdiction
on assessed
the defendant explicitly and unequivocally poses V Special Civil Actions value
objections to the jurisdiction of the court over their
person. Jurisdiction and Venue relates to an act or an
B. Under Section 20, Rule 57, an application for damages omission of a over the
Interpleader municipal trial court territorial area
against the bond presupposes that a trial on the merits in
RTC or of a corporation, a as de ned by
the main case was conducted and the defendant obtained a Declaratory Relief and Similar Remedies
favorable judgment from the court. board, an o cer or a the SC
Prohibition, Certiorari, and Mandamus person
1. Here, petitioner's act of ling an application for
damages against the replevin bond in the same action is Quo Warranto whether or not the
tantamount to requesting the trial court to conduct a CA or same is in aid of the
N/A
trial on the merits of the case—a clear invocation of the Expropriation SB court's appellate
court's jurisdiction. Prohibition, jurisdiction.
Foreclosure of Real Estate Mortgage Certiorari,
In view of the trial court's nal and executory decision in the main
Mandamus act or an omission of
case adjudicating rightful possession to TTAI, the issue has become Partition CA a quasi-judicial N/A
moot and academic.
agency
Forcible Entry and Unlawful Detainer
A. Being provisional and ancillary in character, the existence
and e cacy of the writ of replevin depends on the outcome election cases
Contempt involving an act or
of the case.
an omission of a
B. Considering that a decision has already been rendered in
A Jurisdiction and Venue Comelec municipal or a N/A
the main case, adjudicating rightful possession of the regional trial court,
livestock to TTAI, and which may be maintained in light of in aid of its appellate
SCA JD Venue
the Court's foregoing ruling that the trial court validly jurisdiction
acquired jurisdiction over Jorgenetics, We nd that any
Interpleader MTC or Depending on the Where

themselves, in order to determine nally who is entitled to one

exercising Contempt RTC or MTC1
or the other thing.
jurisdiction
over the The remedy is a orded not to protect a person against a
territorial area Interpleader double liability but to protect him against a double
SC, CA or RTC where the B vexation in respect of one liability.
Rule 62
respondent or
2) An Interpleader to Determine the Ownership of Real
any of the
Property is a Real Action. If it is a real action, jurisdiction
Quo warranto respondents Section 1. When interpleader proper. — Whenever con icting claims
upon the same subject matter are or may be made against a person who
would depend on the value of the property.
resides
claims no interest whatever in the subject matter, or an interest which in 3) Requisites. For an action in interpleader to prosper, the
when the whole or in part is not disputed by the claimants, he may bring an action
following requirements must be present:
Solicitor against the con icting claimants to compel them to interplead and litigate
SC, CA or RTC in the City of their several claims among themselves. 1. The plainti claims no interest in the subject
General
Manila matter OR his claim thereto is not disputed.
commences 1) Concept. It is a remedy whereby a person
the action 2. There must be at least two or more con icting
a) who has property whether personal or real, in his
claimants.
Where possession, or
property 3. The parties to be interpleaded must make e ective
As it is incapable of b) an obligation to render wholly or partially, without
Expropriation RTC sought to be claims.
pecuniary estimation claiming any right in both, or
expropriated
4. The subject matter must be one and the same.
is located c) claims an interest which in whole or in part is not
disputed by the con icting claimants, 4) Cases where interpleader PROPER.
Depending on the Where
MTC or comes to court and asks that the persons who claim the said a) An action by the lessee who does not know the person
Foreclosure value of foreclosed property is
RTC property or who consider themselves entitled to demand to whom to pay rentals due to con icting claims on
property located
compliance with the obligation, be required to litigate among the property.
Where b) Con icting claims to property seized by the Sheri .
Action incapable of
Partition RTC property is
pecuniary estimation c) Interpleader is an issuing bank's proper remedy where
located 1
Where the charge for indirect contempt has been committed against a the purchaser of a cashier's check claims it was lost
Regional Trial Court or a court of equivalent or higher rank, or against an
Forcible entry Regardless of value Where o cer appointed by it, the charge may be led with such court. Where such
and another has presented it for payment.
and Unlawful MTC of property or rental property is contempt has been committed against a lower court, the charge may be led d) Where a principal created a lien in favor of another
with the Regional Trial Court of the place in which the lower court is sitting;
detainer arrears located person on funds in the hands of an agent, the action
but the proceedings may also be instituted in such lower court subject to
appeal to the Regional Trial Court of such place

of the agent against his principal and the other

c) Litis pendentia; or single liability. It requires, as an indispensable requisite, that
claimants is a complaint of interpleader.
con icting claims upon the same subject matter are or may
d) Prescription.
5) Cases where interpleader IMPROPER. be made against the stakeholder who claims no interest
whatsoever in the subject matter or an interest which in
a) Breach of contract between two corporations with Section 5. Answer and other pleadings. — Each claimant shall le his
answer setting forth his claim within fteen (15) days from service of the whole or in part is not disputed by the claimants.
regard to the management, administration and
ownership of Project 4 which does not a ect the summons upon him, serving a copy thereof upon each of the other B. However, a successful litigant who has secured a nal
con icting claimants who may le their reply thereto as provided by these
plainti s as residents of Project 4. judgment in its favor cannot later be impleaded by its
Rules. If any claimant fails to plead within the time herein xed, the court
defeated adversary in an interpleader suit, and compelled to
b) No longer available to a person who has become may, on motion, declare him in default and thereafter render judgment
prove its claim anew against other adverse claimants, as that
independently liable to any of the claimants by virtue barring him from any claim in respect to the subject matter.
would in e ect be a collateral attack upon the judgment.
of a judgment. The parties in an interpleader action may le counterclaims, cross-claims,
third-party complaints and responsive pleadings thereto, as provided by C. Thus, the RTC should have already dismissed TICO's
6) Proper Remedy in Search Warrant Cases. Where
these Rules. complaint for interpleader.
personality has been seized under a search warrant, and it
appears reasonably de nite that the seizure will not be See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 4
7) An adverse claimant in an interpleader case may be
followed by the ling of any criminal action for the
declared in default. Under §5 R62, a claimant who fails to
prosecution of the o enses in connection with which the
answer within the required period may, on motion, be
warrant was issued.
declared in default. The consequence of the default is that the Declaratory Relief and Similar Remedies
court may “render judgment barring the defaulted claimant C
Section 4. Motion to dismiss. — Within the time for ling an answer, Rule 63
from any claim in respect to the subject matter.” The Rules
each claimant may le a motion to dismiss on the ground of impropriety
of the interpleader action or on other appropriate grounds speci ed in
would not have allowed claimants in interpleader cases to be
Section 1. Who may file petition. — Any person
Rule 16. The period to le the answer shall be tolled and if the motion is declared in default if it would “ironically defeat the very
denied, the movant may le his answer within the remaining period, but purpose of the suit. (Lui Enterprises v. Zuellig Pharma a) interested under a deed, will, contract or other written
which shall not be less than ve (5) days in any event, reckoned from 2014) instrument, or
notice of denial.
b) whose rights are a ected by a statute, executive order or
BIR v. Tico Insurance Co., Inc. 18 Apr 2022
regulation, ordinance, or any other governmental
NB: Since R16 has already been removed by the 2019
TICO's interpleader complaint is improper since it amounts to a regulation
Amendments, the defendant should incorporate in his or
her answer the following grounds as special a rmative collateral attack on the nal and executed judgment in favor of may, before breach or violation thereof bring an action in the
defense: Glowide and PMI. appropriate Regional Trial Court to determine any question of
construction or validity arising, and for a declaration of his rights or duties,
a) Lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter; A. The special civil action of interpleader is designed to
thereunder.
protect a person against double vexation in respect of a
b) Res judicata; An action for the reformation of an instrument, to quiet title to real

property or remove clouds therefrom, or to consolidate ownership f) The parties must have legal interest in the b) will,
under Article 1607 of the Civil Code, may be brought under this Rule. controversy; Determination of Hereditary Rights IMPROPER
1) Original jurisdiction of a petition for declaratory relief is g) The controversy must be ripe for judicial c) contract, or
with the RTC. Thus, where a petition seeks a declaration of determination
Alien Certi cate of Registration is NOT a Contract.
the unconstitutionality and/or nullity of a law, it must be
h) Adequate relief is not available through other means
treated as one seeking declaratory relief and should be brought d) other written instrument,
or other forms of action or proceedings.
before the RTC and not the SC even if only questions of law e) statute,
are involved. 3) Actual Case or Controversy means an existing case or
controversy that is appropriate or ripe for determination, not f) executive order or
a) An exception lies where the petition has far-reaching
conjectural or anticipatory. g) regulation or
implications and raises questions that should be
resolved. Such petition may be treated as one for The petition must show "an active antagonistic assertion of h) ordinance or
mandamus. a legal right on one side and a denial thereof on the other
concerning a real, and not a mere theoretical question or i) any other government regulation.
2) Requisites. issue." Court Decisions are NOT Included.
a) The subject matter of the controversy must be a deed, Courts have no judicial power to review cases involving 6) A counterclaim may be led in a petition for declaratory relief.
will, contract, or statute; political questions and as a rule, will desist from taking But a third-party complaint is inconceivable where the
b) The terms of said documents and the validity thereof cognizance of speculative or hypothetical cases, advisory main case is a special civil action for declaratory relief.
is doubtful and require judicial interpretation; opinions and in cases that have become moot.
7) Other instances where petition IMPROPER
c) The petition must be led before there is a breach 4) Instances when Declaratory Relief IMPROPER.
a) When the petition is based on the happening of a
or violation; a) To Obtain Judicial Declaration of Citizenship; contingent event.
d) There must be a justiciable controversy; b) To Resolve a Political Issue or Question; b) When petitioner is not the real party-in-interest.
there must be: c) To Seek Relief on Moot Questions; c) Where administrative remedies have not yet been
i) real parties in interest; d) Where a Decision would not Terminate Uncertainty exhausted.
ii) asserting adverse claims; and or Controversy; d) To challenge mayor’s EO 10 which ordered closure
e) Petition must be Filed before Breach of Contract or and demolition of hotel since the EO had been
iii) presenting a ripe issue.
Statute; partially implemented. (Aquino v. Muni of
e) The controversy must be between persons whose Malay, Aklan 2014)
interests are adverse; 5) Subject Matter of Petition
8) Other similar remedies.
a) deed,

a) Reformation of Instrument; termination of the case, a breach or violation of an instrument or a statute, receiving tax assessments from the BIR and after various
executive order or regulation, ordinance, or any other governmental requests for reconsideration, where it notably already raised
Articles 1359 - 1369
regulation should take place, the action may thereupon be converted into the alleged unconstitutionality of Sections 108 and 184 of
b) Actions to Quiet Title; an ordinary action, and the parties shall be allowed to le such pleadings as
the NIRC as a ground to contest the tax assessment.
may be necessary or proper.
Articles 476 -481 Even assuming arguendo that the RTC had jurisdiction over the
c) Petition for Consolidation of Ownership. petition, the RTC should have dismissed respondent's Petition for
CIR v. Standard Insurance 28 Apr 2021 Declaratory Relief for failure to comply with the requisites for the
Article 1607
said action.
9) Purpose of joinder of all necessary parties. Failure to do so The RTC acted without jurisdiction in taking cognizance of the
A. The said action must comply with the following requisites:
would deprive the declaration of that nal and pacifying Petition for Declaratory Relief and issuing an injunction against the
function the action for declaratory relief is calculated to collection of taxes. 1. the subject matter of the controversy must be a deed,
subserve as they would not be bound by the declaration and will, contract or other written instrument, statute,
A. CA 55 provides that petitions for declaratory relief do not
may raise the identical issue. E.g. trustee in Will. executive order or regulation, or ordinance;
apply to cases where a taxpayer questions his liability for the
10) R65 petitions are not per se remedies to address constitutional payment of any tax under any law administered by the BIR. 2. the terms of said documents and the validity thereof
issues. Declaratory relief proper when questions of validity or are doubtful and require judicial construction;
B. Thus, the courts have no jurisdiction over petitions for
constitutionality cannot be resolved in a factual vacuum. 3. there must have been no breach of the documents in
declaratory relief against the imposition of tax liability or
(Falcis v. Civil Registrar General 2019 En Banc) question;
validity of tax assessments.
11) In a petition for declaratory relief questioning the 4. there must be an actual justiciable controversy or the
C. Taxes being the lifeblood of the government should be
constitutionality of a law, the Republic need not be impleaded. "ripening seeds" of one between persons whose
collected promptly, without unnecessary hindrance or
Mere notice to OSG is su cient. (Zomer Development v. interests are adverse;
delay.
CA 2020 En Banc)
1. Section 218 of the NIRC expressly provides that no 5. the issue must be ripe for judicial determination; and
12) Ordinance imposing regulatory fee is not a tax or revenue
court shall have the authority to grant an injunction to 6. adequate relief is not available through other means or
measure. Hence it need not be appealed to the SOJ.
restrain the collection of any national internal revenue other forms of action or proceeding.
Declaratory relief to challenge ordinance proper. (City of
tax, fee or charge imposed by the code.
CDO v. CEPALCO 2018) B. Here, the third, fourth, fth and sixth requisites were not
2. An exception to this rule, provided under Section 11 of complied with.
13) RTC has jurisdiction over action seeking to set aside GSIS
RA 1125, obtains only when in the opinion of the
rules on computation of retirement bene ts. (GSIS v. 1. Respondent had already received assessments from the
CTA the collection thereof may jeopardize the interest
Daymiel 2019) BIR.
of the government and/or the taxpayer.
2. A justiciable controversy refers to an existing case or
Section 6. Conversion into ordinary action. — If before the nal D. Here, respondent only proceeded with its petition after
controversy that is appropriate or ripe for judicial

determination, not one that is conjectural or merely

C. Upon receipt of the report of the DOE-DOJ Joint Task Exceptions to Filing of Motion for Reconsideration Before
anticipatory. A question is ripe for adjudication when Filing Petition
Force that there was no violation committed by the Big 3,
the act being challenged has had a direct adverse e ect
the RTC, instead of dismissing the case, ordered the COA,
on the individual challenging it. — Here, it was not 1 De nition and Distinctions
the BIR, and the BOC to open and examine the books of
shown that respondent's legal rights are subject of an
accounts of the Big 3 and even allowed private respondent
imminent or threatened violation that should be
Cabigao to be part of the panel of examiners.
prevented by the declaratory relief sought. CERTIORARI PROHIBITION MANDAMUS
1. In doing so, the trial court divested the DOE-DOJ
3. Lastly, respondent's adequate remedy upon receipt of To prevent the To compel the
Joint Task Force of its power and authority.
the FDDA for the DST de ciency for taxable year 2011 Intended to correct
commission of an performance of an
was to le an appeal in due course with the CTA. D. The RTC cannot invoke the doctrine of parens patriae. an act
act act
1. Under the doctrine of parens patriae, the judiciary, as
See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 49 Extends to Discretionary and
an agency of the State, has the supreme power and
Ministerial acts
authority to intervene and to provide protection to discretionary acts ministerial acts
persons non sui juris - those who because of their age or
COA v. Pampilo, Jr. 30 Jun 2020 EN BANC Against judicial or
incapacity are unable to care and fend for themselves.
quasi-judicial Both judicial and non-judicial acts.
An action for declaratory relief is NOT the proper remedy. 2. The doctrine is inapplicable herein considering that functions
A. A petition for declaratory relief is an action instituted by a Congress by enacting RA 8479 has already provided
person interested in a deed, will, contract or other written for the mechanism to protect the interest of the
instrument, executive order or resolution, to determine any Filipino consumers.
2 Requisites, When, and Where to File
question of construction or validity arising from the E. Public respondent RTC therefore committed grave abuse
instrument, executive order or regulation, or statute and for of discretion in not dismissing the Amended Petition.
a declaration of his rights and duties thereunder. CERTIORARI PROHIBITION MANDAMUS
1. It must be led before the breach or violation of the
a. Directed against a. The impugned a. Plainti has
statute, deed or contract to which it refers; otherwise,
a tribunal, board act must be that clear legal
the court can no longer assume jurisdiction over the
action. D Prohibition, Certiorari, and Mandamus or o cer of a tribunal, right to the act
exercising corporation, demanded;
B. Here, private respondents led their Amended Petition De nition and Distinctions JUDICIAL or board or person
based on acts already committed or being committed by the b. It must be the
QUASI-JUDIC exercising
Big 3, which they believe are in violation of the RPC and Requisites, When, and Where to File IAL functions; judicial,
duty of
RA 8479. quasi-judicial,

corporation, board, o cer, or person must have no

or ministerial defendant to Parties include the lower court
b. Respondent choice but to perform the act specifically enjoined by
functions; perform the act; or quasi-judicial agency issuing Original parties to the action
must have acted law.
assailed order
without or in b. Respondent c. Defendant
2. Injunctive relief
excess of must have acted unlawfully May be directed against an Directed to judgments and nal
jurisdiction or without or in neglects the interlocutory order orders
Section 7. Expediting proceedings; injunctive relief. — xxxx
with GADALEJ excess of performance of
jurisdiction or The petition shall not interrupt the course of the principal case, Filed not more than SIXTY
the duty
with unless a TRO or WPI has been issued, enjoining the public respondent (60) DAYS from notice of Filed within 15 DAYS from
enjoined by law;
GADALEJ; from further proceeding with the case. judgment, order or resolution. notice if through notice of
d. Act is
The public respondent shall proceed with the principal case within ten (10) If MNT or MR led, period appeal, 30 DAYS if record on
ministerial. days from the ling of a petition for certiorari with a higher court or shall start from denial of the appeal.
tribunal, absent a TRO or WPI, or upon its expiration. Failure of the motion.
There is no appeal or any other plain, speedy and adequate remedy public respondent to proceed with the principal case may be a ground for
in the ordinary course of law. an administrative charge. Generally requires an MR Does not require an MR
1. When petition proper a. By virtue of AM No 07-7-12-SC, the court that issued the
writ of preliminary injunction shall decide the main
a. Certiorari — Its SOLE o ce is the correction of Ramirez v. Elomina 17 Mar 2021
case or petition within 6 MONTHS from the
errors of jurisdiction, including the commission of issuance of the writ. 1. Due to Ramirez's disregard of the Rules, the appellate
grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess in court was justi ed in denying her motion.
3. Distinguish
jurisdiction.
2. There was no grave abuse of discretion on the part of the
b. Prohibition — It is a process by which a superior court CERTIORARI APPEAL CA.
prevents inferior courts, tribunals, o cers, or persons
from usurping or exercising jurisdiction with which they Corrects errors of judgment 3. It is undisputed that the CA had jurisdiction over the case.
Corrects errors of jurisdiction What Ramirez actually seeks is the reversal of the appellate
have not been vested by law. (fact or law)
courts' ruling declaring Felomino as the lawful owner of the
It is a preventive remedy, as opposed to certiorari which Original and Independent Continuation of the original subject land.
is corrective. It is a proper remedy to prohibit or nullify action suit
acts of executive o cials that amount to usurpation of 3.1. Therefore, assuming there was any error in the
legislative authority. Higher court exercises original Exercise of appellate appellate court's interpretation of the law and
jurisdiction via its power of jurisdiction and power of appreciation of evidence, it may only be corrected
c. Mandamus — For mandamus to lie, the act sought to be through an appeal and not through certiorari.
control and supervision review
enjoined must be a ministerial act or duty. The tribunal,

4. Basic is the rule that once a judgment had attained nality,

judgment, order or resolution. In case a motion for reconsideration or new g. In a criminal case, relief from order of arrest is urgent
trial is timely led, whether such motion is required or not, the petition and the granting by the trial court is improbable;
it can no longer be disturbed, altered or modi ed, the
shall be led not later than sixty (60) days counted from the notice of the
controversy is settled and the matter is laid to rest. denial of the motion. h. Proceedings in the lower court are a nullity for lack of due
5. Once a judgment becomes nal, the court or tribunal loses If the petition relates to an act or an omission of a municipal trial court or process;
jurisdiction, and any modi ed judgment that it issues, as of a corporation, a board, an o cer or a person, it shall be led with the i. Proceedings were done ex parte or in which petitioner had no
well as all proceedings taken for this purpose are null and Regional Trial Court exercising jurisdiction over the territorial area opportunity to object;
void.
as de ned by the Supreme Court. It may also be led with the Court of
j. Issue raised is one purely of law; OR
See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 55 Appeals or with the Sandiganbayan, whether or not the same is in aid
of the court's appellate jurisdiction. k. Where public interest is involved.
4. Distinguish: prohibition, mandamus, and injunction
If the petition involves an act or an omission of a quasi-judicial agency,
unless otherwise provided by law or these rules, the petition shall be led Dy Buncio v. Ramos 23 Mar 2022
PROHIBITION MANDAMUS INJUNCTION
with and be cognizable ONLY by the Court of Appeals.
WON the CA correctly dismissed Buncio's Petition for Certiorari.
Against a tribunal,
corporation, board Against a tribunal, 1. YES, as Buncio had other plain, speedy, or adequate
or person exercising board, o cer, or Exceptions to Filing of Motion for remedy before the DAR.
Generally against a 3
judicial, person exercising
party in the action
Reconsideration Before Filing Petition 2. Section 50-A of RA 6557, as amended by RA 9700,
quasi-judicial, or ministerial expressly provides that if there is an allegation from any of
ministerial functions. a. The order is a patent nullity, as where the court a quo has no
the parties that the case is agrarian in nature and one of the
functions jurisdiction; parties is a farmer, farmworker, or tenant, the case shall be
b. The questions raised in the certiorari proceedings have been automatically referred by the judge or the prosecutor to the
Does not involve the
May be on the ground that respondent acted duly raised and passed upon by the lower court; DAR which shall determine and certify within fteen (15)
jurisdiction of the
without or in excess of jurisdiction days from referral whether an agrarian dispute exists:
court c. There is an urgent necessity to resolve the issue as further
delay would prejudice the interest of either the government or 2.1. Provided, that from the determination of the
May be the main DAR, an aggrieved party shall have judicial
petitioner;
Always the main action action or a recourse.
provisional remedy d. Subject matter is perishable;
3. Hence, the proper recourse of Buncio upon the trial
e. MR would be useless under the circumstances; court's referral of the case to await the DARAB's
5. When and where to file petition
f. Petitioner deprived of due process and there is extreme resolution.
The petition shall be led not later than sixty (60) days from notice of the
urgency for relief. 4. Mendoza v. Germino and Velasquez v. Spouses Cruz pointed

out that the trial court is duty-bound to conduct a exceptions to warrant a relaxation of the rule.
4.1. most persuasive and weighty reasons;
preliminary conference and, if necessary, to receive evidence
5.1. Petitioner invokes an understa ed o ce to justify
to determine if such tenancy relationship had, in fact, been 4.2. to relieve a litigant from an injustice not
the extension of the 60-day period. Such
shown to be the real issue. commensurate with [their] failure to comply with
explanation is unacceptable.
the prescribed procedure;
4.1. If it is shown during the hearing or conference
that, indeed, tenancy is the issue, the trial court 4.3. good faith of the defaulting party by immediately See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 66
should dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction. paying within a reasonable time from the time of
the default;
5. Here, the RTC correctly referred the case to the DAR in
Dormido v. Ombudsman 24 Feb 2020
view of the respondents' allegation of a tenancy 4.4. the existence of special or compelling
relationship. circumstances; 1. The dismissal of the Ombudsman of the Complaint was
4.5. the merits of the case; not tainted with grave abuse of discretion correctible by
See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 8 Certiorari.
4.6. a cause not entirely attributable to the fault or
negligence of the party favored by the suspension 2. The very basic prerequisite of a petition for certiorari is to
of the rules; allege the acts constituting grave abuse purportedly
Republic v. Heirs of Sps Borja 11 Jan 2021
committed by the public o cer, tribunal, or court.
4.7. a lack of any showing that the review sought is
1. It has been settled that the 60-day period within which a
merely frivolous and dilatory; 3. An error of judgment is one which the court may commit
petition for certiorari should be led is non-extendible,
in the exercise of its jurisdiction.
except in meritorious cases. 4.8. the other party will not be unjustly prejudiced
thereby; 4. An error of jurisdiction is one where the act complained of
2. Laguna Metts Corporation v. CA held that following A.M.
was issued by the court without or in excess of jurisdiction,
No. 07-7-12-SC, petitions for certiorari must be led 4.9. fraud, accident, mistake, or excusable negligence
or with grave abuse of discretion, which is tantamount to
strictly within 60 days from the notice of judgment or from without appellant's fault;
lack or in excess of jurisdiction and which error is
the order denying a motion for reconsideration. 4.10. peculiar legal and equitable circumstances correctible only by the extraordinary writ of certiorari.
3. Labao v. Flores recognized that the extension of the 60-day attendant to each case;
5. Here, the Petition contained no allegations of the
period may be granted by the Court in the presence of 4.11. in the name of substantial justice and fair play; Ombudsman's supposed acts of grave abuse of discretion
special or compelling circumstances provided that there
4.12. importance of the issues involved; and adequate to reverse the latter's pronouncements and indict
should be an e ort on the part of the party invoking
respondents instead for the charges of graft and corruption.
liberality to advance a reasonable or meritorious 4.13. exercise of sound discretion by the judge guided by
explanation for his or her failure to comply with the rules. all the attendant circumstances. 6. In dismissing the Complaint and denying the Motion for
Reconsideration, the Ombudsman relied on the
4. The recognized exceptions to the strict observance of the 5. The circumstances in this case do not fall under any of the Ombudsman Act of 1989, cited relevant jurisprudence,
aforementioned rule are

and squarely applied the foregoing to the facts of the case at cannot avail of it. (Pascual v. Robles 2011). An exception to the
10. DepEd may NOT be compelled by mandamus to deduct salary
hand. foregoing rule is where the aggrieved parties were indispensable
of teachers and pay to creditor. (DepEd v. Rizal Teachers
parties. (Crisologo v. JEWM Agro-Industrial 2014).
6.1. Whether these determinations by the Ombudsman Kilusang Bayan for Credit 2019)
were correct or wrong is not remediable by 3. Issuance by DOH of a cease-and-desist order is an exercise of
11. Transferee of shares of stock may compel the corporation to
certiorari. quasi-judicial power and hence may be challenged by certiorari
record share transfer in its stock-and-transfer book, as well as to
and/or prohibition. (Association of Medical Clinics v. GCC
See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 78 issue new stock certi cates in his name. (Andaya v. Rural Bank
Medical Centers 2016 En Banc)
of Cabadbaran 2016)
4. Certiorari and prohibition proper to declare unconstitutionality
12. Mandamus does NOT lie to compel issuance of decree of
of RA 10932 (Anti-Hospital Deposit Law) even if no judicial,
1. EXPANDED Certiorari and Prohibition Broader in registration where it appears that there are two titles over the
quasi-judicial, or ministerial function is involved. (Private
Scope and Reach with respect to the SC. — A petition for same land. (Rodriguez v. CA 2013)
Hospitals Assoc. v. Medialdea 2018 En Banc)
prohibition is NOT the proper remedy to assail an IRR issued 13. A mayor cannot be compelled by mandamus to issue a business
in the exercise of a quasi-legislative function. Prohibition lies 5. Small-claims decision (AL Ang Network v. Mondejar 2014)
permit since the exercise of the same is a delegated police power
against judicial or ministerial functions, but NOT against 6. Judgment declaring presumptive death under Article 41 of the and hence discretionary in nature. (Rimando v. Naguilian
legislative or quasi-legislative functions. Family Code (Republic v. Cantor 2013 En Banc and Republic v. Emission Testing Center 2012 and Lacap v. SB 2017)
With respect to the Court, however, the remedies of certiorari and Catubag 2018)
14. Mandamus does not lie to compel payment of informer’s
prohibition are necessarily broader in scope and reach, and the 7. To set aside issuance by BIR of revenue regulation imposing reward since the grant thereof is discretionary. (Lihaylihay v.
writ of certiorari or prohibition may be issued to correct errors VAT on importation of petroleum into freeport and special Tan 2018)
of jurisdiction committed not only by a tribunal, corporation, economic zones since the issuance of regulations is a
15. Mandamus does not lie to compel mother to produce
board or o cer exercising judicial, quasi-judicial or ministerial quasi-legislative function NOT reviewable by certiorari.
holographic will, since there is an adequate remedy for the heir
functions but also to set right, undo and restrain any act of grave (Clark Investors and Locators Assoc. v. Secretary of Finance
in the ling of a petition for probate of the will and then moving
abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction 2015)
for the issuance of a production order against the mother. (Uy v.
by any branch or instrumentality of the Government, even if
8. The ERC issuance of electric cooperatives’ wheeling rates which Lee 2010)
the latter does not exercise judicial, quasi-judicial or
allowed electric cooperatives to collect contributions from
ministerial functions. 16. Non-compliance with the substitution procedure pursuant to
members for capital contributions is an exercise of rule-making
§17 R3 is a ground for the dismissal of a mandamus petition to
Thus, petitions for certiorari and prohibition are appropriate power NOT reviewable by certiorari. (Rosales v. RCE 2016
compel payment of salaries. (Del Rosario v. Shaikh 2019)
remedies to raise constitutional issues and to review En Banc)
and/or prohibit or nullify the acts of legislative and 17. In a money judgment against the municipality where its o cials
9. Mandamus proper to compel DBM to pay retirement gratuity
executive o cials. (Araullo v. Aquino III 2014 En Banc) unjusti ably refuse to pay the judgment, the remedy of the
di erentials of retired CA justices. (Assoc. of Retired CA Justices
claimant is to sue the o cials for Mandamus.
2. A person not a party to the proceedings subject of certiorari v. Abad 2018 En Banc)

Governing law is OEC Rules of Court 3. When individual may commence an action
This is because the Sheri cannot attach or levy on execution
the public funds. It is the ministerial duty of the public o cials
Illegality of the occupancy of A person claiming to be entitled to a public o ce or position usurped or
to obey a nal judgment, thus, mandamus will lie, otherwise, Issue is ineligibility or disloyalty unlawfully held or exercised by another may bring an action therefor in his
o ce
the claimant will be stuck with an empty judgment. own name.
(Municipality of Makati v. CA) Filed within 1 year from the
Filed within 10 days after a. Who may commence action?
18. As a general rule, an MR must rst be led with the lower court time of cause of ouster, or right
proclamation of election results
before the extraordinary remedy of certiorari is resorted to, since to hold o ce arose. i. Solicitor General or Public Prosecutor when directed
an MR is considered a plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the by the President;
Brought in Comelec, RTC or
ordinary course of law. Nevertheless, this general rule admits of SC, CA, RTC ii. Solicitor General, if he has good reason to believe that
MTC
well-established exceptions, one of which is when the issue a case can be established;
raised is a pure question of law. Must claim to be entitled to the
Petitioner may be any voter iii. Solicitor General or Public Prosecutor may, with leave
Here, the Republic does not dispute the truthfulness of o ce
of court, at the request of a third party.
Remar’s allegations, particularly, the speci c acts he claims to
Cannot declare second place as Court determines who should In such case, the third party, or relator, may be
have done to locate Lovelyn. What the Republic does question
winner occupy o ce required to put up an indemnity for the expenses and
is the su ciency of these acts to merit a legal declaration of
cost of the action.
Lovelyn’s presumptive death. 2. When government commences an action against
individuals or associations Here, the court shall direct that notice be given to
Clearly, the Republic’s Petition for Certiorari raised a pure legal
respondent so that he may be heard in opposition
question. Hence, direct resort to the CA via Rule 65, without
Section 1. Action by Government against individuals. — An action thereto.
ling with the RTC a prior MR, was proper. (Republic v.
for the usurpation of a public o ce, position or franchise may be
Quiñonez 2020) iv. A person claiming to be entitled to the public o ce or
commenced by a VERIFIED petition brought in the name of the
Republic of the Philippines against:
position usurped or unlawfully held or exercised by
another.
a) A person who usurps, intrudes into, or unlawfully
Quo Warranto 4. Rights of a person adjudged entitled to public office
E holds or exercises a public o ce, position or franchise;
Rule 66 a. To assume the o ce after taking the oath of o ce and
b) A public o cer who does or su ers an act which, by the
provision of law, constitutes a ground for the forfeiture of his
executing an o cial bond as may be required by law;
1. Distinguish: quo warranto under the Rules of Court
o ce; or b. Demand from respondent all the books, papers or
and quo warranto under the Omnibus Election Code
c) An association which acts as a corporation within the documents in his possession;
ELECTIVE APPOINTIVE Philippines without being legally incorporated or without lawful
c. To ask the court to cite the respondents in contempt of
authority so to act.
court if he refuses to obey;

d. To recover damages from respondent. Rights of Plainti Upon Judgment and Payment e. The payment of just compensation is to be determined
5. Limitations i. as of the date of the taking of the property or
Guidelines for Expropriation Proceedings of National
a. One year after the cause of such ouster arose; Government Infrastructure Projects ii. the ling of the complaint, whichever came rst.
b. One year after the right of the petitioner to hold such f. Right to Just Compensation. Just compensation means not
1 Two Stages in Every Action for Expropriation
o ce or position arose; only the correct determination of the amount to be paid to the
c. An action for damages will also prescribe in one year a. The first is concerned with a determination of the authority owner of the land but also the payment of the land within a
from the entry of judgment establishing petitioner’s right of the plainti to exercise the power of eminent domain and reasonable time from its taking.
to hold o ce. the propriety of its exercise. g. No Need to File Counterclaim for Just Compensation. In
b. The second phase is concerned with the determination by the condemnation proceedings, the owner of the property sought
Expropriation Court of "the just compensation for the property sought to be to be condemned may introduce evidence as to the just
F taken." compensation including damages to which he is entitled,
Rule 67
without the necessity of ling a counterclaim to that e ect.
When plaintiff can immediately enter into possession of the real
Matters to allege in complaint for expropriation
property — The only requisites for authorizing immediate entry in h. Market value as measure of compensation. The value that
Section 1. The complaint. — The right of eminent domain shall be expropriation proceedings are: ought to be shown in eminent domain proceedings is the
exercised by the ling of a veri ed complaint which shall market value of the land in the locality. By market value we
c. the ling of a complaint for expropriation su cient in form
mean
1) state with certainty the right and purpose of and substance; and
expropriation, i. the price xed by the buyer and seller in the open market
d. the making of a deposit equivalent to the assessed value of
in the usual and ordinary course of legal trade and
2) describe the real or personal property sought to be the property subject to expropriation.
competition;
expropriated, and Upon compliance with the requirements the issuance of the
ii. the price and value of the article established or shown by
3) join as defendants all persons owning or claiming to own, writ of possession becomes "ministerial.”
sale, public or private, in the ordinary way of business;
or occupying, any part thereof or interest therein, showing,
so far as practicable, the separate interest of each defendant. 2 Order of Expropriation iii. the fair value of the property as between one who desires
to purchase and one who desires to sell;
Two Stages in Every Action for Expropriation Order of condemnation is final and appealable. The order of
iv. the current price;
condemnation is by its nature not interlocutory but nal and
Order of Expropriation appealable. v. the general or ordinary price for which the property may
be bought in the locality.
Ascertainment of Just Compensation 3 Ascertainment of Just Compensation 𝐽𝐶 = 𝐹𝑀𝑉 + 𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝐷𝑎𝑚𝑎𝑔𝑒𝑠 − 𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝐵𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑓𝑖𝑡𝑠

Rights of Plainti Upon Judgment and Republic v. Macabagdal 2018

3) Current market value of crops and trees.
4
Payment In negotiated sale, the government will pay ALL the taxes except real
Legal interest shall run not from ling of complaint but from
a. The plainti shall have the right to enter upon the property property taxes.
issuance of writ of possession, since that is when the deprivation
expropriated and to appropriate it for the public use or of property can be established. In case of expropriation, the government shall DEPOSIT with the
purpose de ned in the judgment, or to retain it should he have court an amount equivalent to 100% of the current zonal value of
Republic v. Bunsay 2019
taken immediate possession thereof. the land as determined by the BIR.
Award of capital gains tax and transfer taxes to landowner as
b. Effect of judgment as to person not a party. A person who After deposit, the court shall immediately issue a writ of possession
consequential damages in an expropriation case is improper.
is not a party to a condemnation proceeding is not bound by a in favor of the government and the latter can immediately start the
judgment therein ordering the payment of indemnity for the NPC v. Asoque 2016 implementation of the project.
taking of the land in question to some other person. Appointment of commissioners NOT necessary in inverse
1. Upon the ling of the complaint, and after due notice to the
c. Title; When Passing. In condemnation proceedings the title condemnation.
defendant, the implementing agency shall immediately pay the
to the land does not pass to the plainti until the indemnity is Republic v. Samson-Tatad 2013 owner of the property the amount equivalent to the sum of
paid.
Under §9 R67, the court may determine the issue of ownership but a. one hundred percent (100%) of the value of the
only for the purpose of determining who is entitled to just property based on the current relevant zonal
LBP v. Manzano 2018
compensation. Such determination is not nal and binding as to the valuation of the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR);
Just compensation of agrarian lands expropriated under RA 6657 is issue of title. and
to be determined by the RTC acting as a Special Agrarian Court.
The determination of just compensation by the DARAB pursuant b. the value of the improvements and/or structures as
to RA 6657 is only recommendatory and not binding. determined under Section 7 hereof;
Guidelines for Expropriation Proceedings of
5 2. In provinces, cities, municipalities and other areas where there
The nal decision on the value of just compensation lies solely on National Government Infrastructure Projects
the RTC acting as a Special Agrarian Court. is no zonal valuation, the BIR is hereby mandated within the
RA 8974 was repealed by RA 10752 on March 7, 2016 which period of sixty (60) days from the date of ling of the
NPC v. Heirs of Macabangkit 2011 provides that real property needed for right of way site or locations for expropriation case, to come up with a zonal valuation for said
The action to recover just compensation from the State or its national government projects may be acquired by donation, negotiated area; and
expropriating agency di ers from the action for damages. The sale, expropriation, or any other modes of acquisition. 3. In case the completion of a government infrastructure project
former, also known as inverse condemnation, has the objective to In negotiated sale, the government will o er, as compensation, the is of utmost urgency and importance, and there is no existing
recover the value of property taken in fact by the governmental following: valuation of the area concerned, the implementing agency shall
defendant, even though no formal exercise of the power of eminent immediately pay the owner of the property its pro ered value.
domain has been attempted by the taking agency. 1) Current market value of the land;
2) Replacement cost of structures and improvements;

4. Upon compliance with the guidelines abovementioned, the Judicial Foreclosure 5) Choice of Remedies by Mortgagee. The remedies available
court shall immediately issue to the implementing agency an to a creditor secured by a mortgage are:
order to take possession of the property and start the Extrajudicial Foreclosure 1. Foreclosure of the mortgage.
implementation of the project.
The General Banking Law of 2000 In a pacto de retro sale, considered as an equitable
5. Before the court can issue a writ of possession, the
mortgage, the creditor may avail himself of
implementing agency shall present to the court a certi cate of
foreclosure proceedings to collect his credit.
availability of funds from the proper o cial concerned. Judicial Foreclosure
1 2. Simple action for collection. He may also obtain
6. In the event that the owner of the property contests the Rule 68
attachment upon proper showing by a davit that the
implementing agency's pro ered value, the court shall
1) Prohibition Against Pactum Commissorium. The value of the mortgaged property is insu cient to
determine the just compensation to be paid the owner within
creditor cannot appropriate the things given by way of pledge cover the debt and that the properties of the
sixty (60) days from the date of ling of the expropriation case.
or mortgage, or dispose of them. Any stipulation to the defendant are in danger of being lost or disposed of
contrary is null and void. with intent to defraud creditors.
Republic v. Castillo 26 Feb 2020
Foreclosure of mortgage is the remedy available to the 3. Receivership.
The computation of just compensation should be reckoned from mortgagee by which he subjects the mortgaged property to the
the time of the ling of the original Complaint on September 5, 6) Mortgage on decedent's estate. Choice of Remedies. A
stipulation of the obligation for which the mortgage was given.
1980. creditor holding a claim against the estate secured by mortgage
2) Who must be joined as defendant. Debtor, mortgagor and or other collateral security may:
A. The landowners should be paid the value of the property as all persons claiming an interest on the property subordinate in
of the time of the ling of the complaint which is deemed 1. Abandon his security and prosecute his claim in the
right to that of the holder of the mortgage.
to be the time of taking of the property. probate court and share in the general distribution of
3) Right of Junior Encumbrancer if not pleaded. His right the assets of the estate; or
B. The case is remanded to the lower court for the proper to redeem is not foreclosed and he can therefore redeem the
determination of just compensation, that is, the full and property from the purchaser. 2. Foreclose his mortgage and rely on his security by
fair equivalent of the property taken from its owner by the action in court, making the executor or administrator
4) Three (3) Stages of Judicial Foreclosure subject of appeal
expropriator which simply means the property's fair market a party defendant and if there is a judgment for
value at the time of the ling of the complaint. a) Judgment of foreclosure; deficiency after the sale, le a claim in the estate for
such de ciency under Section 5, Rule 86; or
See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 77 b) Order con rming foreclosure sale;
c) De ciency judgment. 3. Rely upon his mortgage alone and foreclose the same
at any time within the statute of limitations;
There is no right of redemption except mortgages with the
G Foreclosure of Real Estate Mortgage bank, but the mortgagor has the equity of redemption The choice of one remedy is an abandonment of the other.
before the con rmation of the foreclosure sale.

7) Parties in Foreclosure suit. The following must be joined There is NO right of 2) GR: NO right of redemption exists in case of judicial
There is a right of redemption
as defendants: redemption foreclosure of a mortgage;
1. The persons obligated to pay the mortgage debt. If upon the trial in such action the court shall nd the facts set forth in EXC: If the mortgagee is a bank or banking institution, as
the complaint to be true: provided for by the General Banking Act.
2. The persons who own, occupy or control the
mortgaged premises or any part thereof. 3) Judicial foreclosure of mortgages by banks. The
a) it shall ascertain the amount due to the plainti upon
mortgagor has ONE YEAR from the registration of the deed
3. The transferee or grantee of the property. the mortgage debt or obligation, including interest and other
of sale to redeem. But, the party redeeming must pay the
charges as approved by the court, and costs, and
4. The second mortgagee or junior encumbrancer or any amount xed by the court in the order of execution, NOT the
persons claiming a right or interest in the property b) shall render judgment for the sum so found due and amount for which the property was purchased at the public
subordinate to the mortgage sought to be foreclosed. order that the same be paid to the court or to the judgment auction.
5. The mortgagor even if not the owner of the obligee within a period of not less than ninety (90) days nor
4) Effect of Failure to Interpose Right to Redeem as
mortgaged property should be included to satisfy the more than one hundred twenty (120) days from the entry of
Compulsory Counterclaim. The right to redeem must be
de ciency judgment. judgment,
seasonably invoked as a counterclaim.
8) Effect of failure to implead second mortgagee. If the c) and that in default of such payment the property shall be
5) Amount of Redemption in Extrajudicial Foreclosure.
second mortgagee is not impleaded — the foreclosure is sold at public auction to satisfy the judgment.
NOT the purchase price at the time of the sale but the entire
ine ective against such subordinate lien holder with the NOTES ON REDEMPTION amount of the indebtedness he owed the creditor on the
result that there remains in time an unforeclosed equity of date of the sale with interest on the total indebtedness at the
1) Equity of redemption. What Sections 2 and 3 Rule 68
redemption. rate agreed upon in its obligation.
provide for is the mortgagor's equity (not right) of redemption
The remedy is an independent foreclosure in a proceeding which may be exercised by him even beyond the period to The right of legal redemption must be exercised within
in which the Court should require the second mortgagee to pay the judgment obligation" and even after the speci ed time limits. There must be a tender of the full
redeem the rst mortgage within three months under penalty foreclosure sale, payment in good faith of:
of being debarred from the exercise of his right to redeem.
provided it be before the order of the con rmation of the a) the purchase price;
sale. After such order of con rmation no redemption can be
EXTRA-JUDICIAL JUDICIAL b) interest of 1% per month on the purchase price from
e ected any longer.
date of registration of the sale;
Proper only when provided in When there is no agreement in It is not a procedural requirement merely; it is a substantive
the contract the contract c) amount of taxes and assessments paid by purchaser;
right granted to the mortgage debtor as a last opportunity to
and
Governed by Act 3135 aab Act pay the debt and save his mortgaged property from nal
disposition at the foreclosure sale. d) interest of 1% per month on the assessments.
4115 (see AM No 99-10-05-0 for Governed by Rule 68
present procedure)

NB: Section 47 of the General Banking Act reduced the On the other hand, the mortgagors have no means, until after 14) When may writ of possession issue. Until the sale is validly
period of redemption of extrajudicially foreclosed the con rmation, of compelling the purchaser to comply with con rmed by the Court, the purchaser is nothing more than a
properties of juridical persons from one year to "until the terms of the sale. preferred bidder.
but not after, the registration of the foreclosure sale...
The con rmation operates to divest the title out of the In contrast, the purchaser at an extra-judicial foreclosure sale
which in no case shall be more than three (3)
former owner and to vest in the purchaser. It is at this time has a right to the possession of the property even during the
months after foreclosure, whichever is earlier.
when the rights or title passes, and not before. one year redemption period provided he les an indemnity
6) Redemption is an implied admission of the regularity of bond.
10) Valid confirmation is a FINAL order. Con rmation of
the sale and estops the petitioner from later impugning its sale of real estate in judicial proceedings cuts o and all 15) A transferee from the purchaser, who had consolidated his title
validity on that ground. interests of the mortgagor in the real property sold and vests after the expiration of the redemption period, may le a
7) The ling of an action for annulment of mortgage does not them in the purchaser. Con rmation retroacts to the date of petition for the issuance of a writ of possession. (Sps Gallent
toll the period of redemption. the sale. An order of con rmation in court v. Velasquez 2016).
8) Who May Exercise Right of Redemption? If one has a

foreclosure proceedings is a nal order, not merely However, unlike in the case of the original purchaser, the
interlocutory. petition must not be ex parte but must be with hearing to
privity in title with the mortgagor, and he has such an
interest that he would be a loser by the foreclosure, he may 11) Right of purchaser to issuance of writ of possession. The determine if it is still the mortgagor who is in possession. (Sps
redeem. general rule is that after a sale had been made under a decree Reyes v. Chung 2017).
in a foreclosure suit, the Court has the power to give
It is proper where made by
possession to the purchaser, and the latter will not be driven to Extrajudicial Foreclosure
a) debtors, 2
an action at law to obtain such possession. Act No. 3135, as amended
b) grantee, or 12) Issuance of writ of possession not an execution of
1) Presumption of Regularity. Foreclosure proceedings have
c) assignee for the bene t of creditors, judgment but is merely a ministerial and complementary
in their favor the presumption of regularity and the burden of
duty of the court to put an end to the litigation which the
d) assignee or trustee in insolvency proceedings. evidence to rebut the same is on the petitioner.
court can undertake even after the lapse of ve years, provided
9) Effects of confirmation. As the title to mortgaged real the statute of limitations and the rights of third persons have 2) Personal notice not required. It requires only the posting of
property does not vest in the purchaser until after the not intervened in the meantime. notices of sale in three public places and publication of the
con rmation of the sale, he has, prior to that time, no right to same in a newspaper of general circulation. Personal notice is
13) The judgment of foreclosure loses its executory force by the
the possession of such property, and no legal cause of not required.
lapse of ve years which must have to be enforced by action.
complaint against the defendants, who remain in possession EXC: Should the mortgage contract so stipulate.
After the property is sold pursuant to the judgment and
exercising the rights of ownership.
con rmed by the court, the purchaser is entitled to a writ 3) Notice and posting of Extrajudicial Foreclosure
of possession. Indispensable. Thus, where personal notice of foreclosure is

stipulated in the agreement a sale without such notice is

9) Order for issuance of Writ is appealable. The wisdom or
VOID. 3. Section 7 of Act No. 3135 provides that the purchaser in a
soundness of the order granting the writ of possession is a
foreclosure sale may apply for a writ of possession by ling
4) Effect of Redemption. Redemption is an implied admission matter of judgment in connection with which the remedy is
an ex parte motion under oath.
of the regularity of the sale and estops the mortgagor from ordinary appeal.
impugning its validity and the venue of the public auction. 3.1. The provision also requires that a bond be
Certiorari may, however, be allowed particularly when it is
furnished and approved, and no third person is
5) Right of purchaser to writ of possession. Under Section 7 led within the period to appeal to prevent any possible
involved.
of Act 3135 the Purchaser is entitled to the possession of the irreparable damage to private respondent as against an
property during the redemption period, provided that ordinary appeal which may prove to be tedious and 4. Section 8 of the same Act, as amended, provides the remedy
inadequate. available to the debtor, that is, the opportunity to contest
a) a proper motion has been led,
the transfer of possession but only within the period of
10) Not Applicable to Chattel Mortgage. Act No. 3135 only
b) a bond approved and redemption.
covers real estate mortgages and is intended merely to regulate
c) no third person is involved. the extrajudicial sale of the mortgaged property if and when 4.1. Here, the issuance of the writ of possession to the
the mortgagee is given a special power or express authority to purchaser, upon proper application and proof of
6) Issuance of Writ of Possession. May be led after the
do so in the deed itself or in a document annexed thereto. title, merely becomes a ministerial duty of the
expiration of the period to redeem by the nature of the
court which cannot be enjoined or restrained, even
petition, no notice needed to be served upon persons
Sps Torrecampo v. Wealth Development Bank Corp. by the ling of a civil case for the declaration of
interested in the subject property.
21 Mar 2022 nullity of the foreclosure and consequent auction
7) Intervention not proper under Act 3135 whereby under sale.
settled jurisprudence, the judge has to order the immediate The CA did not err in not applying the provisions of Act No. 3135
issuance of a writ of possession in its Decision. See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 9
a) upon the ling of the proper motion and 1. Act No. 3135 only applies when the one-year redemption
period has not yet lapsed.
b) the approval of the corresponding bond. The General Banking Law of 2000
2. The general rule is that in extra-judicial foreclosures, a writ 3
The intervener's remedy is a separate, distinct, and independent Sec. 47, R.A. No. 8791
of possession may be issued to the purchaser in two
suit, provided for in Section 8 of Act No. 3135.
di erent instances, and based on two di erent sources: 1. In the event of foreclosure, whether judicially or
8) Pending Case For Annulment Not a Prejudicial
2.1. within the redemption period, in accordance with extrajudicially, of any mortgage on real estate which is
Question. Until the foreclosure sale of the property is
Act No. 3135, particularly Section 7, as amended; security for any loan or other credit accommodation
annulled by a court of competent jurisdiction, the mortgagor
and granted, the mortgagor or debtor whose real property has
is bereft of any valid title and right to prevent the issuance of a
been sold for the full or partial payment of his obligation shall
writ of possession. Until then, it is the ministerial function of 2.2. after the lapse of the redemption period, based on
have the right within ONE year after the sale of the real
the court to grant the possessory writ. the purchaser's right of ownership.
estate, to redeem the property by paying the amount due

under the mortgage deed, with interest thereon at the rate co-owners may be seen to present simultaneously two
The second phase commences when it appears that "the
speci ed in the mortgage, and all the costs and expenses principal issues.
parties are unable to agree upon the partition" directed by the
incurred by the bank or institution from the sale and custody
First, there is the issue of whether the plainti is indeed a Court.
of said property less the income derived therefrom.
co-owner of the property sought to be partitioned.
6) An action for partition and accounting under Rule 69, is in
2. However, the purchaser at the auction sale concerned whether
Second, assuming that the plainti successfully hurdles the the nature of an action quasi in rem. Such an action is
in a judicial or extrajudicial foreclosure shall have the right to
rst issue, there is the secondary issue of how the property is to essentially for the purpose of a ecting the defendant's interest
enter upon and take possession of such property immediately
be divided between plainti and defendants, i.e., what portion in a speci c property and not to render a judgment against
after the date of the con rmation of the auction sale and
should go to which co-owner. him.
administer the same in accordance with law.
3) Prescription of Action. The action for partition of the thing 7) When it is made to appear to the commissioners that the real
3. Juridical persons whose property is being sold pursuant to an
owned in common (actio communi dividendo or actio familias estate, or a portion thereof cannot be divided without
extrajudicial foreclosure, shall have the right to redeem the
erciscundae) does not prescribe. great prejudice to the interests of the parties, the court may
property in accordance with this provision until, but not after,
the registration of the certi cate of foreclosure sale with the 4) Procedure after judgment. If the parties can agree among order it assigned to one of the parties willing to take the
applicable Register of Deeds which in no case shall be more themselves then the partition can be made by the parties by the same, provided he pays to the other parties such sum or sums
than three (3) months after foreclosure, whichever is earlier. proper instruments of conveyance which shall be submitted of money as the commissioners deem suitable, unless one of
for approval of the court and such partition with the court the parties interested asks that the property be sold instead
of being assigned, in which case the court shall order the
Partition order con rming the same shall be recorded in the O ce of
H the Register of Deeds of the province. commissioners to sell the real estate at public sale and the
Rule 69 commissioners shall sell the same accordingly.
But if the parties are unable to agree upon the partition, the
1) Basic principle of partition in Civil Law. It is a basic 8) The judgment in this action for partition is res judicata only
court shall by order appoint not more than three (3)
principle in civil law that before a property owned in common on the parties thereto and their successors-in-interest.
competent disinterested persons as commissioners to make
is actually partitioned, all that the co-owner has is an ideal or the partition. 9) While an action for partition of real estate is incapable of
abstract quota or proportionate share in the entire property. A pecuniary estimation, jurisdiction still depends on the subject
5) Two Phases of Partition and Accounting Suit.
co-owner has no right to demand a concrete, speci c or property's assessed values in accordance with B.P. Blg. 129.
determinate part of the thing owned in common because until Finality of Order of Partition: Order Appealable The first (Agarrado v. Librando-Agarrado 2018)
division is e ected his right over the thing is represented only phase of a partition and/or accounting suit is taken up with
10) Dismissal with prejudice under §3 R17 cannot bar co-owner’s
by an ideal portion. the determination of whether or not a co-ownership in fact
right to ask for partition at anytime, if there is no adjudication
2) Complaint in Action for Partition of Real Estate. An exists, and a partition is proper (i.e., not otherwise legally
of ownership of shares yet. Between §3 R17 and the right
action for partition — which is typically brought by a person proscribed) and may be made by voluntary agreement of all
granted to co-owners under Art 494 of the Civil Code, the
claiming to be co-owner of a speci ed property against a the parties interested in the property.
latter must prevail. (Quintos v. Nicolas 2014)
defendant or defendants whom the plainti recognizes to be

11) In an action for partition, the court cannot review the validity
D. The 2010 Orders of the RTC are nal orders, NOT c) Accion de Reivindicacion seeks the recovery of ownership
of the adoption decree issued in favor of the Plainti . (which of course includes jus utendi and jus fruendi) also
interlocutory as there is nothing more to be done as regards
(Oribello v. CA 2015) brought in the RTC.
the partition of the subject property.
E. Clearly, respondent led an incorrect remedy to assail Boundary dispute arising from metes and bounds of Torrens
Silva v. Lo 23 Jun 2021
several nal orders of the RTC. title may be threshed out not in a forcible entry case but only
Respondent led an incorrect remedy to assail several nal orders of through an accion reivindicatoria. (Martinez v. Heirs of
F. Since ownership of half of the subject property was already Lim 2019)
the RTC.
transferred and registered to new owners, respondent
A. Rule 69 have laid down two phases of an action for should have led a separate action and directly annul the Section 1. Who may institute proceedings, and when. — Subject to
partition: new titles of the tenants alleging the purported void the provisions of the next succeeding section, a person deprived of the
1. First, the trial court, after determining that a partition, the 2006 Kasunduan. possession of any land or building
co-ownership in fact exists and that partition is proper, a) Forcible Entry — by force, intimidation, threat, strategy, or
issues an order for partition; and stealth, or
2. Second, the trial court promulgates a decision b) Unlawful Detainer — a lessor, vendor, vendee, or other person
con rming the sketch and subdivision of the properties against whom the possession of any land or building is unlawfully
Forcible Entry and Unlawful Detainer
submitted by the parties or by the appointed I withheld after the expiration or termination of the right to hold
Rule 70 possession, by virtue of any contract, express or implied, or the
commissioners.
legal representatives or assigns of any such lessor, vendor, vendee,
B. Here, the CA overlooked the fact that the rst stage of the or other person,
Di erentiated from Accion Publiciana and
partition has long been terminated by the RTC. 1
Accion Reivindicatoria may, at any time within one (1) year after such unlawful deprivation or
C. The issue arose during the course of the second phase, i.e. withholding of possession, bring an action in the proper MTC against the
during the individual partition of the estate's properties, There are three (3) kinds of possessory actions involving real person or persons unlawfully withholding or depriving of possession, or
speci cally the subject property, contained in the 2006 property, viz.: any person or persons claiming under them, for the restitution of such
possession, together with damages and costs.
Kasunduan which was approved by the RTC in its 2007 a) Accion interdictal is the summary action for Forcible entry
Order. and detainer which seeks the recovery of physical possession
1. The RTC's 2007 Order is a nal order which only and is brought within one (1) year in the MTC;
Palajos v. Abad 7 Mar 2022
respondent failed to appeal before the CA following b) Accion Publiciana is recovery of the right to possess and is
Section 2, Rule 69 in relation to Section 1, Rule 41. a plenary action in an ordinary civil proceeding in a RTC; and 1. Manolo proved his prior physical possession of the subject
property.
2. The procedure to question the partition of the subject
property should be via a record on appeal. 2. The three elements that must be alleged and proved for a
forcible entry suit to prosper are the following:

3) Jurisdiction. The rst level courts now has exclusive original

2.1. plainti had prior physical possession of the 5.1. Although they did not immediately put the same
jurisdiction in accion publiciana and accion reivindicatoria,
property before the defendant encroached on the to active use, Manolo had been occupying the land
where the assessed value of the real property does not exceed
property; since 1999.
P20K if outside MM and P50K if within MM.
2.2. plainti was deprived of possession either by force, 6. With regard to the issue of prior physical possession,
4) Tacita Reconduccion. An implied new lease or tacita
intimidation, threat, strategy or stealth by sometime in 2001, Manolo and his siblings took actual
reconduccion will set in when the following requisites are found
defendant; and possession of the subject property and constructed a
to exist:
concrete perimeter fence around it.
2.3. that the action was led within one (1) year from
a) the term of the original contract of lease has expired;
the time the plainti learned of his deprivation of 6.1. On the other hand, Palajos' evidence of alleged
the physical possession of the property, except that prior possession of Lot No. 5 occurred after b) the lessor has not given the lessee a notice to vacate;
when the entry is through stealth, the one (1) year Manolo took possession of the subject property. and
period is counted from the time the
7. Entry in the premises of the subject property without the c) the lessee continued enjoying the thing leased for
plainti -owner or legal possessor learned of the
consent and knowledge of the registered owner, clearly falls fteen days with the acquiescence of the lessor.
deprivation of the physical possession of the
under stealth, which is de ned as any secret, sly or This constitutes a valid defense in an unlawful detainer case.
property.
clandestine act to avoid discovery and to gain entrance into,
3. Possession in forcible entry cases refers to prior physical or to remain within the residence of another without 5) Who may file action
possession or possession de facto, not possession de jure or permission. a. In Forcible Entry. The person deprived of possession
that arising from ownership. by force, intimidation, threat, strategy or stealth.
3.1. As an exception, Section 16, Rule 70 provides that b. In Unlawful Detainer
the issue of ownership shall be resolved in deciding 1) Any of the co-owner may bring an action for forcible entry or
1. The landlord, vendor or vendee or other person
the issue of possession if the question of possession unlawful detainer.
against whom possession of land or building is
is intertwined with the issue of ownership.
2) Accion Publiciana even if brought within one year. If the unlawfully withheld. Under Art. 487, New Civil
4. Possession can be acquired not only by material defendant refuses to vacate on the ground that he is the lessee Code — any one of the co-owners, after the
occupation, but also by the fact that a thing is subject to the of the plainti ’s predecessor in interest, the court will have to expiration or termination of right to hold possession
action of one's will or by the proper acts and legal determine who has a better right of possession and/or whether by virtue of contract.
formalities established for acquiring such right. the antecedent lease contract is binding on the plainti .
2. The legal representative or assignee of any landlord,
5. Here, both the MeTC and the CA correctly found that Hence, the case is an accion publiciana and within the vendor, vendee or other person.
Manolo and his siblings were able to establish that they are jurisdiction of the RTC even if the action was brought within
6) Against whom. The action may be led against persons
the registered owners of the subject property which they one year from demand to vacate the premises. (Bernabe v.
unlawfully withholding or depriving possession or any person
acquired from their parents in 1999. Dayrit)
claiming under them.

7) Nature of Proceedings in Accion Interdictal. Ejectment GR: NOT ESSENTIAL. It is the question of h) Neither do suits for annulment of sale, or title, or
cases are summary proceedings intended to provide an POSSESSION which is primordial. document a ecting property operate to abate
expeditious means of protecting actual possession or right to ejectment actions respecting the same property.
The relevant precedents are hereunder outlined.
possession of property. Title is not involved.
11) The argument of defendants that they subsequently acquired
a) Injunction suits instituted in the RTC by
8) Forcible Entry vs. Unlawful Detainer ownership of the subject property cannot be considered as a
defendants in ejectment actions in the MTCs do not
supervening event that will bar the execution of the questioned
FORCIBLE ENTRY UNLAWFUL DETAINER abate the latter; and neither do proceedings on
judgment, as unlawful detainer does not deal with the issue of
consignation of rentals.
ownership. (Holy Trinity Realty v. Sps Abacan 2013)
possession of the land by the possession of the defendant is b) An "accion publiciana” does not suspend an
12) Jurisdiction of MTC to Resolve Issue of Ownership. As
defendant is unlawful from the inceptively lawful but it becomes ejectment suit against the plainti in the former.
the law now stands, inferior courts retain jurisdiction over
beginning as he acquires illegal by reason of the
c) A "writ of possession case" where ownership is ejectment cases even if the question of possession cannot be
possession thereof by force, termination of his right to the
concededly the principal issue before the RTC does resolved without passing upon the issue of ownership; but this
intimidation, threat, strategy or possession of the property under
not preclude nor bar the execution of the judgment in is subject to the same caveat that the issue posed as to
stealth the contract with the plainti
an unlawful detainer suit where the only issue ownership could be resolved by the court for the sole
involved is the material possession or possession de purpose of determining the issue of possession.
the law does not require a plainti must rst make such
facto of the premises.
previous demand for the demand, which is jurisdictional 13) When Ownership is a Valid Defense. Ownership is,
defendant to vacate d) An action for quieting of title to property is not a however, a valid defense in unlawful detainer cases. While
bar to an ejectment suit involving the same property. possession is the main issue in ejectment, it is also one of the
plainti must prove that he was plainti need not have essential attributes of ownership. It follows that an owner of
e) Suits for speci c performance with damages do
in prior physical possession real property is entitled to possession of the same.
been in prior physical possession not a ect ejectment actions (e.g., to compel renewal
of a lease contract). 14) Agricultural Tenants. The rule is not applicable to cases
the one-year period is generally from the date of last demand or covered by the Agricultural Tenancy Act. Municipal courts
f) An action for reformation of instrument (e.g.,
counted from the date of actual last letter of demand have no jurisdiction over a forcible entry and detainer case
from deed of absolute sale to one of sale with pacto de
entry involving agricultural tenants. But there must be evidence of
retro) does not suspend an ejectment suit between the
tenancy relationship. Mere allegation is not enough.
same parties.
9) Jurisdiction in Accion Interdictal. MeTC, MTC, MTCC
The following essential requisites must concur in order to
have exclusive jurisdiction over cases of forcible entry and g) An action for reconveyance of property or "accion
establish a tenancy relationship:
unlawful detainer, regardless of the amount of rentals and reivindicatoria" also has no e ect on ejectment
damages. suits regarding the same property. a) the parties are the landowner and the tenant;
10) Issue of Ownership. b) the subject matter is agricultural land;

c) there is consent; 19) Where Possession is by Tolerance. A person who occupies 24) An ejectment case survives the death of a party. The
that land of another at the latter's tolerance or permission, lessor's demise did not extinguish the desahucio suit instituted
d) the purpose is agricultural production;
without any contract between them, is necessarily bound by an by her through her guardian. That action, not being a purely
e) there is personal cultivation by the tenant; and there is implied promise that he will vacate upon demand. personal one, survived her death, her heirs have taken her place
a sharing of harvests between the parties. and now represent her interests in the appeal at bar.
20) Tolerance Cannot Convert Forcible Entry Into Unlawful
15) Cases under jurisdiction of HLURB. The MTC is without Detainer. Where the possession of the defendants was illegal 25) Incidents to the main issue of possession de facto. The
jurisdiction where the ground for ejectment would involve a at the inception as alleged in the complaint there can be no following are incidents to the main issue of possession de facto
consideration of the rights and obligations of the parties in a tolerance. Elsewise stated, the tolerance must be presented which falls under the jurisdiction of Municipal Court:
sale of real estate under PD 957 which falls under the right from the start of possession sought to be recovered to
a) Whether or not the relationship between the parties is
jurisdiction of the HLURB. categorize a cause of action as one of unlawful detainer.
one of landlord and tenant.
16) Stealth. In cases of "stealth" the one year period is counted 21) Unlawful detainer is the act of withholding the possession b) Whether or not there is a lease contract and whether
from the time the plainti learned thereof. Stealth is de ned as of land or building from another who is entitled to it after the or not the lease contract had already expired.
any secret, sly or clandestine act to avoid discovery and to gain expiration or termination of the right of the illegal detainer to
entrance into or remain within residence of another without hold possession by virtue of a contract, express or implied, c) The just and reasonable amount of the rent and the
permission. when one year had not yet elapsed from the time the original date when it will take e ect.
17) When Complaint one for Forcible Entry. The questions to possession had become illegal. d) The right of the tenant to keep the premises against
be resolved in an action for forcible entry are: 22) Breach of compromise agreement as basis for ejectment. the will of the landlord.
a) First, who had actual possession over the piece of real Where the lessee entered into a compromise agreement with e) If the defendant has built on the land substantial and
property? the lessors after he refused to pay the increase in rent of the valuable building and there is no dispute between the
lease premises to vacate at a xed period without the necessity parties as to the ownership of the land and the
b) Second, was the possessor ousted therefrom within
of further demand no further demand is necessary for him to building, their rights, according to the Civil Code.
one year from the ling of the complaint by force,
vacate the premises. An unlawful detainer case can spring not
threat, strategy or stealth? And f) The power of the court to x the period of lease.
only from a contract of lease but may also spring from a
c) Lastly, does the plainti ask for the restoration of his compromise agreement which is also a contract. 26) An ejectment court has the power to interpret a contract upon
possession? which claim of ownership necessary to decide possession was
23) Appeal may be dismissed where contract of lease had
based. Union Bank v. Maunlad Homes reiterated. (Optimum
18) The prior physical possession required in a forcible entry case expired. Upon expiration of a contract of lease during the
Devt Bank v. Sps Jovellanos 2013).
is not limited to actual physical possession but also contemplates pendency of the appeal, the appeal may be dismissed for being
possession through legal acts and formalities. (Madayag v. moot and academic and the subleases is without any right to SPECIFIC NOTES ON UNLAWFUL DETAINER
Madayag 2020) remain in possession of the property beyond the lease period. 1) Unless otherwise stipulated, such action by the lessor shall be
commenced only after:

expiration of the lease contract but from the nal demand to

a) demand to pay or comply with the conditions of the b) there must be demand both to pay or to comply
vacate. (Republic v. Sunvar Realty 2012)
lease and to vacate is made upon the lessee, or and vacate within the periods speci ed in Section 2,
6) Effect of Non-recourse to Barangay Conciliation. Referral Rule 70, namely 15 days in case of lands and 5 days in
b) by serving written notice of such demand upon the
to the Lupon Chairman or the Pangkat should be made prior case of buildings.
person found on the premises, or
to the ling of the ejectment case. Legal action for ejectment is
c) by posting such notice on the premises if no person 11) If the lessee pays as demanded there is no cause of action for
barred when there is non-recourse to barangay court.
be found thereon, and the lessee fails to comply unlawful detainer. If he refuses, the cause of action accrues in
7) A complaint of unlawful detainer must allege: which case a demand to pay and to vacate must again be
therewith after fteen (15) days in the case of land or
ve (5) days in the case of buildings. a. That the tenant is withholding the possession of made as a jurisdictional requirement for the ling of an
the property illegally because his right to possess unlawful detainer case.
2) Demand how made:
under his contract with the landlord had expired
12) Acceptance of Arrears not a waiver. By the lessor of the
a) Personally upon tenant (may be oral). (Section 2).
payment by the lessee of the rentals in arrears does not
b) Service of written notice of such demand upon b. That the landlord has made a demand upon the constitute a waiver of the default in the payment of rentals as a
persons found in premises. tenant to comply with the terms of the contract and valid cause of action for ejectment.
c) Posting in premises if no persons be found thereon. to return the possession of the property, and that the
13) There is no need to allege prior demand where the cause of
tenant failed to satisfy the demand within 15 or 5
3) Time to commence action. Within one year after unlawful action is cessation of tolerance and not to pay rentals on the
days, in case of buildings.
deprivation or withholding of possession. property.
c. The complaint must be led within one year from the
4) Period to File Unlawful Detainer. Unlawful detainer must 14) The lessor has the right to increase rentals after the expiration
date of the demand.
be led within one year from the date of last demand of the lease and to evict the lessee who refuses to accept the
with the MTC, otherwise, it is an accion publiciana cognizable 8) The only issue in unlawful detainer is who between new rate without necessity of demand, provided that the same
by the RTC. litigants has a better right to physical possession. is not exorbitant.
Exception. But where the subsequent demands were mere 9) When action is based on violation of lease. Mere failure to 15) Purchaser at Public Auction May File Unlawful
reminders to comply with an alleged previous agreement to pay rent does not ipso facto make unlawful the tenant's Detainer. Under the Rules, if the mortgaged property is not
voluntarily vacate and the reason why no action was taken was possession. It is the demand to vacate and refusal to redeemed within one year from the foreclosure sale, the
because the lessors were expecting that the lessee would vacate which makes unlawful the withholding of possession. purchaser at public auction is entitled to possession of the
voluntarily give possession, the one year period is counted property. To obtain possession, the vendee or purchaser may
10) Thus, for the purpose of bringing an ejectment suit, two
from the rst demand. either ask for a writ of possession or bring an appropriate
requisites must concur, namely:
independent action, such as a suit for ejectment.
5) If upon the expiration of the lease contract, the defendant
a) there must be failure to pay rent or comply
continued to stay in the premises upon the plainti ’s Section 13. Prohibited pleadings and motions. — The following
with the conditions of the lease and
tolerance, the one-year period is counted not from the petitions, motions, or pleadings shall not be allowed:

2) Motion for issuance of Preliminary Injunction in ejectment

1. Motion to dismiss the complaint except on the ground of lack of The owners of a parcel of land which have been used as a road lot for
jurisdiction over the subject matter, or failure to comply with cases must be led within ve(5) days from the ling of the
years has the right to le an ejectment suit against the people residing
section 12; complaint and the same must be resolved by the court within
therein by tolerance if the road lot has not yet been expropriated nor
thirty(30) days.
2. Motion for a bill of particulars; paid by the government.
Should there be an appeal by the defendant to the RTC,
3. Motion for new trial, or for reconsideration of a judgment, or for Hence, absent expropriation and without evidence that it was
reopening of trial; plainti may within ten(10) days from the perfection of the
donated or sold to the government, the same is private property.
appeal, le a motion for preliminary mandatory
4. Petition for relief from judgment;
injunction to restore him in possession which the court may 1) Damages Recoverable in Ejectment cases
5. Motion for extension of time to le pleadings, a davits or any grant if it nds the appeal frivolous or dilatory.
other paper; a) The only damage that may be recovered in a forcible
3) Under the present law, an inferior court has jurisdiction to entry and unlawful detainer cases is the fair rental
6. Memoranda;
grant provisional remedies in proper cases. These proper cases value or the reasonable compensation for the use
7. Petition for certiorari, mandamus, or prohibition against any would be: and occupation of the leased property.
interlocutory order issued by the court;
a. Preliminary attachment under Rule 57, provided b) Other damages must be claimed in an ordinary
8. Motion to declare the defendant in default;
the principal action is within its jurisdiction, such as action.
9. Dilatory motions for postponement an action of forcible entry and unlawful detainer.
But while actual, moral and exemplary damages are
10. Reply; b. Preliminary injunction under Rule 58 in both not permissible, a counterclaim for moral and
11. Third-party complaints; forcible entry and unlawful detainer also in cases exemplary damages within the court's jurisdiction is
12. Interventions. mentioned in the preceding paragraph. permissible.
4) Resolution of Issue of Ownership. Under the Judiciary c) Summary judgment is proper where payments of
1) Certiorari filed with the Regional Trial Court is not Reorganization Act, the issue of ownership shall be resolved rents and default are admitted.
permissible. only to determine the issue of possession: Provided, 2) Attorney's Fees may be Awarded in Ejectment Cases. The
EXCEPTION unless some form of relief is made available to a) The defendant raises the issue of ownership in the award of attorney's fees in ejectment cases has been upheld
defendant the grave injustice and irreparable injury that visited pleadings and where the provisions of Article 2208 are applicable.
him through no fault or negligence on his part will only be
b) The question of possession cannot be resolved 3) Limited Rule on Conclusiveness of Judgment. The
perpetuated, the Court treated pro hac vice the petition for
without deciding the issue of ownership. judgment is still conclusive only with respect to the issue of
relief from judgment which defendant led either as an
possession of the premises but not with respect to ownership
exception to the rule, or a regular appeal to the RTC, or even
Gatchalian v. Flores 2018 or other facts.
an action to annul the order (decision) of the MCTC.

requiring supersedeas bond and deposit of rentals applies even

4) Against whom is Judgment Binding. The judgment is 7) Lessee has No Right of Retention. A lessee is not a possessor
if it is the lessor who appealed; otherwise execution will issue.
binding against the parties and all persons claiming under in good faith and therefore has no right to retain possession of
them, viz.: the premises pending reimbursement of his improvements on Such bond is required to assure the payment of damages to the
the leased premises. winning party in case the appeal is found frivolous, or the
a) Trespassers, squatters, or agents of the defendant
judgment appealed from is a rmed.
fraudulently occupying the property to frustrate the No mere lessee can claim to be a possessor in good faith.
judgment;
NOTES ON JUDGMENT 6) Simply put, "damages" in the context of Section 8 of Rule 70
b) Guests or other occupant of the premises with the is limited to "rent" of "fair rental value for the use and
1) There must first be Notice of Judgment. Before the
permission of the defendant; occupation of the property."
judgment may be executed the defendant must rst be noti ed
c) Transferees Pendente lite; of the decision. However, while formal service of the judgment 7) Loss of jurisdiction by MTC. It was later held that after the
is indeed necessary as a rule, this is no longer necessary where a perfection of an appeal the MTC is without jurisdiction to
d) Sublessees;
MR of the decision was led which would indicate that issue a writ of execution even if no supersedeas bond is led.
e) Members of the family, relatives and other privies of defendants were already informed of such decision. The writ may be issued by the RTC. The writ of execution
the defendant. pending appeal may be issued by the RTC but once the
2) Motion Must be with Notice. The writ of execution may
5) Not binding against non-parties judgment becomes nal, the writ should be issued by the
only be issued after notice of the motion to the adverse party.
MTC.
a) An alias writ of execution cannot legally be issued Defendant must be given reasonable time to vacate by Sheri
against respondent-lessees who are not parties to the enforcing the writ — normally three to ve days. 8) When execution suspended. The court on certiorari and
case. prohibition ordered the suspension of enforcement of writ of
3) Requisites to Stop Execution. To stay execution in an execution and order of demolition in the action for illegal
b) A writ of possession and order of demolition directed ejectment suit, the defendant should: detainer, in view of the action led by petitioner for quieting
against persons who were not parties are void. 1. Perfect appeal to the Regional Trial Court; of title over the lot in issue.
c) A judgment in an ejectment case cannot be enforced 2. File supersedeas bond; and 9) Procedure where possession claimed by stranger to case.
against persons who were not defendants. Where possession of the subject premises was claimed by a
3. Deposit current rentals or reasonable compensation
6) Power of Court in Ejectment Case to Decide Issue of third party or stranger to the ejectment case, the court is
for the use and occupation of the premises.
Builder in Good Faith. As an incident to the main issue of justi ed in suspending the implementation of the writ of
possession de facto the inferior court can decide if the 4) Rule is mandatory. The duty to issue the writ and execution.
defendant has built on the land a substantial and valuable immediate execution is ministerial compellable by
building and there is no dispute between the parties as to the mandamus. But even if the writ is issued, the appeal Section 20. Preliminary mandatory injunction in case of appeal. —
ownership of the land and building, their rights according to continues. Upon motion of the plainti , within ten (10) days from the perfection of
the appeal to the RTCt, the latter may issue a writ of preliminary
the Civil Code. 5) Even if Lessor is Appellant, Appellee must Comply with
mandatory injunction to restore the plainti in possession if the court is
Payment of Rentals and Supersedeas Bond. The rule

satis ed that the defendant's appeal is frivolous or dilatory or that the ownership.
4. Here, the foregoing requisites have been su ciently
appeal of the plainti is prima facie meritorious.
3. It has been consistently held that where the issue of established.
1) The writ of preliminary mandatory injunction may be issued ownership is inseparably linked to that of possession,
4.1. petitioners are the registered owners of the subject
even if the appellant is the plainti lessor if it appears that the adjudication of the issue on ownership is not nal and
property;
lessor's appeal is meritorious. binding, but merely for the purpose of resolving the issue
of possession. 4.2. respondents' occupation of the subject property
2) Even if a supersedeas bond is led, mandatory injunction for was merely tolerated by the petitioners'
restoration of premises may issue but execution with respect to See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 79 predecessor-in-interest and the petitioners
the payment of accrued rentals should be stayed. No execution themselves;
can be issued because of the supersedeas bond.
4.3. occupation became illegal when respondents
3) The grant of mandatory injunction constitutes a judgment of Sps Liu v. Espinosa 31 Jul 2019
refused to heed petitioners' express and clear
the appeal with respect to the possession of the lots. demands to vacate the subject property, the last of
1. The Court nds that the petitioners' action for unlawful
detainer must be sustained. which was dated February 12, 2013;
Section 21. Immediate execution on appeal to Court of Appeals or
Supreme Court. — The judgment of the Regional Trial Court against the 2. Unlawful detainer is a summary action for the recovery of 4.4. the complaint for unlawful detainer, led on
defendant shall be immediately executory, without prejudice to a further possession of real property. August 6, 2013, was made within one year from
appeal that may be taken therefrom. the time the last formal demand to vacate was
3. An action for unlawful detainer will stand if the following
made.
requisites are present:
5. It is settled that a Torrens title is evidence of an indefeasible
Tiña v. Sta. Clara Estate, Inc. 17 Feb 2020 3.1. Initially, possession of property by the defendant
title to property in favor of the person in whose name the
was by contract with or by tolerance of the
title appears.
1. Any ruling on ownership that was passed upon in the plainti ;
ejectment case is not and should not be binding on the 5.1. Hence, petitioners as the titleholders are entitled to
3.2. Eventually, such possession became illegal upon
Cancellation of Title case. all the attributes of ownership of the property
notice by plainti to defendant of the termination
including possession.
2. The sole issue in ejectment cases is physical or material of the latter's right of possession;
possession of the subject property, independent of any See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 82
3.3. Thereafter, the defendant remained in possession
claim of ownership by the parties.
of the property and deprived the plainti of the
2.1. Section 16, Rule 70 provides the exception to the enjoyment thereof; and
rule in that the issue of ownership shall be resolved Contempt
in deciding the issue of possession if the question
3.4. Within one year from the last demand on J
defendant to vacate the property, the plainti Rule 71
of possession is intertwined with the issue of
instituted the complaint for ejectment.

Direct Contempt It is held to be an o ense against public justice which raises an b) Indirect or constructive contempt is one
issue between the public and the accused, and the proceedings committed out or not in the presence of the court. It
Indirect Contempt to punish it are punitive. Intent is a necessary element. is an act done in a distance which tends to belittle,
degrade, obstruct, interrupt or embarrass the court
As to Purpose. Where the primary purpose is to preserve the
Direct Contempt court's authority and to punish for disobedience of its orders,
and justice, as in refusing to obey its order or lawful
1) Concept of Contempt of Court. Contempt of court is a process and can be punished only after hearing.
the contempt is criminal. Where the primary purpose is to
de ance of the authority, justice or dignity of the court; such provide a remedy for an injured suitor and to coerce
Section 2. Remedy therefrom. — The person adjudged in direct
conduct as tends to bring the authority and administration of compliance with an order, the contempt is civil. contempt by any court may not appeal therefrom, but may avail himself
the law into disrespect or to interfere with or prejudice
5) Nature of Criminal Contempt Proceedings. Are generally of the remedies of certiorari or prohibition.
parties-litigant or their witnesses during litigation.
held to be in the nature of criminal or quasi-criminal actions. The execution of the judgment shall be suspended pending resolution of
2) Power inherent in all courts. And is essential to the The proceeding has been characterized as sui generis. such petition, provided such person les a bond xed by the court which
preservation of order in judicial proceedings and to the rendered the judgment and conditioned that he will abide by and perform
6) Nature of Civil Contempt Proceedings. Are generally held
enforcement of judgments, orders, and mandates of the court, the judgment should the petition be decided against him.
to be remedial and civil in their nature; that is, they are
and consequently, to the due administration of justice.
proceedings for the enforcement of some duty, and essentially
Indirect Contempt
3) Two-Fold Aspect of Power to Punish Contempt of Court a remedy for coercing a person to do the thing required.
a) the proper punishment of the guilty party for his 7) By Whom Initiated. In general, civil contempt proceedings
Section 3. Indirect contempt to be punished after charge and
disrespect to the court or its order; and hearing. — After a charge in writing has been led, and an opportunity
should be instituted by an aggrieved party, or his successor, or
given to the respondent to comment thereon within such period as may be
b) to compel his performance of some act or duty someone who has a pecuniary interest in the right to be
xed by the court and to be heard by himself or counsel, a person guilty of
required of him by the court which he refuses to protected. In criminal contempt proceedings, it is generally any of the following acts may be punished for indirect contempt;
perform. held that the State is the real prosecutor.
a) Misbehavior of an o cer of a court in the performance of his
4) Civil vs Criminal Contempt. A civil contempt is the 8) Classification. o cial duties or in his o cial transactions;
failure to do something ordered to be done by a court or a a) Direct Contempt is committed in the presence of b) Disobedience of or resistance to a lawful writ, process, order,
judge for the bene t of the opposing party therein. It is
or so near the court or judge or obstruct or interrupt or judgment of a court;
remedial and for the purpose of the preservation of the rights
proceedings before the same, and can be punished
of private persons. c) Any abuse of or any unlawful interference with the processes
summarily without hearing. Violation of the rule on
or proceedings of a court not constituting direct contempt;
A criminal contempt is conduct directed against the forum shopping or false certi cation is direct
authority and dignity of a court or of a judge, as in unlawfully contempt and may be punished summarily. So also is d) Any improper conduct tending, directly or indirectly, to
assailing or discrediting the authority or dignity of the court or misbehavior of lawyer in court in refusing to abide by impede, obstruct, or degrade the administration of justice;
judge, or in doing a duly forbidden act. ruling is direct contempt. e) Assuming to be an attorney or an o cer of a court, and acting

as such without authority; 6) The ling of a motion for execution and the granting thereof a) where it tends to bring the court into disrespect or, in
f) Failure to obey a subpoena duly served; by judge while case is still pending in Supreme Court is other words, to scandalize the court; OR
contempt.
g) The rescue, or attempted rescue, of a person or property in the b) where there is a clear and present danger that the
custody of an o cer by virtue of an order or process of a court
7) Publication while case is pending. The publication of a administration of justice would be impeded.
held by him. criticism of a party or of the court to a pending case, respecting
12) Criticisms by lawyers. The rule now is post litigation
the same, has always been considered as misbehavior, tending
But nothing in this section shall be so construed as to prevent the court utterances or publications, made by lawyers, critical of the
to obstruct the administration of justice, and subjects such
from issuing process to bring the respondent into court, or from holding courts and their judicial actuation, whether amounting to a
him in custody pending such proceedings.
persons to contempt proceedings.
crime or not, which transcend the permissible bounds of fair
8) Criticisms in good faith. comment and legitimate criticism and thereby tend to bring
1) Writ or order must be lawful. The writ or order must be
Statement that Judge grossly ignorant of the rules of law them into disrepute or to subvert public con dence in their
lawful in order that resistance may be punished as contempt.
and procedure does not constitute improper conduct. integrity and in the orderly administration of justice
2) Refusal to Comply with Writ of Possession NOT Mere criticism or comment on the correctness or wrongness, constitute grave professional misconduct.
Contempt of Court. The proper procedure if the petitioners soundness or unsoundness of the decision of the court in a 13) Any abuse of legal process or proceeding is also contempt
refuse to deliver possession of the lands is not for the court to
pending case made in good faith may be tolerated. under subdivision (c)
cite them for contempt but for the sheri to dispossess
them of the premises and deliver the possession thereof to the 9) Confidential matters. It is also regarded as an interference a) As when a person who is not a pauper alleges under
respondents. with the work of the courts to publish any matter which their oath to be such in order to avoid payment of costs.
policy requires should be kept private, as for example the
However, if subsequent to such dispossession, petitioners enter b) The institution of ctitious suits merely to obtain an
secrets of the jury room, or proceedings in camera.
into or upon the properties for the purpose of executing acts opinion of the court,
of ownership or possession or in any manner disturb the 10) Publications after judgment is final. Criticisms of courts
c) an application for continuance of trial on a pretense
possession of respondents then and only then may they be after a case is nally disposed of does not constitute contempt
of sickness.
charged with and punished for contempt. However, one may still be cited for contempt of court even
Unlawful interference with judicial process is also
3) "Misbehavior" may be de ned as a willful refusal or negligent after a case had ended, where such punitive action is necessary
contempt, such as
failure, without just cause, of an o cer of the court to comply to protect the court and its dignity and to vindicate it from
with an order of the court. acts or conduct intended or calculated to degrade, ridicule or a) procuring unlawfully the arrest of a person for the
bring the court into disfavor and thereby erode or destroy purpose of preventing him from testifying as a
4) Lawyer's tactics in slanting cases tolerated, but not delaying witness, or
public con dence in that court.
tactics by lawyer. They clearly constitute misbehavior
11) Thus, the GENERAL RULE is that in case of a b) any unlawful interference with the possession of a
before the Court in facie curiae, summarily punishable.
post-litigation newspaper publication, fair criticism of the receiver or of an assignee.
5) Failure of counsel to appear in court for trial despite due court, its proceedings and its members, are allowed. EXCEPT
notice was held to constitute indirect contempt.

c) And the attorney on whose advice such interference is 4. On the date of the hearing, the court shall proceed to charge may be led with such court.
committed is also guilty of contempt. investigate the charge and consider the answer or Where such contempt has been committed against a lower court, the
testimony which the accused may make or o er; and charge may be led with the Regional Trial Court of the place in which
NOTES ON CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS
the lower court is sitting; but the proceedings may also be instituted in
5. If found guilty of contempt, he shall be punished
1) Two modes of commencing proceedings for indirect such lower court subject to appeal to the RTC of such place in the same
accordingly.
contempt: manner as provided in section 11 of this Rule.
3) Information need not be filed. Although contempt
a) It may be initiated motu proprio by the court
proceedings are in their nature penal, no procedural necessity 1) Authority of Appellate Court. The rule, as now accepted is
against which the contempt was committed. that where the entire case has already been appealed,
exists for the ling of separate criminal cases, as the acts
b) In all other cases, charges for indirect contempt shall complained of are incidents in the same proceedings. jurisdiction to punish for contempt rests with the appellate
be commenced by a veri ed petition. court where the appeal completely transfers the proceedings
4) Satisfying the Requirements of Due Process. Summing up,
thereto or where there is a tendency to a ect the status quo or
If the contempt charges arose out of or are related to a the procedural requisites before the accused may be punished
otherwise interfere with the jurisdiction of the appellate court.
principal action pending in the court, the petition for for indirect contempt:
contempt shall allege that fact but said petition shall be 2) When double jeopardy exists. A contempt charge partakes
a) a complaint in writing which may either be a motion
docketed, heard and decided separately, unless the court in its of the nature of a criminal action even where the action
for contempt led by a party or an order issued by the
discretion orders the consolidation of the contempt charge complained of is an incident of a civil action. An appeal does
court requiring a person to appear and explain his
and the principal action for joint hearing and decision. not lie from an order dismissing a charge of contempt of court.
conduct; and
The denial of the motion for contempt on grounds of failure
2) Procedure. Brie y, the procedure for the punishment of a
b) an opportunity for the person charged to appear and of movants to appear and prosecute such motion is equivalent
person alleged to have committed an act amounting to indirect
explain his conduct. to a judgment of acquittal.
contempt are as follows:
5) Contempt by non-party. Generally no contempt is Civil contempt cannot be a basis for second jeopardy. But
1. A charge must be led and a copy thereof furnished
committed by one not a party to the case. The remedy against criminal contempt could be a di erent matter.
the person who must be given the opportunity to
such person is either a civil or criminal action. An acquittal in contempt proceedings being in nature penal
answer and be heard;
However, persons who are not parties in a proceeding may be "its denial after trial amounts to a virtual acquittal from which
2. The charge shall be led with the court or judge
declared guilty of contempt for willful violation of an order an appeal would not lie."
against whom the alleged contemptuous act was
issued in a case if said persons are guilty of conspiracy with 3) Multiple Appeal Allowed. An Appeal from a judgment for
committed.
any one of the parties in violating the Court's order. indirect contempt may be prosecuted without waiting for the
3. The accused may be released on bail pending the
termination of the principal case, just as in contempt
hearing of the charge; Section 5. Where charge to be filed. — Where the charge for indirect
committed in special proceedings.
contempt has been committed against a Regional Trial Court or a court
of equivalent or higher rank, or against an o cer appointed by it, the

4) Appeal lies from a verdict of acquittal in civil contempt. authority of the court or an act of disobedience to the WPI.
2. Criminal contempt is committed when a party acts
Where the contempt is civil in nature, it does not constitute
against the court's authority and dignity or commits a D. The injunction order recognized the applicability of the
double jeopardy.
forbidden act tending to disrespect the court or judge. MOA in the enforcement of the WPI. Respondents'
5) Availability of libel as additional remedy not a bar to priority berthing rights is not absolute. The same is
B. In general, civil contempt proceedings should be instituted
contempt. The availability, however, of the power to punish conditioned on:
by an aggrieved party, or has successor, or someone who has
for contempt does not and will not prevent a prosecution for
a pecuniary interest in the right to be protected. In criminal 1. the submission of the required documents such as a
libel, either before, during, or after the institution of contempt
contempt proceedings, it is generally held that the State is written FAA of its vessels to HCPTI; and
proceedings.
the real prosecutor.
2. the availability of the designated berthing area.
6) Contempt Not Res Judicata to Disbarment. Moreover, it
C. Here, while the reliefs prayed for by respondents is a
has been held that the imposition of the ne as a penalty in a E. Considering that petitioners' failure to provide priority
combination of both criminal and civil, punishment, the
contempt proceeding is not considered res judicata to a berthing rights to respondents' vessels was due to
nature of the contempt proceeding is more civil than
subsequent charge for unprofessional conduct. respondents' own failure to comply with the requirements
criminal.
mandated in the MOA, petitioners did NOT commit any
Section 12. Contempt against quasi-judicial entities. — Shall apply D. Clearly, the purpose of the contempt petition was for the act amounting to indirect contempt.
to contempt committed against persons, entities, bodies or agencies enforcement of the WPI.
exercising quasi-judicial functions, or shall have suppletory e ect to such See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 29
1. It is a remedy resorted to preserve and enforce the
rules as they may have adopted pursuant to authority granted to them by
rights of respondents and to compel obedience to the
law to punish for contempt. The RTC of the place wherein the contempt
injunctive writ which was issued for their bene t.
has been committed shall have jurisdiction over such charges as may be led
VI Special Proceedings and Special Writs
therefor. E. Accordingly, an appeal from the decision dismissing the
same is not barred by double jeopardy. Settlement of Estate of Deceased Persons
Petitioners are NOT guilty of indirect contempt.
Harbour Centre Port Terminal v. La Filipina Uygongco Guardianship
Corp. 27 Sep 2021 A. Contempt of court is de ned as a disobedience to the court
by acting in opposition to its authority, justice, and dignity. Writ of Habeas Corpus
The nature of the contempt proceeding in this case is more civil
than criminal. B. Such power should be exercised on the preservative, not on
Writ of Habeas Corpus in Relation to Custody of Minors
the vindictive, principle. Only in cases of clear and
A. The punishment for contempt is classi ed into two contumacious refusal to obey should the power be Change of Name
1. Civil contempt is committed when a party fails to exercised.
Cancellation or Correction of Entries in the Civil
comply with an order of a court or judge "for the C. Here, HCPTI's failure to provide priority berthing rights Registry
bene t of the other party." to respondents' vessels was not intended to undermine the Clerical Error Law

settled, in the province in which he resides at the time of his

Writ of Amparo Grounds for Disallowance
death, and
Writ of Habeas Data Reprobate; E ects of Probate 2. If he is an inhabitant of a foreign country, ANY province
in which he had estate.
Rules of Procedure on Environmental Cases Claims Against the Estate
3. The court rst taking cognizance of the settlement of the
Statute of Non-Claims; Exceptions estate of a decedent, shall exercise jurisdiction to the exclusion
Settlement of Estate of Deceased
A of all other courts.
Persons Claim of Executor or Administrator against the Estate
4. Under RA 11576, MTC, MTCC, MeTC and MCTC shall
How to File a Claim
Venue and Process exercise exclusive original jurisdiction over probate
proceedings, testate and intestate, where the value of the estate
Payment of the Debts of the Estate
Court which has Jurisdiction does NOT exceed P2M.
Sales, Mortgages, and Other Encumbrances of Property 5. The jurisdiction of the RTC is limited to the settlement and
Venue in Judicial Settlement of Estate
of Decedent adjudication of properties of the deceased and cannot extend
Extent of Jurisdiction of Probate Court Distribution and Partition to collateral matters.
Powers and Duties of Probate Court Liquidation 6. Section 1, Rule 73, though it mentions “CFI” (now RTC)
pertains to VENUE and not JURISDICTION.
Summary Settlement of Estates Project of Partition
Venue in Judicial Settlement of Estate
Extrajudicial Settlement by Agreement between Heirs Remedy of an Heir Entitled to Residue but not Given his 1. The residence of the decedent at the time of his death is
Two-year Prescriptive Period Share determinative of the venue of the proceeding.
Instances when Probate Court may Issue a Writ of 2. Venue is NOT jurisdictional. The question of residence is
A davit of Self-Adjudication by Sole Heir Execution determinative only of the venue and does not a ect the
Summary Settlement of Estates of Small Value jurisdiction of the court.
Venue and Process
1 3. If decedent was a resident of the Philippines, venue is laid
Remedies of Aggrieved Parties After Extrajudicial Rule 73 exclusively in the province of his residence at the time of his
Settlement of Estate death.
Allowance or Disallowance of Wills Court which has Jurisdiction
Residence means his personal, actual, or physical habitation,
1. If the decedent is an inhabitant of the Philippines at the
Contents of Petition for Allowance of Will his ACTUAL residence or place of abode.
time of his death, whether a citizen or an alien, his will shall be
proved, or letters of administration granted, and his estate

4. It is only where the decedent was a nonresident of the 5. The rule that the determination of a decedent's lawful heirs 4) Determine and rule upon issues relating to the settlement of
Philippines at the time of his death that venue lies in any should be made in the corresponding special proceeding the estate, such as administration, liquidation, and
province in which he had an estate. precludes the RTC, in an ordinary action for cancellation of distribution of the estate; and
title and reconveyance, from granting the same. (Heirs of Ypon
Extent of Jurisdiction of Probate Court 5) Determine the following:
v. Ricaforte)
1. The main function of a probate court is to settle and a) Heirs of the decedent;
6. However, in Treyes v. Larlar 2020 En Banc
liquidate the estates of deceased persons either summarily b) Recognition of natural child;
or through the process of administration. Unless there is a pending special proceeding for the
settlement of the decedent's estate or for the c) Validity of the disinheritance e ected by testator;
2. The probate court exercises limited jurisdiction, thus it has
determination of heirship, the compulsory or intestate heirs d) Status of a woman who claims to be the lawful wife of
NO power to take cognizance of and determine the issue of
may commence an ordinary civil action to declare the nullity the decedent;
title to property claimed by a third person adversely to the
of a deed or instrument, and for recovery of property, or any
decedent unless the claimant and all other parties who have e) Validity of waiver of hereditary heirs;
other action in the enforcement of their ownership rights
legal interest in the property consent, expressly or impliedly, to f) Status of each heir;
acquired by virtue of succession, without the necessity of a
the submission of the question to the probate court.
prior and separate judicial declaration of their status as g) Whatever property in inventory is conjugal or
In that case, if the probate court allows the introduction of such. exclusive property of deceased spouse; and
evidence on ownership it is for the SOLE purpose of
The ruling of the trial court shall only be in relation to the h) Matters incidental or collateral to the settlement and
determining whether the subject properties should be
cause of action of the ordinary civil action, i.e., the distribution of the estate.
included in the inventory, which is within the probate
nulli cation of a deed or instrument, and recovery or
court’s competence.
reconveyance of property, which ruling is binding only
Summary Settlement of Estates
The determination is only provisional subject to a proper between and among the parties. 2
action in a separate action to resolve the title. Rule 74
7. May the probate court pass upon the title of the property
3. The jurisdiction of the probate court merely relates to matters with FINALITY? IT MAY. Where the interested parties are Summary settlement of estate is a judicial proceeding wherein,
having to do with the heirs who have all appeared in the proceeding and the without the appointment of executor or administrator, and without
a. the settlement of the estate and the probate of wills, rights of third parties are not impaired (Munsayac-De Villa delay, the competent court summarily proceeds to
v. CA).
b. the appointment and removal of administrators, a) value the estate of the decedent;
executors, guardians and trustees. Powers and Duties of Probate Court b) ascertain his debts and order payment thereof;
4. The question of ownership is, as a rule, an extraneous 1) Distribute shares; c) allow his will if any;
matter which the probate court cannot resolve with nality. 2) Determine the legal heirs; d) declare his heirs, devisee and legatees; and distribute his net
3) Issue warrants and processes to secure attendance of witnesses; estate among his known heirs, devisees, and legatees, who shall

thereupon be entitled to receive and enter into the possession not been paid, or that an heir or other person has been unduly
4. No extrajudicial settlement shall be binding upon any person
of the parts of the estate so awarded to them, respectively. deprived of his lawful participation payable in money, the
who has not participated therein or had no notice thereof.
court having jurisdiction of the estate may, by order for that
Extrajudicial Settlement by Agreement between Heirs 5. Extrajudicial partition of the estate shall be valid when purpose, after hearing, settle the amount of such debts or
1. The parties may, without securing letters of administration, the following conditions concur: lawful participation and order how much and in what manner
divide the estate among themselves as they see t by means of a 1) The decedent left no will; each distributee shall contribute in the payment thereof, and
public instrument led in the o ce of the register of deeds, may issue execution, if circumstances require, against the bond
2) The decedent left no debts, or if there were debts left,
and should they disagree, they may do so in an ordinary action or against the real estate belonging to the deceased, or both.
all had been paid;
of partition. This can be done if:
Such bond and such real estate shall remain charged with a
3) The heirs are all of age or if they are minors, the latter
a. Intestate — the decedent left no will and liability to creditors, heirs, or other persons for the full period
are represented by their judicial guardian or legal
b. No debts and of two (2) years after such distribution, notwithstanding any
representative;
transfers of real estate that may have been made.
c. The heirs are all of age, or 4) The partition was made by means of a public
4. Section 4, Rule 74 is only applicable to persons who have
d. The minors are represented by their judicial or legal instrument or a davit duly led with the Register of
participated or taken part or had notice of extra-judicial
representatives duly authorized for the purpose. Deeds; and
partition. (Pedrosa v. CA) There is nothing therein which
2. The parties to an extrajudicial settlement, whether 5) The fact of the extrajudicial settlement or clearly shows a statute of limitation and a bar against third
administration shall be published in a newspaper of person.
a. by public instrument or
general circulation.
5. If on the date of the expiration of the period of two (2) years
b. by stipulation in a pending action for partition, or
Two-year Prescriptive Period the person authorized to le a claim is
c. the sole heir who adjudicates the entire estate to
1. It shall be presumed that the decedent left no debts if no a. a minor or
himself by means of an a davit
creditor les a petition for letters of administration within b. mentally incapacitated, or
shall le, simultaneously with and as a condition precedent to two (2) years after the death of the decedent.
the ling of the abovementioned, c. is in prison or
2. If it shall appear at any time within two (2) years AFTER the
a. a BOND in an amount equivalent to the value of settlement and distribution of an estate, that an heir or other d. outside the Philippines,
the personal property involved and person has been unduly deprived of his lawful participation in he may present his claim within one (1) year after such
b. conditioned upon the payment of any just claim that the estate, such heir or such other person may compel the disability is removed.
may be led under Section 4 of this Rule. settlement of the estate in the courts for the purpose of
satisfying such lawful participation.
3. The fact of the extrajudicial settlement or administration shall
be published in a newspaper of general circulation once a 3. And if within the same time of two (2) years, it shall appear
week for three consecutive weeks. that there are debts outstanding against the estate which have

possession of the portions of the estate so awarded to

A davit of Self-Adjudication by Sole Heir Allowance or Disallowance of Wills
them respectively. 3
If there is only one heir, he may adjudicate to himself the entire Rule 76
2. The court, before allowing a partition, may require the
estate by means of an affidavit led in the o ce of the register of
distributees, if property other than real is to be distributed, to
deeds. Contents of Petition for Allowance of Will
le a BOND in an amount to be xed by court, conditioned
for the payment of any just claim. a) The jurisdictional facts — refer to the fact of death of the
Summary Settlement of Estates of Small Value
decedent, his residence at the time of his death in the province
1. Whenever the gross value of the estate of a deceased person, Remedies of Aggrieved Parties After Extrajudicial where the court is sitting.
whether he died testate or intestate, does not exceed ten Settlement of Estate
b) The names, ages, and residences of the heirs, legatees, and
thousand pesos (P10K), and that fact is made to appear to 1. The creditor may ask for administration of enough devisees of the testator or decedent;
the RTC having jurisdiction of the estate by the petition of an property of the estate su cient to pay the debt, but the heirs
interested person and upon hearing, which shall be held not c) The probable value and character of the property of the estate;
cannot prevent such administration by paying the obligation.
less than one (1) month nor more than three (3) months d) The name of the person for whom letters are prayed;
from the date of the last publication of a notice which shall be 2. Where the estate has been summarily settled, the unpaid
published once a week for three (3) consecutive weeks in a creditor may, within the two-year period, le a motion in the e) If the will has not been delivered to the court, the name of the
newspaper of general circulation in the province, and after court wherein such summary settlement was for the payment person having custody of it.
such other notice to interested persons as the court may of his credit. But no defect in the petition shall render void the allowance of the will,
direct, the court may proceed summarily, without the After the lapse of the two-year period, an ordinary action or the issuance of letters testamentary or of administration with the
appointment of an executor or administrator, and without may be instituted against the distributees within the statute will annexed.
delay, of limitations, but not against the bond. How is a lost or destroyed will proved?
a. to grant, if proper, allowance of the will, if any there 3. The action to annul a deed of extrajudicial settlement on the a) By proving its execution and validity;
be, ground of fraud should be led within FOUR YEARS
from the discovery of the fraud. b) Will is shown to have been in existence at the time of the death
b. to determine who are the persons legally entitled to
of the testator;
participate in the estate, and 4. What is the remedy of an heir who is deprived of one’s
share in the estate because he did not participate, take c) It was fraudulently or accidentally destroyed in the lifetime of
c. to apportion and divide it among them after the
part, or had no notice of the settlement of estate? the testator without his knowledge;
payment of such debts of the estate as the court shall
then nd to be due; and An heir may le an action for reconveyance within ten (10) d) The provision of the will must be proved by two credible
years, which is based on an implied trust (Teves v. CA). This witnesses (Section 6).
d. such persons, in their own right, if they are of lawful
age and legal capacity, or by their guardians or trustees prescriptive period shall commence upon the issuance of a new
Grounds for Disallowance
legally appointed and quali ed, if otherwise, shall title over the property (Marquez v. CA) or from actual notice
in case of unregistered deed (Neri v. Heirs of Uy 2012). The will shall be disallowed in any of the following cases:
thereupon be entitled to receive and enter into the

a) If not executed and attested as required by law; That which is granted in the jurisdiction of the decedent’s b. To foreclose the mortgage judicially and prove the
domicile is termed the principal administration, while any de ciency as an ordinary claim against the estate;
b) If the testator was insane, or otherwise mentally incapable to
other administration is termed ancillary administration.
make a will, at the time of its execution; c. To rely on the mortgage exclusively, or other security
and foreclose the same at any time. Here no claim for
c) If it was executed under duress, or the in uence of fear, or Claims Against the Estate de ciency is allowed.
threats; 4
Rule 86
5. Where spouses were solidarily indebted to creditor and the
d) If it was procured by undue and improper pressure and
husband died, the creditor can opt to run after the surviving
in uence, on the part of the bene ciary, or of some other 1. Administration is for the purpose of liquidation of the
spouse since he is not compelled to le money claim with the
person for his bene t; estate and distribution of the residue among the heirs and
probate court. S6 R86 cannot prevail over Article 1216 of the
e) If the signature of the testator was procured by fraud or trick, legatees.
Civil Code. (Boston Equity Resources v. CA and Toledo 2013)
and Liquidation means the determination of all the assets of the
estate and payment of all debts and expenses. Statute of Non-Claims; Exceptions
f) If the testator acted by mistake or did not intend that the
instrument should be his will at the time of xing his signature 2. The purpose of presentation of claims against decedents of 1. The court shall state the time for the ling of claims against
thereto. the estate in the probate court is to protect the estate of the estate, which shall not be more than twelve (12) not less
deceased persons. That way, the executor or administrator will than six (6) months after the date of the rst publication of
Reprobate; E ects of Probate be able to examine each claim and determine whether it is a the notice.
1. Wills proved and allowed in a foreign country, according to the proper one which should be allowed. 2. Exceptions
laws of such country, may be allowed, led, and recorded by
3. Further, the primary object of the provisions requiring a. At any time before an order of distribution is entered,
the proper RTC in the Philippines.
presentation is to apprise the administrator and the probate on application of a creditor who has failed to le his
2. The general rule is that administration extends only to the court of the existence of the claim so that a proper and claim within the previously limited, the court may,
assets of the decedent found within the state or country timely arrangement may be made for its payment in full for cause shown and on such terms as are equitable,
where it was granted, so that an administrator appointed in or by pro rata portion in the due course of the administration, allow such claim to be led within a time not
one state or country has no power over the property in another inasmuch as upon the death of a person, his entire estate is exceeding one (1) month. (§2)
state or country. burdened with the payment of all his debts and no creditor
b. Creditor can set up his claim as a counterclaim in an
3. Ancillary Administration. When a person dies intestate shall enjoy any preference or priority; all of them shall share pro
action led by the executor or administrator (§5)
owning property in the country of his domicile as well as in rata in the liquidation of the estate of the deceased.
3. If the said claims are not led within the time limited in the
foreign country, administration shall be had in both countries. 4. Remedies available to enforce mortgage against the
notice, they are FOREVER BARRED.
decedent. —
4. What are the claims that must be filed?
a. To waive the mortgage and claim the entire debt
from the estate of the mortgagor;

made thereon which are not credited, and that there are no
a. All claims for money against the decedent, arising Sales, Mortgages, and Other Encumbrances of
o sets to the same, to the knowledge of the a ant.
from contract, express or implied, whether the same 6 Property of Decedent
be due, not due, or contingent; 4. If the claim is not due, or is contingent, when led, it must Rule 89
also be supported by a davits stating the particulars thereof.
b. All claims for funeral expenses;
If the estate is insolvent, the debts shall be paid in the following
c. Expense for the last sickness of the decedent; and Payment of the Debts of the Estate manner:
d. Judgment for money against the decedent.
5
Rule 88 1) Pay the debts in accordance with the preference of credits
established by the Civil Code (§7);
Claim of Executor or Administrator against the Estate If there are su cient properties, the debts shall be paid, thus:
1. If the executor or administrator has a claim against the estate 2) No creditor of any one class shall receive any payment until
1) All debts shall be paid in full within the time limited for the
he represents, he shall give notice thereof, in writing, to the those of the preceding class are paid (§8);
purpose (§1);
court, and the court shall appoint a special 3) If there are no assets su cient to pay the credits of any one
administrator, who shall, in the adjustment of such claim, 2) If the testator makes provision by his will, or designates the
class of creditors, each creditor within such class shall be paid a
have the same power and be subject to the same liability as the estate to be appropriated for the payment of debts they shall
dividend in proportion to his claim (§8);
general administrator or executor in the settlement of other be paid according to the provisions of the will, which must be
respected (§2); 4) Where the deceased was a nonresident, his estate in the
claims.
Philippines shall be disposed of in such a way that creditors in
2. The court may order the executor or administrator to pay to 3) If the estate designated in the will is not su cient, such part
the Philippines and elsewhere may receive an equal share in
the special administrator necessary funds to defend such of the estate as is not disposed of by will shall be appropriated
proportion to their respective credits (§9);
claim. for the purpose (§2);
5) The owner of claims duly proved against the estate of an
4) The personal estate not disposed of by will shall be rst
How to File a Claim insolvent residents shall be entitled to a just distribution of the
chargeable with payment of debts and expenses (§3);
estate in accordance with the preceding rules if the property of
1. A claim may be led by delivering the same with the necessary
5) If the personal estate is not su cient, or its sale would be such deceased person in another country is likewise equally
vouchers to the clerk of court and by serving a copy thereof on
detrimental to the participants of the estate, the real estate apportioned to the creditors residing in the Philippines and
the executor or administrator.
not disposed of by will shall be sold or encumbered for that other creditors, according to their respective claims (§10);
2. If the claim be founded on a bond, bill, note, or any other purpose (§3);
6) It must be noted that the payments of debts of the decedent
instrument, the original need not be led, but a copy thereof
6) Any de ciency shall be met by contributions from devisees, shall be made pursuant to the order of the probate court (§11).
with all indorsements shall be attached to the claim and led
legatees and heirs who have entered into possession of portions
therewith. On granting letters testamentary or administration the court shall allow
of the estate before debts and expenses have been paid (§6);
to the executor or administrator a time for disposing of the estate and
3. When the claim is due, it must be supported by a davit
7) Retain su cient estate to pay contingent claims when the paying the debts and legacies of the deceased, which shall not, in the
stating the amount justly due, that no payments have been
same becomes absolute (§4). rst instance, exceed one (1) year; but the court may, on application

of the executor or administrator and after hearing on such notice of the

he can exercise without leave of court. Liquidation
time and place therefor given to all persons interested as it shall direct,
extend the time as the circumstances of the estate require not 6.1. However, as regards the sale, mortgage or other 1. When order for distribution of residue made. — When
exceeding six (6) months for a single extension nor so that the whole encumbrances on the estate, the provisions of the
period allowed to the original executor or administrator shall exceed Rule 89 apply.
a. debts,
two (2) years (§15). 7. Here, respondents' claim of attorney's fees over the
b. funeral charges, and
recovered properties and the succeeding compromise
Jacinto v. Litonjua 20 Jan 2021 agreement cannot override Ramon's acts of administration c. expenses of administration,
over the decedents' estate. d. the allowance to the widow, and
1. The payment of respondents' attorney's fees can neither be
charged against nor collected from the Compromise See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 64 e. inheritance tax, if any, chargeable to the estate,
Agreement.
have been paid, the court, upon application, and after hearing
2. It was erroneous for the CA to set the amount of P154M upon notice, shall assign the residue of the estate to the
on which to deduct respondents claimed 25% attorney's Distribution and Partition persons entitled to the same.
fees.
7
Rule 90
If there is a controversy before the court as to who are the
3. Respondents did not present their contingency fee lawful heirs of the deceased person or as the distributive shares
Before there could be a distribution of the estate, the following two
agreement with Marilene before the RTC Baguio. to which each person is entitled under the law, the controversy
stages must be followed:
3.1. They also did not question the P100K award as shall be heard and decided as in ordinary cases.
1) Payment of obligations (liquidation of estate) — under the
attorney's fees. No distribution shall be allowed until the payment of the
Rules, the distribution of a decedent‘s assets may only be
3.2. Clearly, they are precluded from propounding a ordered under any of the following three circumstances: obligations above mentioned has been made or provided for,
claim of attorney's fees beyond that what they unless the distributees, or any of them, give a BOND, in a
a. when the inheritance tax, among others, is paid; sum to be xed by the court, conditioned for the payment of
prayed for, and that awarded by the RTC Baguio.
b. when a su cient bond is given to meet the payment said obligations within such time as the court directs.
4. Respondents have no direct and preferential claim over the
of the inheritance tax and all other obligations; and
subject properties or the value thereof. Project of Partition
c. when the payment of the said tax and all other
5. Legal costs for the recovery of the subject properties, 1. Project of partition is a document prepared by the
obligations has been provided for; and
including attorney's fees, are expenses of administration executor or administrator setting forth the manner in which
which respondents could have claimed against the estate of 2) Declaration of heirs — there must rst be a declaration of the estate of the deceased is to be distributed among the heirs.
the Spouses Jacinto or in a separate action. heirs to determine to whom the residue of the estate should be
2. If the estate is a testate estate, the project of partition must
distributed. A separate action for the declaration of heirs is not
6. The general rule is that an administrator has all the powers conform to the terms of the will; if intestate, the project of
proper.
necessary for administration of the estate and which powers

partition must be in accordance with the provisions of the

Appointment of Guardians 1. Any relative, friend, or other person on behalf of a resident
Civil Code.
minor or incompetent who has no parent or lawful guardian,
General Powers and Duties of Guardians or the minor himself if fourteen years of age or over, may
Remedy of an Heir Entitled to Residue but not Given his
Share petition the court having jurisdiction for the appointment of a
Termination of Guardianship
general guardian for the person or estate, or both, of such
1. The better practice for the heir who has not received his share
Guardianship is the power of protective authority given by law and minor or incompetent.
is to demand his share through a proper motion in the same
probate or administration proceedings, or for reopening of imposed on an individual who is free and in the enjoyment of his 2. Grounds to oppose petition for appointment of
the probate or administrative proceedings if it had already rights, over one whose weakness on account of his age or other guardian. —
been closed, and not through an independent action, which in rmity renders him unable to protect himself.
a. majority of the alleged minor,
would be tried by another court or judge. A guardian is a person lawfully invested with power and charged with b. competency of the alleged incompetent, or
2. It has been held that an order which determines the the duty of taking care of a person who for some peculiarity or status or
distributive share of the heirs of a deceased person is defect of age, understanding or self-control is considered incapable of c. the unsuitability of the person for whom letters are
appealable. If not appealed within the reglementary period, it administering his own a airs. prayed.
becomes nal.
NB: Publication is NOT required in a petition for appointment of
General Powers and Duties of Guardians
3. The Court allowed the continuation of a separate action to guardians. 3
Rule 96
annul the project of partition by a preterited heir, since the
estate proceedings have been closed and terminated for over Venue a) To have care and custody over the person of his ward, and/or
three years, and on the ground of lesion, preterition and fraud. 1
Rule 92 the management of his estate (§1);
Instances when Probate Court may Issue a Writ of b) To pay just debts (§2);
The petition shall be led
Execution
1. in the place where the incompetent resides or c) To bring or defend suits in behalf of the ward, and, with the
1. To satisfy the contributive shares of devisees, legatees and approval of the court, compound for debts and give discharges
heirs in possession of the decedent‘s assets; 2. if a non-resident, with the RTC of the place where the to the debtors (§3);
incompetent’s property or part thereof is situated, which has
2. To enforce payment of expenses of partition; and d) To manage the estate frugally and without waste, and apply
jurisdiction over the guardianship proceeding for such
3. To satisfy the costs when a person is cited for examination in incompetent. the income and pro ts to the comfortable and suitable
probate proceedings. maintenance of the ward and his family (§4);
Appointment of Guardians e) To sell or encumber the real estate of the ward upon being
B Guardianship 2 authorized to do so (§4);
Rule 93
Venue

of a detained person renders the petition for habeas

f) To join in an assent to a partition of real or personal estate held 2. Function. The function of the special proceeding of habeas
by the ward jointly or in common with others (§5). corpus is to inquire into the legality of one’s detention. corpus moot and academic, unless there are restraints
attached to his release which precludes freedom of action, in
3. Scope of Inquiry. In all petitions for habeas corpus, the court which case the Court can still inquire into the nature of his
Termination of Guardianship must inquire into every phase and aspect of the petitioner’s
4 involuntary restraint. Petitioner’s temporary release does not
Rule 97 detention from the moment petitioner was taken into custody render the petition for writ moot and academic.
up to the moment the court passes upon the merits of the
1. If it be found that the person is no longer incompetent, his petition and only after such scrutiny can the court satisfy itself 8. Who may grant the writ?
competency shall be adjudged and the guardianship shall cease. that the due process clause of the Constitution has been a. Supreme Court (Section 5, Article VIII, 1987
2. Grounds for Removal of Guardian. — satis ed. Constitution)
a. becomes insane or otherwise incapable of discharging 4. However, once the person detained is duly charged in court, i. Or any member thereof (Sec. 2, Rule 102)
his trust or unsuitable therefor, or he may no longer question his detention by a petition for the
ii. Enforceable anywhere in the Philippines, (id.)
issuance of a writ of habeas corpus.
b. has wasted or mismanaged the estate, or
iii. Returnable before the SC, or any member thereof, or
His remedy then is the quashal of the information
c. failed for thirty (30) days after it is due to render an before the CA or any member thereof, or the RTC or
and/or the warrant of arrest duly issued. The reason for
account or make a return. any Judge thereof. (id.)
the issuance of the writ even becomes more unavailing when
3. The marriage or voluntary emancipation of a minor ward the person detained les a bond for his temporary release. b. Court of Appeals (Section 9, B.P. 129)
terminates the guardianship of the person of the ward, and
5. Not a Mode of Discovery. Habeas corpus may NOT be used i. Or any member thereof, (Sec. 2, Rule 102)
shall enable the minor to administer his property as though he
as a means of obtaining evidence on the whereabouts of a ii. Enforceable anywhere in the Philippines, (id.)
were of age.
person, or as a means of nding out who has speci cally
iii. Returnable before the CA or any member thereof, or
abducted or caused the disappearance of a certain person.
C Writ of Habeas Corpus the RTC or any Judge thereof. (id.)
6. Vis-a-vis Certiorari. The writs of habeas corpus and certiorari
1. Writ of habeas corpus is a writ which has been esteemed c. Regional Trial Court (Section 21, B.P. 129)
may be ancillary to each other where necessary to give e ect
to the best and only su cient defense of personal freedom to the supervisory powers of the higher courts. i. Or any judge thereof (Sec. 2, Rule 102)
having for its object the speedy release by judicial decree of
A writ of habeas corpus reaches the body and the jurisdictional ii. Enforceable within its judicial region, (id.)
persons who are illegally
matters, but not the record. A writ of certiorari reaches the
iii. Returnable before the judge thereof, (id.)
a. restrained of their liberty, or record but not the body. Hence, a writ of habeas corpus may
be used with the writ of certiorari for the purpose of review. d. Sandiganbayan (Section 4 (c), par. 4, R.A. 8049, aab
b. detained from the control of those who are entitled to
R.A. 10660) in aid of its appellate jurisdiction.
their custody. 7. Release Renders Petition Moot; Exception. The general
rule is that the release, whether permanent or temporary,

9. Petition for writ of habeas corpus available in case of c) Once a person detained is duly charged in court, he may no Rule on Custody of Minors and Writ of Habeas Corpus
incommunicado detention. (Boratong v. De Lima 2020 En longer le a petition for habeas corpus. His remedy would be to in Relation to Custody of Minors
banc) quash the information or warrant.
1. The Family Court has exclusive original jurisdiction to hear
10. Petition for Habeas Corpus of convict based on release by When Disallowed/Discharge petitions for custody of minors and the issuance of the writ of
GCTA NOT proper if led with SC. Besides, the petitioner is habeas corpus in relation to custody of minors.
1. If it appears that the person alleged to be restrained of his
not entitled to request because convicted of a heinous crime.
liberty is 2. It should be clari ed that the writ is issued by the Family
(Reyes v. Bantag 2020)
a. in the custody of an o cer under process Court only in relation to custody of minors. An ordinary
11. Writ of Habeas Corpus NOT available to a case where a petition for habeas corpus should be led in the regular Court.
19-year-old lass joined Anakbayan. No illegal detention. b. issued by a court or judge or by virtue of a judgment
or order of a court of record, and 3. The issue of child custody may be tackled by the Family Court
Allegations of indoctrination or brainwashing were merely
without need of a separate petition for custody being led. “Any
speculative. (Lucena v. Elago 2020 En Banc) c. that the court or judge had jurisdiction to issue the person claiming custody” cover the following:
process, render the judgment, or make the order,
Peremptory Writ Preliminary Citation a) the unlawful deprivation of the custody of a minor;
the writ shall not be allowed; or or
Unconditionally commands the Requires the respondent to if the jurisdiction appears AFTER the writ is allowed, the b) which parent shall have the care and custody of a
respondent to have the body of appear and show cause why the person shall not be discharged by reason of any informality minor, when such parent is in the midst of nullity,
the detained person before the peremptory writ should not be or defect in the process, judgment, or order. annulment or legal separation proceedings.
court at a time and place therein granted.
2. Nor shall anything in this rule be held to authorize the 4. A motion to dismiss the petition is not allowed except on
speci ed.
discharge of a person charged with or convicted of an o ense the ground of lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter or over
When NOT Proper/Applicable in the Philippines, or of a person su ering imprisonment the parties. Any other ground that might warrant the dismissal
under lawful judgment. of the petition shall be raised as an a rmative defense in
Instances when the writ of habeas corpus is NOT proper are:
3. Restrictive custody of the members of the PNP facing the answer.
a) For asserting or vindicating denial of right to bail;
administrative charges may be placed under restrictive custody 5. Upon the ling of the veri ed answer or the expiration of the
b) For correcting errors in appreciation of facts or appreciation of under RA 6975 as amended by RA 8551. Therefore, period to le it, the court may order a social worker to make a
law — where the trial court had no jurisdiction over the cause, con nement is by virtue of the authority of the law. Habeas case study of the minor and the parties and to submit a
over the person of the accused, and to impose the penalty corpus will NOT lie. (Ampatuan v. Macaraig 2010) report and recommendation to the court at least three days
provided for by law, the mistake committed by the trial court,
before the scheduled pre-trial.
in the appreciation of the facts and/or in the appreciation of Writ of Habeas Corpus in Relation to Custody
the law cannot be corrected by habeas corpus; 6. Hold Departure Order — The minor child subject of the
1 of Minors
petition shall not be brought out of the country without prior
order from the court while the petition is pending. The court

motu propio or upon application under oath may issue ex parte

d) One has continuously used and been known since correction decree
a hold departure order addressed to the BID or the DOJ a copy
childhood by a Filipino name and was unaware of
of the hold departure order within 24 hours from its issuance Involves change of Involves rst name All cancellation or
alien parentage;
and through the fastest available means of transmittal. name only and nickname correction of entries
e) Change is based on a sincere desire to adopt a Filipino
7. In cases involving minors, the purpose of a petition for habeas
name to erase signs of former alienage, all in good Involves substantial Involves clerical or Substantial and
corpus is NOT limited to the production of the child before
faith and without prejudice to anybody; and changes typographical errors adversary if change
the court. The main purpose of the petition for habeas corpus
f) Surname causes embarrassment and there is no a ects the civil
is to determine who has the rightful custody over the
showing that the desired change of name was for a status, citizenship or
child. (Bagtas v. Santos)
fraudulent purpose, or that the change of name nationality of a
would prejudice public interest. party; Summary if
Change of Name involves mere clerical
D 5. See comparison between Rules 103 and 108 and the Clerical
Rule 103 errors.
Error Act or RA 9048.
1. A change of name is a special proceeding to establish the Order for hearing to Petition shall be Order shall also be
status of a person involving his relation with others, that is, his Rule 103 RA 9048 Rule 108 be published once a published at least published once a
legal position in, or with regard to, the rest of the community. week for three once a week for two week for three
led in the RTC led with the city or Veri ed petition led consecutive weeks in consecutive weeks in consecutive weeks in
2. It is proceeding in rem and as such, strict compliance with where the petitioner municipal civil in the RTC where a newspaper of a newspaper of a newspaper of
jurisdictional requirements, particularly on publication, is resides registrar, or with the corresponding general circulation in general circulation. general circulation in
essential in order to vest the court with jurisdiction therefor. consul general for Civil Registry is the province. Also to be posted in the province, and
3. A change of name granted by the court a ects only the citizens living abroad located. a conspicuous place court shall cause
petitioner. A separate petition for change of name must be for ten consecutive reasonable notice to
Civil Registrar is Civil Registrar is an
led by his wife and children. days. persons named in
NOT a party. indispensable party.
4. Grounds for change of name the petition.
Solicitor General to OSG must also be
a) Name is ridiculous, dishonorable or extremely be noti ed by service noti ed by service of Entry is correct but Entry is incorrect. Cancellation or
di cult to write or pronounce; of a copy of petition. a copy of the petitioner desires to correction of correct
petition. change the entry or incorrect entries
b) Change is a legal consequence of legitimation or
adoption; by the person by any person having By a person An appropriate An appropriate An appropriate
c) Change will avoid confusion; desiring to change direct and personal interested in any adversary proceeding administrative summary or adversary
his name interest in the acts, event, order or proceeding. proceeding depending
on e ects

Requires judicial Does not require Directed or changed d) legal separation; of the city or municipality where the record being sought to be
order judicial order. by the city or corrected or changed is kept, in accordance with the
e) judgments or annulments of marriage;
municipal civil administrative proceeding provided under R.A. 9048 in
registrar or consul f) judgments declaring marriages void from the beginning; relation to R.A. 10172.
general without g) legitimations; A person may only avail of the appropriate judicial remedies
judicial order
h) adoptions; under Rule 103 or Rule 108 in the aforementioned entries
Service of judgment Transmittal of Service of judgment after the petition in the administrative proceedings is led and
i) acknowledgments of natural children;
shall be upon the decision to civil shall be upon the later denied.
j) naturalizations;
civil register registrar general civil register 2. A person seeking
concerned concerned k) election, loss or recovery of citizenship;
1) to change his or her surname or
l) civil interdiction;
Appeal may be In case denied, Appeal may be 2) to change both his or her rst name and surname
availed of if petitioner may either availed of if m) judicial determination of liation;
may le a petition for change of name under Rule 103,
judgment or nal appeal the decision judgment or nal
n) voluntary emancipation of a minor; and provided that the jurisprudential grounds discussed in Republic
order rendered to the civil registrar order rendered
o) changes of name. v. Hernandez are present.
a ects substantial general or le a ects substantial
rights of person appropriate petition rights of person 3. A person seeking substantial cancellations or corrections of
⭐Rules 103 and 108, and RA 9048, as amended as
appealing. with proper court by appealing, to the entries in the civil registry may le a petition for cancellation or
distinguished in
petition for review RTC or to the CA. correction of entries under Rule 108.
under Rule 43. Bartolome v. Republic 2019 As discussed in Lee v. CA and more recently, in Republic v.
Cagandahan, R.A. 9048 "removed from the ambit of Rule 108
1. A person seeking
of the Rules of Court the correction of such errors. Rule 108
Cancellation or Correction of Entries in 1) to change his or her rst name, now applies only to substantial changes and corrections in
E the Civil Registry 2) to correct clerical or typographical errors in the civil entries in the civil register."
Rule 108 register,
Cancellation or correction of entries of: 3) to change/correct the day and/or month of his or her date
Republic v. Ontuca 2020
of birth, and/or
a) births;
4) to change/correct his or her sex, where it is patently clear WON there is a need to file two separate petitions, one with the LCR,
b) marriages; and with the court if what is sought to be corrected are both clerical
that there was a clerical or typographical error or mistake,
c) deaths; errors, as well as substantial ones.
must rst le a veri ed petition with the local civil registry o ce

1. Issuance of the Writ. Upon the ling of the petition, the Even if a person sought to be accountable or responsible in an
NO. To require petitioner to le a new petition with the local civil
court, justice or judge shall immediately order the issuance of amparo petition is a private individual or entity, the
registrar and start the process all over again would not be in keeping
the writ if on its face it ought to issue. government involvement remains an indispensable
with the purpose of RA No. 9048, that is, to give people an option
element. There must be state participation. (Navia v.
to have the erroneous entries in their civil records corrected through The writ shall set the date and time for summary hearing of
Pardico 2012 En Banc)
an administrative proceeding that is less expensive and more the petition which shall not be later than seven (7) days from
expeditious. the date of its issuance. 5. Inapplicable
Consequently, it will be more prudent and judicious to allow the 2. Nature of Amparo as a Remedy. It is preventive in that it a. To protect property or commercial rights; (Canlas v.
ling of a single petition under Rule 108, rather than two breaks the expectation of impunity in the commission of these NAPICO)
separate petitions before the RTC and the local civil registrar. This o enses, and it is curative in that it facilitates the subsequent
b. To protect right to travel; (Reyes v. Gonzales)
will avoid multiplicity of suits and further litigation between the punishment of perpetrators by inevitably leading to
parties, which is o ensive to the orderly administration of justice. subsequent investigation and action (Rodriguez v. Arroyo c. To obtain custody of minor child. (Caram v. Segui
2013 En Banc). 2014 En Banc)
If the indispensable or interested party is not impleaded, 6. Omnibus Waiver Rule — Defenses Not Pleaded Deemed
3. Extralegal killings and enforced disappearance.
will it make the proceedings void? The publication of the order Waived — All defenses shall be raised in the return, otherwise,
Committed without due process of law, i.e., without legal
of hearing under Section 4 of Rule 108 cured the failure to they shall be deemed waived.
safeguards or judicial proceedings.
implead an indispensable party. Thus, publication will cure the
defect (Republic v. Kho). Enforced disappearance has been de ned by the Court as 7. Petitioner is exempted to pay docket and other lawful fees.
the 8. Contents of verified petition: xxxx
F Clerical Error Law a) arrest, detention, abduction or any other form of 9. Contents of return: Within 72 hours after service of the
For RA 9048, the grounds are: deprivation of liberty writ, respondent shall le a veri ed written return together
b) by agents of the State or by persons or groups of with the supporting a davits.
a) First name or nickname is found to be ridiculous, tainted with
dishonor or extremely di cult to write or pronounce; persons acting with the authorization, support or 10. Effects of failure to file return. The court, justice or judge
acquiescence of the State, shall proceed to hear the petition ex parte.
b) The rst name or nickname has been habitually and
continuous used by petitioner publicly known by that rst c) followed by a refusal to acknowledge the deprivation 11. Procedure for hearing. The hearing on the petition shall be
name or nickname in the community; of liberty or by concealment of the fate or summary. However the court, justice or judge may call for a
whereabouts of the disappeared person, which place preliminary conference to simplify the issues and determine
c) Change will avoid confusion. such a person outside the protection of the law the possibility of obtaining stipulations and admissions from
(Mamba v. Bueno 2017 En Banc). the parties. The hearing shall be from day to day until
G Writ of Amparo completed and given the same priority as petitions for habeas
4. NB: Writ of Amparo is NOT the proper remedy if there is
NO government participation. corpus.

12. Interim reliefs available before final judgment: In other words, it is the reduction of the rules to the most basic a davits submitted “with the attendant circumstances
test of reason — i.e., to the relevance of the evidence to the detailed”.
a) Temporary Protection Order — protected in a
issue at hand and its consistency with all other pieces of
government agency of by an accredited person or private 3) After evaluation, the judge has the option to issue the Writ
adduced evidence. Thus, even hearsay evidence can be
institution capable of keeping and securing their safety; of Amparo or immediately dismiss the case.
admitted if it satis es this basic minimum test (Razon, Jr. v.
b) Inspection Order — with a lifetime of 5 days which may Tagitis) a) Dismissal is proper if the petition and the
be extended, may be opposed on the ground of national supporting a davits do not show that the
16. Privilege of writ granted where estranged wife of deceased
security or privileged information, allows entry into and petitioner's right to life, liberty or security is under
alleged NPA and her family were under constant police
inspect, measure, survey or photograph the property; threat or the acts complained of are not unlawful.
surveillance and monitoring. Writ primarily meant to address
c) Production Order — to require respondents to produce concerns such as, but not limited to, extrajudicial killings and b) On the other hand, the issuance of the writ itself
and permit inspection, copying or photographing of enforced disappearances, or threat thereof. (Sanchez v. sets in motion presumptive judicial protection for
documents, papers, books, accounts, letters, photographs, Darroca 2019 En Banc) the petitioner.
objects or tangible things that contain evidence.
17. Privilege of Writ granted to a person “invited” to Mayor’s place 1. The court compels the respondents to appear
d) Witness Protection Order — the court may refer the and allegedly tortured. Grant of petition proper even where before a court of law to show whether the
witnessed to the DOJ. petitioner released since writ serves both curative and grounds for more permanent protection and
preventive roles. The writ covers violation of the right to interim reliefs are necessary.
13. Effect of filing criminal action. A criminal action rst led
excludes the ling of the writ; relief shall be by motion in the security. (Mamba v. Bueno 2017 En Banc) 2. The respondents are required to le a Return
criminal case. A criminal case led subsequently shall be 18. Court may motu proprio dismiss a petition for writ of after the issuance of the writ through the clerk
consolidated with the petition for the writ of amparo. amparo, regardless of the ling of a motion to dismiss, if it is of court. The Return serves as the responsive
14. Quantum of proof. By substantial evidence. Private clear that the case falls outside the purview of the Rules on the pleading to the petition. Unlike an Answer,
Writ of Amparo. (Sps Santiago v. Tulfo 2015) the Return has other purposes aside from
respondent to prove ordinary diligence was observed in the
identifying the issues in the case. Respondents
performance of duty. Public o cial/employee respondent to
prove extraordinary diligence was observed, and cannot invoke De Lima v. Gatdula 2013 En Banc⭐ are also required to detail the actions they had
taken to determine the fate or whereabouts of
the presumption that o cial duty has been regularly
Due to the delicate and urgent nature of these controversies, the the aggrieved party.
performed to evade responsibility or liability.
procedure was devised to a ord swift but decisive relief.
If the respondents are public o cials or
15. What is standard of totality of evidence? It is the
1) It is initiated through a petition to be led in the RTC, employees, they are also required to state the
consideration of all the pieces of evidence adduced in their
Sandiganbayan, the CA, or the SC. actions they had taken.
totality, and to consider any evidence otherwise inadmissible
under our usual rules to be admissible if it is consistent with 2) The judge or justice then makes an “immediate” 4) There will be a summary hearing only after the Return is
the admissible evidence adduced. evaluation of the facts as alleged in the petition and the led to determine the merits of the petition and whether

interim reliefs are warranted. If the Return is not led, the from the protection of the law for a prolonged period of
NO. There was no substantial evidence exists to prove Morada's
hearing will be done ex parte. time as he had been released already.
claim.
5) After the hearing, the court will render the judgment See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 18
1. The elements constituting enforced disappearance as
within ten (10) days from the time the petition is submitted
de ned under RA 9851 are as follows:
for decision.
1.1. that there be an arrest, detention, abduction or any
a) If the allegations are proven with substantial
form of deprivation of liberty;
H Writ of Habeas Data
evidence, the court shall grant the privilege of the
writ and such reliefs as may be proper and 1.2. that it be carried out by, or with the authorization, 1. Where is the venue: If led in the RTC:
appropriate. It is this judgment that could be support or acquiescence of, the State or a political a) in the place where the petitioner resides;
subject to appeal to the Supreme Court via Rule organization;
b) in the place where the respondents reside;
45. 1.3. that it be followed by the State or political
c) in the place where the data or information is gathered,
6) After the measures have served their purpose, the judgment organization's refusal to acknowledge or give
collected or stored.
will be satis ed. information on the fate or whereabouts of the
person subject of the amparo petition; and At the option of the petitioner.
The privilege of the Writ of Amparo should be distinguished
from the actual order called the Writ of Amparo. The privilege 1.4. that the intention for such refusal is to remove The petition may also be led with the SC or the CA or the
includes availment of the entire procedure outlined in A.M. No. subject person from the protection of the law for a Sandiganbayan when the action concerns public data files
07-9-12-SC, the Rule on the Writ of Amparo. prolonged period of time. of government offices.
2. The RTC is correct that the third and fourth elements are 2. Indigent petitioner is exempted from paying docket and
sorely lacking. other lawful fees.
Morada v. Rias 14 Feb 2022
3. It was su ciently established by the respondents that he 3. Contents of verified petition: xxxx
Doctrinal Rule was already released from their custody as evidenced by the 4. Contents of return: xxxx
barangay blotter, signed by Johnson himself. Such evidence
For the issuance of the writ of amparo, it is not sufficient that a A general denial of the allegations in the petition is not
strongly militate against Morada's claim of enforced
person's life is endangered. It is not even sufficient to allege and prove allowed.
disappearance.
that a person has disappeared.
4. There was no refusal to give information on the 5. Effects of failure to file return: The court, justice or judge
It has to be shown by the required quantum of proof that the shall proceed to hear the petition ex parte, granting the
whereabouts of Johnson evidenced by Morada being
disappearance was carried out by, or with the authorization, support or petitioner such relief as the petition may warrant unless the
immediately informed by Rolly that Johnson was captured
acquiescence of the government or a political organization, and that court in its discretion requires petitioner to submit evidence.
but was also released from detention the same day.
there is a refusal to acknowledge the same or to give information on
the fate or whereabouts of the missing persons. 5. Accordingly, there was no intention to remove Johnson

6. Procedure for hearing: The hearing on the petition shall be b. Decisional — The right of individuals to make Writ of Kalikasan
summary. However, the court, justice or judge may call for a certain kinds of fundamental choices with respect to
preliminary conference to simplify the issues and determine their personal and reproductive autonomy; and
the possibility of obtaining stipulations and admissions from c. ✔ Informational — The right of individuals to
the parties.
control information about themselves. (Writ of
7. Effect of filing criminal action: A criminal action rst led Habeas Data)
excludes the ling of the writ; relief shall be by motion in the
11. It seeks to protect a person's right to control
criminal case; A criminal case led subsequently shall be
information regarding oneself, particularly in instances in
consolidated with the petition for the writ of habeas data.
which such information is being collected through unlawful
8. Quantum of proof: The court shall render judgment within means in order to achieve unlawful ends.
10 days from the time the petition is submitted for decision.
It is NOT only con ned to cases of extralegal killings and
If the allegations are proven by substantial evidence, the enforced disappearances. (Vivares v. STC 2014)
court shall enjoin the act complained of, or the deletion,
destruction, or recti cation of the erroneous data or 12. NB: Availment of the writ requires the existence of a NEXUS
information and grant other reliefs as may be just and between the right to privacy on the one hand, and the right to
equitable; otherwise the privilege shall be denied. life, liberty or security on the other.
These Rules govern the procedure in civil, criminal and special civil
9. Instances When Petition be Heard in Chambers. A 13. Habeas Data not available to compel DOJ to produce
actions involving enforcement or violations of environmental
hearing in chambers may be conducted where the respondent documents to justify Boratong’s transfer from NBP to NBP
and other related laws, rules and regulations.
invokes the defense extension facility. No expectation of privacy of a convict.
(Boratong v. De Lima 2020 En Banc)
a. that the release of the data or information in question Temporary Environmental Protection Order
14. Petition for Writ of Habeas Data against President Duterte 1
shall compromise national security or state secrets, or (TEPO)
should be dismissed because of presidential immunity. (De
b. when the data or information cannot be divulged to Lima v. Duterte 2019 En Banc) If it appears from the veri ed complaint with a prayer for the
the public due to its nature or privileged character. issuance of an Environmental Protection Order (EPO) that
10. Three Strands of Right to Privacy Rules of Procedure on Environmental a. the matter is of extreme urgency and
I
a. Locational or Situational — Refers to the privacy Cases
b. the applicant will su er grave injustice and irreparable
that is felt in physical space, such as that which may be injury,
Temporary Environmental Protection Order (TEPO)
violated by trespass and unwarranted search and
the executive judge of the multiple-sala court before ra e or the
seizure; (Sec 2 Art III 1987 Constitution) Writ of Continuing Mandamus
presiding judge of a single-sala court as the case may be, may issue

ex parte a TEPO e ective for only seventy-two (72) hours from

The petition shall be resolved without delay within sixty in connection with the prejudice the inhabitants
date of the receipt of the TEPO by the party or person enjoined.
(60) days from the date of the submission of the petition enforcement or in two or more cities or
Within said period, the court where the case is assigned, shall for resolution. violation of provinces.
conduct a summary hearing to determine whether the TEPO environmental law or
5. Judgment; periodic reports. If warranted, the court shall
may be extended until the termination of the case. unlawful exclusion of
i. grant the privilege of the writ of continuing another from the use or
The applicant shall be exempted from the posting of a bond for
mandamus requiring respondent to perform an act or enjoyment of such right.
the issuance of a TEPO.
series of acts until the judgment is fully satis ed and
Any on behalf of persons
2 Writ of Continuing Mandamus ii. to grant such other reliefs as may be warranted resulting
Who may Only the aggrieved whose right to a balanced
from the wrongful or illegal acts of the respondent.
file persons and healthful ecology is
1. Definition. It is a writ issued by a court in an
The court shall require the respondent to submit violated.
environmental case directing any agency or instrumentality
periodic reports detailing the progress and execution of
of the government or o cer thereof to perform an act or series Government and its
the judgment.. Respondent May be a private entity
of acts decreed by nal judgment which shall remain e ective o cers
until judgment is fully satis ed. The petitioner may submit its comments or observations
2. Action of court. The court in which the petition is led may

on the execution of the judgment. Docket fees ✘ ✘
6. Return of writ. Upon full satisfaction of the judgment, a
i. issue such orders to expedite the proceedings, and Venue RTC, CA, SC CA or SC
nal return of the writ shall be made to the court by the
ii. it may also grant a TEPO for the preservation of the respondent. Damages
rights of the parties pending such proceedings.
If the court nds that the judgment has been fully for Allows payment of
If the matter is of extreme urgency and the applicant will Personal damages if with malice
✘
implemented, the satisfaction of judgment shall be entered in
su er grave injustice and irreparable injury. the court docket. Injury
3. Order to comment. If the petition is su cient in form and Continuing Discovery
substance, the court shall issue the writ and require the Writ of
Mandamus
Kalikasan
measures
✘ ✔
respondent to comment on the petition within ten (10)
days from receipt of a copy thereof. Unlawful neglect in Unlawful act or omission
the performance of an of any person or entity
4. Proceedings after comment filed. The court may Subject 3 Writ of Kalikasan
act which the law involving environmental
matter
i. hear the case which shall be summary in nature or enjoins as a duty from damage of such 1. Definition. — The writ is categorized as a special civil action
an o ce, trust or station magnitude as to and was, thus, conceptualized as an extraordinary remedy,
ii. require the parties to submit memoranda.
which aims to provide judicial relief from threatened or actual

violation of the constitutional right to a balanced and

2. Requisites. The writ is The clerk of court shall forthwith issue the writ under
healthful ecology of a magnitude or degree of damage that
the seal of the court including the issuance of a cease and
transcends political and territorial boundaries. (Paje v. i. a remedy available to a
desist order and other temporary reliefs e ective until
Casiño 2015 En Banc) 1. natural or further order.
Distinguished from Rule 65 2. juridical person, 4. Return of respondent. — Within a non-extendible
Rule 65 Writ of Kalikasan 3. entity authorized by law, period of ten (10) days after service of the writ, the
4. people’s organization, respondent shall le a VERIFIED return which shall contain
Any form of abuse or
ALL DEFENSES.
Subject discretion constituting an 5. NGO, or
GADALEJ
matter unlawful act or omission 5. Effect of failure to file return. In case the respondent fails
6. any public interest group accredited by or registered to le a return, the court shall proceed to hear the petition ex
involving the environment.
with any government agency, parte.
Any on behalf of persons ii. on behalf of persons whose constitutional right to a
Who may Only the aggrieved 6. Hearing. Upon receipt of the return of the respondent, the
whose right to a balanced and balanced and healthful ecology is
file persons court may call a preliminary conference to
healthful ecology is violated.
1. violated, or
i. simplify the issues,
Government and 2. threatened with violation
Respondent May be a private entity ii. determine the possibility of obtaining stipulations or
its o cers
iii. by an unlawful act or omission of a admissions from the parties, and
Docket fees Not exempt Exempt 1. public o cial or employee, or iii. set the petition for hearing.
Venue RTC, CA, SC CA or SC 2. private individual or entity, The hearing including the preliminary conference shall not
extend beyond sixty (60) days and shall be given the same
Exhaustion iv. involving environmental damage of such magnitude as to
priority as petitions for the writs of habeas corpus, amparo
of admin Generally applies Does not apply prejudice the life, health or property of inhabitants in
and habeas data.
remedies two or more cities or provinces.
7. Judgment. — Within sixty (60) days from the time the
3. Issuance of writ. Within three (3) days from the date of
60 days from petition is submitted for decision, the court shall render
Period to ling of the petition, if the petition is su cient in form and
notice of No limitation judgment granting or denying the privilege of the writ of
file substance, the court shall give an order:
judgment kalikasan.
i. issuing the writ; and
Discovery The reliefs that may be granted under the writ are the
Not available Available ii. requiring the respondent to le a veri ed return as following:
measures

i. Directing respondent to permanently cease and desist Prosecution of Civil Action Criminal jurisdiction; Concept and Requisites
1
from committing acts or neglecting the performance of a for Exercise
duty in violation of environmental laws resulting in Preliminary Investigation
environmental destruction or damage; 1. Distinguish jurisdiction over subject matter from
Arrest jurisdiction over person of the accused
ii. Directing the respondent to protect, preserve,
rehabilitate or restore the environment; Bail Subject Matter Person of the Accused
iii. Directing the respondent to monitor strict compliance Arraignment and Plea Conferred by law The person charged must have
with the decision and orders of the court;
been brought to court
iv. Directing the respondent to make periodic reports on Motion to Quash
the execution of the nal judgment; and The authority to hear and try a The authority of the court over
Pre-Trial particular o ense and impose the person charged.
v. Such other reliefs which relate to the right of the people to
the punishment for it
a balanced and healthful ecology or to the protection, Trial
preservation, rehabilitation or restoration of the It CANNOT be conferred upon As a rule, one who seeks an
environment, except the award of damages to
Judgment
the court by the accused, express a rmative relief, such as
individual petitioners. waiver or otherwise. seeking for the dismissal of the
Motion for New Trial or Reconsideration
8. Appeal. — Within fteen (15) days from the date of notice criminal case, is deemed to have
of the adverse judgment or denial of motion for Appeal submitted to the jurisdiction of
the court.
reconsideration, any party may appeal to the Supreme Court
Search and Seizure
under Rule 45. The appeal may raise questions of fact. 2. Requisites for exercise of criminal jurisdiction
9. Institution of separate actions. — The ling of a petition Provisional Remedies in Criminal Cases
a. Jurisdiction over the SUBJECT MATTER;
for the issuance of the writ of kalikasan shall not preclude
The Rule on Cybercrime Warrants b. Jurisdiction over the TERRITORY. — Venue is
the ling of separate civil, criminal or administrative actions.
jurisdictional. A court is bereft of jurisdiction to try an
A General Concepts o ense committed outside its limited territory.
Criminal Procedure
VII Criminal jurisdiction; Concept and Requisites for Exercise c. Jurisdiction over the PERSON OF THE
The Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure
ACCUSED.
When Injunction May be Filed
General Concepts i. The authority of the court over the person charged. It
requires that the person charged with the o ense
Prosecution of O enses must have been brought into its forum for trial,

1) forcibly by warrant of arrest or i) Violations of tra c laws, rules and regulations; c. Family Court — Exclusive original jurisdiction to
hear and decide criminal cases where, at the time of the
2) upon his voluntary submission to the court. ii) Violations of the rental law;
commission of the o ense, one or more of
i) Seeking to dismiss the case; iii) Violations of municipal or city ordinances;
i. accused is below eighteen (18) years of age but not
ii) Appears for arraignment; iv) Violations of BP 22; and less than nine (9) years of age; or
iii) Actively participates in trial and presents v) All other criminal cases where the penalty ii. the victim is a minor.
evidence for the defense; prescribed by law for the o ense charged is
d. Sandiganbayan
imprisonment NOT exceeding one (1) year, or a
iv) Filing a motion for determination of
ne NOT exceeding P50K, or both, regardless of
probable cause. Procedure to Determine Whether SB has Jurisdiction
other imposable penalties, accessory or otherwise,
ii. NOT ALL acts, however, seeking a rmative relief or of the civil liability arising therefrom. 1) Offense — WON the crime charged is
would constitute voluntary appearance or
vi) In o enses involving damage to property through a) among the violations of RA No. 3019, RA No.
submission.
criminal negligence where the imposable ne 1379, and Chapter II, Section 2, Title VII, Book II
1) Making a special appearance in court by way of does not exceed P150K. (as amended by the Rules of the RPC, Anti-Plunder Law, Anti-Money
a motion to quash to question the jurisdiction on Expedited Procedures in the First Level Courts) Laundering Law; or
of the court over the person of the accused is
ii. Special jurisdiction to decide application for bail in b) pursuant to and in connection with EO Nos. 1, 2,
NOT a voluntary appearance.
the absence of all RTC judges in a province or city. 14 and 14-A s. 1986; or
2) Accused les a motion to quash the warrant of
b. Regional Trial Courts c) Other o enses or felonies whether simple or
arrest because it is the very legality of the court
complexed with other crimes committed by the
process forcing the submission of the person of i. Exclusive original jurisdiction in ALL criminal cases
public o cials and employees mentioned in (a) in
the accused that is the very issue. not within the exclusive jurisdiction of any court,
relation to their office, which means that
tribunal or body.
3. Jurisdiction of criminal courts
i) The o ce must be a constituent element
ii. Jurisdiction under speci c laws:
a. Municipal Courts of the crime, OR
1) Art 360 of the RPC on written defamation;
i. Exclusive original jurisdiction over ii) There is an intimate connection between
2) Violation of RA 9165; the o ce and the o ense.
1) All o enses punishable with imprisonment NOT
exceeding six (6) years. 3) Violation of Intellectual Property Rights; If YES, proceed to next step; if NO = Regular courts —
2) O enses involving damage to property through 4) Money laundering cases except where a public look at the penalty.
criminal negligence; o cer is involved. 2) Actor or Offender — WON the accused is
3) Summary Procedure;

authority to bring together the parties actually residing in

jurisdiction over the person of the defendant, whether or
a) An o cial of the executive branch occupying the the same city or municipality for amicable settlement of all
not other grounds for dismissal are included;
positions of regional director and higher, otherwise disputes except:
classi ed as SG ’27’ and higher; OR b. in criminal cases, motions to quash a complaint on the
i. O enses punishable by imprisonment exceeding one
ground of lack of jurisdiction over the person of the
b) Among those speci cally enumerated in Sec 4(a)(1) (1) year or a ne exceeding Php5K;
accused; and
of PD 1606, as amended, regardless of SG; OR
ii. O enses where there is no private o ended party.
c. motions to quash a warrant of arrest.
c) A national and local o cial classi ed as SG ’27’
and higher; OR 1. The venue of libel cases where the complainant is a private However, if a person invoking the special jurisdiction of the
individual is limited to only either of two places, namely: court applies for bail, he must rst submit himself to the
d) A private individual charged as co-principal,
custody of the law. (Miranda v. Tuliao)
accomplice or accessory with the public o cers or a. where the complainant actually resides at the time of the
employees. commission of the o ense; or 3. In vesting in family courts EOJ over criminal cases involving
minors, the law but seeks to protect their welfare and best
If YES, proceed to next step; b. where the alleged defamatory article was printed and first
interests. For this reason, when the need for such protection is
if NO = Regular courts — if punishable by imprisonment published — which does NOT include first access.
not compromised, the Court is able to relax the rule, such as
of more than 6 years = RTC; otherwise, MTC. Appealable (Bonifacio v. RTC Makati 2010)
when the minor victims are dead. (People v. Dela
to Sandiganbayan. 2. Custody of the law is required before the court can act upon Torre-Yadao 2012 En Banc)
3) Damages — WON there was damage to the Republic the application for bail, but is NOT required for the
4. The RTC has EXCLUSIVE original jurisdiction over
exceeding P1M. (as per RA 10660) adjudication of other reliefs sought by the defendant where the
drug-related cases, regardless of whether the accused is a
mere application therefor constitutes a waiver of the defense of
If YES, Sandiganbayan; high-ranking o cial or whether the o ense is committed in
lack of jurisdiction over the person of the accused. (David v.
relation to o ce. (De Lima v. Guerrero 2017 En Banc)
if NO = RTC; Appealable to Sandiganbayan. Agbay 2015)
e. Court of Tax Appeals Custody of the law is accomplished either by arrest or voluntary
surrender, while jurisdiction over the person of the accused is 2 When Injunction May be Filed
i. Exclusive original jurisdiction over all criminal acquired upon his arrest or voluntary appearance.
o enses arising from violations of the NIRC or GR: Injunction will NOT be granted to restrain criminal
Tari and Customs Code and other laws GR: One who seeks a rmative relief is deemed to have
prosecution since public interest requires that criminal
administered by the BIR or BOC where the principal submitted to the jurisdiction of the court.
acts be immediately investigated and prosecuted for the
amount of taxes and fees, exclusive of charges and EXC: In the case of pleadings whose prayer is precisely for the protection of society.
penalties, claimed is at least P1M avoidance of the jurisdiction of the court, which only leads
EXC:
f. Lupon Tagapamayapa and Katarungang to a special appearance. These pleadings are:
a. A ord adequate protection to the constitutional rights
Pambarangay — The lupon of each barangay shall have a. in civil cases, motions to dismiss on the ground of lack of
of the accused;

b. Necessary for the orderly administration of justice or to o cer for the purpose of conducting the requisite d. The running of the period of prescription is interrupted
avoid oppression or multiplicity of actions; preliminary investigation. with the ling of the action even if the court in which the
b) For all other o enses, by ling action was led is without jurisdiction.
c. Pre-judicial question which is subjudice;
i) the complaint or information directly with 2. Who may file them
d. Acts of the o cer are without or in excess of authority;
the MTC, or
A complaint is a sworn written statement charging a person
e. Prosecution is under an invalid law, ordinance or
ii) the complaint with the o ce of the with an o ense, subscribed by the
regulation;
prosecutor.
1. offended party,
f. Double jeopardy is clearly apparent; In Manila and other chartered cities, the complaint
2. any peace o cer, or
g. Court has no jurisdiction over the o ense; shall be led with the o ce of the prosecutor unless
otherwise provided in their charters. 3. other public o cer charged with the enforcement of the
h. Persecution rather than prosecution; law violated.
The institution of the criminal action shall interrupt the
i. Charges are manifestly false and motivated by the lust running period of prescription of the o ense charged unless An information is an accusation in writing charging a person
for vengeance; otherwise provided in special laws. with an o ense, subscribed by the prosecutor and led with the
court.
j. Clearly no prima facie case and a motion to quash on
a. As a rule, there is NO direct ling of an information
that ground has been denied; and
or complaint with the RTC since its jurisdiction covers
1. An Information falls squarely within the ambit of BM No.
k. Preliminary injunction has been issued by the SC. o enses which require preliminary investigation. This is
1922, in relation to BM 850 which REQUIRES practicing
quali ed by the last sentence of Sec 6 of Rule 112:
GR: Mandamus will NOT lie to compel criminal prosecution members of the bar to INDICATE in all pleadings, the number
since such is a matter of discretion. After the filing of the complaint or information in court and date of issue of their MCLE Certi cate of Compliance or
without a preliminary investigation, the accused may Certi cate of Exemption.
EXC: If the prosecutor nds the accused to be so liable, it
within five (5) days from the time he learns of its filing,
becomes his inescapable duty to charge him therewith and The rule under the amendatory Resolution, dated January 14,
ask for a preliminary investigation with the same right to
to prosecute him for the same. The rule loses its 2014 failure will subject the lawyer to the prescribed ne and/or
adduce evidence in his defense.
discretionary character and becomes mandatory. disciplinary action, and will no longer cause for the dismissal
b. In cases involving special laws, the case of Zaldivia is not of the case. (People v. Arrojado 2015)
Prosecution of O enses controlling. In said cases, the institution of proceedings
2. Villareal v. Aliga upheld the doctrine that it is only the OSG, as
B for preliminary investigation against the accused
Rule 110 representative of the State, which may question the acquittal of
interrupts the period of prescription.
the accused via a R65 petition. (Chiok v. People 2015)
1. Criminal actions, how instituted c. Zaldivia and Jadewell Parking Systems 2013 Leonen,
3. Extinction of criminal liability for rape may be had only
J involve ordinances wherein the prevailing rule is that
a) For o enses where a preliminary investigation is through pardon and marriage — which must occur prior to
the period of prescription is interrupted only upon ling
required, by ling the complaint with the proper the institution of the criminal action.
of information in court.

defense since he is presumed to have no independent cured by amendment, courts must deny the motion to
An a davit of desistance executed merely as an afterthought has knowledge of the facts that constituted the o ense. quash and order the prosecution to le an amended
no persuasive e ect. (People v. Dela Cerna) Information. Generally, a defect pertaining to the
b. An information validly charges an o ense when the
4. The penalty of ne and the imposition of subsidiary failure of an Information to charge facts constituting
material facts alleged in the complaint or information shall
imprisonment in case of nonpayment thereof pertain to the an o ense is one that may be corrected by an
establish the essential elements of the o ense charged.
criminal aspect of the case. amendment.
c. Objections relating to the form or insu ciency of the
Consequently, the imposition of ne as penalty may be j. An Information need only state the ultimate facts
information must be made prior to arraignment either
questioned only by the People through the OSG. (People v. constituting the o ense and not the ner details of why
through a bill of particulars or motion to quash, and not
Alapan 2018) and how the crime was committed. (People v.
for the rst time on appeal.
Sandiganbayan and Castillo, et al 2015)
3. Sufficiency of complaint or information d. Failure to pursue either remedy constitutes a waiver to
k. The indictment merely states that psychological pain and
objections to any formal defect.
A complaint or information is su cient if it states physical injuries were in icted on the victim. There is no
e. The nature of the o ense is determined NOT from allegation that the purported acts were employed as a
a) the name of the accused; (§7)
the caption or the preamble of the information, or from prerequisite for admission or entry into the
b) the designation of the o ense given by the statute; (§8) the speci cation of the provision of law alleged to have organization. Failure to aver this crucial ingredient
c) the acts or omissions complained of as constituting the been violated, which are mere conclusions of law, but by would prevent the successful prosecution of the criminal
o ense; the actual recital of the facts in the complaint or responsibility of the accused, either as principal or as
Including its qualifying and aggravating
information. accomplice, for the crime of hazing. (People v. Bayabos
circumstances (§9) f. Aggravating circumstances, whether qualifying or generic, 2015)
d) the name of the o ended party; (§12) must be alleged in the information before they can be l. In cases of falsi cation of private documents, the venue is
considered by the court. (People v. Torrecampo, People the place where the document is actually falsi ed, to the
e) the approximate date of the commission of the
o ense; (§11) and
v. Lapore 2015, People v. Canceran 2015) prejudice of or with the intent to prejudice a third person,
g. It is not necessary to state in the complaint or regardless whether or not the falsi ed document is put to
f) the place where the o ense was committed. (§10)
information the precise date the o ense was committed the improper or illegal use for which it was intended.
When an o ense is committed by more than one person, all of (Navaja v. De Castro 2015)
except when it is a material ingredient of the o ense.
them shall be included in the complaint or information.
h. In o enses against property, if the subject matter of the People v. ZZZ 28 Apr 2021
a. The test for su ciency is whether the crime is described in offense is specific and identifiable, an error in the
intelligible terms with such particularity as to apprise the designation of the o ended party is immaterial. 1. The date of commission is not even an element of the crime
accused, with reasonable certainty, of the o ense charged of rape which elements are:
i. When a motion to quash is led challenging the validity
to enable the accused to suitably prepare for his
and su ciency of an Information, and the defect may be 1.1. sexual congress;

a. Where a single act violates two or more entirely distinct

1.2. with a woman; 5.2. These discrepancies as to minor matters, irrelevant
and unrelated provisions of law, the prosecution of the
to the elements of the crime, cannot, thus, be
1.3. done by force and without consent; accused for more than one o ense in separate
considered a ground for acquittal.
1.4. the victim is under [18] years of age at the time of informations is justi ed.
6. As to ZZZ allegedly unable to have an erection due to old
the rape; b. However, if a single penalty is imposed, such as when
age, he did not present documentary evidence such as a
1.5. the o ender is a parent (whether legitimate, various o enses can be complexed or compounded as per
medical certi cate attesting to the physical impossibility of
illegitimate or adopted) of the victim. Art 48 of the RPC, then a single information su ces.
his having an erection and incapacity of raping AAA.
This also includes delito continuado.
2. It cannot be considered that appellant was deprived of his
See Criminal Law Case Digest No. 30 c. Each incident of sexual intercourse and lascivious act is a
constitutional right to be informed of the nature and cause
of the accusation against him. separate and distinct o ense that must be subject of
separate informations.
3. Objections as to the form of the complaint or information People v. De Guzman 27 Nov 2019
cannot be made for the rst time on appeal. If appellant d. Where a person was arrested for illegal possession of
found the Information insu cient, he should have moved 1. People v. Begino held that the qualifying circumstances multiple rearms, each rearm should be the subject of a
before arraignment either must be properly pleaded in the indictment. separate information because the law provides for a
1.1. If the same are not pleaded but proved, they shall separate penalty for each type of rearm.
3.1. for a bill of particulars, for him to be properly
informed of the exact date of the alleged rape; or be considered only as aggravating circumstances. e. Waiver. Duplicity of the o ense or multifariousness is a
2. De Guzman cannot be held liable for quali ed rape since ground for a motion to quash, but it should be timely
3.2. for the quashal of the Information, on the ground
the prosecution failed to properly designate in the interposed; otherwise, said defect is deemed waived.
that it did not conform with the prescribed form.
Informations that De Guzman is actually BBB's (People v. Gianan y Molina)
4. As appellant failed to pursue either remedy, he is deemed to
common-law husband, which was proven during the trial, f. When two or more o enses are charged in a single
have waived objection to any formal defect in the
and not AAA's stepfather. complaint or information but the accused fails to object to
Information.
it before trial, the court may convict him of as many
5. As to the alleged inconsistencies in AAA's testimony, People See Criminal Law Case Digest No. 56 o enses as are charged and proved, and impose upon
v. Lagbo explained that courts expect minor inconsistencies him the proper penalty for each o ense. (People v.
when a child-victim narrates the details of a harrowing Jugueta 2016 En Banc)
experience like rape. 4. Duplicity of the offense; exception
5. Amendment or substitution of complaint or
5.1. Such inconsistencies on minor details are in fact A complaint or information must charge but one o ense, except information
badges of truth, candidness and the fact that the when the law prescribes a single punishment for various o enses.
witness is unrehearsed.

However, the rule provides that only formal amendments

a. Before accused enters plea— the complaint or i. when a defense of the accused, under the original,
not prejudicial to the rights of the accused are allowed
information may be amended in form or in substance would no longer be available after the amendment is
after plea.
without the need for leave of court. made, and
Applying the test, the plea of self-defense and
However, leave of court plus motion by the prosecutor, ii. when any evidence of the accused might have would
corresponding evidence will not be compatible with
with notice to o ended party, is required even if the be inapplicable to the complaint or information, as
the allegation of conspiracy in the new information.
amendment is made before plea if the amendment: amended. (Leviste v. Alameda 2010)
Therefore, such formal amendment after plea is NOT
i. Downgrades the nature of the o ense charged; or e. An amendment is merely formal if it serves to allowed. (Corpus, Jr. v. Pamular 2018)
incorporate any supervening event, that increases the
ii. Excludes any accused from the complaint or i. Substitution vs Amendment
penalty imposed such as
information.
i. when during trial, the victim died, thereby changing SUBSTITUTION AMENDMENT
b. After accused enters plea and during trial — any
the o ense charged from frustrated homicide to
formal amendment may only be made if
consummated homicide; Necessarily involves substantial May be formal or substantial
i. Leave of court is secured; and change
ii. by reason or on occasion of the rape, the victim
ii. The amendment does not cause prejudice to the became insane. Must be with leave of court If before plea has been entered,
rights of the accused.
f. Examples of substantial amendments: can be e ected without leave of
GR: After arraignment, a substantial amendment is court
i. Change from homicide to murder;
proscribed.
ii. Change from robbery to robbery in an uninhabited Requires another preliminary If formal, no need for another
EXC: If the same is bene cial to the accused.
place; investigation and accused has to preliminary investigation and
c. An amendment is formal if it does not plead anew to the new retaking of plea
iii. Alleging the relationship of the accused to the victim.
i. change the nature of the crime alleged, information
g. Substitution. If it appears at any time before judgment
ii. a ect the essence of the o ense, that a mistake has been made in charging the proper Requires or presupposes that Refers to the same o ense
iii. cause surprise, or o ense, the court shall dismiss the original complaint or the new information involves a charged or to an o ense which
information upon the ling of a new one charging the di erent o ense. necessarily includes or is
iv. deprive the accused of an opportunity to meet the necessarily included in the
proper o ense, for as long as accused is not placed in double
new averment. original charge
jeopardy. (Ocampo v. Abando 2014 En Banc)
Otherwise, it is substantial.
h. An allegation of conspiracy to add a new accused without Accused cannot claim double Accused could invoke double
d. The test as to when the rights of an accused are prejudiced changing the prosecution's theory that the accused jeopardy jeopardy if there is a substantial
by the amendment is, willfully shot the victim is merely a formal amendment. amendment after a plea has been

entered. 2. Malversation; 2. where the oath was taken (Union Bank v.

People 2012 En Banc)
j. There is identity between two o enses 3. Abduction, etc.
7. Intervention of offended party
i. When the evidence to support a conviction for one ii. The second class are those although all the elements
o ense would be su cient to warrant a conviction for thereof for its consummation may have occurred in a a. There are cases where the criminal action also gives rise to
the other; or single place, yet by reason of the very nature of the an independent civil action as in crimes involving:
o ense committed, the violation of the law is deemed
ii. When the second o ense is exactly the same as the i. Physical injuries;
continuing:
rst; or ii. Fraud or defamation; or
1. Kidnaping and illegal detention;
iii. When the second o ense is an attempt to commit or a When the criminal act also constitutes a
frustration of; or 2. Evasion of service of sentence.
iii. Quasi-delict.
iv. When it necessarily includes or is necessarily included c. Section 9 of R.A. 8042 allowed the ling of criminal
actions arising from “illegal recruitment” before the b. Whether public or private crimes are involved, it is
in the o ense charged in the rst information.
RTC of the province or city erroneous for the trial court to consider the intervention of
k. The last paragraph of S14 R110 and S19 R119 are the offended party by counsel as merely a matter of
applicable only before judgment has been rendered. When i. where the o ense was committed OR
tolerance. Thus, where the private prosecution has asserted
the judgment was reviewed by the CA, the RTC had ii. where the o ended party actually resides at the time its right to intervene in the proceedings, that right must be
already rendered a judgment of conviction; hence it was of the commission of the o ense. (Sto. Tomas v. respected. (Liong v. Lee 2013)
error for the CA to remand the case to the RTC for Salac 2012 En Banc)
substitution. (People v. Caoili 2017 En Banc)
d. With regard to Perjury: Prosecution of Civil Action
C
6. Venue of criminal actions Rule 111
i. When the crime is committed through false
a. The criminal action shall be instituted and tried in the testimony under oath in a proceeding that is neither
1. The criminal action for violation of BP 22 shall be deemed
court of the municipality or territory criminal nor civil, venue is at the place where the
to include the corresponding civil action. NO reservation to
i. Where the o ense was committed; or testimony under oath is given.
le such civil action separately shall be allowed.
ii. Where any of its essential ingredients occurred. ii. If in lieu of or as supplement to the actual testimony
2. When civil action may proceed independently. — if the
made in a proceeding that is neither criminal nor civil,
b. There are two classes of transitory or continuing crimes o ended party
a written sworn statement is submitted, venue may
i. The first class are those where some acts material or either be a. waives the civil action,
essential to the crime occur in di erent places: 1. At the place where the sworn statement is b. reserves the right to institute it separately or
1. Estafa; submitted or c. institutes the civil action prior to the criminal action.

that the civil action shall be suspended when the criminal question. (San Miguel Properties v. Perez 2013) Said
The reservation shall be made before the prosecution starts
action is instituted. action is civil in nature that could not be instituted
presenting its evidence.
elsewhere except in the HLURB.
GR: If the civil action was commenced before the
⭐No counterclaim, cross-claim or third-party complaint
institution of the criminal action, the civil action shall 4. Rule on filing fees in civil action deemed instituted with
may be led by the accused in the criminal case, but any cause
be suspended in whatever stage it may be found the criminal action
of action which could have been the subject thereof may be
before judgment on the merits, once the criminal
litigated in a separate civil action. a. When the o ended party seeks to enforce civil liability
action is commenced.
against the accused by way of moral, nominal,
In the cases provided for in Articles 32, 33, 34 and 2176 of the EXC: If there is a prejudicial question. temperate, or exemplary damages without specifying
Civil Code, the independent civil action may be brought by the amount thereof in the complaint or information, the
c. The petition for suspension of the criminal action based
the o ended party. It shall proceed independently of the ling fees thereof shall constitute a first lien on the
upon the pendency of a prejudicial question in a civil
criminal action and shall require only a preponderance of judgment awarding such damages.
evidence. action is to be led in the criminal case:
b. Except as otherwise provided in these Rules, no ling fees
In no case, however, may the o ended party recover damages twice i. If in the preliminary investigation stage — with the
shall be required for actual damages.
for the same act or omission charged in the criminal action. o ce of the prosecutor or the court conducting the
PI; c. In BP 22 cases, ling fees shall be based on the amount
3. Prejudicial question of the check involved, which shall be considered as the
ii. If led in court for trial — with the court before
The elements of a prejudicial question are: actual damages claimed.
prosecution rests.
1) the previously instituted civil action involves an issue
d. In a case for estafa with abuse of con dence, if the
similar or intimately related to the issue raised in the Preliminary Investigation
subsequent criminal action, and
supposed authority of the one demanding in behalf of the D
corporation is found to be defective, it is as if no demand Rule 112
2) the resolution of such issue determines whether or not was ever made, hence, the prosecution for estafa cannot
the criminal action may proceed. Preliminary investigation is an inquiry or proceeding to determine
prosper. Thus, a separate case questioning the authority of
the operations manager to demand the return of the whether there is su cient ground to engender a well-founded belief that a
a. A prejudicial question is that which arises in a case the crime has been committed and the respondent is probably guilty thereof,
company vehicle from the accused raises a prejudicial
resolution of which is a logical antecedent of the issue and should be held for trial.
question that determines the guilt of accused in the estafa
involved in the criminal case, and the cognizance of which
case. See also case of People v. Arambulo 2015 Except as provided in Section 6 of this Rule, a preliminary investigation is
pertains to another tribunal. (Dreamworks required to be conducted before the ling of a complaint or information
Construction Inc. v. Janiola) e. Remember that an administrative case does not raise a for an o ense where the penalty prescribed by law is at least 4Y-2M-1D
prejudicial question. without regard to the ne.
b. A prejudicial question accords a civil case preferential
treatment and constitutes an exception to the general rule However, an action for speci c performance, even if
pending with an administrative agency, raises a prejudicial

Executive vs. Judicial Determination of 1. The o ense involved is punishable by reclusion iii. In case of doubt on the existence of probable cause, the judge
1
Probable Cause perpetua to death; may order the prosecutor to present additional evidence
within ve (5) days from notice and the issue must be
2. New and material issues are raised which were
Preliminary Preliminary resolved by the court within thirty (30) days from the ling
not previously presented before the DOJ and
Investigation Examination of the complaint or information.
were not, hence, ruled upon;
b. When arrest warrant unnecessary
Branch Executive Judiciary 3. The prescription of the o ense is not due to lapse
within 6 months from notice of the questioned i. Accused already detained via lawful warrantless arrest;
Done by Prosecutor Judge resolution; and
ii. Accused is charged for an o ense punishable only by ne;
Ascertain whether a Whether a warrant of 4. The appeal or petition for review is led within
iii. When the case is subject to the Rules on Summary
Purpose thirty (30) days from notice.
charge should be led arrest should be issued Procedure, unless he fails to appear when required. (Sec 5[c])
e. From the OP, the aggrieved party may le an appeal with
1. Resolution of investigation prosecutor 3. Remedies of accused if there was no preliminary
the CA pursuant to Rule 43.
investigation
a. Motion for Reconsideration. The aggrieved party may
f. From the CA, the aggrieved party may avail of an appeal
le an MR within 15 days from receipt of the assailed a. Accused may question the absence or regularity of a PI
by certiorari to the SC under Rule 45.
resolution — either nding probable cause, or dismissing before he enters his plea, otherwise, deemed waived.
the complaint. g. Where the ndings of the Ombudsman on the existence Court shall resolve not later than the start of trial.
of probable cause is tainted with GADALEJ, the
If the MR is denied, the aggrieved party may appeal b. It does not a ect jurisdiction of the court nor does it
aggrieved party may le a Rule 65 Petition for Certiorari
within 15 days from the denial of the MR. impair the validity of the information.
with the SC, and NOT with the Sandiganbayan.
b. The party ling a petition for review is allowed to le a c. Proper remedy is to remand the case to the prosecutor so
2. When warrant of arrest may issue
motion for the suspension of the arraignment. (Sec that a PI may be conducted and not dismissal of the
11[c] Rule 116) a. By the RTC and MTC. — Within ten (10) days from case.
the ling of the complaint or information, the judge shall
c. The resolution of the SOJ may be assailed through a Rule 4. Inquest. —An inquest is an investigation conducted by a
personally evaluate the resolution of the prosecutor and its
65 petition with the CA, and NOT a Rule 43 petition prosecutor in criminal cases where a person has been lawfully
supporting evidence.
for review, solely on the ground of GADALEJ. arrested and detained without a warrant of arrest. It is
i. He may immediately dismiss the case if the evidence on informal and summary and its purpose is
d. An administrative appeal to the O ce of the
record clearly fails to establish probable cause.
President is not proscribed subject to the following a. To determine WON the person detained should remain
conditions which have to be established as jurisdictional ii. If he nds probable cause, he shall issue a warrant of arrest, under custody and
facts: or a commitment order when the complaint or information
b. Then charged in court.
was led.

GR: When accused was lawfully arrested without warrant, an

2.3. The element of intent to deceive and to defraud 4. Furthermore, a petition for certiorari under Rule 65
inquest proceeding is required, not PI.
may be inferred from the similarity of the questioning the regularity of preliminary investigation becomes
EXC: appearance of the goods as o ered for sale to the moot after the trial court completes its determination of
public. probable cause and issues a warrant of arrest pursuant to
a) May be dispensed with in the absence of an inquest
Crespo v. Mogul. (De Lima v. Reyes 2016)
prosecutor. Complaint is then directly led to the court 3. Petitioners' product which is a medicated facial cream sold
(Sec 6 Rule 112). to the public is contained in the same pink oval-shaped
container which had the mark "Chin Chun Su," as that of
b) When accused requests for PI. He however must waive the
respondent.
provisions of Art 125 of RPC in the presence of his
counsel. The PI must be terminated within 15 days from 4. The acts complained of against petitioners constituted the
its inception. Such waiver must be: o ense of Unfair Competition and probable cause exists to
hold them for trial.
i. In writing;
ii. Signed by accused; See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 33
iii. In the presence of his counsel.
1. Withdrawal of information already filed in court.

Kho v. Summerville General Merchandising 04 Aug 2021
Having acquired jurisdiction over the case, the trial court is not
1. The CA did not err when it found grave abuse of discretion bound by the resolution of the SOJ, but is required to evaluate
on the part of the RTC in nding that no probable cause it before proceeding further with the trial. (Junio v.
exists to hold petitioners for trial in the unfair competition Cacatian-Beltran 2014)
case. 2. It is a fundamental principle that the accused in a preliminary
2. Here, the acts complained of constituted probable cause to investigation has no right to cross-examine the witnesses
charge them with Unfair Competition. which the complainant may present. (Estrada v. Ombudsman
2015 En Banc)
2.1. The confusing similarity may or may not result
from similarity in the marks, but may result from 3. The SOJ has the discretion, upon motion or motu proprio, to
other external factors in the packaging or act on any matter that may cause a probable miscarriage of
presentation of the goods. justice in the conduct of a preliminary investigation. This action
Debuque v. Nilson 10 May 2021
may include, but is not limited to, the conduct of a
2.2. Likelihood of confusion of goods or business is a
reinvestigation. Preliminary Discussion
relative concept, to be determined only according
to peculiar circumstances of each case. a. The instant case should have already been moot and

academic. prosecutor, it should be addressed to the court who has

3. Forietrans Manufacturing Corp. v. Davidoff Et. Cie SA
the option to grant or deny the same.
b. Crespo v. Mogul ruled that once the information has been explains that the determination of probable cause is
led before the courts, the dismissal, conviction, or essentially executive in nature, though reviewable by the B. Santos. v. Orda, Jr., emphasized that the above rule likewise
acquittal of the accused rests on their sound discretion; courts if the determination is tainted with grave abuse of applies to a motion to withdraw Information or to dismiss
they are not bound by any change in the opinion of the discretion. the case led before the court, like in the case at bar, even
prosecutor or his superior regarding probable cause. before or after arraignment of the accused.
4. Here, there is no existing syndicate in which Ramon and
c. De Lima v. Reyes reiterated Crespo and stated that once the the other accused had any participation. C. Here, the trial court correctly found that there was factual
information is led in court, the court acquires jurisdiction basis in the allegation that JMA Transport was in fact in
4.1. Atty. Debuque acted on his own, without the
of the case and any motion to dismiss the case or to continuous business operations.
participation or involvement of Ramon or the
determine the accused's guilt or innocence rests within the
other accused. The CA correctly ruled that the RTC abused its discretion in
sound discretion of the court.
issuing the September Order.
4.2. It was not shown that Ramon performed any overt
d. A petition for certiorari led to assail the executive
act in consonance with Atty. Debuque's intent to A. It was already unnecessary for the trial court to direct the
determination of probable cause (and the subsequent
defraud Nilson. prosecution to conduct the reinvestigation.
appeal therefrom) becomes moot once an information has
been led before the court and a warrant of arrest has been 5. The DOJ Secretary, in his August 23, 2007 Resolution, 1. What it should have done was to order the parties to
issued; more so if the trial court has already ruled on the correctly found probable cause for Estafa only against him. submit additional evidence and to admit the same if so
merits of the criminal case. However, as stated, this criminal case for Estafa may not be warranted.
initiated anymore due to his death.
e. Here, the RTC and the CA have already ruled on the merits B. The records do not show that respondents prayed for the
of the criminal case that resulted to Ramon's acquittal. See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 46 conduct of a reinvestigation in their motion for
reconsideration.
f. The Court deemed it necessary to rule on the merits.
1. Jurisprudence dictates that the courts cannot grant a
As to the merits of the case
SSS v. Seno, Jr. 10 Feb 2020 relief not prayed for in the pleadings or in excess of
1. NO. The DOJ Secretary was correct in resolving that only what is being sought by a party to a case.
The CA erred in ruling that the RTC abused its discretion in issuing
Atty. Debuque should be held liable for Estafa. 2. It is improper to enter an order which exceeds. the
the May Order.
2. Probable cause, for the purpose of ling a criminal scope of relief sought by the pleadings, absent notice
A. Crespo v. Mogul held that once a complaint or information
information, does not require absolute certainty or guilt which a ords the opposing party an opportunity to be
is already led in court, any disposition of the case such as
beyond reasonable doubt. A well-founded belief that a heard with respect to the proposed relief.
its dismissal or its continuation rests on the sound
crime was committed and that the individual charged is
discretion of the court. See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 80
probably guilty of committing the crime su ces.
1. When a motion to dismiss the case is led by the public

Arrest d. When a person, previously lawfully arrested escapes or is

5. There is no standard time from commission of crime up to time
E rescued. Any person may retake him at any time and anywhere
Rule 113 of arrest to consider the arrest as hot pursuit. It should be
in the Philippines. (Sec 13)
immediate as well as relentless. Thus, even though the arrest
Arrest Without Warrant, When Lawful e. When an accused released on bail attempts to depart from PH was e ected, say 5 days after, if such pursuit was relentless, it
without permission of the court, he may be arrested. (Sec 23 still is hot pursuit.
Requisites of a Valid Warrant of Arrest Rule 114)
6. Personal knowledge entails knowledge that a crime has been
Determination of Probable Cause for Issuance of Warrant of committed, even if it was not committed in his presence.
Arrest In flagrante delicto
These facts or circumstances pertain to actual facts or raw
1. Mere suspicion and reliable information not proper
evidence, i.e., supported by circumstances su ciently strong in
1 Arrest Without Warrant, When Lawful grounds. There should be "presence of more than one themselves to create the probable cause of guilt of the person to
seemingly innocent activity from which, taken together, be arrested. A reasonable suspicion therefore must be founded
a. In flagrante delicto — Two requisites must concur:
warranted a reasonable inference of criminal activity." (People v. on probable cause, coupled with good faith on the part of the
i. The person to be arrested must execute an overt act Comprado y Bronola 2018) peace o cers making the arrest. (Pestilos v. Generoso 2014)
indicating that he has just committed, is actually
2. There was no overt act indicative of a felonious enterprise
committing, or is attempting to commit a crime; and
that could be properly attributed to the appellant to rouse 2 Requisites of a Valid Warrant of Arrest
ii. Such overt act is done in the presence of the arresting suspicion in the mind of the police o cer where the appellant
o cer. and the informant were just talking with each other when the a. upon probable cause
b. Hot pursuit. — Two stringent requisites must concur: latter approached them. (People v. Edaño y Ebdane 2014) b. determined personally by the judge
i. An o ense has just been committed; 3. The acts of standing around with a companion and handing c. after examination under oath or a rmation of the
over something to the latter cannot in any way be considered complainant and witnesses produced, and
ii. The person making the arrest has personal knowledge of criminal acts. (Comerciante y Gonzales v. People 2015)
facts indicating that the person to be arrested has d. particularly describing the person to be seized.
committed it. 4. Petitioner was merely a passenger who did not exhibit any
unusual conduct in the presence of the law enforcers that would
c. When the person to be arrested is a prisoner who has escaped Determination of Probable Cause for Issuance
incite suspicion. In e ecting the warrantless arrest, the police 3
from a penal establishment or place where he is serving nal o cers relied solely on the tip they received. There was no
of Warrant of Arrest
judgment or is temporarily con ned while his case is pending, valid in flagrante delicto arrest. (Veridiano y Sapi v. People a. Probable cause for the issuance of a warrant of arrest has been
or has escaped while being transferred from one con nement 2017) de ned as such facts and circumstances which would lead a
to another. (Escaped convict)
Hot Pursuit reasonably discreet and prudent man to believe that an o ense
has been committed by the person sought to be arrested.

b. In satisfying himself of the existence of probable cause for the Bail is a matter of right in the following situations: 4. That the circumstances of his case indicate the probability of
issuance of a warrant of arrest, the judge is not required to ight if released on bail; or
a. Before conviction by the municipal courts;
personally examine the complainant and his witnesses.
b. After conviction by the municipal courts; and 5. That there is undue risk that he may commit another crime
during the pendency of the appeal
Bail c. Before conviction by the RTC of an o ense not
F punishable by death, reclusion perpetua, or life
The appellate court may, motu proprio or on motion of any party,
Rule 114 review the resolution of the RTC after notice to the adverse party in
imprisonment.
either case.
Nature Where it has been established without objection that the accused is
only 16 years old, it follows that, if convicted, he would be given 1. The grant of bail is discretionary after conviction of the
When a Matter of Right; Exceptions RTC of an o ense NOT punishable by death, reclusion
"the penalty next lower than that prescribed by law," which
e ectively rules out the death penalty. It results that petitioner is perpetua, or life imprisonment.
When a Matter of Discretion
entitled to bail as a matter of right (Bravo, Jr. v. Borja) 2. Where to Apply After Conviction by the RTC. With the
Bail is the security given for the release of a person in custody of the law, trial court despite the ling of a notice of appeal, provided it
furnished by him or a bondsman, to guarantee his appearance 3 When a Matter of Discretion has not transmitted the original record to the appellate court.
before any court as required under the conditions hereinafter
Corollarily, if the records have been transmitted, then le with
speci ed. Bail may be given in the form of corporate surety, property bond,
Should the court grant the application, the accused may be allowed to the appellate court.
cash deposit, or recognizance.
continue on provisional liberty during the pendency of the appeal under
the same bail subject to the consent of the bondsman. If the decision of the trial court convicting the accused
1 Nature changed the nature of the o ense from non-bailable to
If the penalty imposed by the trial court is imprisonment exceeding six
bailable, the application for bail can only be led with and
(6) years, the accused shall be denied bail, or his bail shall be cancelled
The right to bail is a constitutional right. The grant of bail upon a showing by the prosecution, with notice to the accused, of the resolved by the appellate court.
requires following or other similar circumstances: 3. Bail Pending Appeal Where Penalty Imposed Exceeds 6
a. Jurisdiction over the person; AND 1. That he is a recidivist, quasi-recidivist, or habitual Years.
delinquent, or has committed the crime aggravated by the
b. Custody over the person. i. If NONE of the conditions under the 3rd paragraph
circumstance of reiteration;
of Section 5 are present, the grant of bail is still
2 When a Matter of Right; Exceptions 2. That he has previously escaped from legal con nement, evaded discretionary but authorizes the court to use the less
sentence, or violated the conditions of his bail without valid stringent sound discretion approach;
GR: A person shall, before conviction, be accorded the right to justi cation;
bail. ii. However, if ONE or more is present, the court has no
3. That he committed the o ense while under probation, parole,
option but to deny or revoke bail pending appeal.
EXC: Unless he is charged with a capital o ense and the or conditional pardon;
evidence of guilt is strong. 4. Hearing of application for bail in capital offenses

a. Hearing is MANDATORY. (see People v. Gako, Jr., The ling of a separate petition for certiorari is proscribed prescribed penalty not the imposable penalty. (People v.
Narciso v. Sta. Romana-Cruz) and contravenes the rule against multiplicity of suits and Valdez 2015 En Banc)
constitutes forum shopping.
b. The bail hearing is separate and distinct from the initial
hearing to determine the existence of probable cause.
Thus, to grant bail because the evidence of the Arraignment and Plea
G
prosecution is weak in a hearing to determine probable Rule 116
cause, is grave abuse of discretion on the part of the judge.
Searching Inquiry
c. Duties of trial judge in a petition for bail in o ense
punishable by RP, Life Imprisonment or Death Improvident Plea
a) Notify the prosecutor of the hearing;
1. How made
b) Conduct a hearing;
a. Arraignment is the formal mode and manner of
c) Decide whether the evidence of guilt of accused is implementing the constitutional right of an accused to be
strong based on the summary of evidence of the informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against
prosecution; and him.
d) If not strong — grant bail; Otherwise, deny petition. Absence of such results in the nullity of the trial. Accused
5. Order Fixing the Amount of Bail Unappealable. — The can not be tried in absentia without being arraigned rst.
order xing the amount of the bail shall not be subject to b. Duty of the court before arraignment
appeal.
i. Inform the accused of his right to counsel;
6. Forfeiture and cancellation of bail
ii. Ask him if he desires to have one; and
a. An order of forfeiture is interlocutory and merely
iii. Must assign a counsel de oficio to defend him unless
requires the bondsmen to show cause why judgment
the accused
should not be rendered against them for the amount of 1. Custody of law is not required for motion to quash arrest
the bond. 1. Is allowed to defend himself in person or
warrant and to x amount of bail but once bail amount xed,
The order is di erent from the judgment on the bond applicant must be in custody of law. (Padua v. People 2019) 2. Has employed a counsel of his choice (Sec 6)
which is issued if the accused was not produced within the 2. In determining whether an o ense is punishable by reclusion 2. When should plea of not guilty be entered
30-day period. perpetua or life imprisonment, what is taken into account is the
a. Actual plea of not guilty;
b. The order canceling the bail is subject to review by the
b. Accused refuses to plea;
appellate court, motu proprio or on motion.

c. Makes a conditional plea (Sec 1[c]); ii. With the consent of BOTH the o ended party and 1) To ascertain the voluntariness of the plea, and
the prosecutor. (Sec 2)
d. Pleads guilty but presents exculpatory evidence — the 2) Whether or not accused has full comprehension
guilty plea is withdrawn. (Sec 1[d]) Consent of o ended party not required if he fails to of the consequences of his plea;
appear during arraignment despite due notice. (Sec
Entering a plea of not guilty cures any defect to his arrest. ii. Require prosecution to prove the following:
1[f ])
This, however, does not equate to a waiver to his right to
1) Guilt of the accused; and
question the admissibility of evidence procured during the It is not a matter of right but upon the sound discretion of
illegal arrest. the court. 2) Precise degree of his culpability. and
Plea for leniency in the imposition of penalty is not May be made at any time before trial. In Daan v. iii. Ask the accused if he wishes to present evidence on
conditional plea. But if he imposes it as a condition to his Sandiganbayan, it was held that plea bargaining may also his behalf and be allowed to do so if he so desires.
plea of guilt, then it becomes conditional. be done in trial proper. (People v. Camay)
In People v. Strong, a plea of guilty to the charge but denying c. The refusal of the prosecution to adopt the acceptable b. Murder remains a capital o ense notwithstanding the
the speci c allegations in the information amounts to a plea of plea bargain for the charge of Illegal Sale of Dangerous prohibition on the imposition of the death penalty since
not guilty. Drugs provided in A.M. No. 18-03-16-SC should be death is the imposable penalty under the RPC. Hence the
treated as a continuing objection that should be resolved accused is entitled to an acquittal when the prosecution
In People v. Balisacan, after entering a plea of guilty, accused
by the RTC. This harmonizes the constitutional provision failed to present any witness despite opportunity to do so.
then presented evidence of self-defense after being allowed to
on the rule making power of the Court under the (People v. Pagal 2020 En Banc)
prove mitigating circumstances. This e ectively vacated his
Constitution and the nature of plea bargaining in
plea. In e ect, there was no valid plea. Double jeopardy may
Dangerous Drugs cases. DOJ Circular No. 27 did not 2 Improvident Plea
not attach.
repeal, alter, or modify the Plea Bargaining Framework in
3. When may accused enter a plea of guilty to a lesser a. It may be withdrawn at any time before judgment of
A.M. No. 18-03-16-SC. DOJ Circular No. 27 merely
offense conviction becomes final.
serves as an internal guideline for prosecutors to observe
a. Plea Bargaining is a process whereby the accused and the before they may give their consent to proposed plea b. Failure to conduct searching inquiry renders the plea of
prosecution work to a mutually satisfactory disposition of bargains. (Sayre y Malampad v. Xenos 2020 En Banc) guilty as an improvident one.
the case, subject to court approval. c. Convictions based on an improvident plea are set aside only if
1 Searching Inquiry such plea is the sole basis of the judgment. If the court
b. Accused may plead guilty to a lesser o ense. The court
may allow such given the following conditions: receives additional evidence, then the judgment may not be set
4. Accused plead guilty to capital offense, what the court
aside, notwithstanding the improvidence of the plea.
i. The lesser o ense is necessarily included in the should do
o ense charged; and a. The court is mandated to: 1. The need for arraignment pertains only to substantial
i. Conduct a searching inquiry amendments and not to formal amendments. An amendment

done after the plea and during trial does not call for a second
After the expiration of said period, the trial court is bound 4. That the o cer who led the information had no authority to
plea since the amendment is only as to form. (Kummer v. do so; (WAIVABLE Villa Gomez v. People Nov 2020)
to arraign the accused or to deny the motion to defer
People 2013)
arraignment. 5. That it does not conform substantially to the prescribed form;
2. A judge was found guilty of gross ignorance of the law when he
In a case, 1 year and 10 months had already lapsed, which is 6. Multifariousness. That more than one o ense is charged
arraigned the accused in his chambers. (Bandoy v. Jacinto, Jr.
way beyond the 60-day limit. (Sps Trinidad v. Ang 2011) except when a single punishment for various o enses is
2014) prescribed by law;
The suspension of arraignment beyond the 60-day period is
3. Options of accused before arraignment and plea 7. That the criminal action or liability has been extinguished. 🟊
strictly NOT allowed. (Aguinaldo v. Ventus 2015)
a. Bill of particulars — to enable him to properly plead and 8. That it contains averments which, if true, would constitute a
c. Motion to quash — at any time before entering his plea.
prepare for trial. The motion shall specify: legal excuse or justi cation.
(See Sec 3 Rule 117 in relation to Sec 1)
i. The alleged defects of the complaint or information, 9. Double Jeopardy. That the accused has been previously
d. Challenge the validity of arrest or legality of warrant
and convicted or acquitted of the o ense charged, or the case against
or question the absence of a preliminary investigation him was dismissed or otherwise terminated without his express
ii. The details desired. (Sec 9) (Sec 26 Rule 114) consent. 🟊
The remedy against an indictment that fails to allege the 🟊 Grounds not waivable
time of the commission of the o ense with su cient
de niteness is a motion for a bill of particulars and not Motion to Quash GR: Court shall only consider those grounds stated in the
a motion to quash. (Rocaberte v. People)
H motion. (Sec 2)
Rule 117
b. Suspension of arraignment — for the following causes: EXC: Court will still consider even if not stated in the motion if
Grounds ground is lack of jurisdiction over the o ense
i. Accused appears to be su ering from an unsound
charged.
mental condition. The court shall then order his Double Jeopardy
mental examination, or con nement, if needed. a. Invalid Grounds
Provisional Dismissal
ii. There exists a prejudicial question; and i. Execution of a davit of desistance;
iii. There is a petition for review of the resolution of the 1 Grounds ii. Absence of probable cause — but is a ground for
prosecutor which is pending either at the DOJ, or the dismissal of case;
OP. 1. That the facts charged do not constitute an o ense; 🟊 iii. Matters of defense — EXC double jeopardy or
Period of suspension shall not exceed 60 days from the 2. That the court trying the case has no jurisdiction over the extinguishment of criminal liability.
ling of the petition before the reviewing o ce. This o ense charged; 🟊
iv. Absence of preliminary investigation — but is a
provision is mandatory. (People v. Goyala 2020) 3. That the court trying the case has no jurisdiction over the ground for petition for reinvestigation.
person of the accused;

b. Test in appreciating motion to quash. Whether the Grounds Sec 3 Rule 117 Insu ciency of evidence Radaza propounded reveals that his objections pertained to
facts alleged, if hypothetically admitted, would not the Sandiganbayan appreciation of the evidence and
establish the essential elements of the o ense as de ned by Matters found in the Outside of the application of the law.
Based on
law without considering matters aliunde. Information Information
4.1. An attack against the correctness of a court's
Again, as exceptions, facts aliunde are considered if the If granted Not a dismissal of case Amounts to acquittal judgment, without any real demonstration of its
ground is based on double jeopardy or extinguishment of utter randomness and whimsicality, if any, is not
criminal liability. Effects of sustaining the motion to quash the grave abuse of discretion contemplated by
certiorari proceedings.
c. Remedy from Denial If the motion to quash is sustained, the court may order that
another complaint or information be led except if the ground is due 5. Lack of authority of an o cer to le an Information, while
GR: Petition for certiorari under Rule 65 not proper
to prescription or double jeopardy. a ground for quashal, is not a jurisdictional defect.
remedy.
6. Gomez v. People held that a handling prosecutor's lack of
The remedy is for the movant to go to trial Exception to the rule that sustaining the motion is not a bar to
prior written authority from the head prosecutor in the
without prejudice to reiterating the special another prosecution. — No other complaint or information can be
ling of an Information does not a ect a trial court's
defenses invoked in the motion to quash. led if the ground for sustaining the motion to quash is based on:
acquisition of jurisdiction over the subject matter or the
EXC: Court acts with grave abuse of discretion a. Extinction of criminal liability; or person of the accused.
amounting to lack or in excess of jurisdiction.
b. Double jeopardy. (Sec 6) 6.1. Intentional or not, this de ciency remains formal,
d. When motion is granted. If motion is based on alleged non-jurisdictional, and curable at any stage of the
defect of the information, and such can be cured, the Radaza v. Sandiganbayan 04 Aug 2021 criminal proceedings.
court shall order that an amendment be made.
7. As the lack of a preliminary investigation is not even one of
If after such order, information remains defective such 1. Denials of a motion to quash are improper subjects of a
the listed grounds for quashal of an Information, it is more
that the material averments do not constitute an o ense, petition for certiorari before the SC.
so that the lack or prior written authority or approval on
the court shall grant the motion. (Sec 4) 2. Motions to quash are interlocutory orders that are generally the part of the handling prosecutor is inconsequential in
e. Matters of defense cannot be raised in a motion to quash. unreviewable by appeal or by certiorari. terms of jurisdiction and e cacy of the Information led
(People v. Odtuhan 2013) 3. If the motion to quash is denied, it means that the criminal against the accused.
Distinguish from demurrer to evidence Information remains pending with the court, which then 8. The Sandiganbayan acquired jurisdiction over the o enses
must proceed with the trial to determine whether the charged and over the person of Radaza as an accused.
Quash Demurrer
accused is innocent or guilty of the crime charged against
8.1. First, the factual issues raised by Radaza require
When? Before accused enters plea After prosecution rests him.
analysis of evidence that is already beyond the
4. Here, a plain reading of the issues raised and discussions limited coverage of a preliminary investigation
Leave? Not required With or without

of victims, the o ense remains one and the same, and cannot
inquiry. Jeopardy is the danger of conviction and punishment which the
be split into di erent crimes and prosecution. Thus, a
defendant in a criminal action incurs when a valid indictment has
8.2. Next, the changes in the words and phrasings of second information based on the same o ense constitutes
been found.
the Sandiganbayan issuances and of the double jeopardy after the accused pleaded guilty on the rst
reinvestigation ndings pertained only to the a. Requisites information.
participation of the other accused.
i. Valid indictment; e. In an appeal by the accused, he waives his right not to be
8.3. Also, Radaza has already submitted his person as subject to double jeopardy. Thus, appellant could not have
ii. Before a court of competent jurisdiction;
an accused to the jurisdiction of the been placed twice in jeopardy when the CA modi ed the
Sandiganbayan. iii. Arraignment of accused;
ruling of the RTC by nding him guilty of robbery with
8.3.1. Settled is the rule that an accused is iv. Valid plea entered by accused; homicide as charged in the Information instead of murder.
deemed to have yielded himself to the (People v. Torres 2014)
v. Acquittal or conviction of accused, or dismissal or
jurisdiction of the court upon seeking termination of the case without the express consent of f. When double jeopardy inapplicable despite prior
before it the grant of a rmative reliefs. accused. conviction.
9. More importantly, the accusations against Radaza, whether b. Dismissals equivalent to acquittal even with consent. i. the graver o ense developed due to supervening facts
in the original Information or in the Amended Double jeopardy APPLIES even if the dismissal is with arising from the same act or omission constituting the
Information, both yield a prima facie case of violation of express consent of accused if predicated on either: former charge;
RA 3019, e ectively placing the subject o enses under the
i. Insu ciency of evidence — demurrer; or ii. the facts constituting the graver charge became known or
jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan and rendering Radaza
were discovered only after a plea was entered in the
indictable under Section 3(e) or 3(g). ii. Denial of right to speedy trial — should be preceded by
former complaint or information; or
insisting on a trial.
10. By the wordings of the assailed Informations, the Court
iii. the plea of guilty to the lesser o ense was made without
nds all elements for both o enses properly alleged by the iii. Discharge of accused as state witness.
the consent of the prosecutor and of the o ended
prosecution against Radaza.
c. Finality-of-acquittal doctrine. — Although generally not party except as provided in Sec 1(f) of R116. (Sec 7)
11. Jurisprudence has declared that matters that are evidentiary reviewable, acquittal may be reviewed where:
Where the accused satis es or serves in whole or in part
in nature are better threshed out in a full-blown trial on the
i. There has been deprivation of due process and when there the judgment, he shall be credited with the same in the
merits.
is a nding of mistrial; or event of conviction for the graver o ense. (Sec 7)
See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 31 ii. There has been grave abuse of discretion. g. Prosecution for the same act is not prohibited. What is
d. Double Jeopardy in Quasi-offenses. In Ivler v. Modesto-San forbidden is the prosecution of the same o ense.
Pedro, the Court emphasized the doctrine that reckless h. Identical acts, but constitute DIFFERENT OFFENSES
2 Double Jeopardy imprudence under Art 365 of RPC is a single quasi-o ense by
i. Theft of electricity under RPC & Violation of PD 401;
itself. And, as the careless act is single, regardless of the number

ii. Illegal Recruitment & Estafa; iv. the public prosecutor is served with a copy of the order iii. For the above purpose, the public or private prosecutor
of provisional dismissal of the case. (Los Baños v. Pedro) shall rst present during the trial the essential witness or
iii. Violation of BP 22 & Estafa;
witnesses to the case before anyone else.
e. Unlike in private crimes where the participation of the private
iv. Direct bribery under Art 210 of RPC & those violating
o ended party is generally required for the recovery of civil An essential witness is one whose testimony dwells on
Sec 3(b) of RA 3019.
liability, in the instant case, there is no particular private the presence of some or all of the elements of the crime
o ended party who can actually le the motion to revive. and whose testimony is indispensable to the conviction of
3 Provisional Dismissal
Hence, in some instances, as in this case, it is the arresting the accused.
a. Contemplates that the dismissal of the criminal action is o cer, PO2 Villas, who led the motion to revive the case
Withdrawal of Information vs. Motion to Dismiss
temporary and can be revived within the period set by the considering that he knew his absence was the cause why the
complaint was provisionally dismissed. (Saldariega v. Withdraw Dismiss
Rules of Court.
Panganiban 2015)
b. A case shall NOT be provisionally dismissed except with Attains nality 15 days Attains nality 15 days
f. SECTION 10. Provisional Dismissal. AM 12-11-2-SC. from receipt, without from receipt, with
i. the express consent of the accused and E ect
— prejudice to the re ling of prejudice to the re ling of
ii. with notice to the o ended party. the information the information
i. When the delays are due to the absence of an essential
c. O enses punishable by imprisonment witness whose whereabouts are unknown or cannot
Time-
i. not exceeding six (6) years — one (1) year; be determined and, therefore, are subject to exclusion in NO YES
barred
determining compliance with the prescribed time limits
ii. more than six (6) years — two (2) years.
which caused the trial to exceed one hundred eighty
d. A case is provisionally dismissed if the following (180) days, the court shall provisionally dismiss the action
requirements concur: with the express consent of the detained accused. Pre-Trial
I
Rule 118
i. the prosecution with the express conformity of the ii. When the delays are due to the absence of an essential
accused, or the accused, moves for a provisional dismissal witness whose presence cannot be obtained by due
(sin perjuicio) of his case; or both the prosecution and the diligence though his whereabouts are known, the 1 Pre-Trial Agreement
accused move for its provisional dismissal; court shall provisionally dismiss the action with the
express consent of the detained accused provided: 1. Matters to be considered during pre-trial
ii. the o ended party is noti ed of the motion for a
provisional dismissal of the case; 1. the hearing in the case has been previously twice a) plea bargaining;
postponed; and
iii. the court issues an order granting the motion and b) stipulation of facts;
dismissing the case provisionally; and 2. there is proof of service of the pertinent notices
c) marking for identi cation of evidence of the parties;
of hearings or subpoenas upon the essential
witness and the o ended party. d) waiver of objections to admissibility of evidence;

e) modi cation of the order of trial if the accused admits

All proceedings during the pre-trial shall be recorded, the Examination of Witness for the Prosecution
the charge but interposes a lawful defense; and transcripts prepared and the minutes signed by the parties
and/or their counsels. (I-B[9], AM No 03-1-09-SC) Requisites for Discharge of Accused to Become a State
f) such other matters as will promote a fair and expeditious Witness
trial of the criminal and civil aspects of the case.
2 Non-Appearance E ects of Discharge of Accused as State Witness
a. Mandatory. In all criminal cases.
1. If the counsel for the accused or the prosecutor does not Demurrer to Evidence
b. When Held. Under AM No 12-11-2-SC, the court shall appear at the pre-trial conference and does not o er an
hold the pre-trial conference acceptable excuse for his lack of cooperation, the court may Revised Guidelines on Continuous Trial
i. within 30 days after arraignment or impose proper sanctions or penalties.
ii. within 10 days if the accused is under preventive 2. Petitioners' repeated failure to appear at the pre-trial 1. Instances when presence of accused is required by law
detention. amounted to a failure to comply with the Rules and their
a. Arraignment and plea;
non-presentation of evidence before the trial court was
Should direct testimonies be presented through judicial b. During trial, whenever necessary for identi cation
essentially due to their fault. (Tolentino v. Heirs of
a davits, prosecution should submit such within 20 purposes; and
Laurel-Ascalon 2012)
days from arraignment, in time for pre-trial. (Sec 8[c],
c. At the promulgation of sentence unless it is for a light
AM No 12-11-2-SC)
3 Pre-Trial Order o ense, in which case he may appear by counsel or
c. A stipulation of facts in criminal cases is NOW expressly representative.
sanctioned by law. It is allowed not only during pre-trial 1. The trial judge shall issue a Pre-trial Order within ten (10)
but also and with more reason, during trial proper itself. days after the termination of the pre-trial setting forth the
1 Trial In Absentia
(People v. Hernandez) actions taken during the pre-trial conference, the facts
stipulated, the admissions made, evidence marked, the number a. Accused has already been arraigned;
2. All agreements or admissions made or entered during the of witnesses to be presented and the schedule of trial.
pre-trial conference shall be b. He has been duly noti ed of the trial or hearings; and
2. Said Order shall bind the parties, limit the trial to matters not
a. reduced in writing, and c. He unjusti ably fails to appear in court. (Sec 14[2] Art III
disposed of and control the course of the action during the
1987 Constitution)
b. signed by the accused and counsel, trial. (I-B[10], AM No 03-1-09-SC)
Remedy when accused is not brought to trial within the
otherwise, they cannot be used against the accused. (I-B[8], prescribed period
Trial
AM No 03-1-09-SC) J a. Information may be dismissed upon motion of the accused on
Rule 119
the ground of denial of right to speedy trial.
Trial In Absentia

b. Prosecutor has the burden to prove that delay belongs to the 4) The statement taken may be admitted in behalf of or against
exclusions mentioned in Sec 3. the accused. (Sec 15)
Requisites for Discharge of Accused to Become
3
i. Continuance or postponement. May be granted if 5) Securing appearance of material witness. Upon motion, a State Witness
continuing the proceeding is either party may secure an order from the court for a material
witness to post bail if the court is satis ed upon The following conditions must be met for proper discharge:
1. impossible, or
a. Proof, or a. 2 or more accused are jointly charged with an o ense;
2. would result in a miscarriage of justice (Sec 4[a])
b. Oath b. Motion for discharge is led before prosecution rests;
When the case taken as a whole is so novel, unusual and
complex, due to the number of accused or the nature of That a material witness will not testify. c. Prosecution presents evidence and sworn statements of
the prosecution, or that it is unreasonable to expect proposed state witnesses at a hearing;
Should the witness refuse to post bail, he may be imprisoned
adequate preparation within the periods of time d. Accused gives his consent; and
until he complies or is legally discharged after his testimony
established therein. (Sec 4[b])
has been taken (Sec 14) e. Trial court is satis ed that:
2 Examination of Witness for the Prosecution 6) The use of discovery procedures is directed to the sound i. There is absolute necessity for the testimony of the
discretion of the trial judge. The deposition taking can not be accused whose discharge is requested;
1) When it satisfactorily appears that a witness for the based nor can it be denied on imsy reasons. (People v. Webb)
ii. There is no other direct evidence available for the
prosecution
7) For purposes of taking the deposition in criminal cases, more proper prosecution of the o ense committed, except the
a) is too sick or in rm to appear at the trial as directed particularly of a prosecution witness who would foreseeably be testimony of said accused;
by the order of the court, or unavailable for trial, the testimonial examination should be
iii. The testimony of said accused can be substantially
b) has to leave the Philippines with no de nite date of made before the court, or at least before the judge, where the
corroborated in its material points (see exception below);
returning, case is pending as required by the clear mandate of Section 15,
Rule 119. (Go v. People 2012) iv. Said accused does not appear to be the most guilty;
he may forthwith be conditionally examined before the and
court where the case is pending. People v. Sergio 2019 Hernando, J v. Said accused has not at any time been convicted of any
2) Such examination, in the presence of the accused, or in his offense involving moral turpitude.
Section 15, Rule 119 is
absence after reasonable notice to attend the examination has
inapplicable in the instant case
been served on him, shall be conducted in the same manner as E ects of Discharge of Accused as State
an examination at the trial. Mary Jane is neither too sick nor in rm to appear at the trial nor has 4
Witness
to leave the Philippines inde nitely. Mary Jane is currently
3) Failure or refusal of the accused to attend the examination
imprisoned in Indonesia for having been convicted by nal Discharge shall mean acquittal, except if the accused fails or
after notice shall be considered a waiver.
judgment of the crime of drug tra cking. refuses to testify against his co-accused. (Sec 18)

1. As an exception to the general rule requiring corroboration, the a. Definition. It is actually a motion to dismiss led by the Revised Guidelines on Continuous Trial
uncorroborated testimony of a state witness may be su cient accused after prosecution rests its case. (Sec 23) 6
A.M. No. 15-06-10-SC
when it is shown to be sincere in itself because it is given
b. Grant of demurrer amounts to acquittal and cannot be
unhesitatingly and in a straightforward manner and full of a. Applicability
appealed as it violates the right of accused against double
details which, by their nature, could not have been the result of
jeopardy. i. shall also apply to pending criminal cases with respect to
deliberate afterthought. This exception, however, applies only
c. Order is reviewable only by certiorari (Rule 65) upon the remainder of the proceedings.
if the state witness is an eyewitness since the testimony
would then be direct evidence. (People v. Anabe y Capillan showing of grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or ii. shall NOT apply to criminal cases led under the Rule on
2010) excess of jurisdiction. Summary Procedure unless otherwise specifically
d. Demurrer may be upon motion or upon the initiative of the provided.
2. A principal by inducement is not automatically the most guilty in
a conspiracy. As a rule, for purposes of resolving a motion to court. b. Prohibited and meritorious motions
discharge an accused as a state witness, what is controlling are e. WITH Leave of Court. Motion for leave of court to le i. Prohibited Motions. — Prohibited motions shall be
the speci c acts of the accused in relation to the crime demurrer of evidence to be led within 5 days after denied outright before the scheduled arraignment
committed. prosecution rests. without need of comment and/or opposition.
3. A state witness does not need to be found to be the least guilty; i. If demurrer is granted, acquittal. 1. ⭐Motion for judicial determination of
he or she should not only “appear to be the most guilty.” probable cause.
ii. If denied, the accused presents evidence in his defense,
(Jimenez, Jr. v. People 2014)
then appeals if he is convicted. 2. Motion for preliminary investigation led
4. The testimony of a state witness during the discharge beyond the five (5)-day reglementary period in
iii. Order denying:
proceedings, wherein he was cross-examined by the defense inquest proceedings.
counsel, is admissible against the accused if the state witness dies a) Motion for leave of court to le demurrer of
evidence, or 3. Motion for reinvestigation.
before he could testify during the trial. S17 R119 is explicit that
the testimony of the witness during the discharge proceeding b) The demurrer itself ii. Meritorious Motions. — Motions that allege plausible
will only be inadmissible if the court denies the motion to grounds supported by relevant documents and/or
discharge the accused as a state witness. (People v. Shall not be reviewable by appeal or certiorari before competent evidence, except those that are already covered
Dominguez 2018) judgment. by the Revised Guidelines, are meritorious motions, such
f. WITHOUT Leave of Court. If demurrer is granted, as:
acquittal. 1. Motion to withdraw information, or to
5 Demurrer to Evidence
If denied, the accused waives the right to present downgrade the charge in the original
It is an objection by one of the parties in an action to the e ect that the evidence and submits the case for judgment. information, or to exclude an accused;
evidence which his adversary produced is insu cient in point of law to
2. Motion to quash warrant of arrest;
make out a case or sustain the issue.

3. Motion to suspend arraignment on the ground 1. The use of discovery procedures is directed to the sound 2. An o ense charged necessarily includes that which is proved,
of an unsound mental condition; discretion of the trial judge. The deposition taking can not be when some of the essential elements or ingredients of the
based nor can it be denied on imsy reasons. (People v. Webb) former, as this is alleged in the complaint or information,
4. Motion to suspend proceedings on the ground
constitute the latter. Indeed, where an accused is charged with
of a prejudicial question; 2. For purposes of taking the deposition in criminal cases, more
a speci c crime, he is duly informed not only of such speci c
particularly of a prosecution witness who would foreseeably be
5. Motion to quash information on the grounds crime but also of lesser crimes or o enses included therein.
unavailable for trial, the testimonial examination should be
that (People v. Chi Chan Liu 2015)
made before the court, or at least before the judge, where the
a. the facts charged do not constitute an case is pending as required by the clear mandate of Section 15, 3. Accused employee charged with estafa through
o ense, Rule 119. (Go v. People 2012) misappropriation may not be convicted thereof because of
b. lack of jurisdiction, absence of juridical possession. Accused however may be
ii. O er of evidence. — The o er of evidence, the convicted of theft where information su ciently alleged it.
c. extinction of criminal action or liability, or comment/objection thereto, and the court ruling shall be Since information did not allege grave abuse of con dence,
d. double jeopardy. made orally. accused could be convicted only of simple and not quali ed
6. Motion to discharge accused as state witness; iii. Demurrer to Evidence. — After the prosecution has theft. (Libunao v. People 2020)
rested its case, the court shall inquire from the accused if 4. Mayor charged with violation of Sec. 3(e) of RA 3019 (causing
7. Motion to quash search warrant, or motion to
he/she desires to move for leave of court to le a demurrer undue injury to the govt in the discharge of o cial functions
suppress evidence; and
to evidence. through evident bad faith) cannot be convicted of violating
8. Motion to dismiss on the ground that the Sec. 3(e) through “gross inexcusable negligence.” (Villarosa v.
iv. One-day examination of witness rule. — The court
criminal case is a SLAPP under the Rules of People 2020 En Banc)
shall strictly adhere to the rule that a witness has to be
Procedure for Environmental Cases.
fully examined in one (1) day. 5. Rape by sexual assault is not necessarily included or subsumed
c. Trial; memoranda in rape through sexual intercourse. The accused may however
v. The submission of memoranda is discretionary on the
i. The court shall encourage the accused and the part of the court. be convicted of lascivious conduct against a child under Sec.
prosecution to avail of: 5(b) of R.A. No. 7610, which o ense is necessarily included in
Judgment the o ense charged. (People v. Caoili 2017 En Banc)
1. For the accused — Secs 12 and 13, Rule 119 on
the application for examination of witness for
K 6. When the accused on bail fail to present themselves at the
Rule 120
accused before trial and how it is made; and promulgation of a judgment of conviction, they are considered
1. Variance in the Mode of Commission of Offense. A to have lost their standing in court. Without any standing
2. For the prosecution — Sec 15, Rule 119 on the
variance in the mode of commission of the o ense is binding in court, the accused cannot invoke its jurisdiction to seek
conditional examination of witness for the
upon the accused if he fails to object to evidence showing that relief. (Jaylo v. Sandiganbayan 2015)
prosecution.
the crime was committed in a di erent manner than what was
alleged.

1 Promulgation of Judgment If the judgment is for conviction and the failure of the accused to
appear was without justi able cause, he shall lose the remedies
The judgment is promulgated by reading it in the presence of the available in these rules against the judgment and the court shall
Motion for New Trial or
accused and any judge of the court in which it was rendered. order his arrest. Within fteen (15) days from promulgation of L Reconsideration
However, if the conviction is for a light offense, the judgment may judgment, however, the accused may surrender and le a motion Rule 121
be pronounced in the presence of his counsel or representative. for leave of court to avail of these remedies. He shall state the
When the judge is absent or outside of the province or city, the reasons for his absence at the scheduled promulgation and if he At any time before a judgment of conviction becomes final, the court may, on
judgment may be promulgated by the clerk of court. proves that his absence was for a justi able cause, he shall be motion of the accused or at its own instance but with the consent of the
If the accused is con ned or detained in another province or allowed to avail of said remedies within fteen (15) days from accused, grant a new trial or reconsideration.
city, the judgment may be promulgated by the executive judge of notice.
1. Grounds for new trial
the Regional Trial Court having jurisdiction over the place
of confinement or detention upon request of the court which People v. Eulalio 16 Oct 2019 a. The errors of law or irregularities prejudicial to the
rendered the judgment. The court promulgating the judgment substantial rights of the accused have been committed
shall have authority to accept the notice of appeal and to approve 1. Eulalio was properly convicted of acts of lasciviousness, during the trial;
the bail bond pending appeal; provided, that if the decision of the although charged with rape in the Information.
b. The new and material evidence has been discovered
trial court convicting the accused changed the nature of the o ense 1.1. He committed lewd acts upon AAA, who was which the accused could not with reasonable diligence
from non-bailable to bailable, the application for bail can only be only 11 years old at the time, by kissing her using have discovered and produced at the trial and which if
led and resolved by the appellate court. threats and intimidation. introduced and admitted would probably change the
The proper clerk of court shall give notice to the accused 1.2. Following the variance doctrine enunciated under judgment.
personally or through his bondsman or warden and counsel, Section 4 in relation to Section 5 of Rule 120, Acts 2. Grounds for reconsideration. — on the ground of errors
requiring him to be present at the promulgation of the decision. If of lasciviousness; the o ense proved, is included in of law or fact in the judgment, which requires no further
the accused tried in absentia because he jumped bail or escaped rape, the o ense charged. proceedings.
from prison, the notice to him shall be served at his last known
address. 2. Case law dictates that the allegations in the Information 3. Requisites before a new trial may be granted on ground
must be in such form as is su cient to enable a person of of newly discovered evidence. — A newly-discovered
In case the accused fails to appear at the scheduled date of common understanding to know what o ense is intended evidence, to be a justi able ground for a new trial, the
promulgation of judgment despite notice, the promulgation shall to be charged and enable the court to know the proper following requisites must concur:
be made judgment.
a. The evidence must have been discovered AFTER the trial;
1) by recording the judgment in the criminal docket and 2.1. The Information must allege clearly and accurately
b. It could not have been previously discovered and
2) serving him a copy thereof at his last known address or the elements of the crime charged.
produced at the trial even with the exercise of reasonable
thru his counsel. diligence;
See Criminal Law Case Digest No. 58

c. It is a new and material evidence; and 1. Appeal NOT a Natural Right. Nor is it part of due process 7. The remedy of an aggrieved party in a criminal case from the
but merely a statutory privilege. While the right is statutory, trial court’s order granting a motion to withdraw information
d. If introduced and admitted, it would probably change the
once it is granted by law, its suppression would be a violation is appeal since such an order is a nal order. (Personal Direct
judgment.
of due process. Selling v. Carandang 2017)
1. An erroneous admission or rejection of evidence by the trial 2. Any party may appeal, unless the accused will be placed in 8. Remedy from an order of dismissal upon a demurrer to
court is not a ground for a new trial or reversal of the decision if double jeopardy. The subject of appeal must be a judgment or evidence is R65 not R45. Appeal is not proper since it will put
there are other independent evidence to sustain the decision, or nal order. accused in double jeopardy. (Bowden v. Bowden 2019)
if the rejected evidence, if it had been admitted; would not have
3. In criminal cases, an appeal throws the case wide open for How appeal taken
changed the decision. (Payumo v. Sandiganbayan 2011)
review. When an accused appeals, he waives his right against
a) The appeal to the Regional Trial Court, or to the Court of
2. A new trial may not be had on the basis of evidence which was double jeopardy and runs the risk of being sentenced to a
Appeals in cases decided by the Regional Trial Court in the
available during trial but was not presented due to its negligence. penalty higher than that imposed by the trial court.
exercise of its original jurisdiction, shall be by notice of
(Senit v. People 2016)
4. Change of Theory on Appeal. The rule is that a party appeal led with the court which rendered the judgment or
3. Second MR. While a second motion for reconsideration is, as a CANNOT change his theory on appeal, nor raise in the nal order appealed from and by serving a copy thereof upon
general rule, a prohibited pleading, it is within the sound appellate court any question of law or fact that was not raised the adverse party.
discretion of the Court to admit the same, provided it is led in the court below or which was not within the issue raised by
b) The appeal to the Court of Appeals in cases decided by the
with prior leave whenever substantive justice may be better the parties in their pleadings.
Regional Trial Court in the exercise of its appellate
served thereby. (Astorga v. People)
Such issues cannot be raised because this would be o ensive to jurisdiction shall be by petition for review under Rule 42.
the basic rules of fair play, justice and due process.
c) The appeal in cases where the penalty imposed by the
5. Factual Findings Regional Trial Court is reclusion perpetua, life imprisonment
Appeal
M GR: Factual ndings of the trial court, especially when or where a lesser penalty is imposed for o enses committed on
Rule 122 the same occasion or which arose out of the same occurrence
a rmed by the CA, deserve great weight and respect
and should not be disturbed on appeal; that gave rise to the more serious o ense for which the penalty
Appeals from the MTCs
of death, reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment is imposed,
EXC: unless there are facts of weight and substance that
Appeals from the RTCs shall be by notice of appeal to the Court of Appeals in
were overlooked or misinterpreted and that would
accordance with paragraph (a) of this Rule.
materially a ect the disposition of the case.
Appeals from the CA d) No notice of appeal is necessary in cases where the Regional
6. Designation of wrong court does not a ect validity of appeal.
Trial Court imposed the death penalty. The Court of
Duty of RTC judge to forward case to SB. (Sideño v. People
1 Appeals from the MTCs Appeals shall automatically review the judgment as
2020 reiterating Dizon v. People 2018, Muñez v. People
2019, Galeon v. People 2019)

e) Except as provided in the last paragraph of section 13, Rule c) Upon perfection of the appeal, the execution of the judgment Dismissal of appeal for abandonment or failure to
124, all other appeals to the Supreme Court shall be by or nal order appealed from shall be stayed as to the appealing prosecute
petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45. party.
The Court of Appeals may, upon motion of the appellee or motu
Waiver of notice NOTE proprio and with notice to the appellant in either case, dismiss the
1. An appeal in a criminal proceeding throws the whole case appeal if the appellant fails to file his brief within the time
The appellee may waive his right to a notice that an appeal has
open for review of all its aspects, including those not raised by prescribed by this Rule, except where the appellant is represented
been taken. The appellate court may, in its discretion, entertain an
the parties. The records show that Rodriguez had withdrawn by a counsel de o cio.
appeal notwithstanding failure to give such notice if the interests
of justice so require. his appeal due to nancial reasons. However, applying Section The Court of Appeals may also, upon motion of the appellee or
11(a) of Rule 122, the evidence against and the conviction of motu proprio, dismiss the appeal if
When appeal to be taken both appellant and Rodriguez are inextricably linked. Hence,
1) the appellant escapes from prison or con nement,
An appeal must be taken within fteen (15) days from appellant's acquittal, which is favorable and applicable to
Rodriguez, should bene t the latter. (People v. Rodriguez y 2) jumps bail or
1) promulgation of the judgment or
Culo) 3) ees to a foreign country during the pendency of the
2) from notice of the nal order appealed from. appeal.
Withdrawal of appeal
This period for perfecting an appeal shall be suspended from the
time a motion for new trial or reconsideration is led until notice Notwithstanding the perfection of the appeal, the RTC, MTC as Judgment not to be reversed or modi ed except for
the case may be, may allow the appellant to withdraw his substantial error
of the order overruling the motion shall have been served upon the
accused or his counsel at which time the balance of the period appeal BEFORE the record has been forwarded by the clerk of No judgment shall be reversed or modi ed unless the Court of
begins to run. court to the proper appellate court, in which case the judgment Appeals, after an examination of the record and of the evidence
shall become nal. adduced by the parties, is of the opinion that error was committed
N.B. Application of Neypes Doctrine in Criminal Cases. (see Yu v.
The RTC may also, in its discretion, allow the appellant from the which injuriously a ected the substantial rights of the appellant.
Samson-Tatad 2011)
judgment of a MTC to withdraw his appeal, provided a motion to (Harmless Error Rule)
E ect of appeal by any of several accused that e ect is led before rendition of the judgment in the
Quorum of the court; certi cation or appeal of cases to
a) An appeal taken by one or more of several accused shall not case on appeal, in which case the judgment of the court of origin
Supreme Court
a ect those who did not appeal, except insofar as the shall become nal and the case shall be remanded to the latter court
a) Whenever the Court of Appeals nds that the penalty of
judgment of the appellate court is favorable and applicable to for execution of the judgment.
death should be imposed, the court shall
the latter;
2 Appeals from the RTCs i) render judgment
b) The appeal of the o ended party from the civil aspect shall not
a ect the criminal aspect of the judgment or order appealed ii) but refrain from making an entry of judgment and
from.

iii) forthwith certify the case and elevate its entire record Decision if opinion is equally divided a. A search warrant is NOT a criminal action nor does it
to the SC for review. represent a commencement of a criminal prosecution even
When the Supreme Court en banc is equally divided in opinion
if it is entitled like a criminal action.
b) xxxx or the necessary majority cannot be had on whether to acquit the
appellant, the case shall again be deliberated upon and if no Any aggrieved party may question an order quashing the
c) In cases where the Court of Appeals imposes reclusion
decision is reached after re-deliberation, the judgment of search warrant without the need for the conformity of the
perpetua, life imprisonment or a lesser penalty, it shall
conviction of the lower court shall be reversed and the accused public prosecutor. (Worldwide Web Corporation v.
render and enter judgment imposing such penalty. The
ACQUITTED. People 2014)
judgment may be appealed to the Supreme Court by notice of
appeal led with the Court of Appeals. b. The omission of the People of the Philippines from the
a Section 13, Rule 124 petition is fatal. Every search warrant is applied for and
Motion for new trial issued by and under the authority of the State, regardless
Appointment of counsel de oficio for accused on appeal. — It shall be
At any time after the appeal from the lower court has been of who initiates its application or causes its issuance. (Te
the duty of the clerk of the trial court, upon ling of a notice of
perfected and before the judgment of the Court of Appeals v. Breva 2015)
appeal, to ascertain from the appellant, if con ned in prison,
convicting the appellant becomes final, the latter may move for
whether he desires the Regional Trial Court, Court of Appeals or c. Exclusionary Rule — any evidence obtained in violation
a new trial on the ground of newly-discovered evidence of this or the preceding section shall be inadmissible for
the Supreme Court to appoint a counsel de o cio to defend him.
material to his defense. any purpose in any proceeding.
Where new trial conducted Search and Seizure 2. Application for search warrant, where filed
N
When a new trial is granted, the Court of Appeals may conduct Rule 126
1. Any court within whose territorial jurisdiction a crime
the hearing and receive evidence or refer the trial to the court of
1. Nature of search warrant was committed.
origin.
2. For compelling reasons stated in the application, any
A search warrant is
Reconsideration court within the judicial region where the crime was
A motion for reconsideration shall be led within fteen (15) 1) an order in writing committed if the place of the commission of the crime is
known, or any court within the judicial region where the
days after from notice of the decision or nal order of the Court of 2) issued in the name of the People of the Philippines,
warrant shall be enforced.
Appeals, with copies served upon the adverse party, setting forth 3) signed by a judge and
the grounds in support thereof. The mittimus shall be stayed However, if the criminal action has already been led, the
4) directed to a peace o cer, application shall only be made in the court where the criminal
during the pendency of the motion for reconsideration. No party
5) commanding him to search for personal property action is pending.
shall be allowed a second motion for reconsideration of a judgment
or nal order. described therein and bring it before the court.
a. The fact that a search warrant application involves a
“special criminal case” excludes it from the compelling
3 Appeals from the CA

reason requirement under Sec 2 R126. (Laud v. People witnesses must be examined by the judge. (People v. things described are limited to those that bear a direct
2014) Gabiosa 2020) relation to the offense for which the warrant is being
issued. (Worldwide Web Corporation v. People 2014)
b. Venue in an application for search warrant is NOT b. The examination must be probing and exhaustive, not
jurisdictional. The issue of whether the application merely routinary, general, peripheral, perfunctory or pro 6. Exceptions to search warrant requirement
should have been led in RTC-Iriga City or RTC-Naga, is forma.
a. Search incidental to lawful arrest
not one involving jurisdiction because the power to
c. The judge must not simply rehash the contents of the
issue a special criminal process is inherent in all courts. i. Second search done at police station, after rst search
a davit but must make his own inquiry on the intent and
(Pilipinas Shell v. Romars International 2015) incident to warrantless arrest, not a valid search.
justi cation of the application.
(Vaporoso v. People 2019)
c. In certain cases when no criminal action has yet been led,
5. Particularity of place to be searched and things to be
any court may issue a search warrant even though it has ii. The law requires that there be rst a lawful arrest
seized
no jurisdiction over the o ense allegedly committed, before a search can be made — the process cannot be
provided that all the requirements for the issuance of such a. A description of the place to be searched is sufficient reversed.
warrant are present. if the o cer with the warrant can, with reasonable e ort,
A search substantially contemporaneous with an
ascertain and identify the place intended and distinguish it
Nothing in S2 R126 requires that the court issuing the arrest can precede the arrest if the police have
from other places in the community.
search warrant must also have jurisdiction over the probable cause to make the arrest at the outset of the
o ense. (People v. Castillo 2016) b. The executing o cer’s prior knowledge as to the place search.
intended in the warrant is relevant.
3. Requisites. — A search warrant shall not issue except iii. Immediate Reach and Control Rule. The
c. The owner or occupant of the place to be searched is provision limits the search to the following:
a. upon probable cause in connection with one speci c irrelevant and need not be named in the warrant.
o ense 1. For dangerous weapons;
d. A designation or description that points out the place to
b. to be determined personally by the judge 2. For anything which may have been used in the
be searched to the exclusion of all others, and on
commission of an o ense; or
c. after examination under oath or a rmation of the inquiry unerringly leads the peace o cers to it, satis es the
complainant and the witnesses he may produce, and constitutional requirement of de niteness. (People v. 3. For anything which constitutes proof in the
Tuan y Baludda 2010) commission of an o ense.
d. particularly describing the place to be searched and the
things to be seized which may be anywhere in the e. In Columbia Pictures, Inc. v. CA, the Court settled that a iv. The marijuana was found in a black bag in
Philippines. search warrant that covers several counts of a certain Calantiao’s possession and within his immediate
speci c o ense does NOT violate the one-speci c-o ense control. As the black bag containing the marijuana
4. Personal examination by judge of the applicant and was in Calantiao’s possession, it was within the
rule. (Laud v. People 2014)
witnesses permissible area that the apprehending o cers could
f. A search warrant ful lls the requirement of particularity
a. In application for search warrant under S4 R126, it is validly conduct a warrantless search incident to a
in the description of the things to be seized when the
NOT necessary that both the complainant and the

lawful arrest. (People v. Calantiao y Dimalanta terminal and along its route is likewise covered by the
e. Plain view situation
2014) following guideline.
i. The elements are:
b. Consented search. — Occurs when a person gives a LEA 1) the manner of the search must be least
permission to search in areas in which such person has a intrusive; 1. a prior valid intrusion based on the valid
reasonable expectation of privacy. warrantless arrest in which the police are legally
2) the search must not be discriminatory;
present in the pursuit of their o cial duties;
c. Search of moving vehicle. — Or the Carroll Doctrine,
3) as to the purpose of the search, it must be
that is justi ed on the ground that it is not practicable to 2. the evidence was inadvertently discovered by
con ned to ensuring public safety; and
secure a warrant because the vehicle can be quickly moved the police who have the right to be where they
out of the locality or jurisdiction in which the warrant 4) the courts must be convinced that are;
must be sought. precautionary measures were in place to
3. The illegality of the evidence must be
ensure that no evidence was planted against
i. Here, police o cers are limited only to routine immediately apparent; and
the accused.
checks where the examination of a vehicle is limited to 4. "plain view" justi ed mere seizure of evidence
visual inspection. To emphasize, the guidelines do not apply to
without further search;
privately-owned cars. Neither are they applicable to
However, an extensive search becomes permissible ii. Inadvertence Requirement. It means that the
moving vehicles dedicated for private or personal use,
only if the o cers made it upon probable cause, i.e. o cer must NOT have known in advance the
as in the case of taxis. (Saluday v. People 2018 En
upon a belief that an automobile or other vehicle location of the evidence and discovery is NOT
Banc)
contains an item, article or object which by law is anticipated.
subject to seizure and destruction. iv. ⭐ The Court now holds that the cases adhering to
the doctrine that exclusive reliance on an Plain view doctrine is inapplicable if the police o cers
d. Check points; body checks in airport. — For as long as did not just accidentally discover the evidence but
unveri ed, anonymous tip cannot engender
the vehicle is neither searched nor its occupants subjected actually searched for it.
probable cause that permits a warrantless search
to a body search, and the inspection of the vehicle is
of a moving vehicle that goes beyond a visual This doctrine may not be used to extend a general
limited to a visual search, said routine checks are proper.
search — which include both long-standing and the exploratory search from one object to another until
i. Routine checks, when conducted in a FIXED area, most recent jurisprudence — should be the something incriminatory at last emerges.
are even less intrusive and are permissible. prevailing and controlling line of jurisprudence.
iii. Immediately Apparent Requirement. The
ii. Searches here are valid for as long as they are In Comprado, Cogaed, and Veridiano, the Court incriminating nature of the evidence becomes
warranted by exigencies of public order and are has held that mere reliance on information relayed by apparent if the o cer, at the moment of seizure, had
conducted in a way least intrusive to motorists. an informant does not su ce to provide a genuine probable cause to connect it to a crime without the
reason for the police to conduct a warrantless search bene t of an unlawful search or seizure.
iii. Aside from public transport buses, any moving
and seizure. (People v. Sapla y Guerrero 2020 En
vehicle that similarly accepts passengers at the f. Stop and frisk situation
Banc)

i. The test of the conduct of an o cer was not the b. Even if the barangay o cials were not present during the
2.2. such probable cause must be determined
existence of probable cause because no full arrest is initial search, the search was witnessed by
personally by the judge;
made. But it cannot be mere suspicion. It has to be a accused-appellants themselves. (People v. Punzalan
genuine reason. (see Comerciante) 2015) 2.3. the judge must examine, in writing and under oath
or a rmation, the complainant and the witnesses
ii. The o cer must have his own suspicion and not c. The legality of a seizure can be contested ONLY by the
he or she may produce;
merely adopt those of another. (People v. Cogaed y party whose rights have been impaired thereby, and the
Romana 2014) objection to an unlawful search and seizure is purely 2.4. the applicant and the witnesses testify on the facts
personal and cannot be availed of by third parties. personally known to them; and
iii. Search of a car based on a solitary tip was not valid.
Items seized inadmissible because of the fruit of a d. When order quashing the warrant a proper subject 2.5. the warrant speci cally describes the place to be
poisonous tree. (People v. Sison 2019) Combination of an appeal. Where the search warrant is issued as an searched and the things to be seized.
of police asset’s speci c tip and arresting o cer’s incident to a pending criminal case, the quashal of a search 3. A description of a place to be searched is su cient if the
observation of gun-shaped bulge in arrestee’s shirt is warrant is merely interlocutory. Thus, an appeal is not a o cer with the warrant can ascertain and identify with
adequate basis for stop-and-frisk. (Manibog v. proper remedy. reasonable e ort the place intended, and distinguish it from
People 2019) other places in the community.
On the other hand, where a search warrant is applied for
iv. Where the tip was about a suspicious person with and issued in anticipation of a criminal case yet to be filed, 4. Here, the search warrant complied with the foregoing
something bulging in his waist but the arresting the quashal, and denial of the MR, ends the judicial standard since it particularly described the place to be
o cer’s testimony didn’t mention anything about the process. Here, appeal is proper. searched, which is petitioner's "house at Gitna, Brgy.
bulge, the warrantless arrest was invalid. (Porteria v. Cuyab, San Pedro, Laguna."
e. The most important e ect is the exclusion of the evidence
People 2019)
obtained from being used against the person whose rights 4.1. Although the house number of petitioner's house
g. Enforcement of custom laws — Routine baggage were violated by the search, the evidence being the was not indicated, the description of the place to
inspections conducted by port authorities, although done proverbial and jurisprudential “fruit of the poisonous be searched was su cient as the police o cers who
without search warrants, are not unreasonable searches per tree.” served the same were able, with reasonable e ort,
se. (Libo-on Dela Cruz v. People 2016) to ascertain and identify the house of petitioner.
7. Remedies from unlawful search and seizure Diaz v. People 15 Jul 2020
5. The omission of the warrant to (a) indicate that the place to
a. Objects of lawful commerce con scated in the course of 1. The Court holds that the validity of the warrant. be searched contained ve rooms which were separately
an enforcement of RA 9165 that are the property of a occupied by petitioner and her siblings; and (b) con ne the
2. The requirements of a valid search warrant are laid down in
third person are subject to be returned to the lawful search to petitioner's unit is inconsequential:
Article III, Section 2 of the 1987 Constitution and in Rule
owner who is not liable for the unlawful act. But the trial 126, Section 4, viz.: 5.1. The units or rooms where petitioner and her
court may not release such objects pending trial and before siblings lived all form an integral part of the house.
2.1. probable cause is present;
judgment. (PDEA v. Brodett 2011)

accordingly, require any person or service provider to

d) When the accused resides outside the Philippines.
5.2. It has been held that the requirement of disclose or submit subscriber's information, tra c data,
particularity as to the things to be seized does not or relevant data in his/her or its possession or control.
require technical accuracy in the description of the The Rule on Cybercrime Warrants
P d. Interception of computer data. — Warrant to Intercept
property to be seized, and that a search warrant A.M. No. 17-11-03-SC
Computer Data (WICD). — A WICD is an order authorizing
may be said to particularly describe the things to be
a. Scope and applicability. — involves the preservation, the LEAs to carry out any or all of the following activities:
seized when the description therein is as speci c as
the circumstances will ordinarily allow it to be disclosure, interception, search, seizure, and/or examination, as i. listening to,
described. well as the custody, and destruction of computer data, as
provided under RA 10175. ii. recording,
6. It would be unreasonable to expect PO2 Avila to have
b. General provisions iii. monitoring, or
extensive knowledge of the interior set-up or oor plan of
petitioner's house. i. Where to File an Application for a Warrant. — before iv. surveillance of the content of communications,
any of the designated cybercrime courts of the province or v. including procuring the content of computer data.
See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 73 the city
e. Search, seizure, and examination of computer data. —
1. where the o ense or any of its elements has been Warrant to Search, Seize and Examine Computer Data
committed, is being committed, or is about to be (WSSECD). — A WSSECD is an order authorizing the LEAs
Provisional remedies in criminal cases
O committed, or to search the particular place for items to be seized and/or
Rule 127
2. where any part of the computer system used is examined.
When the civil action is properly instituted in the criminal action situated, or i. Examination Where Lawful Possession of Device is
as provided in Rule 111, the o ended party may have the property 3. where any of the damage caused to a natural or Obtained; Warrant to Examine Computer Data
of the accused attached as security for the satisfaction of any juridical person took place. (WECD). — Upon acquiring possession of a computer
judgment that may be recovered from the accused in the following device or computer system via a lawful warrantless
cases: 4. CCs in Quezon City, the City of Manila, Makati City, arrest, or by any other lawful method, LEAs shall rst
Pasig City, Cebu City, Iloilo City, Davao City and apply for a WECD before searching the said computer
a) When the accused is about to abscond from the Cagayan De Oro City shall have the special device or computer system for the purpose of obtaining
Philippines; authority to act on applications and issue warrants for forensic examination the computer data contained
b) When the criminal action is based on a claim for which shall be enforceable nationwide and outside therein.
money or property embezzled or fraudulently the Philippines.
misapplied or converted to the use of the accused xxxx; c. Disclosure of computer data. — Warrant to Disclose Evidence
c) When the accused has concealed, removed, or disposed of Computer Data (WDCD). — A WDCD is an order VIII
his property, or is about to do so; and authorizing the LEAs to issue an order to disclose and Revised Rules on Evidence

as amended by A.M. No. 19-08-15-SC 3. Evidence has been de ned as the means, sanctioned by the requires Ante to present evidence that weighs in his
Rules of Court, of ascertaining in judicial proceedings the favor to counteract the ndings of SDT.
General Concepts truth a ecting a matter of fact.
2.1. Instead, the burden of proof logically lies with
Admissibility of Evidence SDT, since it is the party alleging a fact — that
2 Burden of Proof vs. Burden of Evidence
Ante participated in the hazing activities
Judicial Notice and Judicial Admissions
which led to the death of Mendez.
Burden of proof is the duty of a party to present evidence on the
Object (Real) Evidence facts in issue necessary to establish his or her claim or defense by the See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 10
amount of evidence required by law. Burden of proof never shifts.
Documentary Evidence
Burden of evidence is the duty of a party to present evidence
Testimonial Evidence su cient to establish or rebut a fact in issue to establish a prima facie 3 Equipoise Rule
case. Burden of evidence may shift from one party to the other in
Burden of Proof and Presumptions Where the evidence on an issue of fact is in issue or there is doubt
the course of the proceedings, depending on the exigencies of the
on which side the evidence preponderates, the party having the
Presentation of Evidence case.
burden of proof loses.
Judicial A davit Rule The EQUIPOISE RULE nds application if the inculpatory facts
and circumstances are capable of two or more explanations, one of
Ante v. UP Student Disciplinary Tribunal
Weight and Su ciency of Evidence which is consistent with the innocence of the accused and the
14 Mar 2022
other consistent with his guilt, for then the evidence does not ful ll
Rules on Electronic Evidence 1. Burden of proof is the duty of a party to present the test of moral certainty, and does not su ce to produce a
evidence on the facts in issue necessary to establish his conviction. Brie y stated, the needed quantum of proof to convict
A General Concepts claim or defenses by the amount of evidence required the accused of the crime charged is found lacking.
by law.
Admissibility of Evidence
1 Proof vs. evidence 1.1. Burden of evidence is that logical necessity B
Rule 128
1. Proof is not evidence itself. There is proof only because of which rests on a party at any particular time
evidence. It is merely the probative e ect of evidence and is the during the trial to create a prima facie case in 1. Requisites for admissibility of evidence; exclusions
consideration of persuasion of the mind resulting from a his favor or to overthrow one when created under the Constitution, laws, and the Rules of Court
consideration of the evidence. against him. Admissibility = Relevancy + Competency
2. Proof is the e ect or result of evidence, while evidence is the 2. Here, only the burden of evidence is shifted, which
medium of proof.

When our rules speak of relevancy as requisite of admissibility, 4. Conditional admissibility. — Contemplates a situation i. Positive. A particular set of facts exists or an event
it necessarily includes materiality. Materiality is subsumed in wherein a proponent of an evidence is allowed to present his took place.
the broader concept of relevancy. evidence although it is apparently inadmissible, subject to the
ii. Negative. A particular set of facts did not exist or an
condition that eventually the proponent will be able to
2. Relevance of evidence and collateral matters event did not take place. Common example is alibi,
establish the admissibility of the evidence in tandem with the
or denial.
Section 4. Relevancy; collateral matters. — Evidence must have such a
other pieces of evidence yet to be presented.
All things being equal, the positive evidence
relation to the fact in issue as to induce belief in its existence or There may be an instance wherein the independent evidence
prevails, especially if the witness is not shown to have
non-existence. Evidence on collateral matters shall not be allowed, except of conspiracy is unavailable for the time being. The principle
when it tends in any reasonable degree to establish the probability or an ill-motive to testify falsely against the accused.
of conditional admissibility may then be invoked asking
improbability of the fact in issue. 8. Competent and Credible Evidence
permission that the extrajudicial confession be admitted with
the undertaking that in due time, evidence to establish i. Competent evidence is one which is not otherwise
3. Multiple admissibility. — The court shall consider no
conspiracy will be presented. Failure to ful ll such excluded by the Constitution, by law or by the rules.
evidence unless it is o ered; and its purpose must be speci ed.
undertaking will result in the conditionally admitted evidence
This is so because evidence may be admissible for one purpose, ii. Credible evidence is evidence that is not necessarily
being stricken out from the records.
but inadmissible for another. true but that is worthy of belief.
5. Curative admissibility. — There are instances when the
Uniwide Sales v. Titan-Ikeda
court erroneously admits otherwise inadmissible evidence to Judicial Notice and Judicial Admissions
This involves a construction contract wherein Titan-Ikeda the prejudice of the party against whom it is o ered. C
undertook to construct 3 buildings for Uniwide. The contract Rule 129
This principle o ers a procedural mechanism to the aggrieved
stipulated a xed date of completion. For failing to pay part of the
by allowing him to introduce an equally inadmissible 1. Matters of Judicial Notice
contract price, the contractor sued the project owner. The latter led
evidence in order to cure the defect or damage of the a. Mandatory. — (lengthy enumeration follows)
a counter-claim for liquidated damages due to alleged delay. During
erroneously admitted inadmissible evidence.
the trial, the project engineer was presented and testi ed that the b. Discretionary. — Matters the court may or may not take
project was eventually completed at a certain date, which was later 6. Direct and circumstantial evidence judicial notice. A court may take judicial notice of matters
than the stipulated date. i. Direct evidence proves a fact without the need to which
So the project owner invoked the testimony of the engineer to the make an inference from another fact. i. are of public knowledge, or
e ect that the completion of the project was delayed. This was not ii. Circumstantial or indirect evidence proves a fact ii. are capable to unquestionable demonstration, or
sustained because the testimony of the engineer was o ered for the by making an inference from a previously established
purpose of establishing completion of the project and not to prove fact. iii. ought to be known to judges because of their
delay. judicial functions. — To reconcile, the requirement
7. Positive and Negative Evidence of formal o er applies only to situations where the
evidence is necessary to prove a fact in issue, or to

prove the defense or claim of a party, in so far as

objection by the adverse party. But here, an evidence presented Under Special Laws
the main case is concerned.
contrary to a judicial admission is still inadmissible even if not
But matters involving incidental proceedings, not objected to by the adverse party. 1 Requisites
related to the merits of the case, does not require
GR: A judicial admission may be treated as an extrajudicial 1. Requisites for admissibility
formal offer, and so the court can take judicial notice
thereof. admission in a separate case. a) It should be relevant + competent;
2. Judicial Admissions EXC: If a judicial admission is made in answer to a request for b) It must be authenticated by a competent witness; and
admission under Rule 26 Sec 3. Any admission made in reply
Any admission, c) It must be formally o ered.
to such request can only be used in the same case and is
1) written or oral, inadmissible for any other purpose or in any other proceeding. 2. Chain of Custody Rule
2) made by a party, a) Starts with the seizure and marking of the seized
Judicial Extrajudicial
illegal drugs. — The seizing or apprehending o cer is
3) in the course of the proceedings in the main case,
required to mark the seized illegal drugs at the place of
Made in the course of the
need not be proved. Made outside of the proceedings seizure, immediately after the seizure.
proceedings of the same case
a. Effect of judicial admissions Who should be present during the seizure and marking?
Conclusive upon the admitter Controvertible
GR: Judicial admission is binding and conclusive on 1) The accused or his representative or counsel;
the admitter. Does not require proof Requires proof 2) Before the amendment, there were 3 required 3rd
party witnesses:
Santos v. Lumbao b. How judicial admissions may be contradicted
a. Representative from the media;
A case for partition. In their Answer, the heirs admitted that they i. that it was made through palpable mistake or
witnessed the execution of the deed of sale. But during trial, they b. Representative from the National
ii. that the imputed admission was not, in fact, made.
turned around and claimed otherwise. Prosecution Service or DOJ; AND
Applying the judicial admission rule, SC ruled that the heirs can not Object (Real) Evidence c. A public elected o cial.
be allowed to disown their admission. Any evidence presented D
Rule 130, A
di erent from or inconsistent from their earlier admission can not People v. Larry Mendoza 2014 reiterated in the case of
be considered. Requisites People v. Joshua Que 2018
Elayda v. CA The rule now is that the three 3rd party witnesses should be present
Exclusionary Rules
The rule on waiver does not apply in judicial admissions. not only during the inventory and photograph taking but also
Normally an inadmissible evidence can be admitted for lack of Under the 1987 Constitution during the seizure and marking of the seized illegal drugs.

People v. De Guzman
SC pointed out that the presence of these witnesses is to prevent the There should be a hearing rst where the proponent is allowed to
evils of planting evidence. So to prevent planting, substitution and Where it was established that seized illegal drugs were submitted by present prima facie evidence of paternity.
contamination of illegal drugs, their presence is required even during the apprehending o cer to the o ce of the public prosecutor. SC
In other words, the DNA test is not the only evidence to prove
seizure and marking. said the o ce of the public prosecutor is NOT one of those
paternity. It is only con rmatory or corroborative to the prima facie
designated links by law. There was a serious breach in the chain of
evidence already presented.
b) Next step is the physical inventory. After the marking, custody.
the seized illegal drugs should now be physically b. Post-conviction DNA testing; remedy
People v. Manansala 2018
inventoried.
Recording the incident to a barangay blotter is not enough and This is only useful for convicts who have not yet served or
What happens if the seizing officer fails to strictly comply with fully served his sentence.
not a substitute to a physical inventory.
the substantive requirements of Sec 21?
The convict or the prosecution may le a petition for a
Apply the substantial compliance rule. For this rule to In drug cases, Sec 21 is the process of authentication. But the
writ of habeas corpus in the court of origin if the results
apply, the following requisites must be met: SC has been very consistent that failure to comply with Sec 21
of the post-conviction DNA testing are favorable to the
is not a ground for inadmissibility of seized illegal drugs.
1) The prosecution should recognize, admit that there is convict.
non-compliance; What is then the effect if Sec 21 is not sufficiently complied with?
c. Assessment of probative value of DNA evidence and
Jurisprudence has it that it merely a ects the weight and
2) They should o er a justi able reason for the admissibility. — the court shall consider the following:
su ciency of the evidence.
non-compliance. i. The chain of custody;
a) You can not move for the exclusion of the seized
There are FOUR LINKS in the chain of custody of illegal ii. The DNA testing methodology;
illegal drugs;
drugs:
b) Proceed with trial. iii. The forensic DNA laboratory; and
1) The seizure of the illegal drugs by the apprehending
c) You may le a demurrer to evidence. If granted, the iv. The reliability of the testing result.
or seizing o cer from the accused;
case will be dismissed for insu ciency of evidence.
2) The turn over of the seized illegal drugs by the seizing d. Rules on evaluation of reliability of the DNA testing
o cer to the investigating o cer; 3. DNA Evidence methodology
3) The turn over by the investigating o cer to the a. Application for DNA testing order i. DNA results that exclude the putative parent from
chemist or the crime laboratory to determine the paternity or a negative result, shall be conclusive
contents of the substance. Lucas v. Lucas proof of non-paternity.
4) The turn over or submission of the seized illegal drugs Before a DNA test can be allowed, the proponent should establish ii. If the value of the Probability of Paternity is < 99.9%,
by the chemist to the court. prima facie possibility of paternity. The court wanted to prevent the results of the DNA testing shall be considered as
unscrupulous parties from using DNA tests as a tool for harassment. corroborative evidence.

iii. If the value of the Probability of Paternity is 99.9% or Incriminating nature can be determined by any of the senses.
The seized marijuana leaves were disregarded for having been a fruit
higher there shall be a disputable presumption of Take the case of Pp v. Claudio where a plastic woven bag
of a further search. Given that the police o cers already knew where
paternity. appearing to contain camote tops on the top had a big bundle
to nd the shabu subject of the warrant, it’s logical to assume that
of plastic of marijuana at the bottom since the o cer
the police rst found the shabu and paraphernalia. And after nding
2 Exclusionary Rules the items subject of warrant, police conducted further search. And
recognized its smell.
in the process, seized other items not indicated in the warrant. Search incident to a lawful arrest
Under the 1987 Constitution
Thus, the further search can not be deemed a valid intrusion since This contemplates a situation where a search takes place after a
Right Against Unreasonable Searches and the purpose of the search has already been accomplished. VALID arrest. It can not be the reverse.
Seizure and the Right to Privacy
An arrest is valid if done pursuant to a warrant of arrest or
GR: Any search and seizure is invalid b) Inadvertent Discovery. The seizing o cer should not
under the recognized exceptions. Under Rule 113 Sec 5, there
speci cally look for the incriminating object. Pp v. Musa
EXC: unless made pursuant to a search warrant or falls among the are 3 instances of valid warrantless arrests
demonstrates this requirement.
recognized exceptions.
a. In flagrante delicto. Requires compliance with 2 requisites:
Seizure of Evidence in Plain View A buy-bust operation was conducted outside the house of Musa.
i) Overt acts on the part of the person to be arrested
The poseur-buyer handed Musa the marked money. Musa went
The rationale behind this is the impracticability of authorities indicating that a crime has just been, is being or about to
back to his house to get the illegal drugs. Indeed, he returned, and
procuring search warrant in the face of an incriminating object be committed;
then Musa delivered the shabu to the poseur-buyer.
observed directly by the seizing o cer. For this to prosper, 3 requisites
Trail-blazed by cases such as People v. Amminudin
must be met: When they conducted a body search on Musa, they could not nd
the marked money. The o cers thus barged in the house to look for
a) Prior Valid Intrusion. The seizing o cer must have the Arrest was illegal and cannot be justi ed under in agrante delicto
the marked money. Lo and behold, they found a plastic container
right where he is when he stumbled upon the incriminating because there is nothing illegal about a person disembarking from
hanging over the kitchen which eventually yielded dried marijuana
object. the vessel walking on the gangplank.
leaves.
Take the case of People v. Salanguit
SC ruled that the police went inside for the purpose of looking for People v. Mengote
incriminating evidence. For the plain view doctrine to operate, the
When the purpose of the search warrant is already accomplished, any Police obtained a report of 3 persons acting suspiciously in an alley.
discovery must be inadvertent such that it should not be speci cally
further search is no longer justi ed. Mengote was arrested after being observed to be looking side-to-side,
sought for. The dried marijuana leaves were therefore inadmissible.
with his hand holding his abdomen.
The case involves a search warrant commanding the police to search
and determine a quantity of shabu and paraphernalia. While c) Apparent Illegality of Object. The incriminating nature of There is nothing criminal about this.
implementing the warrant, police further found dried marijuanan the object must be apparent to the observation of the seizing
o cer. Its illegality must be obvious. People v. Sy-Chua
leaves wrapped in newspaper.

An arrested drug-peddler divulged that his source of illegal drugs was A person is stopped and frisked. If the search of his body yields The only allowed search is a visual one, done outside the vehicle. It
Mr Chua. Police then conducted surveillance on Chua and found positive, that person may now be arrested, under in flagrante delicto. does not authorize the o cers to demand the lowering of the windows,
the latter on his way to a hotel. Police saw Chua disembarking from nor to demand that occupants alight from the vehicle.
his car, carrying with him a Zest-o juice box. Police arrested him then Posadas v. CA
Exceptions would be when there is probable cause that the occupants
searched the box and his car, yielding contraband.
There was extensive bodily search on the person who suddenly ran are committing a crime or that the vehicle contains incriminating
There is nothing illegal about this. away upon being approached by the police. This yielded contraband. objects. Refer to Guanzon v. De Villa. Also in
People v. Manalili
compare this with Pp v. Quebral People v. Vinecario
There was a search conducted in a cemetery. When police saw the
Police received a tip-o that 2 men and a woman would meet at a There was a COMELEC Gun Ban. In a checkpoint, a motorcycle
suspect walking wobbly, with his eyes red shut, characteristic of a
certain place for a drug deal. Police dispatched a team to surveil and with 3 men on board sped past it prompting an o cer to whistle
person high on drugs, they approached him and the suspect then
true enough found a jeepney passing by in the vicinity identi ed by them to return.
acted suspiciously. Police then extensively searched the suspect.
the informant.
One of them misrepresented himself to be a military o cer but
Moments later, another vehicle arrived. The woman then handed to Consented Search failed to present an ID. Police noticed a military backpack and when
the man a white envelope, prompting police to swoop down on the asked by the police to hand it over, they took turns in passing it to
This is based on the principle of waiver. A search is an intrusion into
suspects, seize the envelope which yielded marijuana. each other. They were restless and dgety. Acting on their suspicious
the privacy of the individual. This is a personal right available to the
SC saw it di erently. What happened here is the opposite of person concerned, and may be waived only by the person concerned. actuations, police conducted the search that yielded some
Amminudin. Here, search rst, arrest later. The search was He who invokes it, waives it. contraband.
predicated from a valid tip-o , su cient ground for probable cause SC upheld the search ruling that if there is probable cause, a more
to conduct the search. The tip-o was validated by the police on the People v. Damaso extensive search is allowed although done in a checkpoint.
ground when the transaction actually took place.
The apartment rented by the accused was raided by the authorities.
Thus, for purposes of warrantless search, probable cause, which may Accused was not there when the raid took place. Police were allowed Right of Persons under Custodial Investigation
be derived from a telephone call, is su cient, if of course validated entry by the househelp. This consent is not valid. The search was or the Miranda Rights
by the observation of the arresting o cers on the ground. thus invalid. When are these rights available? Only in custodial investigations.
ii) Personal knowledge of the arresting o cer Checkpoint Search What is a custodial investigation? It is a stage wherein the
investigation ceases to be a general inquiry in an unsolved crime
b. Hot pursuit. Valid as long as to meet the exigencies of public order and for as long as and now focuses on a particular suspect placed or taken under
the search is not extensive or intrusive. It should not involve the search custody, and otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in a
c. Arrest of an escaped prisoner.
of the occupants of the vehicle, nor it should allow the search of the signi cant way by the o cer who carries out the process of
Terry Search vehicle itself. investigation aimed at eliciting admission from the suspect. Thus,
there are 4 requisites.

1) Investigation should no longer be a general inquiry, and is People v. Edna Malngan

SC sustained the inadmissibility of the confession since the practice
already accusatory;
of the police in inviting him amounted to custodial investigation Malngan was a househelp who burnt down the house of her
Police line-up is not a custodial investigation. where his Miranda rights should have been observed and enforced. employer. She was identi ed by the neighbors and was picked up by
the barangay captain.
2) Suspect must be taken into custody of law.
3) The confession made must be in response to police
In the course of the interrogation by the barangay captain, Edna
interrogation. Spontaneous statements pro ered not
People v. Guting confessed. SC rejected the confession as it was not done via the
through interrogation are not covered by the Miranda
assistance of a counsel. Barangay captain is considered as a law
The son stabbed his father to death. He approached two policemen doctrine.
enforcement agent.
standing across the police station and voluntarily confessed to them.
People v. Andan
SC says Miranda rights are not available here. Also includes public prosecutors conducting the
Murder and rape of a minor girl. Andan was arrested and detained. preliminary investigation, as well as judges
Under RA 7438, "custodial investigation" shall include the When he learned that the mayor was in the police station, he sought
practice of issuing an "invitation" to a person who is investigated an audience with the mayor. Without being interrogated by the People v. Bokingco
in connection with an o ense he is suspected to have committed, mayor, Andan broke down and confessed to the mayor.
Involves murder of a contractor. During PI, they were interrogated
without prejudice to the liability of the "inviting" o cer for any This is not covered as his confession was a spontaneous statement by the prosecutor without assistance of counsel.
violation of law. done in an ordinary manner. The Miranda rights were never
SC sustained the inadmissibility of the evidence as their confession
intended to prevent the suspect from being truthful. Instead, it was
People v. Lauga was done under custodial investigation. The suspects were subjected
intended to avoid the slightest coercion that may compel the suspect
to the same coercive, relentless and intimidating atmosphere as to
Father raped his daughter. The mother sought the assistance of a to admit to something that he never did.
compel them to admit something that they may not have done.
bantay-bayan. The bantay-bayan invited the father to the house of
the barangay captain. The father confessed to the crime. 4) The one questioning must be a law enforcement agent. People v. Baloloy
The extrajudicial confession was then impugned for violating the Rape-slay of a minor girl where the suspect took the liberty of
People v. Guillermo
Miranda doctrine. SC sustained. He was under custodial reporting the crime but not him as the culpable one. During the
investigation. When Guillermo was arrested, he was visited by reporters. He was wake, the barangay captain went in front and raised a black rope and
interviewed, wherein he confessed to the killing. asked who its owner was. To Baloloy’s credit, he admitted having
People v. Del Rosario
Not covered because the one asking the question were not law owned the rope. So he eventually confessed.
A case for murder. A witness positively identi ed the driver of the enforcement o cers. Witnesses and Baloloy were brought to the judge for them to
getaway motorcycle. The driver was invited by police where he
subscribe to their a davit. During that proceeding, the judge asked
confessed. Who may be regarded as law enforcement agents? Police,
Baloloy certain questions prompting Baloloy to confess. Such
Mayor, Barangay Captains.
confession was deemed inadmissible.

Questioning conducted by employers to their employees NOT pupil. Accused sought the exclusion of these evidence for having The kernel of the privilege is testimonial compulsion. Thus, it covers
COVERED. been obtained without the assistance of counsel. generally testimonial evidence. Object evidence or those that are purely
mechanical are not covered.
SC rejected this contention ruling that the Miranda rights only cover
De Castro v. People
testimonial evidence and not object evidence.
US v. Ong Siu Hong
De Castro was accused of estafa thru falsi cation. She was made to
People v. Malimit
undergo disciplinary proceedings. She executed an extrajudicial This involves compelling a suspect to discharge morphine from his
confession admitting culpability. Malimit was a suspect for robbery and while under custody, he mouth. He invoked his right against self-incrimination. SC rebu ed
confessed and pointed to the location where they hid the stolen him, ruling that the right applies only to testimonial compulsion.
De Castro can not invoke Miranda rights. The proceedings were not
goods.
initiated by the State but by private individuals. ADMISSIBLE! US v. Tan Teng
Malimit sought the exclusion of the goods as evidence contending
This involves a suspect compelled to submit to physical tests where
that these were procured in violation of his rights under Sec 12 Art
substances emitted by his body were subjected to laboratory tests to
People v. Bongcarawan III. SC rejected such an argument, applying the rule that object
determine if he is a icted with gonorrhea. The victim of the acts of
evidence is not covered under the Miranda warnings.
Security employed by a private employer is not a law enforcement lasciviousness was also a icted with gonorrhea.
agent. A passenger of a vessel whose bag was searched by the security Tan Teng’s objection was rejected since this is not covered by the
Right Against Self-incrimination
guard employed by the shipping rm. Passenger argued that the privilege of self-incrimination.
search was illegal because it was not done with a search warrant. §17 Art III. No person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
Villaflor v. Summers
SC disagreed on the ground that the constitutional right against
correlate with Rule 130, Sections 27, 29 & 31 Consistent with this doctrine, an accused of adultery may be
unreasonable search and seizure does not apply.
Section 27. Admission of a party. — The act, declaration or omission of a
compelled to submit to a pregnancy test to prove that the baby she is
What types of evidence are covered under the party as to a relevant fact may be given in evidence against him or her. carrying is sired by a man other than her husband.
Miranda warnings? People v. Vallejo
Section 29. Admission by third party. — The rights of a party cannot be
GR: Testimonial evidence, only. prejudiced by an act, declaration, or omission of another, except as
Rape and slay of a minor child. DNA test was conducted on the
hereinafter provided.
vaginal swab taken from the victim. This was compared to the DNA
People v. Baylon Section 31. Admission by conspirator. — The act or declaration of a pro le of Vallejo which yielded a positive match. This again is not
conspirator in furtherance of the conspiracy and during its existence, may covered by the right against self-incrimination.
Killing of a teacher witnessed by the pupil. The pupil described the
be given in evidence against the co-conspirator after the conspiracy is
assailant as wearing a hat, maong pants, white shirt, green
shown by evidence other than such act of declaration. The same principle applies as when accused is subjected to:
handkerchief wrapped around his neck. Acting on the description
given, police arrested the suspect. Suspect was stripped of his a) Fingerprinting;
clothing and presented to court to corroborate the testimony of the
b) Para n test;

c) Photographing; When is the right invocable? What kind of proceeding is this invocable? Pascual v. Board of Examiners
ANY, as long as the proceeding is initiated by the State. Remember
d) Forcing accused to strip naked to show conditions of his body; Pascual was administratively charged for gross misconduct that
People v. Marti.
could strip him o his license. The proceeding is penal in nature
e) Forcing accused to measure parts of his body for comparison.
When is a question incriminating? When the question calls for an since it could possibly forfeit his license which is a property right.
These are purely mechanical, and not protected by the right against answer that may establish criminal liability or expose the witness to Pascual may then refuse to take the witness stand.
self-incrimination. criminal prosecution. If it only tends to establish civil or
Cabal v. Kapunan
The principle no longer applies if the process of examination would administrative liability, the question is NOT incriminating.
Cabal is a military o cer accused of violating the Anti-Graft and
require the intervention of the mind or the mental faculty of the Although the right may be invoked in any proceeding, the nature of the
Corrupt practices Act as well as Anti Ill-gotten wealth. He was
subject. This piece of evidence is now protected. question propounded is an entirely di erent matter. The right may
investigated by the Department of National Defense in an
only be invoked against those questions that are incriminating.
administrative proceeding. There, he refused to take the witness
Beltran v. Samson
If the question seeks an admission for a crime that has prescribed or stand.
When a person charged with falsi cation of documents was forced that the person has already been granted immunity, this is no longer
SC sustained Cabal’s refusal ruling that the nature of the proceeding
to produce a sample of his handwriting to compare it with the covered. This is no longer incriminating since the person would no
is penal since it could possibly result in the forfeiture of his property
alleged falsi ed document. longer be exposed to possible criminal liability or prosecution.
by the State.
The SC sustained Samson’s objection holding that this is not purely How do you invoke the right against self-incrimination?
mechanical since producing one’s handwriting involves the How about in Rosete v. Lim
Refuse to take Refuse to answer
intervention of the mind. Proceeding
witness stand questions This is an action for nullity of documents and recovery of property.
Jaime dela Cruz v. People
Parallel to the civil proceedings is a criminal action for violation of
Even if evidence was taken by a purely mechanical act but it has
CRIMINAL ✔ ✔ BP 22.
absolutely no relation to the principal cause of the arrest of the
CIVIL ✘ Only incriminating In the civil case, the plainti sought the deposition of the
suspect, it is still subject to the protection of the right against
respondents who were the accused in the criminal case. Respondents
self-incrimination.
ADMIN ✘ Only incriminating refused to participate in the deposition contending that any
Here, the suspect was arrested for alleged extortion but was testimony that may be taken from him may surely be used in the
subjected to a urine test that yielded positive results of drug use. The moment an incriminating question is propounded, the right may criminal case.
then be invoked and defendant may refuse to answer the question.
In the prior cases discussed, the evidence was related to the principal SC reiterated the rule that the manner of invoking the right is
cause of arrest, unlike in this case. Urine has nothing to do with An exception in Civil and Admin cases is when the proceeding is di erent from criminal on the one hand, and civil and admin on the
extortion. Unless you use urine to extort. PENAL IN NATURE. The manner of invoking the right is similar to other. Respondents can not refuse to participate in the deposition
that of criminal proceedings. taking in the civil case but have the right to not answer incriminating
questions.

If the one invoking is a witness, he can not altogether refuse to take the nature and may not be examined, inquired or looked into by any person,
SC sustained the lawyers saying the right against self-incrimination
witness stand even in criminal proceedings. Also, the witness does not government o cial, bureau or o ce, except...
covers not only testimonial but also documentary evidence.
stand on equal footing with the accused. He is called not for the
Also covered here is with regard to privileged communication RA 6426, Foreign Currency Deposits Act of the Philippines
purpose of him being incriminated.
between lawyer and client. Generally, disclosure of the identity of SEC. 8. Secrecy of deposits.—The secrecy of deposits under this Act shall be
Just like any other rights, the right against self-incrimination can be
the client is not con dential. However, if it would lead to possible governed in accordance with the provisions of RA 1405.
waived, either expressly or impliedly. The implied waiver takes place
criminal liability on the part of the client, then it becomes
a) when the accused voluntarily takes the stand; or con dential. We have RA 1405, a law of general application, which prohibits the
access or inquiring into the bank deposit without the consent of the
b) when a witness voluntarily answers an incriminating question;
Exclusionary Rules Under Special Laws depositor, subject to exceptions.
or
1. upon written permission of the depositor, or
c) when the counsel fails to timely object. Documentary Stamp Tax
What’s the procedural effect of non-payment of DST? Any taxable 2. in cases impeachment, or
Take note that this waiver is limited. This only covers questions related
to the crime as regards to which the accused testi es. The waiver does document that does not comply with DST is INADMISSIBLE in 3. upon order of a competent court in cases of bribery or
not extend to other possible criminal liability not subject to the evidence in court. dereliction of duty of public o cials, or
criminal proceeding. Here, counsel should timely object on the ground The court however is liberal in applying this. When a party fails to 4. in cases where the money deposited or invested is the subject
that the question is irrelevant to the fact in issue. comply with the DST, the court shall require its compliance rst rather matter of the litigation.
What is protected by the privilege? Testimonial, object, and ALSO than outrightly excluding the document. Failure to comply with such
Another law is RA 6426, Foreign Currency Deposits Act, a law of
documentary. an order will then justify the exclusion of such documents in evidence.
speci c application, that a ords immunity of a foreign currency
What are these taxable documents? deposit from being levied or attached on execution; as well as being
Regala v. Sandiganbayan examined or inquired to. There is only one exception: CONSENT of
a) Certi cates of stocks;
This case involves the Coco Levy Fund. It was alleged that proceeds depositor, as enunciated in PSB v. Senate Impeachment Court.
b) Any deed reconveying real property; Forgetting their previous ruling in
of the fund were funneled to corporations of the cronies of Marcos.
c) Insurance policies;
During the proceedings, the government moved that the lawyers be
Salvacion v. Central Bank
compelled to disclose the identity of their principals. The lawyers d) SPAs, etc.
were forced to produce corporate records to establish the identity of The rationale of FCDA is to help the PH economy by encouraging
Secrecy of Bank Deposits foreign investors. The law was enacted to a ord absolute protection
their principals. The lawyers invoked right against self-incrimination,
for possible criminal prosecution for violation of the Anti-Dummy of foreign currency deposits.
SEC. 2. All deposits of whatever nature with banks or banking institutions
Law. in the Philippines including investments in bonds issued by the In this case, accused was convicted of raping a Filipina girl several
Government of the Philippines, its political subdivisions and its times. SC said the accused was merely a transient. His deposit did
instrumentalities, are hereby considered as of an absolutely con dential

not in any way serve the purpose of the law. Therefore, there is no Their conversation turned violent that resulted in the death of a
Ramirez presented a recording of the altercation hoping to nail
reason to apply the law to his bene t. reporter.
Garcia, but ended up being nailed by it.
Unknownst to Navarro, the confrontation was secretly recorded by
These prohibitions are imposed particularly on the bank o cers and Ramirez contended that she could not be liable since she was a party
the other reporter. Navarro objected to the presentation of the
institutions. It is not a prohibition imposed on the depositor. to the conversation. SC disagreed saying that the literal language of
recording as it allegedly violated RA 4200.
the law says that ANY person not being authorized is liable.
Anti-Wire Tapping Act
SC rebu ed him holding that the recorded confrontation was
This law punishes anyone who, without the permission of all parties to PUBLIC, taking into account that: Rape Shield Protection Rule
a private communication or spoken words, tap any wire or cable, or use Section 6, Republic Act No. 8505, otherwise known as the
a) The confrontation happened in a public place;
any device to intercept, overhear, record such communication by using “Rape Victim Assistance and Protection Act of 1998”
devices such as dictaphone, dictagraph, walkie talkie, tape recorder, or b) It took place in the presence of many other people.
any device however described. All these negate privacy. SEC. 6. Rape Shield. — In prosecutions for rape, evidence of
complainant's past sexual conduct, opinion thereof or of his/ her
Gaanan v. CA Gaanan v. CA
reputation shall not be admitted unless, and only to the extent that the
SC took note that the conversations between the lawyers were court nds, that such evidence is material and relevant to the case.
This involves a telephone conversation between two lawyers. Atty.
Pintor called up Atty Laconico to discuss a possible settlement in a private. If it was only meant to be heard to a speci c person, then it
Sexual Abuse Shield Rule
criminal case. Unknown to Pintor, Laconico allowed his client to is private.
listen to the conversation using an extension telephone line. Section 30, Rule on Examination of a Child Witness, A.M.
Had Pintor known that someone else was listening to the
No. 00-4-07 dated 21 November 2000, e ective 15 December
The client was prosecuted for violation of RA 4200. conversation, he would not have proceeded with it. The intent of the
2000
speaker was taken into consideration.
SC ruled that the use of an extension telephone line is not
prohibited under RA 4200. Applying ejusdem generis, the Inadmissibility of any recording in violation of the Act only refers Section 30. Sexual abuse shield rule. —
prohibited devices are used for illegal purposes, but an extension against the person who did not consent to the recording, or whose a) Inadmissible evidence. — The following evidence is NOT
telephone line is not intended for an illegitimate purpose. It was a right has been violated. So that if the recording is presented against admissible in any criminal proceeding involving alleged child
common practice to allow extension wires. the violator, it is admissible. sexual abuse:
1) Evidence o ered to prove that the alleged victim

Needless to state, RA 4200 does not cover video recordings. Not all Ramirez v. CA engaged in other sexual behavior; and
communications are covered, only PRIVATE.
Involves 2 friends, or maybe not so. One day, they had a meeting, 2) Evidence o ered to prove the sexual predisposition of
Navarro v. People Garcia lambasted Ramirez, calling her names, and unleashed her the alleged victim.
vilifying words against Ramirez. Ramirez got o ended and sued
Two reporters proceeded to the police station to report the public b) Exception. — Evidence of speci c instances of sexual behavior
Garcia for damages arising from defamation. by the alleged victim to prove that a person other than the accused
exhibition of women in a bar. Navarro acted hostile to the reporters.
was the source of semen, injury, or other physical evidence shall be

admissible. Exclusionary rule only applies against the person whose rights have Terrorism is committed when a person or group of persons commit
been violated under the law. It is admissible against the violator of the an act causing widespread panic and extraordinary fear upon the
Anti VAWC law subject to the following conditions: populace to compel the government to give in to unlawful demands.
Section 44, Republic Act No. 9262 otherwise known as “An Act 1) There should be a court order allowing the use of the This law also provides for exceptions to the so-called authorized
De ning Violence against Women and their Children” recording; surveillance. There are certain types of communications which cannot
be the subject of a CA-authorized wire-tapping:
SECTION 44. Confidentiality. — All records pertaining to cases of
2) Court is convinced it is necessary for the purposes of
violence against women and their children including those in the barangay prosecution and conviction of the law-o ender or if necessary a) Lawyer-Client;
shall be con dential and all public o cers and employees and public or in the prevention of the commission of further similar acts.
b) Physician-Patient;
private clinics to hospitals shall respect the right to privacy of the victim.
This is unlike in any other exclusionary rules that does not require a
c) Journalist-Sources;
prior court order in order to use the evidence against the violator.
Anti-Photo and Video Voyeurism Act d) Business correspondence.
Does the Act protect crime? Is there privacy in crime? There’s nothing in
Prohibits taking of photo or video coverage of a person or group of These are still privileged communication that must be protected. It
the law that remotely distinguishes so long as the video was taken
persons performing sexual act, or of a similar activity; capturing the would appear from the literal language of the law that any
without the consent of the persons concerned, inadmissible. In the
image of the individual’s private area under such circumstances communication is protected regardless of tenor. But juxtaposed with
same manner that an illegally intercepted conversation is still protected.
without the consent of the person and under such circumstances the privileged communication rule, while their communication is
wherein there is reasonable expectation of privacy. Reason for the restrictions: This is a sensitive material that is not
indeed by professional con dentiality, it is far from being absolute.
supposed to be exposed to the public.
Covered: This does not protect illegitimate or illegal communication. It
Human Security Act only covers conversations which are relevant for the purpose of the
a) the naked or undergarment clad genitals,
professional engagement.
Provides the exception by allowing certain communications to be
b) pubic area, with or without hair
legally intercepted, overheard or recorded. This applies in a situation Take note that the exclusionary rule imposes a positive command,
c) buttocks or wherein the communication is made between persons or organizations makes any recorded conversation inadmissible absolutely against
d) female breast. which are judicially declared an outlawed terrorist, or any person ANY person.
suspected or charged with terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism.
The protection presupposes lack of consent on the part of the persons Data Privacy Act
concerned; or wherein there is reasonable expectation of privacy. This can only be done if authorized by an order issued by an
This generally regulates the gathering, processing, use and disclosure of
appropriate division of the CA. It has a lifespan of 30 days, renewable
Other prohibited acts include the act of copying or reproducing, sale or personal data of individuals. This covers any person or entities that
for another 30 days. Take note of the subject of the surveillance:
distribution, or possession of such recordings. Consent must be given process personal information. Examples:
to each of the prohibited acts. a) Judicially declared outlawed terrorist organizations;
a) Academic institutions;
b) Those suspected of terrorism or conspiracy to commit
b) Banks;
terrorism;

c) Companies hiring employees, among others. that relates to the position or functions of the individual. The Act a ords some rights to the data subject, such as the right to be
forgotten.
GR: The processing of personal information shall NOT be 2. Information about an individual who is or was performing
allowed, subject to exceptions. service under contract for a government institution; Take note of the extended privileged communication. Privileged
communication can only be invoked by the holder, in this case, the data
Personal Data is any information from which 3. Information relating to any discretionary bene t of a nancial
nature such as the granting of a license or permit given by the subject. However, under Sec 15 of the Act, Personal information
a) The identity of an individual is apparent; or
government; controllers may invoke the principle of privileged communication
b) The identity can be ascertained; or over privileged information that they lawfully control or process.
4. Personal information processed for journalistic, artistic,
c) If put together with other information will directly and literary or research purposes; Subject to existing laws and regulations, any evidence gathered on
certainly identify an individual. privileged information is inadmissible.
5. Information necessary in order to carry out the functions of
Sensitive personal information includes the individual’s: public authority; Although it provides penalties for violations against processing of
a) Race, ethnic origin, marital status, age, color, and religious, personal and sensitive personal information, it does not speak of the
6. Information necessary for banks and other nancial
philosophical or political a liations; admissibility or inadmissibility of these information when illegally
institutions;
procured.
b) health, education, genetic or sexual life of a person; 7. Personal information originally collected from residents of
The law is conspicuous by its silence.
c) social security numbers, previous or cm-rent health records, foreign jurisdiction.
licenses or its denials, suspension or revocation, and tax return. SUMMARY
GR: The processing of sensitive personal information and
privileged information shall NOT be allowed. EVIDENCE ADMISSIBLE AGAINST VIOLATOR VICTIM
Privileged information refers to any and all forms of data which
under the Rules of Court and other pertinent laws constitute EXC: Wiretapping Act ✔ ✘
privileged communication.
1) With the consent of data subject — evidenced by a written or
1. Lawyer-Client; orally recorded consent. Anti-Photo and Video Voyeurism Act ✔ ✘
2. Physician-Patient; 2) The processing is necessary to protect the health and life Human Security Act ✘ ✘
3. Journalist-Sources; of the data subject or any person and the data subject is
incapable of giving his consent. Privileged
4. Priest-Penitent; Data Privacy Act ✘
Info
3) When necessary for medical purposes;
5. Business correspondence.
4) When required by existing laws;
NOT COVERED are:
1. Information about any individual who is or was an o cer or
5) When necessary to protect one’s rights and interests in court Documentary Evidence
proceedings. E
employee of a government institution; Rule 130, B

De nition Consolidated Bank and Trust v. Del Monte Motor Works

During trial, the prosecution presented a photocopy of the marked
The rule is inapplicable here since the content of the note is not at money. Thus, the contents of the document presented is not the
Original Document Rule
issue. Defendants did not dispute the content of the note. Their controlling issue. The photocopy was presented to prove its
Secondary Evidence only defense was that they did not receive the loan. The note was existence which is an extraneous matter.
only o ered as proof that the note was issued as evidence of the loan.
Same with Arceo v. People where
Parol Evidence Rule
i. When the original document is unavailable. — Establish A photocopy was presented to prove not the contents, but the
1 De nition the following: existence of the bum check.
1. Meaning of documentary evidence 1. Existence and authenticity of original;

c. Meaning of original document and duplicate
The operative fact is that the evidence is o ered to prove as to 2. Fact of loss;
i. An "original” of a document is
its contents, which is the subject of inquiry. 3. Absence of bad faith;
1. The document, itself; or
2. Requisites for admissibility. — 4. Contents of the original.
2. Any counterpart intended to have the same e ect
a. Relevance; ii. When the original document is in the adverse party's by a person executing or issuing it.
b. Competency; custody or control. — or the original cannot be
ii. Data is "original" if stored in a computer or similar device
obtained by local judicial processes or procedures.
c. Proper authentication. 1. any printout or
iii. Summaries. — When the original consists of numerous
accounts or other documents. 2. other output readable by sight or
2 Original Document Rule
3. other means, shown to re ect the data accurately.
a. Meaning of the rule. — Formerly, the Best Evidence Rule, Compania Maritima v. Allied Free Workers
iii. A "duplicate" is a counterpart produced by
this is an exclusionary rule that applies only to documentary For the secondary evidence rule to apply, the original voluminous
evidence. It is a rule of preference. If the original document is 1. the same impression as the original, or
accounts or records should be made accessible to the adverse party
available, present the original, and nothing else. However, if for examination or even for copying. 2. from the same matrix, or
the original is not available, the next to best, the secondary
3. by means of photography, including
evidence, is allowed. iv. When the original document is a public record.
enlargements and miniatures, or
Under this rule, if the subject of inquiry is the contents of v. Collateral Fact Rule. — When the original is not
4. by mechanical or electronic re-recording, or
the document, no evidence other than the original is admitted. closely-related to a controlling issue.
5. by chemical reproduction, or
b. When NOT applicable
People v. Tandoy 6. by other equivalent techniques which accurately
reproduce the original.

iv. A "duplicate" is technically NOT an original but is 3) Summaries a) Chart; considering their age and the fact that they could not even
treated as such. It is a functional equivalent of the remember their own birthdays.
b) Summary; or
original. It is admissible to the same extent as the original
D. In contrast, respondents presented as evidence the Primary
unless c) Calculation.
Entry Book which is an o cial record of all instruments
1. a genuine question is raised as to the authenticity 4) Public record Certi ed true copy of the original issued by led with the Register of Deeds.
of the original, or the legal custodian. 1. As a public document, it is entitled to a presumption
2. in the circumstances, it is unjust or inequitable to of truth as to the recitals contained therein pursuant to
5) Collateral Fact ANY evidence, since the Original Document
admit the duplicate in lieu of the original. Section 44, Rule 130 of the ROC.
Rule Rule does not apply.
E. Having been executed within the ve-year prohibitory
3 Secondary Evidence period, the Deed of Sale, as correctly ruled by the CA, is
Prodon v. Alvarez 2013 void ab initio.
Exception Corresponding Secondary Evidence
SC distinguished how to prove a fact or a document when the best See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 34
1) When a) a copy , or2 evidence rule does not apply. SC said any form of evidence may be
unavailable presented since there is no need to strictly follow the rules on
b) by a recital of its contents in some
secondary evidence because secondary evidence nds no application City of Tanauan v. Millonte 28 Jun 2021
authentic document, or
when the best evidence rule is inapplicable.
c) by the testimony of witnesses in the 1. The Deed of Absolute Sale was indeed null and void.
order stated. (this is not strictly 2. To prove that the signatures of the Gonzagas were forgeries
enforced) Heirs of Bagaygay v. Heirs of Paciente 04 Aug 2021 because they had died prior to the execution of the Deed of
Absolute Sale, Millonte submitted
2) When in If the adverse party, despite reasonable notice,
Documentary evidence prevails over testimonial evidence.
adverse party's fails to produce the original, the original is 2.1. a Certi cation indicating the fact of death of
custody or control now deemed lost, destroyed or unavailable. A. Section 5, Rule 130 the ROC allows the presentation of Ambrosio;
Thus, secondary evidence under the rst secondary evidence when the original document has been
2.2. Certi cations stating that the death certi cates of
exception, may now be resorted to. lost or destroyed and its unavailability has been duly
Pantaleona, Lucio, Marcelo, and Eleuteria could
established.
not be produced or located due to the re;
B. As a rule, documentary evidence takes precedence over
2 2.3. the testimonies of the relatives of the deceased.
Normally, a copy is a functional equivalent, and is therefore treated as an original. testimonial evidence as the latter can easily be fabricated.
This copy as secondary evidence would apply in a situation where there is genuine 3. Millonte's resort to secondary evidence was proper, as the
question of authenticity of the original. This means that if the authenticity of the C. The testimonies of petitioner Anecita and Anastacia with
original is being questioned, its copy will no longer be treated as an original but merely original documents (the death certi cates of the other
secondary. In consequence thereof, the original must rst be accounted for before respect to the date of execution cannot be relied upon
presentation of such copy.

Gonzaga siblings) were unavailable because these were successors in interest, no evidence of such terms other than the i. Intrinsic Ambiguity, Mistake or Imperfection.
destroyed by the re. contents of the written agreement.
ii. Failure to reflect the true intention of the
4. More importantly, as long as one contracting party to the However, a party may present evidence to modify, explain or add to the parties.
contract is proven with evidence to be dead at the time of terms of written agreement if he or she puts in issue in a verified pleading:
the execution of the contract — in this case, Ambrosio — Heirs of Policronio Ureta v. Heirs of Liberato Ureta 2011
a) An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or imperfection in the written
the Deed of Absolute Sale should be considered as agreement; In their Answer, the heirs of Alfonso, pleaded it as an issue that the
de nitely simulated.
b) The failure of the written agreement to express the true intent deed of sale did not re ect the true intention of the parties, because
5. Thus, the Deed of Absolute Sale is null and void. and agreement of the parties thereto; the deed was ctitious. Heirs of Policronio objected, invoking parol
evidence rule.
6. Petitioner could not even claim to be an innocent purchaser c) The validity of the written agreement; or
for value since it did not show that it fully ascertained the d) The existence of other terms agreed to by the parties or their SC overruled the objection since it was impleaded that the true
identities and genuineness of the signatures of the successors in interest after the execution of the written agreement. intention of the parties was not re ected in the contract.
purported vendors.
The term "agreement" includes wills. iii. Validity of the agreement. The application of the
7. Article 1410 of the Civil Code states that the action or
parol evidence rule presupposes a valid contract. This
defense for the declaration of the inexistence of a contract a. Application of the parol evidence rule. — There are was also applied in the case of Heirs of Ureta v. Heirs
does not prescribe. three conditions before parol evidence rule applies: of Ureta, as it was alleged that the deed of sale was
7.1. Millonte, as an heir, could assail the validity of the i. If other terms or agreement, other than those simulated and therefore void.
Deed of Absolute Sale even years after the written, are sought to be proved; iv. Terms subsequent to the execution of the
execution of the document, and even if the title of
ii. These other terms or agreements are sought to be agreement. These other terms agreed upon AFTER
the property has already been transferred in the
proved by extraneous evidence other than the terms the execution of the written agreement can be
name of the City of Tanauan.
of the written agreement itself; interpreted as the parties’ intention to modify the
See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 41 previously executed agreement.
iii. These other terms or agreements are contrary to or
inconsistent with the terms of the written Canuto v. Mariano
agreement.
4 Parol Evidence Rule There was this deed of sale with a right of repurchase. The seller was
b. When parol evidence can be introduced. — For given one year to exercise her right to repurchase. When the one year
purposes of invoking the exception, there is one, singular, period was about to expire, and anticipating her inability to
Section 10. Rule 130. Evidence of written agreements. — When the terms
indispensable requirement: that the party should raise repurchase, the seller approached the buyer requesting for a grace
of an agreement have been reduced to writing, it is considered as containing
all the terms agreed upon and there can be, as between the parties and their
any or some of these exceptions in a VERIFIED period. The buyer graciously agreed. The one year period lapsed. But
pleading. before the grace period expired, the seller approached the buyer and

o ered to pay the repurchase price. But the buyer refused, Truthfulness or Accuracy in the evidence to unmask the true intent behind the written
Issue
contending that the redemption period has expired. falsity of the contents contents of document word.
SC ruled in favor of the seller applying the 4th exception that the 1. However, no such vice of consent or illegalities were
Only to documents
grace period the seller tried to prove by extraneous evidence is To ALL forms of proven to taint the Deed of Sale and Agreement.
Application which consist of a
another term executed by the parties AFTER the execution of the document
contract or agreement. 2. Thus, there is no reason to look beyond the plain
written deed of sale with repurchase.
import of the parties' contractual stipulations.
By and against a party By and against ALL
Who exactly is this party to a written agreement? Invocability
to the agreement. parties See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 60
a) Those who signed the written agreement;
b) Stipulation pour autrui. One who may not be a
party, but stands to bene t out of the terms of the Bacala v. Heirs of Sps Poliño 10 Feb 2021 Testimonial Evidence
F
written agreement. This was illustrated in the Rule 130, C
A. The parol evidence rule forbids any addition to or
relatively recent case of
contradiction of the terms of a written instrument by
Quali cations of Witnesses
testimony or other evidence purporting to show that, at or
Heirs of Pacres v. Heirs of Ygoña 2010
before the execution of the parties' written agreement, Disquali cations of Witnesses
SC had the occasion to apply the principle of stipulation pour other or di erent terms were agreed upon by the parties,
autrui in relation to parol evidence rule. Even if the heirs were not varying the purport of the written contract. Testimonial Privilege
parties to the deed of sale, since the alleged undertakings of Ygoña
B. The plain meaning rule assumes that the intent of the
purport to bene t Mario and his heirs, they are deemed to be Admissions and confessions
parties to an instrument is embodied in the writing itself,
bene ciaries of such undertakings. Being bene ciaries, they are in
and when the words are clear and unambiguous the intent Previous Conduct as Evidence
law deemed to be parties to the contract.
is to be discovered only from the express language of the
c) If a person’s claim is based upon a written agreement. Testimonial Knowledge
agreement or when he asserts a right emanating C. The "four corners" rule allows courts in some cases to Hearsay and Exceptions to the Hearsay Rule
from the written agreement. Even if he is not a party, search beneath the semantic surface for clues to meaning.
he is deemed a party to the contract. Opinion Rule
D. In case of fraud, mistake, or any other vice vitiating consent
c. Distinguish: original document rule and parol by either or both of the parties, or if any or all contractual
evidence rule
Character Evidence
stipulations would be shown to be contrary to law, morals,
good customs, public order, or public policy, the courts
As to Parol Original Document may step in to consider all the prevailing circumstances and 1 Quali cations of Witnesses

GR: All persons who can perceive, and perceiving, can make 1) in a civil case led by one spouse against the other c. Attorney's secretary, stenographer, or clerk, or
their known perception to others, may be witnesses. spouse; other persons assisting the attorney.
a. While “mental insanity” and “mental immaturity” are 2) in a criminal case for a crime committed by one EXC:
no longer grounds to disqualify the witness from spouse against the other spouse or against the latter’s
a. Furtherance of crime or fraud. — refers only
testifying, his or her testimony must still be subjected to direct descendants or ascendants.
to “future crime or fraud”
the test of weight and credibility.
Alvarez v. Ramirez b. Claimants through same deceased client. —
b. However, Section 6 of the Rules on Examination of a communication may be essential to an accurate
Child Witness requires the court to conduct a The better rule is that, when an o ense directly attacks, or directly
resolution of competing claims of succession and
competency examination of a child witness, motu and vitally impairs, the conjugal relation, it comes within the
the testator would presumably favor disclosure in
proprio or upon motion of a party, when it nds that exception to the statute that one shall not be a witness against the
order to dispose of his estate accordingly.
substantial doubt exists regarding the ability of the child other except in a criminal prosecution for a crime committed by one
against the other. c. Breach of duty by lawyer or client. — does
to perceive, remember, communicate, distinguish truth
not cover any and all of the information obtained
from falsehood, or appreciate the duty to tell the truth in
b. Disqualification by Reason of Privileged or advice given in the course of the engagement;
court.
Communications; Rule on Third Parties but only such information or advice as may be
relevant to the issue of the breach of duty.
Navarro Marcos v. Navarro, Jr 2013 1) Husband and wife. — The husband or the wife,
during or after the marriage, CANNOT be examined d. Document attested by the lawyer. — as a
As a handwriting expert of the PNP, PO2 Alvarez can surely
without the consent of the other as to any lawyer who acts as an attesting witness is
perceive and make known her perception to others. We have no
communication received in con dence by one from the technically not providing professional service.
doubt that she is quali ed as a witness. She cannot be disquali ed as
other during the marriage EXCEPT
a witness since she possesses none of the disquali cations speci ed e. Joint clients. — the common lawyer may be
under the Rules. a) in a civil case by one against the other, or examined on such communication, but only if
the communication is o ered in an action
b) in a criminal case for a crime committed by one
between any of the clients.
against the other or the latter's direct descendants or
2 Disquali cations of Witnesses ascendants.
Regala v. Sandiganbayan
a. Disqualification by Reason of Marriage 2) Attorney and client; exceptions
The general rule in our jurisdiction is that a lawyer may not invoke
GR: Either spouse may testify for, but not against, the GR: Persons covered by the privilege: the privilege and refuse to divulge the name or identity of his client.
other spouse; a. Attorney; This is quali ed by some important exceptions:
EXC: b. Any person reasonably believed by the client to
be licensed to engage in the practice of law;

treatment of the patient's physical, mental or emotional

4) Priest and penitent. — A minister, priest or person
1) Client identity is privileged where a strong probability exists condition, including alcohol or drug addiction, between
reasonably believed to be so cannot, without the consent
that revealing the client’s name would implicate that the patient and his or her physician or psychotherapist.
of the a ected person, be examined as to ANY
client in the very activity for which he sought the lawyer’s
communication or confession made to or any advice
advice. Lim v. CA
given by him or her, in his or her professional character.
2) Where disclosure would open the client to civil liability, In order that the privilege may be successfully claimed, the following
5) Public officers. — A public o cer cannot be examined
his identity is privileged. requisites must concur:
during or after his or her tenure as to communications
3) Where the government’s lawyers have no case against an 1. the privilege is claimed in a CIVIL case; made to him or her in o cial con dence, when the court
attorney’s client unless, by revealing the client’s name, the nds that the public interest would su er by the
2. the person against whom the privilege is claimed is one duly
said name would furnish the only link that would form disclosure.
authorized to practice medicine, surgery or obstetrics;
the chain of testimony necessary to convict an individual of
a crime, the client’s name is privileged. 3. such person acquired the information while he was
6) Rule on Third Parties. — ⭐The
communication
shall remain privileged, EVEN IN THE HANDS OF
attending to the patient in his professional capacity;
People v. Sandiganbayan, Honrada, et al. A THIRD PERSON who may have obtained the
4. the information was necessary to enable him to act in that information, provided that the original parties to the
The same privileged con dentiality, however, does not attach with
capacity; and communication took reasonable precaution to
regard to a crime which a client intends to commit thereafter or
in the future and for purposes of which he seeks the lawyer’s advice. 5. the information was con dential, and, if disclosed, would protect its con dentiality.
blacken the reputation (formerly character) of the patient.
3) Physician and patient. — Persons covered: 3 Testimonial Privilege
Chan v. Chan
a. Physician;
It is of course possible to treat Josielene’s motion for the issuance of a. Parental and filial privilege rule
b. Psychotherapist; a subpoena duces tecum covering the hospital records as a motion for GR: No person shall be compelled to testify against his or
c. Any person reasonably believed by the patient to production of documents, a discovery procedure available to a her parents, other direct ascendants, children or other
be authorized to practice medicine or litigant prior to trial. But the above right to compel the production direct descendants,
psychotherapy. of documents has a limitation: the documents to be disclosed are
“not privileged.” EXC: When such testimony is indispensable in a crime
d. Members of the patient's family, who have against that person or by one parent against the other.
participated in the diagnosis or treatment of the Physician memorializes all these information in the patient’s
patient under the direction of the physician or records. Disclosing them would be the equivalent of compelling the Lee v. CA
psychotherapist. physician to testify on privileged matters he gained while dealing
with the patient, without the latter’s prior consent. The rule applies only to "direct" ascendants and descendants, a
INAPPLICABLE in a civil case, without the consent of family tie connected by a common ancestry. A stepdaughter has no
the patient, be examined as to any con dential common ancestry from her stepmother.
communication made for the purpose of diagnosis or

b. Trade secrets. — a “plan or process, tool or mechanism or 1) Independent evidence of the existence of partnership
second, the admission relates to the common object; and
compound known only to its owner and those of his or agency;
employees to whom it is necessary to con de.” third, it has been made while the declarant was engaged in
2) The statement is related to the authority of the
carrying out the conspiracy.
GR: A person CANNOT be compelled to testify about declarant;
any trade secret, Since conspiracy was not established, the extrajudicial confession has
3) The declarant or one doing the act is duly authorized
no probative value and is inadmissible in evidence against Col.
EXC: Unless the non-disclosure will conceal fraud or to do so.
otherwise work injustice. f. Admission by privies. — Where one derives title to property
The Learning Child v. Ayala Alabang Village Association from another, the latter’s act, declaration, or omission, in
4 Admissions and confessions We have to clarify that ALI's statements, if damaging to AAVA, relation to the property, is evidence against the former if done
would be binding on the latter. It appears that Ayala Corporation while the latter was holding the title.
a. Admission by a party. — The act, declaration or omission
of a party as to a relevant fact may be given in evidence against is JOINTLY INTERESTED with AAVA in an action to enforce City of Manila v. Del Rosario
him or her. the Deed of Restrictions, and is therefore covered under the
Whatever statements Lorenzo del Rosario might have made in the
following exception to the res inter alios acta rule: xxxx
b. Res inter alios acta rule. — Things done between strangers documents mentioned, they are not binding upon the defendant,
ought not to injure those who are not parties to them. Narra Nickel v. Redmont because where one derives title to real property from another, the
A joint venture agreement between and among corporations may declaration, act, or omission of the latter, in relation to the property,
c. Admission by a third party. — The rights of a party
be seen as similar to partnerships since the elements of partnership is evidence against the former ONLY WHEN MADE WHILE
cannot be prejudiced by an act, declaration, or omission of
are present. THE LATTER HOLDS THE TITLE"
another, except as hereinafter provided.
Gevero v. IAC and Del Monte Development
d. Admission by a co-partner or agent. — Vicarious e. Admission by a conspirator. — The act or declaration of a
Admission Rule. — The act or declaration of a partner or conspirator in furtherance of the conspiracy and during its The admission of the former owner of a property must have been
agent authorized by the party to make a statement existence, may be given in evidence against the co-conspirator made WHILE HE WAS THE OWNER thereof in order that such
concerning the subject, or within the scope of his or her after the conspiracy is shown by evidence other than such act admission may be binding upon the present owner.
authority and during the existence of the partnership or of declaration.
g. Admission by silence. — An act or declaration made in the
agency, may be given in evidence against such party after the
People v. Bokingco presence and within the hearing or observation of a party
partnership or agency is shown by evidence other than such act
who does or says nothing when the act or declaration is such as
or declaration. In order that the admission of a conspirator may be received against
naturally to call for action or comment if not true, and when
The same rule applies to the act or declaration of a joint his or her co-conspirators, it is necessary that
proper and possible for him to do so, may be given in evidence
owner, joint debtor, or other person jointly interested first, the conspiracy be rst proved by evidence other than the against him or her. Exceptions, or those not covered
with the party. Requisites admission itself;
1) Under custodial investigation;

ADMISSIBLE in evidence against the accused who

2) Written statements — such as failure to reply to a
made the plea or o er. If the defendant has on more than one occasion performed similar
demand letter.
acts, accident in good faith is possibly excluded, negligence is
4) Neither is any statement made in the course of plea
h. Confessions. — The declaration of an accused acknowledging intensi ed, and fraudulent intent may even be established.
bargaining with the prosecution, which does not
his or her guilt of the o ense charged, or of any o ense
result in a plea of guilty or which results in a plea of As a general rule, the evidence of other o enses committed by
necessarily included therein, may be given in evidence against
guilty later withdrawn, admissible. a defendant is inadmissible. The e ort here is not to convict
him or her. (§34 R130)
the accused of a SECOND o ense nor is there an attempt to draw
5) Good Samaritan Rule. An o er to pay or the
Extrajudicial Confession. An extrajudicial confession made the mind away from the point at issue and thus to prejudice
payment of medical, hospital or other expenses
by an accused, shall not be su cient ground for conviction, defendant's case. The purpose is to ascertain defendant's knowledge
occasioned by an injury is NOT ADMISSIBLE in
unless corroborated by evidence of corpus delicti. (§3 R133) and intent, and to x his negligence.
evidence as proof of civil or criminal liability for the
i. Admissibility of offers of compromise. injury.
1) NOT Admissible in CIVIL Cases also such other
6 Testimonial Knowledge
conduct or statements made in the course of the 5 Previous Conduct as Evidence
compromise negotiation,
Evidence that one did or did not do a certain thing at one time is NOT Section 22. Testimony confined to personal knowledge. — A witness can
EXC if such conduct or statement is otherwise ADMISSIBLE to prove that he or she did or did not do the same or testify only to those facts which he or she knows of his or her personal
discoverable or o ered for a purpose other than to similar thing at another time; but it may be received to prove knowledge; that is, which are derived from his or her own perception.
prove the liability of the o eror, such as:
1) a speci c intent or knowledge;
a. proving bias or prejudice of a witness;
2) identity, plan, system, scheme, habit, custom or usage, and the
b. negativing a contention of undue delay; or like.
7 Hearsay and Exceptions to the Hearsay Rule
c. proving an e ort to obstruct criminal a. Meaning of hearsay. — Hearsay is a statement other
investigation or prosecution. Boston Bank v. Manalo than one made by the declarant while testifying at a trial
2) In CRIMINAL cases, an o er of compromise by HABIT, CUSTOM, USAGE, PATTERN OF CONDUCT. The or hearing, offered to prove the truth of the facts asserted
the accused may be received in evidence as an examples o ered in evidence to prove habit, or pattern of evidence therein. A statement is
implied admission of guilt. EXC those involving must be numerous enough to base on inference of systematic i. an oral or written assertion or
conduct.
a. quasi-o enses (criminal negligence) or ii. a non-verbal conduct of a person, if it is intended by him
In determining whether the examples are numerous enough, and or her as an assertion.
b. those allowed by law to be compromised, e.g.
su ciently regular, the key criteria are adequacy of sampling and
tax cases. Hearsay evidence is INADMISSIBLE except as otherwise
uniformity of response.
3) A plea of guilty later withdrawn, or an unaccepted provided in these Rules. A statement is not hearsay if the
US v. Pineda
o er of a plea of guilty to lesser o ense, is NOT declarant testi es at the trial or hearing and is SUBJECT TO

CROSS-EXAMINATION concerning the statement, and the

given in evidence against him." It has long been settled that these
statement is Geraldo and Ariate v. People
admissions are admissible even if they are hearsay.
a) Prior inconsistent statement. — inconsistent with the Even if the victim's dying declaration were admissible in evidence, it
declarant's testimony, and was given under oath subject c. Exceptions to the hearsay rule must identify the assailant with certainty; otherwise it loses its
to the penalty of perjury at a trial, hearing, or other signi cance.
1) Dying declaration. — A dying declaration is
proceeding, or in a deposition; ADMISSIBLE as evidence if the following circumstances It has not been established, however, that the victim would
b) Prior consistent statement. — consistent with the are present: have been competent to testify had he survived the attack.
declarant's testimony and is o ered to rebut an express or There is no showing that he had the opportunity to see his assailant.
a) it concerns the cause and the surrounding
implied charge against the declarant of recent fabrication circumstances of the declarant's death; People v. De Joya
or improper in uence or motive; or
b) it is made when death appears to be imminent and the DOCTRINE OF COMPLETENESS. It has been held that a
The purpose here is to rebut any insinuation that the declarant is under a consciousness of impending dying declaration to be admissible must be complete in itself.
declarant is moved by ill-motive. death;
To be complete in itself does not mean that the declarant must recite
c) one of identi cation of a person made after perceiving c) the declarant would have been competent to testify everything that constituted the res gestae of the subject of his
him or her. had he or she survived; and statement, but that his statement of any given fact should be a
b. Reason for exclusion of hearsay evidence full expression of all that he intended to say as conveying his
d) the dying declaration is o ered in a case in which the
meaning in respect of such fact.
subject of inquiry involves the declarant's death.
People v. Padit
2) Statement of decedent or person of unsound mind.
The reason for the exclusion of hearsay evidence is that the party People v. Babiera
— Dead-man Statute. — Aside from the fact that a
against whom the hearsay testimony is presented is deprived of the A statement made under circumstances which would not render it party or assignor of a party or a person in whose behalf the
right or opportunity to cross-examine the person to whom the admissible as a dying declaration becomes admissible as such if action is prosecuted is no longer disquali ed from
statements are attributed. Moreover, the court is without approved or repeated by the declarant after he had abandoned all testifying in an action against an executor or administrator
opportunity to test the credibility of hearsay statements by hope of recovery. or representative of a deceased person or person of
observing the demeanor of the person who made them. unsound mind upon a claim or demand against the estate
Although said statement in itself is inadmissible as an ante-mortem
Estrada v. Desierto of the deceased person or person of unsound mind on a
declaration, inasmuch as there is nothing to show that at the time he
matter of fact occurring before the death of the deceased
A more circumspect examination of our rules of exclusion will show made it Severino Haro knew or rmly believed that he was at the
person or before the person became of unsound mind, his
that they do not cover admissions of a party and the Angara point of death, nevertheless, having RATIFIED its contents a week
or her testimony on such fact, even if not of his or her
Diary belongs to this class. Section 26 of Rule 130 provides that "the later when he was near death as a result of his wounds, said
personal knowledge, is ADMISSIBLE if the following
act, declaration or omission of a party as to a relevant fact may be declaration is admissible as a part of that which he made
requisites are present:
ante-mortem.

a) the testimony of the party or assignor of a party Declaration Against Interest Admission Against Interest
There are three (3) essential requisites for the admissibility of a
or party in whose behalf the action is prosecuted
declaration against interest: Made by a person NOT a party Made by a party or those with
relates to a statement made by the deceased or
of the person of unsound mind; a) the declarant must not be available to testify; to the case interest
b) the statement made was based on the personal b) the declaration must concern a fact cognizable by the Admissible only when declarant Admissible regardless of
knowledge of the person deceased or person of declarant; and is unavailable declarant’s availability
unsound mind; c) the circumstances must render it improbable that a motive
Binding upon anyone Binding only upon the declarant
c) the statement was made at a time when the to falsify existed.
matter had been recently perceived by the In the instant case, we nd that the declaration particularly against 4) Act or declaration about pedigree. — The act or
person deceased or person of unsound mind and penal interest attributed to Zoilo Fuentes Jr. is NOT declaration of a person deceased, or unable to testify, in
while his or her recollection was clear. ADMISSIBLE. respect to the pedigree of another person related to him or
Such statement, however, is INADMISSIBLE if made her by birth, adoption, or marriage or, in the absence
When it is claimed that the declarant is “unable to testify,” the
under circumstances indicating its lack of proponent must prove that the declarant is thereof, with whose family he or she was so intimately
trustworthiness. associated, may be received in evidence where it
a. mentally incapacitated or physically incompetent or
occurred before the controversy, and the relationship
3) Declaration against interest. — is made by a person
b. that serious e ort to produce the declarant in court has between the two persons is shown by evidence other than
who is neither a party nor in privity with a party to the
been exerted but without success. such act or declaration.
suit and admissible only when the declarant is unavailable
as a witness and is binding upon the party, his or Mere absence of the declarant is not enough.
People v. Alegado
predecessors-in-interest or even third party. Parel v. Prudencio
It is long-settled that the testimony of a person as to his age is
A statement tending to expose the declarant to criminal DECLARATION AGAINST INTEREST. It is the best evidence admissible although hearsay. He may testify as to his age as he had
liability and offered to exculpate the accused is NOT which a ords the greatest certainty of the facts in dispute. learned it from his parents and relatives and his testimony in such a
ADMISSIBLE unless corroborating circumstances clearly
The a ant, Florentino, who died in 1989 was petitioner's father and case is an assertion of family tradition.
indicate the trustworthiness of the statement.
had adequate knowledge with respect to the subject covered by his Tison v. CA and Domingo
Fuentes v. CA and People statement. In said a davit, Florentino categorically declared that
The general rule is that where the party claiming seeks recovery
while he is the occupant of the residential building, he is not the
An essential requisite for the admissibility of a declaration against against a relative common to both claimant and declarant, but not
owner of the same as it is owned by respondent who is residing in
interest is that the declarant must not be available to testify. Mere from the declarant himself or the declarant’s estate, the relationship
Quezon City. It is safe to presume that he would not have made such
absence from the jurisdiction does not make one ipso facto of the declarant to the common relative may not be proved by the
declaration unless he believed it to be true, as it is prejudicial to
unavailable under this rule. declaration itself. There must be some independent proof of this
himself as well as to his children's interests as his heirs.
fact. EXCEPT where it is sought to reach the estate of the

declarant himself and not merely to establish a right through his i) Entries in family bibles or other family books or and her son Esteban, were one in their declaration that Ana is a
declarations to the property of some other member of the family. charts, Tagalog who had continuously resided in the place, and that
Esteban, her son was reputedly born out of wedlock. Such
A statement is considered a declaration about pedigree which is ii) engravings on rings,
declarations constitute admissible evidence of the birth and
admissible, as an exception to the hearsay rule, subject to the
iii) family portraits and the like, illegitimacy of Esteban Mallare. Unlike that of matters of
following conditions:
may be received as evidence of pedigree. pedigree, general reputation of marriage may proceed from
1) that the declarant is dead or unable to testify; persons who are not members of the family — the reason for the
6) Common reputation. — Common reputation existing
2) that the declarant be related to the person whose pedigree distinction is the public interest that is taken in the question of the
previous to the controversy, as to boundaries of or
is the subject of inquiry; existence of marital relations.
customs affecting lands in the community and
3) that such relationship be shown by evidence other reputation as to events of general history important 7) Part of the res gestae. — Statements made by a person
than the declaration; and to the community, or respecting marriage or moral while a startling occurrence is taking place or
character, may be given in evidence. Monuments and immediately prior or subsequent thereto, under the
4) that the declaration was made ante litem motam, that is,
inscriptions in public places may be received as evidence of stress of excitement caused by the occurrence with
not only before the commencement of the suit involving
common reputation. respect to the circumstances thereof, may be given in
the subject matter of the declaration, but before any
controversy has arisen thereon. The amendment still retains “marriage” and “moral evidence as part of res gestae.
character” but makes “matters of general reputation” So, also, statements accompanying an equivocal act
The present case is one instance where the general requirement on
more speci c as referring only to material to the issue, and giving it a legal signi cance, may
evidence aliunde may be relaxed. Petitioners are claiming a
right to part of the estate of the declarant herself. i) boundaries of lands in the community; be received as part of the res gestae.
Conformably, the declaration made by Teodora Dezoller
ii) customs a ecting lands in the community; and
Guerrero that petitioner Corazon is her niece, is DBP Pool v. RMN
ADMISSIBLE and constitutes su cient proof of such iii) reputation as to events of general history
The rule in res gestae applies when the declarant himself did not
relationship. important to the community.
testify and provided that the testimony of the witness who heard the
The element of “antiquity” (more than thirty years old) declarant complies with the following requisites:
5) Family reputation or tradition regarding pedigree.
provided for in the old rules has also been deleted.
— The reputation or tradition existing in a family 1) that the principal act, the res gestae, be a startling
Instead, reliability is ensured because the testimony
previous to the controversy, in respect to the pedigree of occurrence;
represents the general consensus of the community.
any one of its members, may be received in evidence if the 2) the statements were made before the declarant had the
witness testifying thereon be also a member of the time to contrive or devise a falsehood; and
In Re Mallare
family, either by consanguinity or a nity, or
adoption. The witnesses, all natives of Macalelon, who had personal 3) that the statements must concern the occurrence in
knowledge of the person, birth and residency of both Ana Mallare question and its immediate attending circumstances.

store on that fateful night. But Ernesto did not say that Wilfredo
Talidano v. Falcon Maritime The facts appearing in the logbook should be supported by the facts
and Jaime participated in Glorito's killing.
gathered at the investigation. If no investigation is conducted, the
Section 42 (now 44) of Rule 130 of the Rules of Court mentions
And second, an appreciable amount of time had elapsed from the contents of the logbook have to be duly identi ed and
two acts which form part of the res gestae, namely: spontaneous
time of the killing and the arrival of SPO Abarra at his store to authenticated lest an injustice result from a blind adoption of such
statements and verbal acts.
whom he gave his statement identifying Wilfredo and Jaime as contents which merely serve as prima facie evidence.
In spontaneous exclamations, the res gestae is the startling companions of Cirilo. Ernesto could have contrived his story
Northwest Airlines v. Chiong
occurrence, whereas in verbal acts, the res gestae are the statements implicating Wilfredo and Jaime in the crime during the
accompanying the equivocal act. interregnum. While there is no necessity to bring into court all the employees who
individually made the entries, it is su cient that the person who
Absent the critical element of SPONTANEITY, the fax messages
8) Records of regularly conducted business activity. — supervised them while they were making the entries testify that the
cannot be admitted as part of the res gestae of the rst kind.
account was prepared under his supervision and that the entries were
Neither will the second kind of res gestae apply. The requisites for Canque v. CA regularly entered in the ordinary course of business.
its admissibility are:
The admission in evidence of entries in corporate books requires the
9) Entries in official records. — Entries in o cial records
1) the principal act to be characterized must be equivocal; satisfaction of the following conditions:
made in the performance of his or her duty by a public
2) the equivocal act must be material to the issue; 1. The person who made the entry must be dead, outside o cer of the Philippines, or by a person in the
the country or unable to testify. performance of a duty specially enjoined by law, are
3) the statement must accompany the equivocal act; and
2. The entries were made at or near the time of the prima facie evidence of the facts therein stated.
4) the statements give a legal signi cance to the equivocal act.
transactions to which they refer;
People v. Estibal Spouses Africa v. Caltex
3. The entrant was in a position to know the facts stated in the
AAA’s statements to the barangay tanod and the police do not entries; There are three requisites for admissibility:
qualify as part of res gestae in view of the missing element of a) that the entry was made by a public o cer, or by another
4. The entries were made in his professional capacity or in the
spontaneity and the lapse of an appreciable time between the person specially enjoined by law to do so;
performance of a duty, whether legal, contractual, moral or
rape and the declarations which a orded her su cient opportunity
religious; and b) that it was made by the public o cer in the performance
for re ection.
5. The entries were made in the ordinary or regular course of of his duties, or by such other person in the performance
People v. Oposculo of a duty specially enjoined by law; and
business or duty.
There are two (2) reasons why the rule of res gestae can not apply in c) that the public o cer or other person had su cient
Wallem Maritime v. NLRC and Macatuno
this case. knowledge of the facts stated by him, which must have
A copy of an o cial entry in the logbook is legally binding and been acquired by him personally or through o cial
First, accused Ernesto, the declarant, testi ed in court and stated that
serves as an exception to the hearsay rule. information.
he saw appellants Wilfredo and Jaime with appellant Cirilo at his

People v. San Gabriel 4) it is generally used and relied upon by persons in the a) the witness is dead or unable to testify or out of the
same occupation. Philippines;
The Advance Information Sheet does not constitute an
exception to the hearsay rule, hence, inadmissible. The public The exhibits mentioned are mere price quotations issued b) his testimony or deposition was given in a former case or
o cer who prepared the document had no su cient and personal personally to Del Rosario who requested for them from proceeding, judicial or administrative, between the same
knowledge of the stabbing incident. dealers of equipment similar to the ones lost at the collision of the parties or those representing the same interests;
two vessels.
Sabili v. Comelec 2012 c) the former case involved the same subject as that in the
Accordingly, the author of the letter should be presented as present case, although on di erent causes of action;
Even without being sworn to before a notary public, Barangay
witness to provide the other party to the litigation the
Captain Honrade’s Certi cation would not only be admissible in d) the issue testi ed to by the witness in the former trial is the
opportunity to question him on the contents of the letter.
evidence, but would also be entitled to due consideration. same issue involved in the present case; and
First, the Barangay Secretary is required by the LGC to “keep an 11) Learned treatises; e) the adverse party had an opportunity to cross-examine the
updated record of all inhabitants of the barangay.” witness in the former case.
12) Testimony or deposition at a former trial. — The
Second, Mitra v. Comelec has recognized that “it is the business of a testimony or deposition of a witness deceased or out of Francisco v. People
punong barangay to know who the residents are in his own the Philippines or who cannot, with due diligence, be
Only parties to a case are bound by a judgment of the trial court.
barangay.” found therein, or is unavailable or otherwise unable
Strangers to a case are not bound by the judgment of said case.
to testify, given in a former case or proceeding, judicial or
Third, the Barangay Captain’s exercise of powers and duties
concomitant to his position requires him to be privy to these records
administrative, involving the same parties and subject 13) ⭐ Residual exception. — A statement not speci cally
matter, may be given in evidence against the adverse party covered by any of the foregoing exceptions, having
kept by the Barangay Secretary.
who had the opportunity to cross-examine him or her. equivalent circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness,
10) Commercial lists and the like. — is admissible if the court determines that
Tan v. CA and Tan
i) the statement is o ered as evidence of a material
PNOC Shipping v. CA
Subsequent failure or refusal to appear at the second trial or hostility fact;
A document is a commercial list if: since testifying at the rst trial does not amount to inability to
ii) the statement is more probative on the point for
1) it is a statement of matters of interest to persons engaged testify, but such inability proceeding from a grave cause, almost
which it is o ered than any other evidence which
in an occupation; amounting to death, as when the witness is old and has lost the
the proponent can procure through reasonable
power of speech.
2) such statement is contained in a list, register, periodical or e orts; and
other published compilation; Manliclic v. Calaunan
iii) the general purposes of these rules and the
3) said compilation is published for the use of persons TESTIMONY AT A FORMER PROCEEDING. The following interests of justice will be best served by
engaged in that occupation, and requisites must be satis ed: admission of the statement into evidence.

However, a statement may not be admitted under this proceeded to represent himself as a duly authorized
exception unless the proponent makes known to the Arriola v. People 24 Feb 2020 seller of the said lot.
adverse party, su ciently in advance of the hearing,
1. Evidence is called hearsay when its probative force depends, 4. The return by the accused of money belonging to the
or by the pre-trial stage in the case of a trial of the
in whole or in part, on the competency and credibility of private complainant will not reverse a consummated act of
main case, to provide the adverse party with a fair
some persons other than the witness by whom it is sought Estafa.
opportunity to prepare to meet it, the proponent's
to produce it. 5. Such action may even uphold a conviction.
intention to o er the statement and the particulars of it,
including the name and address of the declarant. 2. The hearsay rule, however, does not apply to independently 5.1. Section 27, Rule 130 states that in criminal cases,
relevant statements. except those involving quasi-o enses or criminal
d. Independently relevant statements. — the ban on hearsay
evidence does not cover independently relevant 2.1. Del Rosario's testimony can and will be admitted negligence or those allowed by law to be
statements. These are statements which are relevant as evidence only for the purpose of proving that compromised, an o er of compromise by the
independently of whether they are true or not. They belong to such statements regarding Arriola's lack of accused may be received in evidence as an implied
two (2) classes: authority to sell the subject property were, in fact, admission of guilt.
made and uttered by Candelaria. 6. Arriola's initial attempts to reimburse Del Rosario through
1) those statements which are the very facts in issue, and
2.2. Regardless of the truth or falsity of a statement, checks, coupled with the actual return of the latter's money
2) those statements which are circumstantial evidence of
when what is relevant is the fact that such after the RTC issued its judgment of conviction, may all be
the facts in issue. — which includes the following:
statement has been made, the hearsay rule does not considered as unequivocal gestures to compromise and
a) Statement of a person showing his state of apply and the statement may be shown. which can be measured against Arriola as his implied
mind; admission of guilt.
2.3. Del Rosario's account as to the fact of her
b) Statements of a person which show his physical conversation with Candelaria and the latter's stand See Criminal Law Case Digest No. 54
condition; against Arriola's authority to sell, irrespective of its
c) Statements of a person from which an inference veracity, is considered as an independently relevant
may be made as to the state of mind of another, statement that may properly be received as 8 Opinion Rule
that is, the knowledge, belief, motive, good or bad evidence against Arriola.
faith, etc. of the latter; GR: The opinion of a witness is NOT ADMISSIBLE. (§51
3. Assessed with other established circumstances, Arriola's
R130)
d) Statements which may identify the date, place fraud is evident.
and person in question; and EXC:
3.1. Arriola had not been authorized to sell
e) Statements showing the lack of credibility of a Candelaria's land. a. Opinion of expert witness; weight given. — The
witness. opinion of a witness on a matter requiring special
3.2. Despite full knowledge of such fact, Arriola still

knowledge, skill, experience, training or education, which

However, the prosecution may not prove his or her
he or she is shown to possess, may be received in evidence. In the instant case, proof of the bad moral character of the
bad moral character unless on rebuttal.
victim is IRRELEVANT to determine the probability or
b. Opinion of ordinary witness. — The opinion of a
b. Civil cases. — Evidence of the moral character of a party improbability of his killing. Accused has not alleged that the victim
witness for which proper basis is given, may be received in
in a civil case is admissible only when pertinent to the was the aggressor or that the killing was made in self-defense. There
evidence regarding —
issue of character involved in the case. is no connection between the deceased’s drug addiction and thievery
i. The identity of a person about whom he or she has with his violent death in the hands of accused.
c. Criminal and civil cases. — Evidence of the good
adequate knowledge;
character of a witness is not admissible until such
ii. A handwriting with which he or she has su cient character has been impeached.
familiarity; and Burden of Proof and Presumptions
Additional Points G
iii. The mental sanity of a person with whom he or she Rule 131
1) In all cases in which evidence of character or trait of
is su ciently acquainted.
character of a person is admissible, proof may be made by 1. Presumptions. — Inferences derived from established facts.
The witness may also testify on his or her impressions of testimony as to the reputation or by testimony in the form
A legal presumption cannot rise from another
the emotion, behavior, condition or appearance of a of an opinion.
presumption!
person.
2) On cross-examination, inquiry is allowable into relevant
a. Conclusive presumptions
speci c instances of conduct. In cases in which character
9 Character Evidence or a trait of character of a person is an essential element of 1) Estoppel by deed. — This happens when a party
the charge, claim or defense, proof may also be made of deliberately or intentionally leads another to believe
GR: Evidence of a person's character or a trait of character is
speci c instances of that person’s conduct. that a certain fact is true, and that other party acts in
NOT ADMISSIBLE for the purpose of proving action
accordance with that belief. The party who made the
in conformity therewith on a particular occasion.
CSC v. Belagan representation may not be permitted to falsify it in
EXC: case a litigation arises out from that act or declaration.
When the credibility of a witness is sought to be impeached by proof
a. Criminal cases of his reputation, it is necessary that the reputation shown should be 2) Estoppel against tenants. — The tenant may not be
i. The character of the o ended party may be proved that which existed before the occurrence of the circumstances out of allowed to deny the title or better right of possession
if it tends to establish in any reasonable degree the which the litigation arose, or at the time of the trial and prior of his landlord at the commencement of the relation
probability or improbability of the o ense charged. thereto, but not at a period remote from the commencement of between landlord and tenant.
the suit. This is because a person of derogatory character or However, when what is being denied is the title that
ii. The accused may prove his or her good moral
reputation can still change or reform himself. exists after the commencement, this conclusive
character, pertinent to the moral trait involved in the
o ense charged. People v. Noel Lee presumption does NOT apply.

Ermitaño v. Paglas 2013 3) Death. — A person is presumed dead by his mere c. Presumptions in civil actions and proceedings;
absence. This applies when the ONLY evidence against an accused in criminal cases
The landlord, during the existence of the lease, obtained a loan from
presented is the fact that the person is missing.
a creditor. As security, he mortgaged the leased property. For failing i. In CIVIL cases. — If presumptions are inconsistent,
to pay, the creditor foreclosed the property and thereafter acquired a) Under ordinary circumstances, or those that the presumption that is founded upon weightier
ownership. The creditor-mortgagee then sold the property to the don’t involve danger of death: considerations of policy shall apply.
tenant.
i) For purposes other than succession, 7 years; If consideration of policy is of equal weight, neither
SC said the conclusive presumption only applies when what is being presumption applies.
ii) For purposes of succession, 10 years;
denied is the relationship at the commencement, not after. In the
ii. In CRIMINAL cases. — If a presumed fact that
case at bar, the relationship has changed where the tenant eventually iii) But if the missing person disappeared after
establishes guilt, is
became the owner. The tenant may now deny the title of the the age of 75, 5 years, for all purposes;
landlord. 1. an element of the o ense charged, or
b) Disappearance took place under danger of
death: 2. negates a defense,
b. Disputable presumptions
i) 4 years; the existence of the basic fact must be proved beyond
1) Ownership. — one in possession of an item
reasonable doubt and the presumed fact follows from
which is taken in the doing of a recent act is ii) Except if the purpose is to remarry, 2 years.
the basic fact beyond reasonable doubt.
presumed to be the taker and doer of the whole Inapplicable in the following cases
act. One in possession of a stolen item, is presumed to
Eastern Shipping v. Lucero Bacala v. Heirs of Sps Poliño 10 Feb 2021
be the thief. And if a person dies during the theft,
then the possessor is also presumed to be the killer, Presumption of death can not be applied because other than the fact A. Two presumptions nd relevance in this case.
since he is presumed to be the doer of the whole act. that Lucero went missing, preponderance of evidence showed that
1. A contract enjoys the presumption that it is supported
he died in that incident. Preponderance of evidence negates
2) Willful Suppression. — evidence willfully by an existing and lawful cause or consideration.
presumption of death.
suppressed, would be adverse if presented. The
2. Notarized documents, being public in nature, require
presumption does not apply if: Victory Shipping v. Workmen's Compensation Commission
no further proof of their authenticity and due
a) The suppression is pursuant to an exercise of a This involves a crewmember who jumped o a vessel when he execution.
right; realized that a re of unknown origin engulfed the vessel. And since
B. To debunk the existence of consideration in the Deed of
then he was never heard of again.
b) The evidence is equally available at the disposal Sale, there must be more than mere preponderant evidence
of all the parties; and SC said the presence of preponderance of evidence militates the showing that Anecito did not truly execute the disputed
application of presumption of death. No need to wait for 4 years. document or that the parties had not truly intended a
c) The evidence is merely corroborative or
contract of sale.
cumulative.

iii. Not to be examined except only as to matters 1) Adverse party's witness. — A witness may be
1. Here, petitioner never submitted any controverting
pertinent to the issue; impeached by the party against whom he or she was called,
evidence.
iv. Not to give an answer which will tend to subject him a) by contradictory evidence,
C. The legal presumptions of the existence of a valid
or her to a penalty for an o ense unless otherwise
consideration and regularity of execution of contract still b) by evidence that his or her general reputation for
provided by law; or
stand in favor of the Deed of Sale. truth, honesty, or integrity is bad, or
v. Not to give an answer which will tend to degrade his
See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 60 c) by evidence that or she has made at other times
or her reputation, unless it to be the very fact at issue
statements inconsistent with his or her present,
or to a fact from which the fact in issue would be
testimony,
presumed. But a witness must answer to the fact of
Presentation of Evidence his or her previous nal conviction for an o ense. but NOT by evidence of particular wrongful acts, except
H that it may be shown by the examination of the witness, or
Rule 132 b. Leading and misleading questions. — A question which
the record of the judgment, that he or she has been
suggests to the witness the answer which the examining party
convicted of an o ense.
Examination of Witnesses desires is a leading question. It is NOT ALLOWED, except:
2) By evidence of conviction of crime. — For the purpose
Authentication and Proof of Documents i. On cross examination;
of impeaching a witness, evidence that he or she has been
ii. On preliminary matters; convicted by nal judgment of a crime shall be admitted
O er and Objection
if
iii. When there is a di culty in getting direct and
intelligible answers from a witness who is ignorant, or a) the crime was punishable by a penalty in excess of
1 Examination of Witnesses a child of tender years, or is of feeble mind, or a one year; OR
a. Rights and obligations of a witness. — A witness must deaf-mute;
b) the crime involved moral turpitude, regardless
answer questions, although his or her answer may tend to iv. Of an unwilling or hostile witness; or of the penalty.
establish a claim against him or her. However, it is the right of
v. Of a witness who is an adverse party or an o cer,
a witness: However, evidence of a conviction is not admissible if the
director, or managing agent of a public or private
conviction has been the subject of an amnesty or
i. To be protected from irrelevant, improper, or corporation or of a partnership or association which is
annulment of the conviction.
insulting questions, and from harsh or insulting an adverse party.
demeanor; 3) Own witness. — Except with respect to witnesses
A misleading question is one which assumes as true a fact
ii. Not to be detained longer than the interests of justice not yet testi ed to by the witness, or contrary to that which he referred to in paragraphs (d) and (e) of Section 10 of this
require; or she has previously stated. It is NOT ALLOWED. Rule, the party presenting the witness is not allowed
to impeach his or her credibility.
c. Impeachment of witness

A witness may be considered as unwilling or hostile only 1) Applicability of the rule. — applies to child witnesses i) Is deceased, su ers from physical in rmity,
if so declared by the court upon adequate showing of who are victims of crime, accused of a crime, and lack of memory, mental illness, or will be
witnesses to crime. It shall apply in ALL criminal exposed to severe psychological injury; or
a) his or her adverse interest,
proceedings and non-criminal proceedings.
ii) Is absent from the hearing and the
b) unjusti ed reluctance to testify, or
2) Competency of a child witness. — Every child is proponent of his statement has been unable
c) his or her having misled the party into calling him presumed quali ed to be a witness. to procure his attendance by process or other
to the witness stand. reasonable means.
However, the court shall conduct a competency
The unwilling or hostile witness so declared, or the examination of a child, motu proprio or on motion of a d) When the child witness is unavailable, his hearsay
witness who is an adverse party, may be impeached by party, when it nds that substantial doubt exists testimony shall be admitted only if corroborated by
the party presenting him or her in all respects as if he regarding the ability of the child to other admissible evidence.
or she had been called by the adverse party, except by
a) perceive, remember, communicate, 5) Sexual abuse shield rule
evidence of his or her bad character.
b) distinguish truth from falsehood, or a) Inadmissible evidence. — The following evidence is
He or she may also be impeached and cross-examined by
NOT admissible in any criminal proceeding involving
the adverse party, but such cross-examination must c) appreciate the duty to tell the truth in court.
alleged child sexual abuse:
only be on the subject matter of his or her
3) Examination of a child witness. — shall be done in
examination-in-chief. i) Evidence o ered to prove that the alleged
open court.
victim engaged in other sexual behavior; and
4) How the witness is impeached by evidence of
4) Hearsay exception in child abuse cases. —
inconsistent statements. — What constitutes ii) Evidence o ered to prove the sexual
impeachment is not the mere pointing of the a) Before such hearsay statement may be admitted, its predisposition of the alleged victim.
inconsistency but the failure of the witness to provide proponent shall make known to the adverse party the
b) Exception. — Evidence of speci c instances of
a satisfactory explanation of the inconsistency. intention to o er such statement and its particulars to
sexual behavior by the alleged victim to prove that a
provide him a fair opportunity to object.
person other than the accused was the source of
People v. Cortezano b) In ruling on the admissibility of such hearsay semen, injury, or other physical evidence shall be
Previous extrajudicial statements cannot be employed to impeach statement, the court shall consider the time, content admissible.
the credibility of a witness unless his attention is rst directed to the and circumstances thereof which provide su cient
discrepancies, and he must then be given an opportunity to indicia of reliability. 2 Authentication and Proof of Documents
explain them. It is only when the witness cannot give a reasonable c) The child witness shall be considered unavailable
explanation that he shall be deemed impeached. a. Meaning of Authentication. — the process by which
under the following situations:
documentary evidence and other physical evidence is proven to
d. Examination of a child witness be genuine, and not a forgery.

b. Classes of Documents 2000, the time she supposedly personally transacted with Matti, Jr. iii. is unblemished by any alterations or circumstances
in the Philippines. of suspicion.
PUBLIC DOCUMENTS are
This was further corroborated by the passport of Dizon, a public
Bartolome v. IAC
a) The written o cial acts, or records of the o cial acts of the document, which bears o cial stamps made by the Bureau of
sovereign authority, o cial bodies and tribunals, and public Immigration proving her absence from the Philippines during said An incomplete document is akin to, if not worse than, a document
o cers, whether of the Philippines, or of a foreign country; period. with altered contents.
b) Documents acknowledged before a notary public except last wills Republic v. Unabia 2019 Heirs of Lacsa v. CA and Songco
and testaments;
Medical certi cate by a government physician that respondent was The last requirement of the "ancient document rule" that a
c) Documents that are considered public documents under
“phenotypically male” is a public document and thus does not document must be unblemished by any alteration or circumstances
treaties and conventions which are in force between the
require authentication. of suspicion refers to the extrinsic quality of the document itself.
Philippines and the country of source; and
d) Public records, kept in the Philippines, of private documents c. When a private writing requires authentication; proof e. Public documents as evidence; proof of official record. —
required by law to be entered therein. of a private writing Documents consisting of entries in public records made in the
performance of a duty by a public o cer are prima facie
All other writings are PRIVATE.
1) By anyone who saw the document executed or written; evidence of the facts therein stated.
2) By evidence of the genuineness of the signature or handwriting
All other public documents are evidence, even against a third
Kummer v. People 2013 of the maker; or
person, of the fact which gave rise to their execution and of the
3) By other evidence showing its due execution and date of the latter.
Public documents are admissible in court without further proof of
authenticity.
their due execution and authenticity.
Any other private document need only be identi ed as that which it is Solinap v. Locsin, Jr
The chemistry report showing a positive result of the para n test
claimed to be. A Certi cate of Live Birth duly recorded in the Local Civil Registry,
is a public document. As a public document, the rule on
authentication does not apply. a copy of which is transmitted to the Civil Registry General
d. When evidence of authenticity of a private writing is pursuant to the Civil Registry Law, is prima facie evidence of the
Kwong Management v. Diamond Homeowners 2019 not required. — Ancient Document Rule. — no other facts therein stated. However, if there are material discrepancies
A local ordinance is a public document. Public documents are evidence of its authenticity need be given where a private between them, the one entered in the Civil Registry General prevails.
prima facie evidence of the facts stated in them. document
Dizon v. Matti, Jr 2019 i. is more than thirty years old, Section 24. Proof of official record. — xxxx
The o cial travel record issued by the Bureau of Immigration is ii. is produced from the custody in which it would A document that is accompanied by a certificate or its equivalent
prima facie evidence of the fact that Dizon was abroad in February naturally be found if genuine, and may be presented in evidence without further proof, the certificate
or its equivalent being prima facie evidence of the due execution

and genuineness of the document involved. The certificate shall not 5) consular agent or
B. Despite the non-presentation of the original contracts
be required when a treaty or convention between a foreign country
6) by any o cer in the foreign service of the Philippines themselves, Vergara's and Jacob's a davits satisfactorily'
and the Philippines has abolished the requirement, or has exempted
the document itself from this formality. stationed in the foreign country in which the record is proved the due execution of the Westinghouse and B&R
kept, contracts and their corresponding commission agreements
Generally, public documents may be proved by with Disini.
and authenticated by the seal of his or her o ce.
1) its o cial publication; or C. As to Disini's commission agreements with Westinghouse
Heirs of Arcilla v. Teodoro and B&R, Vergara and Jacob positively a rmed the
2) by a copy of the public document attested by the
existence thereof as they had the opportunity to personally
o cer having legal custody thereof. The rule that requires a certi cation from an o cer of the foreign
witness and participate in these transactions.
service of the Philippines pertains to written o cial acts, or records
In addition, if the public document is not kept in the
of the o cial of the sovereign authority, o cial bodies and tribunals, D. Contrary to Disini's contention, the Best Evidence Rule is
Philippines, the rule requires that the attestation executed by
and public o cers, whether of the Philippines, or of a foreign not applicable in the present case. The Republic presented
the legal custodian must be accompanied with a certi cate that
country. the a davits of both Vergara and Jacob to prove the
such o cer has the custody. This certi cate is what is
existence and execution of these contracts and the
commonly known as “consular authentication.” A certi cation of non-forum shopping executed in a foreign
corresponding commission agreements without inference
country is NOT covered under this rule.
Apostille Convention. — If the public document is as to the contents or terms thereof.
originating in a foreign country which is a contracting party NB However, by express provision of the present Section 24 of Rule
E. It was also proven that Disini received commissions from
to a treaty or convention to which the Philippines is a 132, the required certi cate also applies to documents classi ed
Westinghouse and B&R.
contracting party, the required certi cate or its equivalent shall under paragraph (c),
be in the form prescribed by such treaty or convention subject 1. The sworn testimonies and a davits of Vergara and
to reciprocity granted to public documents originating from Jacob are categorical, credible and corroborative,
the Philippines. Disini v. Republic 15 Jun 2021 EN BANC su ciently proving that Disini, through Herdis and its
subsidiaries, acquired ill-gotten wealth in relation to
On the other hand, if the public document is originating from The proof of the existence of the Westinghouse and B&R contracts the BNPP project.
a foreign country which is not party to a treaty or in relation to the BNPP project as well as the existence of their
convention to which the Philippines is a contracting party, 2. Disini trusted Jacob as he hired him as President of
corresponding commission agreements with Disini was-su ciently
the required certi cate may be made by Herdis and even allowed him to join in his meetings
established by the testimonies of Vergara and Jacob.
with Westinghouse. Disini also entrusted to Jacob the
1) a secretary of the embassy or legation, A. However, the Republic is only entitled to temperate and task of transferring his commissions from
2) consul general, exemplary damages, and not to actual damages amounting Westinghouse and B&R to his overseas personal bank
to $50.5M as the documentary evidence presented to prove accounts.
3) consul, such amount was not properly authenticated.
F. Despite the fact that the Republic o ered mere
4) vice-consul, or

photocopies of the bank documents, this does not a ect the Disini.
2. To prove the amount of the total commissions received
admissibility and probative value of Jacob's sworn
by Disini, the best evidence would be the Westinghouse See Political Law Case Digest No. 10
statement as to the existence of the bank accounts and
and B&R contracts and their corresponding
Disini's receipt of commissions, 'especially since these
commission agreements.
statements came from a credible witness such as Jacob.
J. Here, the Sandiganbayan accorded great weight to Exhibit 3 O er and Objection
1. When the evidence presented concerns the existence,
E-9 or a tabulation of commissions allegedly typewritten on
execution or delivery of the writing, without inference 1. Offer of evidence. — The court shall consider no evidence
Disini's stationery, which was attached to Manahan's
to its terms, the Best Evidence Rule cannot be invoked. which has not been formally o ered. The purpose for which
a davit, to arrive at the amount of $50.5M.
G. In cases involving ill-gotten wealth, EO No. 14-A requires the evidence is o ered must be speci ed.
1. Exhibit E-9 is a certi ed xerox copy.
preponderance of evidence. 2. When to make an offer. — All evidence must be offered
K. Under the Best Evidence Rule, when the subject of inquiry orally.
1. Preponderance of evidence refers to the comparative
is the content of a document, no evidence shall be
weight of the evidence presented by the opposing a. The o er of the testimony of a witness in evidence
admissible other than the original document itself subject
parties. must be made at the time the witness is called to
to certain exceptions.
H. Here, the factual circumstances established by the Republic testify.
1. Here, the Republic failed to o er any plausible reason
through testimonial evidence are su cient and convincing b. The offer of documentary and object evidence shall
or justi cation why it presented a mere photocopy
enough to prove that Disini received substantial be made after the presentation of a party's
instead of the original.
commissions from Westinghouse and B&R in relation to testimonial evidence.
the BNPP project despite lack of documentary proof of his L. Whether a document is public or private is relevant in
determining its admissibility as evidence. 3. Objection. — Objection to the offer of evidence must be
receipt thereof.
made orally immediately after the o er is made.
I. However, the Republic's witnesses did not speci cally 1. Exhibit E-9, as a private document, must be properly
authenticated to be admissible and given probative Objection to the testimony of a witness for lack of a
quantify the amount of commissions but referred to certain
value. formal offer must be made as soon as the witness begins
documents which were not only mere photocopies but
to testify. Objection to a question propounded in the course
were also not properly authenticated. Hence, these 2. However, its due execution and genuineness were not of the oral examination of a witness must be made as soon as
documents are inadmissible and have no probative value. proved by the Republic in accordance with Section 20 the grounds therefor become reasonably apparent.
1. Vergara and Jacob's testimony that Disini was paid 3% of Rule 131.
and 10% of the Westinghouse and B&R contracts as 4. Repetition of an objection. — When repetition of objection
M. Since Exhibit E-9 was unauthenticated, and thus
commissions clearly warrants the review of the terms of unnecessary. — When it becomes reasonably apparent in the
inadmissible in evidence as proof of the fact stated therein,
the contract which is covered by the Best Evidence course of the examination of a witness that the question being
the Sandiganbayan should not have relied thereon in
Rule. propounded are of the same class as those to which objection
determining the exact amount of commissions received by
has been made, whether such objection was sustained or

overruled, it shall not be necessary to repeat the objection, it disqualify the witness or to strike out his a davit or any of the
Yu v. CA and Lim Yu
being su cient for the adverse party to record his or her answers found in it on ground of inadmissibility.
continuing objection to such class of questions. Before tender of excluded evidence is made, the evidence must
The court shall promptly rule on the motion, without
have been formally o ered before the court. And before formal
5. Ruling. — The ruling of the court must be given prejudice to a tender of excluded evidence.
o er of evidence is made, the evidence must have been identi ed and
immediately after the objection is made, unless the court
presented before the court. d. Application in criminal cases. — This rule shall apply to all
desires to take a reasonable time to inform itself on the
criminal actions:
question presented; but the ruling shall always be made during In the instant case, the insurance application and the insurance
the trial. policy were yet to be presented in court, much less formally o ered i. Where the maximum of the imposable penalty does not
before it. In fact, private respondent was merely asking for the exceed 6 years;
6. Striking out of an answer
issuance of subpoena duces tecum and subpoena ad testificandum
ii. Where the accused agrees to the use of judicial a davits,
when the trial court issued the assailed Order.
1) Should a witness answer the question before the adverse party had irrespective of the penalty involved; or
the opportunity to voice fully its objection to the same, or iii. With respect to the civil aspect of the actions, whatever
2) where a question is not objectionable, but the answer is not the penalties involved are.
Judicial A davit Rule
responsive, or I e. Effect of non-compliance. —
A.M. No. 12-8-8-SC
3) where a witness testifies without a question being posed or
testifies beyond limits set by the court, or
i. A party who fails to submit the required judicial a davits
a. Scope. — shall apply to all actions, proceedings, and incidents
and exhibits on time shall be deemed to have waived their
4) when the witness does a narration instead of answering the requiring the reception of evidence except in small claims
submission. The court may, however, allow only once
question, and such objection is found to be meritorious, cases under A.M. 08-8-7-SC.
the late submission of the same provided,
the court shall sustain the objection and order such answer, testimony or b. Submission in lieu of direct testimony. — The parties shall
1. the delay is for a valid reason,
narration to be stricken o the record. le with the court and serve on the adverse party, personally or
by licensed courier service, not later than ve days before 2. would not unduly prejudice the opposing party, and
On proper motion, the court may also order the striking out of answers
which are incompetent, irrelevant, or otherwise improper.
pre-trial or preliminary conference or the scheduled 3. the defaulting party pays a ne at the discretion of the
hearing with respect to motions and incidents, the following: court.
7. Tender of excluded evidence. — If documents or things i. The judicial a davits of their witnesses, which shall take ii. The court shall not consider the a davit of any witness
o ered in evidence are excluded by the court, the o eror may the place of such witnesses' direct testimonies; and who fails to appear at the scheduled hearing of the case
have the same attached to or made part of the record. If the as required.
ii. The parties' documentary or object evidence, if any.
evidence excluded is oral, the o eror may state for the record
c. Offer and objection. — The party presenting the judicial Counsel who fails to appear without valid cause despite
the name and other personal circumstances of the witness and
a davit of his witness in place of direct testimony shall state notice shall be deemed to have waived his client's right
the substance of the proposed testimony.
the purpose of such testimony at the start of the
presentation of the witness. The adverse party may move to

to confront by cross-examination the witnesses there

iii) Whether the witness has applied the principles and sold on a cash transaction basis, for which he had the duty
present.
methods reliably to the facts of the case; and to accept cash payment, but failed to remit the payments to
Cathay's treasury department.
iv) Such other factors as the court may deem helpful to
Weight and Su ciency of Evidence
J make such determination. 5.1. The collective testimonies of witnesses su ciently
Rule 133 establish that Uy had the duty to accept cash
f ) Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc laid down
payment for the sale of the retazos.
a) Proof beyond reasonable doubt. — In a criminal case, the the following standards:
accused is entitled to an acquittal, unless his or her guilt is 5.2. The release of the retazos was conditioned upon
i) whether the scienti c theory or technique has been or
shown beyond reasonable doubt. Uy's authorization, which was in turn conditioned
can be tested;
upon the customer's cash payment.
b) Proof beyond reasonable doubt does not mean such a degree ii) whether the theory or technique has been subjected to
of proof, excluding possibility of error, produces absolute 5.3. The delivery receipts and the statements of
peer review and publication, its known or potential
certainty. Moral certainty only is required, or that degree of account presented by Cathay su ciently prove the
error rate and the existence and maintenance of
proof which produces conviction in an unprejudiced mind. existence of the unremitted payments.
standards controlling its operation; and
c) Preponderance of evidence. — In civil cases, the party 5.4. The lack of conclusive proof showing actual
iii) whether it has attracted widespread acceptance within
having the burden of proof must establish his or her case by a payment does not negate his liability.
a relevant scienti c community.
preponderance of evidence. 6. In contrast, all that Uy could o er to negate his liability is
d) Substantial evidence. — In cases led before administrative Cathay Pacific Steel Corp v. Uy, Jr. 14 Jun 2021 the dismissal of the criminal case led by Cathay against
or quasi-judicial bodies, a fact may be deemed established if it him. He did not even deny the authenticity and due
1. Cathay was able to establish by preponderance of evidence
is supported by that amount of relevant evidence which a execution of his signature in the delivery
Uy's liability for the unremitted payments.
reasonable mind might accept as adequate to justify a receipts.WHEREFORE, the Petition is hereby
conclusion. 2. The determination of preponderance of evidence depends GRANTED.
greatly on the credibility of the witnesses.
e) Weight to be given to opinion of an expert witness. — In See Remedial Law Case Digest No. 44
any case where the opinion of an expert witness is received in 3. When it comes to the witnesses' credibility, the trial court's
evidence, the court has a wide latitude of discretion in assessment deserves great weight, and is even conclusive and
determining the weight to be given to such opinion, and for binding, unless the same is tainted with arbitrariness or
Heirs of Magsaysay v. Sps Perez 28 Jun 2021
that purpose may consider the following: oversight of some fact or circumstance of weight and
in uence. The property being claimed by petitioners to be in their and their
i) Whether the opinion is based upon su cient facts or
predecessors-in-interest's possession is not identical to the property
data; 4. Here, Cathay was able to establish by a preponderance of
titled to respondents.
evidence Uy's liability.
ii) Whether it is the product of reliable principles and
A. Under Section 1 of Rule 133, in determining whether or
methods; 5. Uy authorized on four occasions the release of the retazos

not there is preponderance of evidence, the court may have no claim over Cadastral Lot No. 1377 and that it a. Meaning of electronic evidence; electronic data massage.
consider the following: is respondents who have a preferential right over the — an electronic document refers to information or the
said lot. representation of information, data, gures, symbols or other
1. all the facts and circumstances of the case;
modes of written expression, described or however
Petitioners failed to present clear and convincing proof that fraud
2. the witnesses' manner of testifying, their intelligence, represented,
was attendant in the issuance of respondents' titles.
their means and opportunity of knowing the facts to
i. by which a right is established or an obligation
which they are testifying, the nature of the facts to A. A complaint for reconveyance is an action which admits the
extinguished, or
which they testify, the probability or improbability of registration of title of another party but claims that such
their testimony; registration was erroneous or wrongful. ii. by which a fact may be proved and a rmed,
3. the witnesses' interest or want of interest, and also their 1. The relief prayed for may be granted on the basis of which is (this is the most important part) received, recorded,
personal credibility so far as the same may ultimately intrinsic fraud - fraud committed on the true owner transmitted, stored, processed, retrieved or produced
appear in the trial; and instead of fraud committed on the procedure ELECTRONICALLY.
amounting to lack of jurisdiction.
4. the number of witnesses, although it does not mean It includes
that preponderance is necessarily with the greater B. The party seeking to recover the property must prove, by
i. digitally signed documents and
number. clear and convincing evidence, that he or she is entitled to
the property, and that the adverse party has committed ii. any print-out or output, readable by sight or
B. What is important is the relative weight or probative value
fraud in obtaining his or her title. iii. other means, which accurately re ects the electronic
of the evidence on record.
1. This standard of proof is less than proof beyond data message or electronic document. — "Electronic
1. Here, while it may be true that petitioners have
reasonable doubt (for criminal cases) but greater than data message" refers to information generated, sent,
presented a greater number of testimonial and
preponderance of evidence (for civil cases). received or stored by electronic, optical or similar
documentary evidence, such evidence was not enough
means.
to discharge petitioners' burden of proof. C. Here, there can be no fraud or misrepresentation if the
property being applied for by respondents in the b. Probative value of electronic documents or evidentiary
2. No evidence presented by petitioners would prove that
administrative proceedings were di erent from the weight; method of proof. — Whenever a rule of evidence
the land they are seeking to recover is identical with
property being claimed by petitioners. refers to the term writing, document, record, instrument,
respondents' titled lands.
memorandum or any other form of writing, such term shall be
C. Petitioners' evidence could not outweigh See Civil Law Case Digest No. 25 deemed to include an electronic document.
1. respondents' Torrens titles, which is imbued with the An electronic document shall be regarded as the equivalent of
presumption of regularity, and an original document under the Original Document Rule if it
Rules on Electronic Evidence is a printout or output readable by sight or other means,
2. the decision of the DENR, also imbued with the K
A.M. No. 01-7-01-SC shown to re ect the data accurately.
presumption of regularity, that found petitioners to

A davit evidence. — All matters relating to the vii. all of which are shown by the testimony of the custodian
2. Person who has personal knowledge of the text.
admissibility and evidentiary weight of an electronic or other quali ed witnesses,
document may be established by an a davit stating facts of It so happened that the police who pretended to be the owner was a
is excepted from the rule on hearsay evidence.
direct personal knowledge of the a ant or based on authentic party to the text exchanges. Thus, the transcript of the text messages
records. This may be overcome by evidence of the were duly authenticated. We also have
untrustworthiness of the source of information or the
c. Authentication of electronic documents and electronic People v. Navarro
method or circumstances of the preparation, transmission
signatures. — If the document is electronic there is a unique SC had the occasion to lay down the requisites for authenticating
or storage thereof.
way to AUTHENTICATE it. an audio recording:
e. Audio, photographic, video and ephemeral evidence. —
i. Thru digital signature. — This is di erent to the 1. The existence of the audio recording has to be established;
Ephemeral as in “ eeting”. The rule does not de ne this, only
digitized or electronic signatures in driver’s license and
enumerates. This refers to 2. The voice in the recording should be identi ed;
other IDs.
i. telephone conversations, 3. The witness should be able to testify that the voice in the
ii. By evidence that other security procedures or devices as
ii. text messages, recording is really the voice of the person purporting to be
may be authorized by the SC or by law for authenticating
the owner of that voice in the recording.
electronic documents. iii. chatroom sessions,
Torralba v. People
iii. By any other means by which the integrity and reliability iv. streaming audio,
of the electronic document is preserved to the satisfaction It is a rudimentary rule of evidence that before a tape recording is
v. streaming video, and
of the court. admissible in evidence and given probative value, the following
vi. other electronic forms of communication the requisites must rst be established, to wit:
d. Electronic documents and the hearsay rule. —
evidence of which is not recorded or retained.
Inapplicability of the hearsay rule. — 1) a showing that the recording device was capable of taking
This can be AUTHENTICATED by: testimony;
i. A memorandum, report, record or data compilation of
acts, events, conditions, opinions, or diagnoses, i. The testimony of the party to the 2) showing that the operator of the device was competent;
communication;
ii. made by electronic, optical or other similar means 3) establishment of the authenticity and correctness of the
ii. By any witness who had personal knowledge of recording;
iii. at or near the time of or from transmission or supply of
the communication.
information 4) a showing that changes, additions, or deletions have not
been made;
iv. by a person with knowledge thereof, and People v. Enojas 2014
5) a showing of the manner of the preservation of the
v. kept in the regular course or conduct of a business activity, SC said there are two persons who could authenticate text messages:
recording;
and
1. Party to the exchanges;
6) identi cation of the speakers; and
vi. such was the regular practice,

7) A showing that the testimony elicited was voluntarily made c) Proceedings Where Lawyers are Prohibited to Appear i) legal advice and instructions to clients to inform
them of their rights and obligations,
without any kind of inducement. as Counsels
ii) preparation for clients of documents requiring
Prohibited Practice of Non-lawyers and Appearance Without
Legal and Judicial Ethics with knowledge of legal principles not possessed by
ordinary layman, and
Authority
Practical Exercises
iii) appearance for clients before public tribunals which
Public O cials and the Practice of Law
possess power and authority to determine rights of
I Legal Ethics life, liberty, and property according to law, in order to
a) Prohibitions and Disquali cations of Former
assist in proper interpretation and enforcement of
Practice of Law Government Attorneys law. (Ulep v. Legal Clinic)
Duties and Responsibilities of a Lawyer Under the b) Public O cials Who Cannot Practice Law or Can The following factors are considered in determining whether
CPR there is practice of law:
Practice Law With Restrictions
Suspension, Disbarment and Discipline of Lawyers iv) Habituality – implies customarily or habitually
Lawyers Authorized to Represent the Government holding one's self out to the public as a lawyer.
Notarial Practice
The Lawyer’s Oath v) Application of law, legal principles, practice or
procedure – calls for legal knowledge, training and
A Practice of Law
experience.
1 Basic Concepts
Basic Concepts vi) Compensation – implies that one must have
a) Definition of the Practice of Law. — Practice of law means presented himself to be in the active and continued
Quali cations for Admission to the Bar any activity, in or out of court, which requires the application practice of the legal profession and that his
of law, legal procedure, knowledge, training and experience. professional services are available to the public for
Continuing Requirements for Membership in the Bar
"To engage in the practice of law is to perform those acts compensation, as a service for his livelihood or in
Appearance of Non-lawyers which are characteristics of the profession. Generally, to consideration of his said services.
practice law is to give notice or render any kind of service, vii) Attorney-client relationship.
a) Law Student Practice Rule
which device or service requires the use in any degree of legal
b) Practice of Law as a Privilege, Not a Right. — Is not a
b) Non-lawyers in Courts and/or Administrative knowledge or skill." (Cayetano v. Monsod)
property right but a mere privilege and as such must bow to
Tribunals In the practice of his profession, a licensed attorney at law the inherent regulatory power of the Court to exact
generally engages in three principal types of professional compliance with the lawyer’s public responsibilities.
activity:

The right to practice law is not a natural or constitutional identity, and educational records renders him un t for admission to 6. That no charges against him, involving moral turpitude, have
right. the Bar. The practice of law, after all, is not a natural, absolute been led or pending in any court in PH.
It is also in the nature of a right because lawyers cannot be or constitutional right to be granted to everyone who
No applicant who obtained the Bachelor of Laws degree in this
prevented from practicing law except for valid reasons demands it. Rather, it is a privilege limited to citizens of good jurisdiction shall be admitted to the bar examination unless he or she
observing due process. moral character. has satisfactorily completed the following courses in a law school or
c) Law as a Profession, Not a Business or Trade. — It is not university duly recognized by the government:
a money-making venture. It is a calling impressed with public
1. civil law,
interests. Sps Tolentino v. Ancheta 2016 En Banc
2. commercial law,
It is not a right de jure. It cannot be assigned or inherited, but Despite receipt of the P30,000.00 acceptance fee, he did not act on
must be earned by hard study and good conduct. his client's case. Moreover, he prevailed upon complainants to give 3. remedial law,
It contemplates a succession of acts of the same nature him P200,000.00 purportedly to be used to bribe the Justices of the 4. criminal law,
habitually or customarily holding one’s self to the public as a Court of Appeals in order to secure a favorable ruling, palpably
5. public and private international law,
lawyer. showing that he himself was unconvinced of the merits of the case.
It is a profession and not a business; a profession in pursuit of "A lawyer shall not, for any corrupt motive or interest, encourage 6. political law,
which pecuniary reward is merely incidental. any suit or proceeding or delay any man's cause." Atty. Ancheta's 7. labor and social legislation,
misconduct betrays his lack of appreciation that the practice of
8. medical jurisprudence,
Caronan v. Caronan 2016 En Banc law is a profession, not a money-making trade.
9. taxation,
WON the IBP erred in ordering that: (a) the name "Patrick A.
Caronan" be stricken off the Roll of Attorneys; and (b) the name 10. legal ethics and
Quali cations for Admission to the Bar
"Richard A. Caronan" be barred from being admitted to the Bar. 2 11. clinical legal education program. (shall apply to the bar
Bar Matter No. 1153 examination applicants commencing the 2023 bar
NO. The IBP was also correct in ordering that respondent, whose
examinations. A.M. No. 19-03-24-SC)
real name is "Richard A. Caronan," be barred from admission to the Requirements for All Applicants for Admission to the Bar
Bar. Under Section 6, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court, no Filipino Citizens who are graduates of foreign law schools are
1. PH citizen;
applicant for admission to the Bar Examination shall be admitted allowed to take the bar examinations provided they show the following:
unless he had pursued and satisfactorily completed a pre-law 2. At least 21 years of age;
1. Completion of all courses leading to the degree of Bachelor of
course. 3. Of good moral character; Laws or its equivalent degree;
The Court does not discount the possibility that respondent may 4. A resident of PH; 2. Recognition or accreditation of the law school by the proper
later on complete his college education and earn a law degree under authority;
5. Must produce before the SC satisfactory evidence of good
his real name. However, his false assumption of his brother's name,
moral character; and

3. Completion of all the fourth year subjects in a law school duly 4. faithful observance of the rules and ethics of the legal the community. As keepers of public faith, lawyers are burdened
recognized by the Philippine Government. profession and with a high degree of social responsibility and, hence, must handle
their personal a airs with great caution.
5. being continually subject to judicial disciplinary control.
Continuing Requirements for Membership in
3
the Bar a. Good moral character b. Citizenship; reacquisition of the privilege to practice
Good moral character is what a person really is, as distinguished law in the Philippines
Qualifications for admission to the bar
from good reputation or from the opinion generally entertained of A Filipino lawyer who becomes a citizen of another country is
1. Citizen of the Philippines; him, the estimate in which he is held by the public in the place deemed never to have lost his Philippine citizenship if he reacquires
2. Resident of the Philippines; where he is known. it in accordance with RA 9225. Although he is also deemed never
to have terminated his membership in the Philippine bar, no
3. At least 21 years old; Moral character is not a subjective term but one which
automatic right to resume law practice accrues.
corresponds to objective reality. The standard of personal and
4. A person of good moral character;
professional integrity is not satis ed by such conduct as it merely Under RA 9225, if a person intends to practice the legal profession
5. No charges against him, involving moral turpitude, led or are enables a person to escape the penalty of criminal law. Good in the Philippines and he reacquires his Filipino citizenship
pending in court; moral character includes at least common honesty. pursuant to its provisions, he must rst secure from the SC the
authority to do so, conditioned on:
6. Possess the required educational quali cations; This requirement is not only a condition precedent to admission to
the practice of law, its continued possession is also essential for a) the updating and payment in full of the annual
7. Pass the bar examinations;
remaining in the practice of law. membership dues in the IBP;
8. Take the lawyer’s oath;
The requirement of good moral character has four general purposes, b) the payment of professional tax;
9. Sign the roll of attorneys; namely, to protect: c) the completion of at least 36 credit hours of mandatory
10. Receiving from the clerk of court of the SC a certi cate of the 1) the public; continuing legal education; this is specially signi cant to
license to practice. refresh the applicant/petitioner’s knowledge of Philippine
2) the public image of lawyers;
Continuing requirements for the practice of law laws and update him of legal developments and
3) prospective clients; and
Membership in good standing ― is a continuing requirement. d) the retaking of the lawyer’s oath which will not only
This means continued membership and, concomitantly, 4) errant lawyers from themselves. remind him of his duties and responsibilities as a lawyer
and as an o cer of the Court, but also renew his pledge to
1. payment of annual membership dues in the IBP; 2017 En Banc
Torres v. Dalangin maintain allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines. (In
2. payment of the annual professional tax; re Dacanay)
As o cers of the court, lawyers must not only in fact be of good
3. compliance with the mandatory continuing legal education moral character but must also be seen to be of good moral character
requirement; In re Muneses 2012 En Banc
and leading lives in accordance with the highest moral standards of

all other cases the supervising lawyer determines that

In pursuance to the quali cations laid down by the Court for the b. drafting and submission of pleadings and documents
his or her presence is required;
practice of law, the OBC required the herein petitioner to submit before trial and appellate courts and quasi-judicial and
the original or certi ed true copies of the following documents in administrative bodies, c. Assume personal professional responsibility for any
relation to his petition: work performed by the certi ed law student
c. assistance in mediation and other alternative modes of
practitioner while under his or her supervision;
1. Petition for Re-Acquisition of Philippine Citizenship; dispute resolution,
d. Assist and advise the certi ed law student practitioner
2. Order (for Re-Acquisition of Philippine citizenship); d. legal counseling and advice, and
in the activities authorized by these rules and review
3. Oath of Allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines; e. such other activities that may be covered by the such activities with the certi ed law student
Clinical Legal Education Program of the law school practitioner, all to the extent required for the proper
4. Identi cation Certi cate (IC) issued by the Bureau of
herein provided. practical training of the certi ed law student
Immigration;
2. Eligibility Requirements of Law Student Practitioners practitioner and the protection of the client;
5. Certi cate of Good Standing issued by the IBP;
— e. Read, approve, and personally sign any pleadings,
6. Certi cation from the IBP indicating updated payments of
a. Level 1 certi cation, for law students who have briefs or other similar documents prepared by the
annual membership dues;
successfully completed their rst-year law courses; certi ed law student practitioner prior to the ling
7. Proof of payment of professional tax; and and/or thereof, and read and approve any documents which
8. Certi cate of compliance issued by the MCLE O ce. shall be prepared by the certi ed law student
b. Level 2 certi cation, for law students currently
practitioner for execution by the eligible party; and
enrolled for the second semester of their third-year
law courses. f. Provide the level of supervision to the certi ed law
Appearance of Non-lawyers 3. A law student practitioner may sign briefs, pleadings, letters,
student practitioner required by these rules.
4
Rules 138, 138-A, Rules of Court and other similar documents which the student has produced b) Non-lawyers in Courts and/or Administrative
under the direction of the supervising lawyer. Tribunals
GR: Only those who are licensed to practice law can appear and
handle cases in court. 4. Supervising Lawyers — A supervising lawyer shall be a 1. In cases before the MTC, a party may conduct his own case or
member of the bar in good standing. The following are the litigation in person, with the aid of an agent or friend
EXC:
duties of a supervising lawyer: appointed by him for that purpose.
a) Law Student Practice Rule a. Supervise such number of certi ed law student 2. Before any other court, a party may conduct his litigation
1. Coverage. — The limited practice of law covers practitioners as far as practicable; personally.
a. appearances, b. Personally appear with the law student practitioner in 3. In localities where members of the bar are not available, the
all cases pending before the second-level courts and in court may appoint any person, resident of the province and of

good repute for probity and ability, to defend the accused individual who is not an attorney to assist that party upon the
before an MTC. (Sec 7 Rule 116) latter's consent (Sec 17, Rules of Procedure in Small Claims 2. Respondent's acts of signing and ling of pleadings for his
Cases) client in the Murder case months after the promulgation of
4. Before the NLRC
the Resolution are clear proofs that he practiced law during
a. Represent themselves; 2. In all katarungang pambarangay proceedings, the the period of his suspension.
parties must appear in person without the assistance of the
b. Represent their organization or members thereof counsel or representative, except for minors and incompetents 3. The Court has consistently imposed an additional
with written authorization; or who may be assisted by their next of kin who are not lawyers suspension of six months on lawyers who continue to
(Sec 415 LGC). practice law despite their suspension.
c. Duly accredited members of any legal aid o ce duly
recognized by the DOJ, or the IBP in cases referred to 4. However, considering that the Court had already imposed
by the latter. Malecdan v. Baldo 2018 upon respondent the ultimate penalty of disbarment for his
gross misconduct and willful disobedience of the lawful
5. Any o cial or other person appointed or designated in The language of P.D. 1508 is mandatory in barring lawyers from
orders of the court in an earlier complaint for disbarment
accordance with law to appear for the Government of the appearing before the Lupon. Moreover, pursuant to the familiar
led against him in Zarcilla v. Quesada, Jr., the penalty of
Philippines. (Sec 33 Rule 138) maxim in statutory construction dictating that 'expressio unius est
additional six months suspension from the practice of law
6. Before the Cadastral Court; exclusio alterius', the express exceptions made regarding minors and
can no longer be imposed upon him.
incompetents must be construed as exclusive of all others not
7. Before the DARAB. 5. But while the Court can no longer impose the penalty
mentioned.
The following limitations must be observed: upon the disbarred lawyer, it can still give the
Atty. Baldo's violation of P.D. 1508 thus falls squarely within the
corresponding penalty only for the sole purpose of
1. The non-lawyer should con ne his work to non-adversary prohibition of Rule 1.01 of Canon 1 of the CPR.
recording it in his personal le with the OBC.
contentions and should not undertake purely legal work (i.e.,
examination of witness, presentation of evidence); See Ethics Case Digest No. 30
2. The services should not be habitual; Prohibited Practice of Non-lawyers and
5
Appearance Without Authority
3. Attorney’s fees should not be charged.
Petelo v. Rivera 16 Oct 2019
a. Lawyers without authority. — Corruptly or willfully
c) Proceedings Where Lawyers are Prohibited to Appear 1. The acts of Atty. Rivera constituted violations of the CPR,
appearing as an attorney for a party to a case without authority
as Counsels
to do so is a ground for disbarment or suspension. (Sec 27 particularly Rule 9.01, Canon 9, Rule 1.10, Canon 1 and
1. In small claims cases, no attorney shall appear on behalf of R138) Rule 10.01, Canon 10.
or represent a party at the hearing, unless the attorney is the
2. Atty. Rivera's act of allowing persons other than himself to
plainti or defendant. If the court determines that a party Valmonte v. Quesada, Jr. 04 Dec 2019
use his signature in signing papers and pleadings, in e ect,
cannot properly present his/her claim or defense and needs
1. Quesada committed unauthorized practice of law. allowed non-lawyers to practice law.
assistance, the court may, in its discretion, allow another

iv. Administrative complaint against the erring lawyer or

2.1. Worse, he failed to display or even manifest any zeal 5. Members of constitutional commissions;
government o cial;
or eagerness to unearth the truth behind the events
6. Members of the JBC;
which led to his involvement in the ling of the v. Criminal complaint for estafa against the person who
unauthorized civil suit. falsely represented himself as a lawyer to the damage of 7. Ombudsman and his deputies;
another. 8. All governors and mayors;
3. He openly admitted his association with a disbarred lawyer
and their ongoing agreement to allow the latter to use his 9. Those prohibited by special law.
signature and "details" in the preparation of pleadings. 6 Public O cials and the Practice of Law
Public O cials who CAN practice law WITH restrictions
3.1. By so doing, he not only willingly allowed a a) Prohibitions and Disquali cations of Former 1. Members of Congress cannot personally appear as
non-lawyer to practice law; worse, he allowed one Government Attorneys counsel before any court of justice, electoral tribunals, or
to continue to practice law notwithstanding that
Sec 7(b) of RA 6713 provides that public o cials and employees quasi-judicial and other administrative bodies. Thus, they
this Court already stripped him of his license to
during their incumbency shall not, among others, engage in the are allowed to engage in other aspects of the law practice.
practice law.
private practice of their profession unless authorized by the
2. Under the LGC, Sanggunian members may practice law,
4. Here, Atty. Rivera abused the privilege that is only personal Constitution or law, provided that such practice will not con ict
provided they shall NOT:
to him when he allowed another who has no license to or tend to con ict with their o cial functions.
practice law, to sign pleadings and to le a suit before the a. Appear as counsel before any court in any civil
The professional concerned cannot practice his profession in
court using his signature and "details." cases wherein an LGU or any o ce, agency, or
connection with any matter before the o ce he used to be with, in
instrumentality of the government is the adverse
5. Tapay v. Bancolo similarly imposed the penalty of which case the one-year prohibition shall apply. (one year after
party;
suspension of one (1) year to the respondent-lawyer therein resignation, retirement, or separation from public office)
who was found to have authorized or delegated to his b. Appear as counsel in any criminal case wherein an
secretary the signing of the pleadings for ling before the b) Public O cials Who Cannot Practice Law or Can o cer or employee of the national or local
courts. Practice Law With Restrictions government is accused of an o ense committed in
relation to his o ce;
See Ethics Case Digest No. 31 Public O cials who CANNOT practice law
c. Collect any fee for their appearance in
b. Persons not lawyers. — The following are the remedies for 1. Judges and other o cials or employees of the superior administrative proceedings involving the LGU of
persons who are not lawyers and lawyers who appear without court; which he is an o cial; AND
authority: 2. O cials and employees of the OSG; d. Use property and personnel of the Government
i. Petition for injunction; 3. Government prosecutors; except when the sanggunian member concerned is
defending the interest of the government.
ii. Declaratory relief; 4. President, VP, Members of the Cabinet, their deputies and
iii. Contempt of court (Sec 3[e] R71); assistants;

3. A retired justice or judge receiving pension from the 4. I will not wittingly nor willingly promote or sue any 1. Immoral conduct is gross when it is so corrupt as
government cannot act as counsel groundless, false or unlawful suit, or give aid nor consent to constitute a criminal act, or so unprincipled as to
to the same; be reprehensible to a high degree, or when committed
a. in any civil case which the government is the under such scandalous or revolting circumstances as
adverse party; or 5. I will delay no man for money or malice, and will conduct to shock the community's sense of decency.
myself as a lawyer according to the best of my knowledge
b. in any criminal case wherein an o cer or employee 2. These distinctions are made as the supreme penalty
and discretion, with all good delity as well to the court as
of the government is accused of an o ense of disbarment arising from conduct requires
to my clients; and
committed in relation to his o ce. grossly immoral, not simply immoral, conduct.
6. I impose upon myself this voluntary obligation without
any mental reservation or purpose of evasion. 3. Duty not to counsel illegal activities (Rule 1.02
Canon 1)
Lawyers Authorized to Represent the So help me God.
7
Government ii. Duty not to encourage lawsuits; duty not to delay
any man’s cause (Rule 1.03 Canon 1)
Any o cial or other person appointed or designated in accordance
with law to appear for the Government of the Philippines shall Duties and Responsibilities of a Lawyer 1. Barratry is the o ense of frequently exciting and
have all the rights of a duly authorized member of the bar to appear B Under the CPR stirring up quarrels and suits, either at law or
in any case in which said government has an interest direct or otherwise.
Code of Professional Responsibility
indirect (Sec 33 R138) 2. It is the lawyer’s act of fomenting suits among
To Society individuals and o ering his legal services to one of
8 The Lawyer’s Oath them for monetary motives or purposes.
To the Legal Profession
I, _________________ of _________________ do solemnly 3. Ambulance chasing is the act of haunting
swear that To the Courts hospitals and visiting homes of the a icted,
1. I will maintain allegiance to the Republic of the o ciously intruding their presence and persistently
To the Clients o ering his service on the basis of a contingent fee.
Philippines;
2. I will support its Constitution and obey the laws as well as To Society 4. The lawyer is guilty of ambulance chasing whether
the legal orders of the duly constituted authorities 1 the act is done by him personally or by person under
Canons 1 to 6
therein; his employ.
a. Respect for law and legal processes iii. Duty to encourage amicable settlement (Rule 1.04
3. I will do no falsehood, nor consent to the doing of any in
court; i. Duty not to engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral Canon 1)
or deceitful conduct (Rule 1.01 Canon 1)

with the dignity of the profession; made in a modest

1. A lawyer CANNOT, without special authority, iii. Duty not to do or permit to be done any act to solicit
and decorous manner.
compromise his client’s litigation or receive anything legal business (Rule 2.03 Canon 2)
in discharge of the client’s claim but the full amount 6. The use of the following are permissible:
1. The practice of law is a profession, NOT a
in cash.
money-making trade. a. Simple signs stating the name or names of
2. A compromise entered into without authority is lawyers;
2. It is a branch of the administration of justice.
merely unenforceable. It can be rati ed by the
b. Professional cards bearing the name of the
client. 3. The following characteristics distinguish the legal
lawyer, o ce and residence address and special
profession from business:
b. Efficient and convenient legal services lines in law;
a. A duty of public service, of which the
i. Duty not to reject the cause of the defenseless or c. Advertisements in legal periodicals bearing
emolument is a by-product, and in which one
oppressed (Rule 2.01 Canon 2) same data;
may attain the highest eminence without making
GR: The cause of the defenseless and oppressed much money; d. Calling cards with a formal picture of the
must not be rejected by a lawyer whose services are lawyer;
b. A relation as an ‘o cer of court’ to the
being engaged. administration of justice involving thorough e. Publication in reputable law lists of brief
EXC: For two valid reasons: sincerity, integrity, and reliability; biographical and informative data. (Ulep v. The
Legal Aid Clinic)
a. Lack of Competence — he is not in a position to c. A relation to clients in the highest degree of
carry out the work e ectively or competently; or duciary; f. Modest announcements in newspapers,
periodicals or magazines about the opening of a
b. Conflict of Interest — between him and the d. A relation to colleagues at the bar characterized
law o ce or rm stating the names of the lawyers
prospective client or between a present client and by candor, fairness, and unwillingness to resort to
and the address of the rm.
the prospective client. (Rule 14.03) current business methods of advertising and
encroachment on their practice, or dealing g. Legal aid program as a public service.
Legal Aid is NOT a matter of charity, but a
directly with their clients.
Public Responsibility. — It is a means for the iv. Duty not to charge rates lower than those
correction of social imbalance that may often lead to 4. It is highly unethical for an attorney to advertise his customarily prescribed (Rule 2.04 Canon 2)
injustice. talents and skills as a merchant. The most worthy and
1. The purpose is to avoid any demeaning or degrading
effective advertisement possible is the establishment of a
ii. Duty not to refuse to render legal advice to the competition among lawyers.
well-merited reputation for professional capacity and
defenseless or oppressed (Rule 2.02 Canon 2) — Even if 2. They must refrain from charging rates lower than the
fidelity to trust.
a lawyer could validly not accept a case, he must not customary rates unless the client is
refuse to provide immediate legal advice necessary to 5. When is solicitation of legal business
permissible? The solicitation must be compatible a. a relative or brother lawyer; or
protect their rights.

b. too poor — here, the lawyer may reduce the EXC: If the law allows him to practice law concurrently 2. He owes it to his profession to take an active interest
charge or render pro bono service. while holding the position such as a Sanggunian in the maintenance of high standards of legal
member. education; and
c. True, honest, fair, dignified, and objective information
on legal services — A lawyer may make known his legal iv. Duty not to seek publicity (Rule 3.04 Canon 3). — A 3. He owes it to the lay public to make the law a part of
services by using true, honest, fair, digni ed and objective lawyer shall not pay or give anything of value to their social consciousness.
information or statement of facts. Even if true, the manner of representatives of mass media in an anticipation of, or in
making it known must not be undigni ed and demeaning to return for, publicity to attract legal business. Cerilla v. Lezama 2017 En Banc
the profession.
WON respondent acted beyond the scope of his authority and thereby
i. Duty not to use or permit use of self-praises or false Kimteng, et al. v. Young 2015
violated Canons 15 and 17 of the CPR.
claims on quali cations or quality of legal services
A disbarred lawyer's name cannot be part of a rm's name. A lawyer YES. Nowhere is it expressly stated in the SPA that respondent is
(Rule 3.01 Canon 3). — Any false pretense by a lawyer
who appears under a rm name that contains a disbarred lawyer's authorized to compromise on the sale of the property or to sell the
intended to defraud, mislead and deceive or to tout on his
name commits indirect contempt of court. property of complainant.
quali cations or quality of his legal services is unethical —
whether done by him personally or through another with The obligations of lawyers as a consequence of their Canon 5 duty
his permission. have been reiterated in Hernandez v. Atty. Padilla—It is
Palencia v. Linsangan 2018 En Banc
ii. Duty not to use false, misleading or assumed name imperative that lawyers be conversant with basic legal
for a rm name (Rule 3.02 Canon 3) Since a claim for attorney's fees may be asserted either in the very principles.
action in which the services of a lawyer had been rendered, or in a
1. If a partner died, and the continued use of the name is
separate action, respondents, instead of forcibly deducting their
desired, the name of the deceased may still be used
share, should have moved for the judicial determination and Intestate Estate of Jose Uy v. Maghari III 2015 En Banc
provided, in all communications, there is an
collection of their attorney's fees.
indication that said partner is dead. WON Maghari engaged in unethical conduct and of what proper
2. If the partner is appointed as judge, his name should d. Participation in the improvements and reforms in the penalty may be meted on him.
be dropped from the rm because he is no longer legal system (Canon 4)
YES. A counsel's signature on a pleading is neither an empty
allowed to practice law. This is to avoid misleading the e. Participation in legal education program (Canon 5). — formality nor even a mere means for identi cation. Through his or
public and display of in uence. Once a person becomes a lawyer, he incurs a three-fold her signature, a party's counsel makes a positive declaration.
iii. Duty to withdraw from the rm when lawyer obligation: In certifying through his or her signature that he or she has read the
accepts public o ce (Rule 3.03 Canon 3) 1. He owes it to himself to continue improving his pleading, that there is ground to support it, and that it is not
knowledge of the law; interposed for delay, a lawyer asserts his or her competence,
GR: If a partner accepts public o ce, his name shall be
credibility, and ethics. Signing a pleading is such a solemn
removed from the rm name.
component of legal practice that this court has taken occasion to

matter that the lawyer dealt with while employed by

decry the delegation of this task to non-lawyers as a violation of the lawyers charged with administrative o enses involving the
the government and the interests of the current and
CPR. performance of their o cial duties.
former are adverse.
Should the respondents be administratively disciplined based on the
f. Lawyers in government service discharging their tasks. 3. The American Bar Association de ned matter as any
allegations of the complainant?
— Misconduct in o ce as a public o cial may be a ground discrete, isolatable act as well as identi able
for disciplinary action. transaction or conduct involving a particular situation NO. The acts complained of undoubtedly arose from the
i. Duty to see to it that justice is done (Rule 6.01 Canon and speci c party, and not merely an act of drafting, respondents' performance or discharge of o cial duties as
6) enforcing or interpreting government or agency prosecutors of the Department of Justice.
procedures, regulations or laws, or brie ng abstract
ii. Duty not to use his public position to promote or
principles of law.
advance private interest (Rule 6.02 Canon 6). — This is
4. To intervene only includes an act of a person who To the Legal Profession
especially applicable to lawyers in public o ce who are 2
concurrently allowed to engage in the private practice of has the power to in uence the subject proceedings. Canons 7 to 9
law. (PCGG v. SB)
a. Upholding the dignity and integrity of the profession
GR: Lawyers who hold government o ce may NOT be
Pasok v. Zapatos 2016 i. Duty not to make false statements or suppress a
disciplined as a member of the Bar for misconduct in
material fact in connection with application for
the discharge of his duties as a government o cial. WON respondent violated Rule 6.03 of the CPR.
admission to the bar (Rule 7.01 Canon 7)
EXC: If the misconduct is of such a character as to a ect his YES. A lawyer shall not, after leaving government service, accept 1. When the applicant concealed a charge of a crime that
quali cation as a lawyer or to show moral engagement or employment in connection with any matter in which does NOT involve moral turpitude, this concealment
delinquency, then he may be disciplined as a member he had intervened while in said service. will be taken against him.
of the Bar upon such ground.
The respondent, in his capacity as the judge of the MTCC of 2. It is the FACT OF CONCEALMENT and not the
iii. Restrictions against government lawyers who left Tangub City, presided over the case before eventually inhibiting commission of the crime itself that makes him
the service (Rule 6.03 Canon 6) himself from further proceedings. His act of presiding morally un t to become a lawyer. When he made a
1. A lawyer who leaves public service is prohibited by the constituted intervention. concealment, he perpetrated perjury.
Rule from accepting engagement or employment in The restriction as applied to him lasted beyond his tenure in relation ii. Duty not to support unquali ed bar applicant (Rule
connection with any matter in which he had to the matters in which he had intervened as judge. 7.02 Canon 7). — The act of supporting the application to
intervened while in said service.
the Bar of any person known to him to be unquali ed
2. Adverse-interest conflicts exist where the matter in constitutes gross misconduct in o ce. (Sec 27 R138)
which the former government lawyer represents a Trovela v. Robles, et al 2018
client in private practice is substantially related to a
The IBP has no jurisdiction to investigate government

iii. Duty not to engage in conduct adversely a ecting to the sexual desires of the abuser. Further, it is NOT necessary courts that he had professionally vowed to espouse, per
the legal profession ⭐ (Rule 7.03 Canon 7) that a demand or request for sexual favor is articulated in a Canon 7, Rule 7.03 of the CPR.
categorical manner as it may be discerned from the acts of the
7. The prohibition against foreign ownership of Philippine
Campos v. Campos 2014 o ender. What the law aims to punish is the undue exercise of
private lands is too basic a rule for even non-attorneys to be
power and authority manifested through sexually charged
unaware of. As a lawyer, Atty. Vitorilllo is presumed to
Unbecoming conduct “applies to a broader range of conduct or one lled with sexual undertones.
know this.
transgressions of rules not only of social behavior but of ethical
practice or logical procedure or prescribed method.” 8. He is deemed to have acted in contravention of Canon 1,
Rule 1.02 - CPR's proscription against counseling activities
Although Alistair and Charmaine were not entirely faultless, a Partsch v. Vitorillo 04 Jan 2022 EN BANC
aimed at de ance of the law.
higher level of decorum and restraint was then expected from Eliseo,
Atty. Vitorillo is suspended for THREE years from the practice of
whose conduct failed to show due respect for the court and lend See Ethics Case Digest No. 3
law.
credit to the nobility of the practitioners of the legal profession.
1. The Court nds Atty. Vitorillo guilty of deceitful conduct
Atty. Campos thus violated Rule 7.03, Canon 7 of the CPR.
proscribed by Canon 1, Rule 1.01 of the CPR.
Andaya v. Tumanda 18 Feb 2020 EN BANC
2. In the contract to sell that he himself submitted before the
1. Atty. Tumanda violated Canon 1, Rule 1.01 and Canon 7,
Ricafort v. Medina 2016 En Banc Court, he expressly named himself as the seller and absolute
Rule 7.03 of the CPR.
owner of the subject property.
WON Medina should be held administratively liable. 2. Ong v. Atty. Delos Santos explained that a lawyer who issues
3. What he had was at best an inchoate right, anchored on
YES. There is su cient proof to establish that respondent slapped a worthless check is in breach of his oath to obey the laws.
mere hope that the subject property shall someday be
the complainant. Contrary to the respondent's claim that it shows transferred to his name. 2.1. Issuing a worthless check is a violation of BP 22 for
the political motive behind this case, the letter reinforced which he may be disciplined under Rule 138,
4. This expectancy was admittedly conditioned on the
complainant's credibility and motive. The presence of 19 Mayors' Section 27.
issuance of a nal court ruling cancelling the title over the
signatures only reinforced the appalling nature of the respondent's
main lot in favor of his clients, who were the ones directly 3. A penalty of one-year suspension from the practice of law is
act. It re ects the public's reaction to the respondent's display of
claiming ownership over the subject property in their own usually imposed upon a lawyer who issues a worthless
arrogance.
right. check.
5. He fed Partsch false assurances that the trial court would 3.1. However, due to attendant circumstances, the
2019 En Banc grant his cause. He even openly blamed the trial court's penalty imposed should be increased to three years.
Re Atty. Untian, Jr.
supposed delay in resolving the pending ownership dispute. 4. Here, aside from issuing a worthless check, respondent has
WON Untian is guilty of sexual harassment.
6. In so doing, Atty. Vitorillo demeaned the integrity of legal acted in utmost bad faith when he sold to another person
YES. R.A. No. 7877 does not require that the victim had acceded processes and tarnished the image of impartiality of the the Mercedes Benz he previously sold to complainant as full

payment for the loan obligation. Malabed v. Dela Peña 2016 En Banc
Atty. Guevarra is found guilty of violation of Rules 7.03, 8.01,
5. Moreover, his deliberate failure to settle his obligation WON respondent is guilty of dishonesty and grave misconduct. and 19.01 of the CPR and is thus SUSPENDED from the practice
despite repeated demands is in itself a gross misconduct for Respondent is GUILTY of gross misconduct. By using improper of law for a period of one (1) year.
which he may be sanctioned with one-year suspension from language in his pleadings, respondent violated Rule 8.01 of Canon
the practice of law. 8 of the CPR.
6. Also, respondent has been using several addresses to avoid Pheninah D.F. Washington v. Dicen 2018
being traced and to evade his obligation to complainant.
Atty. Dicen referred to complainant as a "lunatic" who was on a
The Law Firm of Chavez Miranda Aseoche v. Lazaro 2016
6.1. He even refused to answer the accusations against "crazy quest for revenge" against him. Atty. Dicen violated Rule
him and to appear in the mandatory conferences In Disciplinary proceedings against lawyers, only the lawyer 8.01, Canon 8 of the CPR for his use of language that not only
despite due notice, thereby causing undue delay in who is the subject of the case is indispensable. No other party, maligned complainant's character, but also imputed a crime against
the resolution of the instant case. not even a complainant, is needed. her, i.e., that she was committing adultery against her husband.
See Ethics Case Digest No. 26 The Court nds respondents guilty of violating Canons 8 and 10
of the CPR. Respondents twice accused complainant of antedating
b. Courtesy, fairness, and candor towards professional Canete v. Puti 2019
a petition it had led with the DOJ without any proof whatsoever.
colleagues
This allegation of impropriety undoubtedly brought complainant Atty. Puti called Atty. Tan "bakla" in a condescending manner. To
i. Duty not to use abusive and improper language (Rule and its lawyers into disrepute. The accusation also tended to mislead be sure, the term "bakla" (gay) itself is not derogatory. However,
8.01 Canon 8) the courts, as it was made without hesitation notwithstanding the when "bakla" is used in a pejorative and deprecating manner, then it
absence of any evidentiary support. The Court cannot condone becomes derogatory. Atty. Puti also nonchalantly accused the
1. Employment of disrespectful, abusive and abrasive
this. prosecutors of having been bribed or otherwise acting for a valuable
language, serves no useful purpose and on the
contrary constitutes direct contempt or contempt consideration with his remark, "Bakit 2 kayong prosecutor? Malaki
in facie curiae. siguro bayad sa inyo." Atty. Puti thus violated Rule 8.01 of the
Belo-Henares v. Guevarra 2016 CPR.
2. Courts may EXPUNGE improper language from the
records. WON respondent should be held administratively liable based on the c. No assistance in unauthorized practice of law. — The
ii. Duty not to encroach upon the professional allegations of the verified complaint. unauthorized practice of law by assuming to be an attorney
employment of another lawyer (Rule 8.02 Canon 8) — YES. That complainant is a public gure and/or a celebrity and and acting as such without authority constitutes indirect
However, it is the right of any lawyer, without fear or favor, therefore, a public personage who is exposed to criticism does not contempt which is punishable by ne, imprisonment or both.
to give proper advice and assistance to those seeking relief justify respondent's disrespectful language. It is the cardinal i. Duty not to delegate legal work to unquali ed
against unfaithful or neglectful counsel. condition of all criticism that it shall be bona fide, and shall not persons (Rule 9.01 Canon 9)
spill over the walls of decency and propriety.

— The Lawyer’s Oath mandates the lawyer among other

ii. Duty not to divide legal fees with non-lawyers (Rule 1) Did Atty. Era engage in the practice of law during his suspension
duties:
9.02 Canon 9) EXC therefrom? YES. Atty. Era's acts constituted ''practice of law."
1. To do no falsehood;
1. Where there is a pre-existing agreement with a It is true that being present in an auction sale and negotiating
partner or associate that, upon the latter’s death, matters relating to the same may not be exclusively for lawyers. 2. Nor consent to the doing of the same in court;
money shall be paid over a reasonable period of time However, in this case, Atty. Era's acts clearly involved the 3. To conduct himself as a lawyer according to the best
to his estate or to the persons speci ed in the determination by a trained legal mind of the legal e ects and of his knowledge and discretion with all good delity
agreement; or consequences of each course of action in the satisfaction of the to the court.
2. Where a lawyer undertakes to complete un nished judgment award.
ii. Duty not to knowingly misquote or misrepresent
legal business of a deceased lawyer; or Atty. Era was thus engaged in an unauthorized practice of law (Rule 10.02 Canon 10).
3. Where a lawyer or law rm includes non-lawyer during his suspension. His acts constitute willful disobedience
of the lawful order of this Court, which under Sec 27 R138 is a iii. Duty to observe the rules of procedure; duty not to
employees in a retirement plan, even if the plan is
su cient cause for suspension or disbarment. misuse the rules (Rule 10.03 Canon 10).
based in whole or in part on a pro t sharing
agreement. 2) Is Atty. Bragas guilty of directly or indirectly assisting Atty. Era iv. Duty to furnish opposing party with a copy of
in his illegal practice of law that would likewise warrant this pleading (Rule 10.04 Canon 10).
Sps Eustaquio v. Navales 2016 Court's exercise of its disciplining authority against her? YES. GR: A motion must be set for hearing.
Atty. Bragas is guilty of assisting Atty. Era in his unauthorized EXC: those that do not prejudice the rights of the adverse
WON respondent should be held administratively liable.
practice of law and, thus, must likewise be reproved. party, i.e. a harmless motion for extension of time to
YES. Under Sec 27 R138, willful disobedience to any lawful order le pleading, reset a hearing.
Atty. Bragas has knowledge of Atty. Era's suspension from the
of a superior court and wilfully appearing as an attorney without
practice of law and yet, she allowed herself to participate in Atty.
authority to do so — acts which respondent is guilty of in this case 2016 En Banc
Era's unauthorized practice. Clearly, Atty. Bragas violated Canon 9 Francisco v. Flores
— are grounds for disbarment or suspension from the practice of
of the CPR.
law. Failure of counsel to act upon a client's case resulting in the
prescription of available remedies is negligence in violation of
The Court, in Lingan v. Calubaquib, Feliciano v. Bautista-Lozada
Canon 18 of the CPR.
and Ibana-Andrade v. Paita-Moya consistently imposed an To the Courts
additional six (6)-month suspension from the practice of law to 3 The general rule is that notice to counsel is notice to client. This
Canons 10 to 13
erring lawyers who practiced law despite being earlier suspended. rule remains until counsel noti es the court that he or she is
a. Candor, fairness, and good faith towards the courts withdrawing his or her appearance, or client informs the court of
change of counsel. Untruthful statements made in pleadings led
i. Duty not to do nor consent to the doing of any before courts, to make it appear that the pleadings are led on time,
Bonifacio v. Era, et al 2017 En Banc
falsehood; duty not to mislead (Rule 10.01 Canon 10) are contrary to a lawyer's duty of committing no falsehood.

b. Respect for courts and judicial officers. — Where duties to WON respondent should be administratively sanctioned.
Here, Atty. Flores is guilty of violating Canon 10, Rules 10.01 and
the courts con ict with his duties to his clients, the latter must
10.03, and Canon 18, Rule 18.03. YES. The Court nds that respondent violated the Code and the
yield to the former. A lawyer’s duty to the court is NOT
Respondent was not truthful in his Motion for Reconsideration Lawyer's Oath for in uence peddling, attempted bribery,
secondary to that of his client.
led before the IBP. His allegations are con icting. He initially threatening court o cers and disrespecting court processes.
i. Duty to appear in court properly attired (Rule 11.01
claimed that he was on vacation from February 9 to May. He Influence Peddling and
Canon 11).
subsequently claimed that his vacation was from February 11 to Attempted Bribery
June. These show respondent violated Rule 10.01. ii. Duty to be punctual at court hearings (Rule 11.02
A lawyer is duty-bound to actively avoid any act that tends to
Canon 11).
Respondent also violated Rule 10.03. His attempts to rectify are in uence, or may be seen to in uence, the outcome of an ongoing
further evidence that what he did— le a Petition for Relief iii. Duty to abstain from scandalous, o ensive or case, lest the people's faith in the judicial process is diluted. A lawyer
docketed as a di erent case before a di erent trial court—was wrong menacing language or behavior before the courts that approaches a judge to try to gain in uence and receive a
in the rst place. (Rule 11.03 Canon 11). favorable outcome for his or her client violates Canon 13.
iv. Duty not to attribute to a judge motives not On the other hand, bribery is classi ed as a serious charge that
supported by the record or having no materiality to constitutes malfeasance in o ce. A lawyer who commits attempted
Sitaca v. Palomares 2019 En Banc the case (Rule 11.04 Canon 11). — There are times when bribery, or corruption of public o cials, against a judge or a court
it is the judge who misbehaves during a court proceeding. personnel, violates Canon 10 and Rule 10.01.
WON Atty. Palomares is liable for the falsified bail bond.
It is NOT contemptuous for the lawyer to demand that
YES. First. He was the counsel of record for his son who was Threatening Court Officers
such misbehavior be made of record.
and Disrespecting Court
charged with murder, a non-bailable o ense. Second. As such, he
v. Duty not to criticize the conduct of a judge in an Processes
knew there was no petition for bail at all, much less any hearing
insulting language (Rule 11.05 Canon 11).
thereon. Third, respondent unabashedly turned the table on the A lawyer must not disrespect the o cers of the court. A lawyer who
persons accusing him of falsifying the bail bond and release order. vi. Duty to submit grievances against a judge to the disrespects the court and its o cers violates Canon 11 and Rule
Fourth. When a court has already obtained jurisdiction over a proper authorities (Rule 11.06 Canon 11). — 11.03.
criminal case, such jurisdiction is retained up until the end of the 1. If the complaint is administrative, le with the SC
litigation. Fifth. Under the principle of presumption of authorship, through the OCA.
the possessor and user of a falsi ed document is the author of the Canete v. Puti 2019
falsi cation and whoever stands to bene t from the falsi cation is 2. If criminal, le with the Ombudsman. However, if
the author thereof. the alleged criminal act is in connection with their WON Atty. Puti is guilty of provoking and insulting the prosecutors;
duties, le with the SC. and disrespecting the court.
Palomares, Jr. is GUILTY of violation of Rule 1.01, Canon 1 and
Rule 10.01, Canon 10. Accordingly, he is DISBARRED. 2018 En Banc
YES. Atty. Puti stated in open court that the judge was abusing his
Judge Dumlao v. Camacho
discretion and implied that the judge was partial and biased.

Moreover, Atty. Puti threatened the judge that he would withdraw 4. The certi cation against forum shopping should be with the same cause/s of action, parties and relief/s which
from the case and walk out if his request was not granted. Again, signed by the petitioner and not the counsel. constitutes a violation of the rule against forum shopping.
such statements were improper.
5. The elements of forum shopping are: 4. There was no showing that Atty. Teruel or Fr. Reyes
Atty. Puti thus violated Rules 11.03 and 11.04 of the CPR. Such informed the IBP Commissioner, of the ling and
a. Two or more cases are pending;
transgression, however, is not of a grievous character as to merit pendency of the subsequent (undocketed)
his suspension since his misconduct is considered as simple rather b. Involving the same. — Parties, Causes of action Counter-Complaint of the respondent as required under
than grave. In Quilendrino v. Icasiano, a lawyer was reprimanded and, Reliefs prayed for. Section 5, Rule 7.
for violating Canon 8, Rule 8.01, Canon 11, and Rule 11.03 of the 6. If one case has already been litigated before and is
CPR. See Ethics Case Digest No. 12
re led thereafter, the defense would be res judicata
and NOT forum shopping.
c. Assistance in the speedy and efficient administration of
justice Villanueva v. Alentajan 08 Jun 2020
Go v. Teruel 04 Nov 2020
i. Duty to adequately prepare for trial (Rule 12.01 A. Here, Atty. Alentajan committed forum shopping when he
Canon 12). 1. The essence of forum shopping is the ling of multiple
led the second case despite the nality of the judgment in
suits involving the same parties for the same cause of action,
ii. Duty not to engage in forum shopping (Rule 12.02 the rst case.
either simultaneously or successively, for the purpose of
Canon 12). — obtaining a favorable judgment. 1. an identity of parties exists in both cases;
1. There is forum shopping 1.1. An important factor in determining its existence is 2. the evidence necessary to prove the claim in the second
a. when as a result of an adverse opinion in one the vexation caused to the courts and the case had already been presented in the previous case.
forum, a party seeks a favorable opinion in parties-litigants by the ling of similar cases to 3. the reliefs sought by the heirs of Bienvenido in both
another or claim substantially the same reliefs. cases were the same such that a ruling in one case
b. when he institutes two or more actions grounded 2. Here, Atty. Teruel willfully committed forum shopping would have resulted in the resolution of the other, and
on the same cause, on the gamble that one or the when he instituted two actions grounded on the same vice versa.
other court would make a favorable disposition. cause, even if strictly speaking, he was not included as a B. The reliefs prayed for, the facts upon which both are based,
"complainant" in Fr. Reyes' Complaint. and the parties are substantially similar in the two cases.
2. Effect — dismissal of ALL actions pending without
prejudice to the taking of appropriate actions against 2.1. The outcome in one case would necessarily have an 1. Since the elements of res judicata are present, Atty.
the counsel or party concerned. e ect in the other since both cases share the same Alentajan committed forum shopping.
cause of action and involve the same parties.
3. Forum shopping is inapplicable to disbarment 2. In engaging in forum shopping, Atty. Alentajan
proceedings. 3. It is not strictly the actual docketing of the administrative violated Canon 1 of the CPR.
complaints but the mere act of ling multiple complaints

Testimony in Evidence under Art 184 of the RPC. He

acceptance fee for legal services and failing to render the services is a
C. Rule 10.3, Canon 10 of the CPR mandates lawyers to shall be both criminally and administratively liable.
violation of Canon 18 of the CPR. A lawyer's failure to le the
observe the rules of procedures and to not misuse them to
vii. Duty not to abuse, browbeat or harass or needlessly position paper is a per se violation of Rule 18.03.
defeat the ends of justice.
inconvenience a witness (Rule 12.07 Canon 12). — It is
1. The ling of multiple cases constitutes abuse of the the duty of an attorney to abstain from all o ensive
court's processes and improper conduct that tends to personality and to advance no fact prejudicial to the honor Avida Land Corporation v. Argosino 2016
impede, obstruct and degrade the administration of or reputation of a party or witness, unless required by the
justice. justice of the cause with which he is charged. (§20[f ] WON respondent's act of filing numerous pleadings, that caused
D. The ling of another action concerning the same subject R138) delay in the execution of a final judgment, constitutes professional
matter likewise runs contrary to Canon 1 and Rules 12.02 misconduct in violation of the CPR and the Lawyer's Oath.
viii. Duty to avoid testifying in behalf of his client (Rule
and 12.04 of Canon 12 of the CPR. 12.08 Canon 12). — YES. Despite the simplicity of the issue involved in the HLURB
case, the path towards its resolution became long, tedious, and
See Ethics Case Digest No. 20 GR: A lawyer shall avoid testifying in behalf of his
frustrating because of the deliberate attempts of respondent to delay
client.
iii. Duty to le pleadings on time (Rule 12.03 Canon 12). the actual execution of the judgment therein. Respondent’s acts are
EXC: in direct contravention of Rules 10.3 and 12.04 of the CPR.
iv. Duty not to unduly delay a case, impede the
execution of a judgment or misuse court processes a. On formal matters, such as the mailing,
(Rule 12.04 Canon 12). authentication of custody of an instrument; or
Alicias, Jr. v. Baclig 2017
v. Duty not to talk to witness, during break or recess, b. On substantial matters, in cases where his testimony
while the latter is still under examination (Rule 12.05 is essential to the end of justice, in which event he Is Atty. Baclig administratively liable? YES, with regard to forum
Canon 12). must, during his testimony, entrust the trial of the
shopping. An amended complaint was led by Lamorena, et. al.
case to another counsel.
vi. Duty not to knowingly assist a witness to against Alicias and Paa before the MTCC in February 2010.
misrepresent or impersonate (Rule 12.06 Canon 12). — Enriquez v. Lavadia 2015 En Banc However, on September 19, 2012, another amended complaint was
The witness who commits the misrepresentation or led by Lamorena, et. al. against Alicias, et. al., but this time, before
impersonation is criminally liable for False Testimony WON Lavadia should be administratively sanctioned for violating the RTC which prayed for similar reliefs as those which were sought
either under Arts 181, 182 or 183 of the RPC. And the the CPR. for in the complaint before the MTCC. Thus, Atty. Baclig
lawyer who induces a witness to commit false testimony YES. A lawyer is expected to serve his client with competence and consented to the ling of another complaint before another forum.
is equally guilty. The ling of another action concerning the same subject matter
diligence. Lawyers are reminded to note Rules 12.03 and 18.03 of
The lawyer who presented a witness knowing him to be a the CPR. runs contrary to Canon 1 and Rule 12.04 of Canon 12.
false witness is criminally liable for O ering False
In Solidon v. Macalalad, the Court stated that receiving money as

David v. Rongcal 2020 En Banc criminal intent. See Ethics Case Digest No. 24
WON respondent lawyers committed acts in violation of their Oath 3. Here, the following acts by Atty. Plata clearly constitute d. Reliance on merits of case, not on impropriety tending
and the CPR. gross misconduct: to influence the courts
YES. Attys. Rongcal, et. al. should be held administratively liable. 3.1. Atty. Plata's act of ling yet another case against i. Duty not to extend extraordinary attention nor seek
The judgment on the forcible entry case remains unexecuted due to Pagdanganan, after admitting that there are various opportunity for cultivating familiarity with judges
the ling of the frivolous motions orchestrated by the respondent criminal and administrative cases still pending (Rule 13.01 Canon 13)
lawyers with the sole intention to stall or to delay the enforcement against him and the other members of
ii. Duty not to make public statements in the media
of a nal judgment. Their act of ling frivolous motions which SAMANAI; and
regarding pending case (Rule 13.02 Canon 13). —
unduly delayed the execution of a judgment that had long been nal 3.2. Atty. Plata's act of reserving in his Answer to the
and executory is a clear violation of their Lawyer's Oath, Canons iii. Duty not to invite outside interference in the judicial
administrative case that he will le, commence
1, 10 and 12, and Rules 10.03 and 12.04 of the CPR. proceedings (Rule 13.03 Canon 13). — The rationale is
and/or institute another perjury case with damages
to preserve the independence of judges in the performance
For unduly delaying the administration of justice, the Court deems against Pagdanganan speci cally.
of their duties.
it proper to mete out the penalty of DISBARMENT against Atty. 4. Applying Section 27, Rule 138, the abovementioned acts
Rongcal considering that he has been previously sanctioned for are inexcusable, shameful and agrantly unlawful, all of Fajardo v. Alvarez 2016
immorality in Vitug v. Atty. Rongcal. which were clearly motivated by an intentional purpose to
harass and intimidate Pagdanganan. WON a lawyer working in the Legal Section of the National Center
for Mental Health under the Department of Health is authorized to
5. The Attorney's Oath is clear that Atty. Plata must "not
Pagdanganan v. Plata 26 Feb 2020 EN BANC privately practice law.
wittingly or willingly promote or sue any groundless, false
1. Atty. Plata's acts against Pagdanganan constitute gross or unlawful suit, nor give aid nor consent to the same." YES but with restrictions and subject to certain conditions.
misconduct and a violation of the Lawyer's Oath, which 6. The ling of several groundless suits and the reservation of Atty. Alvarez here committed unauthorized practice of his
are clear grounds for his suspension. ling another perjury suit in the future despite the profession.
2. Gross misconduct has been de ned as any inexcusable, pendency of another perjury case reveal Atty. Plata's gross Under Section 7(b)(2) of RA 6713, government o cials or
shameful or agrantly unlawful conduct on the part of the indiscretion as a colleague in the legal profession, in blatant employees are prohibited from engaging in private practice of their
person involved in the administration of justice, conduct violation of his oath and duties as a lawyer. profession unless authorized by their department heads. More
that is prejudicial to the rights of the parties or to the right 7. Atty. Plata's harassing tactics of ling multiple groundless importantly, if authorized, the practice of profession must not
determination of the cause. and baseless suits are contrary to the following Rules and con ict nor tend to con ict with the o cial functions of the
Canons in the CPR: CANON 8; Rule 10.03; Rule 12.02; government o cial or employee.
2.1. Such conduct is generally motivated by a
premeditated, obstinate or intentional purpose, Rule 12.04. In this case, respondent was given written permission by the Head
but does not necessarily imply corruption or of the NCMH. However, by assisting and representing complainant

in a suit against the Ombudsman and against government in 1. A lawyer may only decline an appointment to be i. Con dentiality rule — Duty to ascertain conflict of
general, respondent put himself in a situation of con ict of counsel de oficio for serious and su cient cause. interest (Rule 15.01 Canon 15). —
interest.
2. The benchmark of a counsel de oficio for trial lawyers 1. A lawyer should immediately disclose to his
Respondent violated the Lawyer's Oath and the CPR when he to emulate is to see to it that the fundamental rights prospective client of any possible involvement in
communicated to or, at the very least, made it appear to of his client are more than su ciently protected with con icting interests.
complainant that he knew people from the OMB who could a reasonable zealousness to win the case within the
2. In case of con ict of interests between a lawyer and
help them get a favorable decision in complainant's case. Thus, bounds of the law.
his client, the lawyer shall give preference to his
respondent violated Canon 1, Rules 1.01, and 1.02, and Canon
3. It is the duty of the judge to appoint a counsel de client’s interests. A possible exception is Rule 15.03.
7. A lawyer that approaches a judge to try to gain in uence and
oficio. However, the frequent appointment of the same
receive a favorable outcome for his or her client violates Canon 13. ii. Privileged communication — Duty to preserve
attorney as counsel de oficio is discouraged for two
This act of in uence peddling is highly immoral and has no privileged communication (Rule 15.02 Canon 15). —
reasons:
place in the legal profession. 1. The exceptions to the privilege are provided in Rule
a. It is unfair to the attorney as it would be a burden
21.01, to wit:
of his regular practice; and
a. When the revelation is authorized by the client
To the Clients b. It may be considered by some lawyers as a regular
after having been acquainted of the consequences
4 source of compensation which is not envisioned
Canons 14 to 22 of the disclosure;
by the Rules.
b. When the revelation is required by law;
a. Availability of service without discrimination iii. Valid grounds for refusal. — Duty not to refuse
representation of indigent clients (Rule 14.03 Canon c. When necessary to collect the lawyer’s fees or to
i. Services regardless of person's status. — Duty to
14). — Under Sec 31 R138, there is already a pending defend himself, his employees or associates or by
make available services regardless of status (Rule
case. Here, the lawyer is just being engaged by a destitute judicial action.
14.01 Canon 14). —
client. In both cases, the lawyer may not refuse to accept 2. The privilege applies even to a mere prospective
1. A lawyer is NOT BOUND to accept every case that is
the case, unless client, whose case has not been accepted by the
referred to him. However, the lawyer cannot decline to
1. Lack of competence — he is not in a position to lawyer.
represent a person for the SOLE reason of the latter’s
race, sex, creed, status in life; or because of the lawyer’s carry out the work e ectively or competently; or 3. The requisites of the privileged communication are:
opinion that said person is guilty. 2. Conflict of interests — he labors under a con ict of a. There exists an attorney-client relationship or a
2. Rule 14.01 is applicable ONLY in criminal cases. interest between him and the prospective client or kind of consultancy relationship with a
between a present client and the prospective client. prospective client;
ii. Services as counsel de o cio. — Duty not to decline
appointment as counsel de oficio or amicus curiae b. Candor, fairness, and loyalty to clients
(Rule 14.02 Canon 14). —

b. The communication was made by the client to v. Compliance with laws — Duty to impress compliance
Another test of the inconsistency of interests is whether the
the lawyer in the course of the lawyer’s with laws (Rule 15.07 Canon 15). — Lawyers must resist
acceptance of a new relation will prevent an attorney from the
professional employment; and the whims and caprices of clients and to temper their
full discharge of his duty of undivided delity and loyalty to
propensity to litigate. It is the client who should yield to
c. The communication must be intended to be his client or invite suspicion of unfaithfulness or double
the lawyer and not the other way around.
con dential. Thus, con dentiality is NOT dealing in the performance thereof.
presumed. vi. Concurrent practice with another profession —
Duty in case of dual profession (Rule 15.08 Canon 15).
4. The privilege OUTLASTS the lawyer’s engagement.
— If a lawyer is engaged in another profession or Zalamea v. De Guzman 2016
Its purpose is twofold:
occupation concurrently with the practice of law, he shall
a. To encourage the client to make a full disclosure make clear to his client whether he is acting as a lawyer or WON De Guzman violated the Lawyer's Oath and the CPR by
of the facts of the case to his counsel without fear; in another capacity. allegedly buying a client's property which was subject of litigation.
and
NO. De Guzman clearly never acquired any of his client's
b. To allow the lawyer the freedom to obtain full Anglo v. Valencia, et al. 2015 properties or interests involved in litigation in which he may
information from his client. take part by virtue of his profession.
WON respondents are guilty of representing conflicting interests in
5. Basic Limitations — the privilege is limited to violation of the pertinent provisions of the CPR. The relationship between the Spouses De Guzman and the Zalamea
communications which are within the ambit of lawful brothers is actually one of business partners rather than that of a
employment and does NOT extend to those
YES. There is con ict of interest when a lawyer represents
lawyer and client.
transmitted in contemplation of future crimes or inconsistent interests of two or more opposing parties. The test is
frauds. "whether or not in behalf of one client, it is the lawyer's duty to ght
for an issue or claim, but it is his duty to oppose it for the other
iii. Con ict of interest — Duty not to represent client. In brief, if he argues for one client, this argument will be Paces Industrial Corp v. Salandanan 2017 En Banc
conflicting interests (Rule 15.03 Canon 15). — EXC by opposed by him when he argues for the other client." WON Salandanan is guilty of committing malpractice and/or gross
written consent of ALL concerned given after a full
This rule covers not only cases in which con dential misconduct when he represented conflicting interests.
disclosure of facts.
communications have been con ded, but also those in which no YES. Under Rule 15.03, Canon 15 and Canon 21 of the CPR, it
In the process of determining whether there is con ict of confidence has been bestowed or will be used. Also, there is
interests an important criterion is probability, not is explicit that a lawyer is prohibited from representing new clients
con ict of interests if the acceptance of the new retainer will require
certainty of con ict. whose interests oppose those of a former client in any manner,
the attorney to perform an act which will injuriously affect his first
whether or not they are parties in the same action or on totally
iv. Candid and honest advice to clients — Duty to give client in any matter in which he represents him and also whether he
unrelated cases. The protection given to the client is perpetual.
candid, honest advice (Rule 15.05 Canon 15). — The will be called upon in his new relation to use against his rst client
lawyer should avoid overstating or understating the any knowledge acquired through their connection. Here, Salandanan su ciently represented or intervened for Paces in
prospects of the case. its negotiations for the payment of its obligation to E.E. Black Ltd.

His defense for Paces was eventually opposed by him when he rules on con ict of interest under the CPR, it is essential to come into his possession for purposes of satisfying the legal
argued for E.E. Black Ltd. Thus, Salandanan had indisputably determine whether: fees and disbursements due to him.
obtained knowledge of matters a ecting the rights and obligations
1. a lawyer is duty-bound to ght for an issue or claim in F. It is essential that the client consent to the application of his
of Paces which had been placed in him in unrestricted con dence.
behalf of one client and, at the same time, to oppose property or funds to the legal fees, in which case the lawyer
that claim for the other client; may deduct what is due him and return the excess to the
client.
2. the acceptance of a new relation would prevent the full
Legaspi v. Fajardo 2018
discharge of a lawyer's duty of undivided delity and G. Absent the client's consent, the lawyer must return the
WON Fajardo's alleged acts constituted conflict of interest. loyalty to the client or invite suspicion of funds to the client, without prejudice to the ling of a case
unfaithfulness or double-dealing in the performance of to recover the unpaid fees.
YES. Here, it is clear that respondent indeed violated the rule on
that duty; and
con ict of interest when he entered his appearance for defendant H. Here, the requisites to exercise lien were not met. There is
Malino and thereafter, accepted his appointment as attorney-in-fact 3. a lawyer would be called upon in the new relation to no proof that HGC consented to the respondents'
for Gabriel, who was the plainti in the same case, and even use against a former client any con dential information withholding of the titles to satisfy the unpaid legal fees.
submitted pleadings and motions on Gabriel's behalf therein. acquired through their connection or previous
I. The Court acknowledges the fact that the documents were
employment.
already returned to HGC during the pendency of this case.
B. Here, the Law Firm did not represent BSCDC as counsel in
J. The Court deems it proper to reprimand respondents.
Palalan Carp Farmers MPC v. Dela Rosa 2019 En Banc the arbitration case. Atty. Tagayuna merely signed as
president to verify the complaint. See Ethics Case Digest No. 1
Respondent had proven himself disloyal to his client — exploitative,
untrustworthy, and a double-dealer. The client's land had been sold. C. Further, evidence show that the Law Firm and ESP were
The client did not know who the buyer was. Respondent acted to engaged by HGC for collection purposes only; there is no
proof that the Law Firm handled matters that were related Constantino v. Aransazo, Jr. 10 Feb 2021
protect the buyer's interest, and in all likelihood, his as well. The
client did not know and still does not know how much was actually to the arbitration case. 1. Atty. Aransazo violated the rule on privileged
paid for the land. Money owed from an account set-up by Respondents improperly exercised its right to retain HGC's communication between attorney and client.
Respondent himself and although under the Cooperative's documents as lien. 2. If an individual consults a lawyer in respect to his business
name, Respondent alone had access to it.
D. Any money or property collected for the client coming into a airs or legal troubles of any kind with a view towards
the lawyer's possession should be promptly declared and obtaining professional advice or assistance, and the lawyer,
reported to the client. by virtue thereof, permits or acquiesces with the
Home Guaranty Corp v. Tagayuna 23 Feb 2022 consultation, then a lawyer-client relationship is
E. Rule 16.03 of the CPR and Section 37, Rule 138
Respondents did NOT violate the con ict of interest rule. established.
recognizes that a lawyer is entitled to a lien over funds,
A. In determining whether a lawyer is guilty of violating the documents and papers of his client which have lawfully 3. A perusal of the sworn statement of Atty. Aransazo will

reveal that the communication between him and Atty. refute complainant's claim that the deed of assignment was attention and diligence.
Constantino set out therein transpired within the context executed with a valid consideration.
2.2. He was grossly negligent of his duty as counsel and
of Atty. Constantino intending to engage the services of
9.1. The respondent himself may take the witness was manifestly disinterested in his client's cause.
Atty. Aransazo as his lawyer in relation, among others, to a
stand to testify on his sworn statement.
mortgage obligation amounting to P2.2M. See Ethics Case Digest No. 8
9.2. Thus, he is guilty of representing con icting
4. Thus, the moment Atty. Constantino approached Atty.
interests.
Aransazo to seek legal advice, a veritable lawyer-client
relationship evolved between the two. Villamor v. Jumao-as 09 Dec 2020 EN BANC
See Ethics Case Digest No. 7
5. Notwithstanding the fact that Atty. Aransazo may have 1. Respondent is guilty of representing con icting interests.
initially dispensed legal advice to Atty. Constantino as a 2. Hornilla v. Salunat explained that there is con ict of
personal favor, he was still duty-bound to preserve and Portuguese, Jr. v. Centro 26 Jan 2021 EN BANC
interest when a lawyer represents inconsistent interests of
protect the personal, con dential and duciary relation 1. Atty. Centro departed from his sworn oath by committing two or more opposing parties.
established between them. the following acts:
2.1. The test is whether or not in behalf of one client, it
6. By executing the sworn statement alone, respondent 1.1. failing to le a Memorandum and even is the lawyer's duty to ght for an issue or claim,
breached his obligation to maintain inviolate the misrepresenting about ling it; but it is his duty to oppose it for the other client.
con dence reposed on him and to preserve the secrets of
complainant. 1.2. failing to inform Portuguese of the RTC's 2.2. In brief, if he argues for one client, this argument
Decision; will be opposed by him when he argues for the
7. Also, Atty. Aransazo represented con icting interests in other client.
violation of Canon 15, Rule 15.03 of the CPR which 1.3. failing to protect Portuguese's interest against the
provides that "a lawyer shall not represent con icting adverse RTC's Decision; 2.3. This rule covers not only cases in which
interests except by written consent of all concerned given con dential communications have been con ded,
1.4. failing to inform Portuguese of the Motion for
after a full disclosure of the facts." but also those in which no con dence has been
Execution, the scheduled hearing, and the
bestowed or will be used.
8. A con ict of interest exists where a lawyer represents resolution granting the said motion; and
inconsistent interests of two opposing parties, like when the 3. The lawyer-client relationship begins from the moment a
1.5. failing to le an Answer to the instant Complaint.
lawyer performs an act that will injuriously a ect his rst client seeks the lawyer's advice upon a legal concern.
2. Atty. Centro's unjusti able negligence and abandonment
client in any matter in which he represented him, or when 4. Here, a lawyer-client relationship existed between Villamor
of his client's cause violated the Lawyer's Oath as well as the
the lawyer uses any knowledge he previously acquired from and respondent despite the absence of any express or
CPR.
his rst client against the latter. written agreement or arrangement as to attorney's fees.
2.1. He casually set aside a legal matter that was
9. Here, respondent's sworn statement necessarily would 5. Villamor made consultations with respondent on legal
entrusted to him and which deserved his full

matters pertaining to the incorporation and operation of intermittent and limited.

6.2. the present engagement involves transactions that
the lending business.
4. Lawyers are deemed to represent con icting interests when, occurred during the lawyer's employment with the
6. When respondent sent a demand letter to Villamor on in behalf of one client, it is their duty to contend for that former client and matters that the lawyer
behalf of Yu, he was clearly representing con icting which duty to another client requires them to oppose. previously handled for the said client.
interests.
4.1. One test is whether a lawyer is duty-bound to ght 7. Here, Jonathan failed to establish that Atty. Lacuanan has
7. Rule 15.03 provides that lawyers shall not represent for an issue or claim in behalf of one client and, at con dential information which the latter acquired through
con icting interests except by written consent of all the same time, to oppose that claim for the other their connection or previous employment and which can
concerned given after a full disclosure of the facts. client. be used against him in the pending civil and criminal
proceedings instituted by Mary Grace.
8. The act of respondent of representing con icting interests 4.2. Another test of inconsistency of interests is
warrants the imposition of an administrative sanction upon whether the acceptance of a new relation would 7.1. Jonathan generally avers that in the course of their
him. prevent the full discharge of the lawyer's duty of professional and personal relations, he had shared
undivided delity and loyalty to the client or invite with Atty. Lacuanan con dential information as
9. Quiambao v. Bamba pointed out that jurisprudence
suspicion of unfaithfulness or double-dealing in regards his marital and family life as well as his
regarding the penalty solely for a lawyer's representation of
the performance of that duty. businesses and properties.
con icting interests is suspension from the practice of law
ranging from one to three years. 4.3. Still another test is whether the lawyer would be 7.2. However, these are merely his bare allegations,
called upon in the new relation to use against a unsubstantiated by any piece of evidence.
See Ethics Case Digest No. 9 former client any con dential information
8. There is also merit to Atty. Lacuanan's argument that the
acquired through their connection or previous
allegations of concubinage, grounds for both the criminal
employment.
and civil proceedings against Jonathan, are based on public
Parungao v. Lacuanan 11 Mar 2020
5. Palm v. Iledan, Jr. categorically declared that a lawyer's records, particularly, the nal and executory Decision that
1. Atty. Lacuanan is NOT guilty of representing con icting immutable duty to a former client does not cover upheld the validity of Jonathan's previous marriage to one
interests and is therefore not administratively liable. transactions that occurred beyond the lawyer's employment Annaliza.
2. When Atty. Lacuanan agreed to represent Mary Grace as with the client.
8.1. Documents which are public records could not be
her legal counsel in the criminal and civil proceedings that 6. For there to be con icting interests when a former client is considered con dential.
the latter instituted against her husband and herein involved, the following circumstances must concur:
complainant, Jonathan, there was no longer an existing See Ethics Case Digest No. 21
6.1. the lawyer is called upon in his present engagement
attorney-client relationship between Atty. Lacuanan and
to make use against a former client con dential
Jonathan.
information which was acquired through their
Burgos v. Bereber 04 Mar 2020
3. Atty. Lacuanan's engagements with Jonathan were connection or previous employment, and

1. Bereber is not guilty of representing con icting interests. 5.1. Here, the administrative complaint led before the
iv. Borrowing or lending. — Duty not to borrow from
nor lend money to client (Rule 16.04 Canon 16). —
2. Hornilla v. Salunat explained that there is con ict of NEA against the accused CAPELCO directors
This rule is two-pronged:
interest when a lawyer represents inconsistent interests of and managerial sta were brought by Burgos and
two or more opposing parties. other consumer-members in their individual 1. A lawyer shall not borrow money from his client
capacities and not in behalf of CAPELCO. unless the client’s interests are fully protected by the
3. In determining whether a lawyer is guilty of violating the
nature of the case or by independent advice.
rules on con ict of interest under the CPR, it is essential to 6. Bereber can be said to have merely exercised independence
determine whether: of judgment as a lawyer when he defended the interests of 2. A lawyer shall not lend money to his client except
other member-consumers of CAPELCO. when in the interest of justice, he has to advance
3.1. a lawyer is duty-bound to ght for an issue or
necessary expenses in a legal matter he is handling for
claim in behalf of one client and, at the same time, See Ethics Case Digest No. 23 the client.
to oppose that claim for the other client;
c. Client's money and properties a. The advances made shall be subject to
3.2. the acceptance of a new relation would prevent the
i. Fiduciary relationship. — Duty to account for all reimbursement. If the lawyer spends for all legal
full discharge of a lawyer's duty of undivided
money or property collected or received (Rule 16.01 expenses, the contract of legal employment might
delity and loyalty to the client or invite suspicion
Canon 16). — The lawyer is not relieved of his obligation become champertous, if his attorney’s fees will
of unfaithfulness or double-dealing in the
to make a proper accounting even if he has an attorney’s be payable in kind. Champertous contracts
performance of that duty; and
lien over the client’ moneys or funds in his possession. A are VOID. (Bautista v. Gonzales)
3.3. a lawyer would be called upon in the new relation
lawyer needs an SPA before he can disburse the money
to use against a former client any con dential Spouses Lopez v. Limos 2016 En Banc
collected for his client in favor of the latter’s creditors.
information acquired through their connection or
previous employment. ii. Co-mingling of funds. — Duty to keep client’s funds WON Limos should be held administratively liable for violating the
separate (Rule 16.02 Canon 16). — it is improper for CPR.
4. Firstly, there exists NO attorney-client relationship
the lawyer to put his client's funds in his personal
between Burgos and Bereber. YES. Respondent violated Rules 16.01 and 16.03, Canon 16 of
safe deposit vault. Funds belonging to the client should
the CPR when she failed to return the amount of P75K
4.1. At no instance did Burgos obtain Bereber's legal be deposited in a separate trust account in a bank or
representing legal fees that complainants paid her.
advice in connection with the pending NEA trust company of good repute for safekeeping.
complaint and/or Audit Report. Even worse, respondent misrepresented to complainants that she
iii. Delivery of funds. — Duty to deliver the funds and
had already commenced an adoption proceeding on behalf of the
5. A lawyer can be said to be representing con icting interests property; attorney’s lien (Rule 16.03 Canon 16). — A
latter These deceitful acts clearly violate Rule 1.01, Canon 1.
speci cally in circumstances when he, having been engaged lawyer cannot unilaterally appropriate the client’s money
as counsel for a corporation, subsequently represents the for himself by the mere fact that the client owes him
members of the same corporation's board of directors in a attorney’s fees. What he can do is to exercise his right of
derivative suit led against them. Huang v. Zambrano 2019 En Banc
lien, if proper.

same, and if the client refuses to heed the lawyer’s advice

WON Zambrano should be disbarred for violating Canon 16 of the response to the complaint before the MeTC in the small
for recti cation, the lawyer must WITHDRAW from the
CPR. claims action led against him. To make matters worse,
case.
Atty. Sagario did not even appear during the scheduled
YES. There is no dispute that he had received the PhP250K from
mandatory conference or le any responsive pleading before iii. Procedure in handling cases. — Duty to control
the respondents in the Estafa Case. He rejected Huang's sound
the IBP despite due notice. proceedings (Rule 19.03 Canon 19) — The counsel is
suggestion to have the settlement money directly deposited by said
obliged to comply with his client’s lawful request. Should
respondents to his account. He also refused Huang's alternative See Ethics Case Digest No. 32 he not agree, his remedy is to withdraw from the case.
proposition to have his friend receive the money on his behalf.
There is evidently a premeditated e ort by Atty. Zambrano to e. Competence and diligence
ensure that the settlement money would be given to him. Minas v. Doctor 2020 En Banc i. Adequate protection. — Duty to adequately prepare
Atty. Zambrano is DISBARRED for violating Rules 1.01, 16.01, for cases (Rule 18.02 Canon 18) — A lawyer must handle
WON Atty. Doctor should be held administratively liable for his
and 16.03. cases only as much as he can e ciently handle. Otherwise,
failure to account the money received from complainant and serve his
his clients will be prejudiced.
client with competence and diligence, in violation of Canon 16, Rule
16.01 and Rule 16.03 and Canon 18, Rule 18.03 and Rule 18.04 of ii. Negligence. — Duty not to neglect legal matters
Francia v. Sagario 8 Oct 2019 EN BANC the CPR. (Rule 18.03 Canon 18) — A lawyer has NO authority to
waive his client’s right to appeal. His failure to perfect an
1. Atty. Sagario is guilty of professional misconduct for YES. Atty. Doctor should have properly accounted for said appeal constitutes negligence and malpractice.
violating Canons 16, 17, and 18 of the CPR. amounts and immediately returned the money to complainant
when he failed to use the same. If he had done so, there would have iii. Collaborating counsel. — Duty not to undertake
2. In this case, Atty. Sagario breached his duties to his client
been no need for complainant to send demand letters to him. legal services if not qualified; collaborating counsel
when he failed to exercise due diligence in handling the
(Rule 18.01 Canon 18)
annulment case of complainant. In fact, to the detriment of NB: Leonen, J dissented, opining that Atty. Doctor should have
complainant, he failed to render any legal service to her been DISBARRED. GR: Lawyers are directed NOT to undertake legal
despite receipt of fees in the total amount of P57K. This services which he knows or should know he is
constitutes a clear violation of Rule 18.03, Canon 18. d. Fidelity to client's cause not quali ed or competent to render.
3. Atty. Sagario also violated Canon 16, Rules 16.01 and i. Use of fair and honest means. — Duty to employ only EXC: If his client consents, the lawyer can take as
16.03, and Canon 17 when he failed to return the amount fair and honest means (Rule 19.01 Canon 19) collaborating counsel another lawyer who
of P57K upon complainant's demand. Acceptance of is competent on the matter.
ii. Client's fraud. — Duty to rectify client’s fraud (Rule
money from a client establishes an attorney-client 19.02 Canon 19) — If in the cause of the employment of 1. Clients are entitled to effective representation.
relationship and gives rise to the duty of delity to the the lawyer in a case, he discovers or receives information
client's cause. 2. A collaborating counsel is one who is subsequently
that his client has perpetuated a fraud upon a person or engaged to assist a lawyer already handling a particular
4. Moreover, Atty. Sagario did not bother to submit his tribunal, he shall promptly advise his client to rectify the case for a client.

iv. Duty to apprise client. — Duty to inform client of case on behalf of the complainant despite full payment of his any unfounded or baseless criminal case or cases against the
status of the case (Rule 18.04 Canon 18) — It is the duty attorney's fees. His negligence caused his client to lose his cause of adversaries of his client designed to secure a leverage to compel the
of a party litigant to be in contact with his counsel from action since the prescriptive period of one year to le the ejectment adversaries to yield or withdraw their own cases against the lawyer's
time to time in order to be informed of the progress of the case had already lapsed. client.
case.
That the respondent eventually returned a portion of the money to In the instant case, the monetary consideration Feir was demanding
the complainant and both have signi ed consent to the termination from Malvar in the amount of P18M cannot be considered as the
De Leon v. Geronimo 2018
of the case do not automatically exonerate him from administrative subject of blackmail or extortion. Contrary to Malvar's claims, there
WON Geronimo's acts merit disciplinary sanction. liability. Restitution may have earned him the condonation of his is nothing in the demand letters to show that the same was
client but, being a member of the IBP, he is also answerable to the maliciously made with intent to extort money from him since it was
YES. Canon 17 and Canon 18, Rules 18.03 and 18.04 of the legal profession. based on a valid and justi able cause. Indeed, the writing of demand
CPR are apropos in this case. Atty. Geronimo's failure to inform his letters is a standard practice and tradition in this jurisdiction.
client about the adverse ruling of the NLRC, thereby precluding
her from further pursuing an appeal, is a clear breach of Canons 17 g. Attorney's fees
De Borja v. Mendez 2018
and 18 of the CPR. i. Acceptance fees
WON Mendez violated Canons 16 and 18 of the CPR.
1. Acceptance of money from a client establishes an
YES. A lawyer shall not neglect a legal matter entrusted to him, and attorney-client relationship and gives rise to the duty
Morales v. Borres, Jr. 2019
his negligence in connection therewith shall render him liable. of delity to the client’s cause (Emiliano Court
WON Borres violated Canons 17 and 18. In the instant case, Atty. Mendez' conduct relative to the non- ling Townhouses Homeowners Association v. Dioneda).
of the appellant's brief falls below the standards exacted upon 2. Failure to render the legal services agreed upon,
NO. For one, respondent does not appear to have been engaged as
lawyers on dedication and commitment to their client's cause. despite receipt of an acceptance fee, is a clear violation
complainant's counsel of record in subject cases. This precisely was
the reason why respondent himself did not receive copies of the of the CPR (Macarulay v. Seriña).
f. Representation with zeal within legal bounds (Canon 19)
orders or resolutions issued in said cases. It was, therefore, unfair for — A lawyer’s duty is not to his client, but to the ii. Contingency fee arrangements in
complainant to even suspect that respondent withheld these orders administration of justice; to that end, his client’s success is
or resolutions from him. wholly subordinate; and his conduct ought to and must Cortez v. Cortes 2018
always be scrupulously observant of law and ethics.
WON the acts complained of constitute misconduct on the part of
Balmaceda v. Uson 2018 Malvar v. Feir 2018 Atty. Cortes, which would subject him to disciplinary action.
YES. A contingent fee arrangement is VALID in this

WON Uson violated the CPR. WON the complaint against Feir should be dismissed.
jurisdiction, but must be laid down in an express contract.
YES. Uson reneged on his duty when he failed to le the ejectment YES. Under Rule 19.01, a lawyer should not le or threaten to le
A much higher compensation is allowed as contingent fee in

satisfy his lawful fees and disbursements but must give

consideration of the risk that the lawyer may get nothing if the suit b. Charging lien. — to the same extent upon all
prompt notice to his client for the latter’s advisement.
fails. Contracts of this nature are permitted because they redound to judgments for the payment of money. (§37 Rule
the bene t of the poor client and the lawyer especially in cases where 2. When documents in the possession of a lawyer are the 138)
the client has meritorious cause of action, but no means with which subject of attorney’s lien, he cannot be compelled to
8. Retaining lien. — Requisites for its valid exercise
to pay for legal services unless he can, with the sanction of law, make surrender the same without prior proof that his fees
are:
a contract for a contingent fee to be paid out of the proceeds of the have been fully satis ed.
litigation. a. Client-lawyer relationship;
3. If the fees have not been paid, and there is genuine
Complainant alleges that the contingency fee was xed at 12% via a need for the court to gain possession of the b. Claims for attorney’s fees are not satis ed;
handshake agreement, while Atty. Cortes counters that the documents, an adequate security must rst be c. Counsel is in possession of the subject papers,
agreement was 50%. Although we agree that the 50% contingency led for the lawyer’s fees. documents and funds; and
fee was excessive, We do not agree that the 10% limitation as
4. The client can dismiss the lawyer anytime. However, d. That the possession is lawful.
provided in Article 111 is automatically applicable. Article
if the dismissal is without justi able cause, the client
111 of the Labor Code deals with the extraordinary concept 9. Charging lien is the equitable right of the attorney
will pay in full attorney’s fees expressly agreed upon in
of attorneys fees. to have the fees due him for services in a particular suit
their contract.
secured by the judgment or recovery in such suit.
It would then appear that the contingency fees that Atty. Cortes
5. Lawyer’s charging lien may be assigned — Requisites are:
required is in the ordinary sense as it represents reasonable
anchored on the accomplishment of services and
compensation for legal services he rendered for complainant. a. Client-lawyer relationship;
resulting in favorable money judgment for the client
Necessarily, the 10% limitation of the Labor Code would not be b. Favorable judgment secured by the counsel for his
may be assigned because it is a property right.
applicable. Beyond the limit xed by Article 111, such as between client which judgment is a money judgment;
the lawyer and the client, the attorney's fees may exceed 10% on the 6. Charging lien survives the death of client — If
the charging lien had already been duly registered in c. Noting into the records of the case through the
basis of quantum meruit.
the records of the case, it survives the death of the ling of an appropriate motion of the statement
iii. Champertous contracts are VOID. Where the lawyer client and therefore it need not be enforced in the of the lawyer’s claim for attorney’s fees with
agrees to spend for all litigation expenses in consideration proceeding for the settlement of the client’s estate. copies furnished to the client and the adverse
for a bigger percentage as fees on the property subject of party.
7. Attorneys' liens. — An attorney shall have a lien
litigation. It is against public policy. 10. The charging lien may be enforced against the client
a. Retaining lien. — upon the funds, or against the judgment debtor.
iv. Attorney's liens
documents and papers of his client which
1. Implementation of attorney’s Retaining or have lawfully come into his possession and may Retaining Lien Charging Lien
Charging Liens — A lawyer shall have a lien over the retain the same until his lawful fees and
client’s funds and may apply so much thereof to disbursements have been paid, and may apply Nature Passive. It is a general Active. It can be
such funds to the satisfaction thereof.

lien. enforced by execution. It A. Registration or recording of attorney's lien merely A Compromise Agreement between the counsels client and the
is a special lien. recognizes the right of the lawyer to claim from the adverse party is one of the factors in determining the counsel's
judgment of the suit, whereas the lien can only be enforced lawful fees for the legal services he rendered.
Basis Lawful possession of Securing of a favorable
when the money judgment in favor of the counsel's client
papers, documents, money judgment for the A. Indeed, the compromise agreement and those factors
becomes nal and executory.
property of client. client. enumerated under Rule 20.01 of the Code of Professional
B. If a lien may be enforced in said, petition when the money Responsibility (CPR) may serve as basis for the award, of
Coverage Papers, documents and Covers all judgments for judgment has become nal, then the registration of the lien attorney's fees.
property. the payment of money may be granted even prior to the judgment in order to
and executions issued. B. Gubat v. National Power Corporation is instructive, to wit:
establish the lawyer's claim.
A client may enter into a compromise agreement
Effectivity As soon as possession is As soon as the claim had 1. The determination and the xing of attorney's fees may
without the intervention of the lawyer, but the
had. been entered into the be deferred until the resolution of the case and the
terms of the agreement should not deprive the
records of the case. nality of the money judgment in favor of the lawyer's
counsel of his compensation for the professional
client.
services he had rendered.
Notice Client need NOT be Client AND adverse
C. The language of Section 70 of PD 1529 is clear; it does not
noti ed. party MUST be noti ed. C. Since Atty. Domiguez rendered his legal services in the
limit the issues that may be resolved by the trial court in a
petition for cancellation of adverse claim for the spouses
Applicability May be exercised before Generally exercisable petition for cancellation of adverse claim.
Africa, he is then entitled to his attorney's fees.
judgment or execution, only when the attorney D. In Palanca v. Pecson the Court En Banc upheld the rule
or regardless thereof. had already secured a D. The case is remanded to the trial court as it is in the best
against multiplicity of suits to justify its holding that
favorable judgment for position to determine the correct amount of attorney's fees
probate courts may pass upon a petition to determine
his client. on the basis of quantum meruit leveraged on the factors
attorney's fees.
under Rule 20.01 of CPK, as well as the Compromise
1. Parenthetically, in a petition for cancellation of adverse Agreement.
claim, trial courts may at the same time hear matters
Dominguez v. Bank of Commerce 29 Sep 2021 In charging lien to secure attorney's fees, money judgment and
regarding claims for attorney's fees and charging of
execution are necessary.
Doctrinal Rule lien, in observance of the policy against multiplicity of
suits. A. Attorney's lien attaches on all money judgments and on the
Trial courts are not precluded from adjudicating money claims such subsequent execution thereof which the lawyer secured in
as attorney's fees in a petition for cancellation of adverse claim. E. The lawyer may choose to record and enforce his attorney's
advocating the cause of his client in a litigation, provided
fees and lien in a petition for cancellation of adverse claim
In petitions for cancellation of adverse claim, trial courts are not that
or he may opt to le an entirely separate action for this
precluded from adjudicating matters involving attorney's fees. 1. the lawyer caused the registration of his lien on the
purpose.

records of the court; and 3. Legal interest CANNOT be imposed on attorney’s

g) The amount involved in the controversy and the bene ts
fees.
2. the lawyer caused a written notice to such e ect to be resulting to the client from the service;
delivered to his client and to the adverse party. 4. The award of attorney’s fees must be deleted where
h) The contingency or certainty of compensation;
the award of moral and exemplary damages are
B. The registration of the lien should also be distinguished
i) The character of the employment, whether occasional or eliminated.
from the enforcement of the lien.
established; and
5. When is a fee considered reasonable? If it is within
1. Registration merely determines the birth of the lien.
j) The professional standing of the lawyer. capacity of the client to pay, and is directly
2. The enforcement of the lien, on the other hand, can commensurate with the value of the legal services
only take place once a nal money judgment has been 1. There are two concepts of attorney’s fees
rendered.
secured in favor of the client. a. Ordinary — it is the reasonable compensation
6. Division of fees in proportion to the work
paid to a lawyer for legal services rendered.
See Ethics Case Digest No. 4 performed and responsibility assumed (Rule
b. Extraordinary — it is an indemnity for 20.02 Canon 20)— It is improper for a lawyer to
v. Fees and controversies with clients. — Duty to avoid damages ordered by the court to be paid by the receive compensation for merely recommending
compensation controversies with client (Rule 20.04 losing party to the prevailing party in a litigation. another lawyer to his client and render no legal
Canon 20) services at all.
It is payable to the CLIENT—unless it has been
vi. Concepts of attorney's fees agreed that the award shall pertain to the lawyer 7. Duty not to accept any fee or other compensation
as additional compensation or as part thereof. whatsoever related to his professional
Guide in determining attorney’s fees employment from anyone other than the client
2. Quantum Meruit means as much as he has
a) The time spent and the extent of the services rendered or deserved. Recovery of attorney’s fees on the basis of (Rule 20.03 Canon 20) — The only exception
required; quantum meruit is authorized when whereby a lawyer may receive compensation from a
person other than his client is when the latter has full
b) The novelty and di culty of the questions involved; a. There is no express contract for payment of knowledge and approval thereof.
c) The importance of the subject matter; attorney’s fees;
d) The skill demanded; b. Where the stipulated fees are unconscionable; Sanchez v. Aguilos 2016
e) The probability of losing other employment as a result of c. When the contract is void due to formal matters; WON Aguilos should be held administratively liable for misconduct
acceptance of the pro ered case; d. When the counsel was not able to nish the case and be ordered to return the attorney's fees paid.
f) The customary charges for similar services and the to its conclusion, for justi able reasons; YES. A reading of the answer led by the respondent would show
schedule of fees of the IBP chapter to which he belongs; e. When the parties both disregard the contract. that he himself is not well versed in the grounds for legal separation.
Clearly, the respondent misrepresented his professional competence

and skill to the complainant. He thus transgressed Canon 18, and except to avoid possible con ict of interest. WON Atty. Amora should be held administratively liable based on
Rules 18.01, 18.02 and 18.03. the allegations on the Complaint.
ii. Disclosures, when allowed. — Duty not to reveal the
We cannot see how the respondent deserved any compensation confidences or secrets (Rule 21.01 Canon 21) — YES. Amora violated the Lawyer's Oath and Rules 15.01, 15.03,
because he did not really begin to perform the contemplated tasks if, Exceptions are 21.01 and 21.02 of the CPR.
even based on his version, he would prepare the petition for legal
1. when authorized by the client after acquainting him The requirement under Rule 15.03 is quite clear. A lawyer must
separation instead of the petition for annulment of marriage. The
of the consequences of the disclosure; secure the written consent of all concerned parties after a full
attorney who fails to accomplish the tasks he should naturally
2. when required by law; disclosure of the facts. Respondent, however, failed to present any
and expectedly perform during his professional engagement
such document. Amora's representation of Phil Golf violated the
does not discharge his professional responsibility and ethical 3. when necessary to collect his fees or to defend himself, rules on con ict of interest as he undertook to take up the causes of
duty toward his client. his employees or associates or by judicial action. his new client against the interest of his former client.
h. Preservation of client's confidences. — Mere establishment Additionally, by causing the ling of the complaint before the
Adelfa Properties, Inc. v. Mendoza 2019
of a client-lawyer relationship does not raise a presumption of HLURB, Amora must have necessarily divulged to Phil Golf and
confidentiality. There must be an intention that the WON Atty. Mendoza violated the CPR. used information that he gathered while he was complainant's
communication relayed by the client to the lawyer be treated as counsel in violation of Rules 21.01 and 21.02.
YES. While the Court nds the allegations of violation of rule on
con dential.
privileged communication and extortion to be unsubstantiated, the i. Withdrawal of services
i. Prohibited disclosures and use Court nds Atty. Mendoza's act of causing himself to be
interviewed by the media, i.e., ABS-CBN, thereby divulging i. The following are good cause for withdrawal (Rule
1. Duty not to use information received in the
information he has gathered in the course of his employment with 22.01 Canon 22)
course of employment (Rule 21.02 Canon 21)
complainant in the media to be violative of Rules 13.02, 21.01 1. When the client pursues an illegal or immoral course
2. Duty not to give information to outside agency and 21.02 of the CPR. of conduct in connection with the matter he is
(Rule 21.03 Canon 21)
Atty. Mendoza's actuation of allowing himself to be interviewed by handling;
3. Duty to protect from disclosure (Rule 21.04-05 the media, thus, utilizing that forum to accuse his former employer 2. When the client insists that the lawyer pursue
Canon 21) — A lawyer may disclose the a airs of a of committing several illegal activities and divulging information conduct violative of these canons and rules;
client of the rm to partners or associates thereof which he secured in the course of his employment while he was the
unless prohibited by the client. 3. When his inability to work with co-counsel will not
complainant's in-house counsel, no matter how general the
promote the best interest of the client;
4. Duty to avoid indiscreet conversation (Rule 21.06 allegations are, is an act which is tantamount to a clear breach of
Canon 21) the trust and con dence of his employer. 4. When the mental or physical condition of the lawyer
renders it di cult for him to carry out the
5. Duty not to reveal that he was consulted (Rule
employment e ectively;
21.07 Canon 21) — A lawyer shall not reveal that he
has been consulted about a particular case Palacios v. Amora 2017 En Banc

thereby extinguished, it shall be the duty of his counsel to

5. When the client deliberately fails to pay the fees for 2. Disbarment is the act of the Philippine Supreme Court in
inform the court within thirty (30) days after such death of
the services or fails to comply with the retainer withdrawing from an attorney the privilege to practice law.
the fact thereof, and to give the name and address of his legal
agreement;
representative or representatives. Failure of counsel to comply Restorative justice, not retributive, is the goal in disciplinary
6. When the lawyer is elected or appointed to public with his duty shall be a ground for disciplinary action. proceedings against lawyers.
o ce; and other similar cases.
3. The main objects of disbarment and suspension proceedings
ii. While the right of the client to terminate the relation is Sps Warriner v. Dublin 2013 are:
ABSOLUTE, the right of an attorney should be for
WON Dublin merits administrative sanctions. a. To compel the attorney to deal fairly and honestly
su cient cause.
with his clients; and
iii. An attorney may only retire from a case either
YES. Dublin admitted that he deliberately failed to timely le a
formal o er of exhibits because he believes that the exhibits were b. To remove from the profession a person whose
1. by written consent of his client or fabricated and was hoping that the same would be refused misconduct has proved him un t to be entrusted with
admission by the RTC. This is improper. If respondent truly believes the duties and responsibilities belonging to the o ce
2. by permission of the court after due notice and
that the exhibits to be presented in evidence by his clients were of an attorney;
hearing, in which event the attorney should see to it
that the name of the new attorney is recorded in the fabricated, then he has the option to withdraw from the case. Canon c. To punish the lawyer although not so much as to
case. 22 allows a lawyer to withdraw his services for good cause. safeguard the administration of justice;
iv. The lawyer must report to the court the death of his client d. To set an example or a warning for the other members
within 30 days. Failure to do so may merit disciplinary of the bar;
action. Suspension, Disbarment and Discipline
e. To safeguard the administration of justice from
v. Duties of lawyers who withdraw; retaining lien
C of Lawyers incompetence and dishonesty of lawyers;
(Rule 22.02 Canon 22)— A lawyer who withdraws or is Rule 139; Rule 139-B
f. To protect the public.
discharged shall, subject to a retainer lien,
Nature and Characteristics of Disciplinary Actions against
1. immediately turn over all papers and property to Lawyers Nature and Characteristics of Disciplinary
1
which the client is entitled, and Grounds Actions against Lawyers
2. shall cooperate with his successor in the orderly
transfer of the matter, including all information
Proceedings a. Sui generis
necessary for the proper handling of the matter. A disbarment proceeding is a class by itself. It is sui generis. It has the
Sanctions
following characteristics:
j. Duties of lawyers in case of death of parties represented
— Section 16. Rule 3. Death of party; duty of counsel. — 1. Suspension is the temporary withholding of the lawyer’s 1. It is neither a civil nor a criminal proceeding;
Whenever a party to a pending action dies, and the claim is not privilege to practice his profession for a certain period, or for
2. Double jeopardy cannot be availed of;
an inde nite period of time.

3. It can be initiated motu proprio by the SC or IBP; commission of the act because it was only after the property was 2. the IBP upon the veri ed complaint of any person.
foreclosed that complainant discovered the SPA.
4. It can proceed regardless of the interest, or lack thereof, of The IBP Board of Governors may, motu propio or upon
complainants; referral by the Supreme Court or by a Chapter Board of
O cers, or at the instance of any person, initiate and
5. It is imprescriptible;
2 Grounds prosecute proper charges against erring attorneys including
6. Its conduct is con dential until its nal determination; those in the government service.
A member of the bar may be removed or suspended from his o ce as
7. It is itself due process of law; attorney by the Supreme Court for any 2) Service or dismissal. — If the complaint appears to be
8. Whatever has been decided therein cannot be a source of right meritorious, the Investigator shall direct that a copy thereof be
1. deceit,
that may be enforced in another action; served upon the respondent, requiring him to answer the same
2. malpractice, or other gross misconduct in such o ce, within fteen (15) days from the date of service.
9. In pari delicto rule is inapplicable.
3. grossly immoral conduct, or If the complaint does not merit action, or if the answer shows
b. Prescription of actions to the satisfaction of the Investigator that the complaint is not
4. by reason of his conviction of a crime involving moral
turpitude, or meritorious, the same may be dismissed by the Board of
Frías v. Bautista-Lozada Governors upon his recommendation.
5. for any violation of the oath which he is required to take
The defense of prescription does not lie in administrative before the admission to practice, or A copy of the resolution of dismissal shall be furnished to the
proceedings against lawyers. In Heck v. Santos, we declared that an complainant and the Supreme Court which may review the
6. for a wilful disobedience of any lawful order of a superior
administrative complaint against a member of the bar does not case motu propio or upon timely appeal of the complainant
court, or
prescribe. led within 15 days from notice of the dismissal of the
7. for corruptly or willful appearing as an attorney for a party complainant.
to a case without authority so to do.
No investigation shall be interrupted or terminated by reason
Isenhardt v. Real 2012 The practice of soliciting cases at law for the purpose of gain, either of the desistance, settlement, compromise, restitution,
personally or through paid agents or brokers, constitutes malpractice. withdrawal of the charges, or failure of the complainant to
Anent respondent’s claim of prescription of the o ense pursuant to (§27 Rule 138) prosecute the same, unless the Supreme Court motu propio or
Section 1, Rule VIII of the Rules of Procedure of the Commission upon recommendation of the IBP Board of Governors,
on Bar Discipline, we agree with the Investigating Commissioner
Proceedings determines that there is no compelling reason to continue with
that the rule should be construed to mean two years from the 3 the disbarment or suspension proceedings against the
Rules of Court on the Legal Profession
date of discovery of the professional misconduct. To rule respondent.
otherwise would cause injustice to parties who may have discovered 1) How Instituted. — Proceedings for the disbarment,
the wrong committed to them only at a much later date. 3) Confidentiality. — Proceedings against attorneys shall be
suspension, or discipline of attorneys may be taken by
private and con dential. However, the nal order of the
In this case, the complaint was led more than three years after the 1. the Supreme Court motu propio, or

Supreme Court shall be published like its decisions in other

4. Disbarment, the act of the SC in withdrawing from an proceeding, not in the disbarment proceeding. Allegations of
cases.
attorney the privilege to practice law and striking out the name falsi cation or forgery must be competently proved because
of the lawyer from the roll of attorneys. falsi cation or forgery cannot be presumed. A disbarment
4 Sanctions proceeding is not the occasion to determine the issue of falsi cation
5. The CA or RTC may suspend an attorney from practice for
or forgery simply because the SOLE issue to be addressed and
Administrative any of the causes named in Rule 138, Section 27, until further
determined therein is whether or not the respondent attorney
action of the SC in the case. (§16 Rule 139-B)
1. Warning, Admonition and Reprimand — A warning, is still fit to continue to be an officer of the court in the
in ordinary parlance, has been de ned as "an act or fact of 6. Disciplinary proceedings involve no private interest and a ord dispensation of justice.
putting one on his guard against an impending danger, evil no redress for private grievance. They are undertaken and
The complainants bore the burden of proof in this disbarment
consequences or penalties," while an admonition, "refers to a prosecuted solely for the public welfare. They are undertaken
proceeding against the respondent. They must establish their
gentle or friendly reproof, a mild rebuke, warning or reminder, for the purpose of preserving courts of justice from the o cial
charges of falsi cation and dishonesty by convincing and
counseling, on a fault, error or oversight, an expression of ministration of persons un t to practice in them.
satisfactory proof. Surmises, suspicion and conjectures are not bases
authoritative advice or warning". They are not considered as The attorney is called to answer to the court for his conduct as of nding his culpability. The foregoing disquisitions on the
penalties. an o cer of the court. The complainant or the person who falsi cation show that the complainants did not discharge their
A reprimand, on the other hand, is of a more severe nature, called the attention of the court to the attorney's alleged burden of proof thereon.
and has been de ned as a public and formal censure or severe misconduct is in no sense a party, and has generally no interest
The Court nds the need to clarify that although it may entertain a
reproof, administered to a person in fault by his superior in the outcome except as all good citizens may have in the
disbarment or suspension complaint brought against a lawyer
o cer or a body to which he belongs. It is more than just a proper administration of justice. (Rayos-Ombac v. Rayos)
employed in the government service whether or not the complaint
warning or an admonition. A reprimand is an administrative
pertained to an act or conduct unrelated to the discharge of his
penalty although it may be a slight form of penalty. Salado, et al. v. Villanueva 2016 En Banc
o cial functions, the investigation should be carried out by the
2. Suspension, a temporary withholding of a lawyer’s right to Disbarment proceedings based on falsi cation or forgery of agency or o ce having administrative supervision over him or her
practice his profession as a lawyer for public documents should not be the occasion to establish the when the allegations of the complaint relate to the quali cations of
a. A de nite period; or falsi cation or forgery. Such bases should rst be duly and the respondent to be appointed to the public o ce.
competently established either in criminal or civil proceedings
b. An inde nite period, which amounts to quali ed Accordingly, any questions pertaining to the quali cations of the
appropriate for that purpose.
disbarment, in which case, the lawyer determines for respondent to be appointed as a state prosecutor should be directed
himself for how long or how short his suspension WON Villanueva should be suspended from the practice of law for to the Secretary of Justice who had administrative supervision over
shall last by proving to court that he is once again t gross misconduct and gross dishonesty. him under the law, and not to this Court in the guise of the
to resume practice of law. disbarment complaint.
NO. The disbarment complaint is DISMISSED. The charges were
3. Censure, an o cial reprimand. not competently substantiated.
Falsi cation must be proved in the appropriate criminal or civil Domingo v. Revilla, Jr. 2018 En Banc

WON the penalties meted by the IBP against Revilla are Canon 15 that required members of the Legal Profession to observe disbarment is a way for the Court to assert its authority and
commensurate to his transgressions. candor, fairness and loyalty in all their dealings and transactions competence to discipline all acts and actuations committed by the
with their clients. members of the Legal Profession.
NO. The Court modi es the recommended penalty considering
that his violation of the CPR constituted deliberate defraudation of In their conversations, the respondent told the complainant that the
the client instead of mere negligence. judge handling the case would rule in their favor only if he would be
given 10% of the value of the property at Parañaque, and that the Rico v. Salutan 2018
Firstly, the respondent misled the complainant into thinking that it
handling judge consequently agreed on the fee of P200K but needed
would be his law rm that was to take on the case. Secondly, despite WON Atty. Salutan should be administratively sanctioned.
an additional P50K "for the boys" in the CA and the SC. In doing
the fact that he had intimated to the complainant that it would be NO. In administrative proceedings, the burden of proof rests upon
so, the respondent committed calumny, and thereby violated Rules
highly unlikely to still have the adoption decree nulli ed due to the
15.06 and 15.07. the complainant. For the court to exercise its disciplinary powers,
decree having long become nal and executory, he nonetheless
the case against the respondent must be established by convincing
accepted the case. Thirdly, he told the complainant that he had The respondent's commission of various o enses constituting
and satisfactory proof.
already instituted the action for the annulment of the adoption professional misconduct only demonstrated his unworthiness to
despite not having yet done so. Fourthly, he kept on demanding remain as a member of the Legal Profession. He ought to be Here, despite the charges hurled against Atty. Salutan, Rico failed to
more money from the complainant although the case was not disbarred for such o enses upon this complaint alone. A review of show any badge of deception on the lawyer's part. There was no
actually even moving forward. Fifthly, he continued to make up his record as an admitted member of the Bar shows, however, that in court decision declaring that Villa Abrille's title was fake or that it
excuses in order to avoid having to furnish to the complainant the Que v. Revilla, Jr., the Court had disbarred him. In view of his had encroached on Rico's property. All that Atty. Salutan did was to
requested copies of court documents that, in the rst place, he could prior disbarment, we can no longer impose the appropriate penalty zealously advocate for the cause of his client. He was not shown to
not produce. And, lastly, he claimed that he intended to return the of disbarment as deserved because we do not have double or have misled or unduly in uenced the court through
money to the complainant but instead sent the latter a stale check. multiple disbarments in this jurisdiction. misinformation. He merely persistently pursued said cause and he
did so within the bounds of the law and the existing rules. He
All these acts, whether taken singly or together, manifested the In ne, the gravity of the respondent's professional misconduct and
succeeded at nally having the writ of execution, albeit at the fourth
respondent's dishonesty and deceit towards the complainant, his deceit should fully warrant his being permanently barred from
(4th) time, implemented.
client, in patent violation of Rule 1.01. reinstatement to the ranks of the Philippine Bar and from having
his name restored in the Roll of Attorneys. In administrative proceedings, the quantum of proof necessary for a
Respondent led the case for the annulment of the adoption decree
nding of guilt is substantial evidence, which is that amount of
only after the complainant had sent him the demand letter. Such However, circumstances attendant in this case should be considered
relevant evidence that a reasonable mind might accept as adequate
ling was already during the pendency of the administrative and appreciated in mitigating the penalty to be imposed. Perpetual
to support a conclusion.
investigation of the complaint against him in the IBP. The Court disquali cation from being reinstated will be too grave a
has consistently held, in respect of Rule 18.03, that the mere failure penalty in light of the objective of imposing heavy penalties
of the lawyer to perform the obligations due to the client is like disbarment to correct the o enders.
Buntag v. Toledo 2019 re Quantum of Proof
considered per se a violation.
To start the respondent on the long road to reinstatement, we ne
Furthermore, the respondent did not abide by the mandate of him in the amount of P100K. Meting the sti ne despite his The burden of proof lies on the party making the allegation.

In a disbarment complaint, the allegations of the complainant Commissioner, and which either recommends the dismissal of the (JDR) wherein parties are encouraged to reach a settlement and put
must be proven with substantial evidence. complaint or the imposition of disciplinary action, shall be an end to litigation. Further, a lawyer is encouraged under Rule 1.04
transmitted to the Supreme Court for nal action. B.M. No. 1645 of the CPR to encourage his clients to settle a controversy if it
WON Atty. Toledo violated the CPR.
did away with the procedure of ling a motion for would admit of a fair settlement.
NO. The allegations in a disbarment complaint must be proven reconsideration as well as a petition for review of the
Complainant's allegations that Atty. Alvarico proposed terms
with substantial evidence. The standard of substantial evidence resolution of the IBP Board of Governors.
unfavorable to his client when he asked for a commission are
required in administrative proceedings is more than a mere scintilla.
WON Atty. Alvarico violated the CPR and should be disbarred. self-serving and unsubstantiated. The A davit of Atty. Alvarico
It means such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as
presented by complainant proved nothing more than the
adequate to support a conclusion. NO. An attorney enjoys the legal presumption that he is innocent
negotiations between the parties, and did not in any way show
of the charges against him until the contrary is proved, and that as
Here, complainants failed to present any evidence to adequately solicitation of commission.
an o cer of the Court, he is presumed to have performed his duties
support their allegations against respondent. They failed to state
in accordance with his oath. In disbarment proceedings, the
how much he supposedly demanded from them. They also did not
quantum of proof is substantial evidence and the burden of
attach receipts of the payment they had sent him to support their
proof is on the complainant to establish the allegations in his Notarial Practice
claim of unreasonable demand of money. Receipts from nancial
complaint. A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC, as amended
institutions could have supported their allegations that the D
unreasonable demand of money caused them to borrow money As to the allegation of representing con icting interests, engaging in 2020 Interim Rules on Remote Notarization of Paper
with high interest rates. negotiations with the adverse party is not per se representation of Documents
con icting interests. A survey of jurisprudence shows that
As a basic rule in evidence, the burden of proof lies on the party 1. Qualifications of notary public. — A notarial commission
negotiation would lead to a violation of the rule on con icting
who makes the allegations — ei incumbit probation, qui decit, non may be issued by an Executive Judge to any quali ed person
interests when the respondent-attorney negotiates with the client's
qui negat; cum per rerum naturam factum negantis probation nulla who submits a petition in accordance with these Rules.
adversary in opposition to his client's interest or claim.
sit.
To be eligible for commissioning as notary public, the
In the case at bar, during the negotiations between complainant and
petitioner:
Atty. Alvarico, the latter did not represent the former's interests
Tan v. Alvarico 2020 re Quantum of Proof because his o er to settle the civil aspect of the case through the a. must be a citizen of the Philippines;
payment of the value of the allegedly stolen steering wheel is in the b. must be over twenty-one (21) years of age;
Based on a survey of jurisprudence, the quantum of proof for interest of his client Manco who was criminally charged for the theft
administrative proceedings against lawyers is substantial thereof. The settlement of the civil aspect of the theft case led c. must be a resident in the Philippines for at least one (1)
evidence and NOT preponderance of evidence. against his client was towards his client's interest, and even year and maintains a regular place of work or business in
encouraged by our legal system and aligned with the duty of an the city or province where the commission is to be issued;
As a preliminary procedural matter, it is t to note that as per Bar
Matter No. 1645, a resolution of the IBP Board of Governors, attorney. The civil aspect of theft is subject to mandatory d. must be a member of the Philippine Bar in good
arising from its review of the report of the IBP Investigating Court-Annexed Mediation (CAM) and Judicial Dispute Resolution standing with clearances from the O ce of the Bar

Con dant of the Supreme Court and the Integrated Bar following sites located within his territorial
iii. the notary public writes below the thumb or other
of the Philippines; and jurisdiction:
mark: "Thumb or Other Mark a xed by (name of
e. must not have been convicted in the rst instance of any signatory by mark) in the presence of (names and 1. public o ces, convention halls, and similar places
crime involving moral turpitude. addresses of witnesses) and undersigned notary where oaths of o ce may be administered;
public"; and
2. Term of office of notary public. — A person commissioned 2. public function areas in hotels and similar places
as notary public may perform notarial acts for a period of two iv. the notary public notarizes the signature by thumb or for the signing of instruments or documents
(2) years commencing the rst day of January of the year in other mark through an acknowledgment, jurat, or requiring notarization;
which the commissioning is made, unless earlier revoked or the signature witnessing.
3. hospitals and other medical institutions where a
notary public has resigned. c. A notary public is authorized to sign on behalf of a person party to an instrument or document is con ned
3. Powers and limitations who is physically unable to sign or make a mark on an for treatment; and
instrument or document if:
a. A notary public is empowered to perform the following 4. any place where a party to an instrument or
notarial acts: i. notary public is directed by the person unable to sign document requiring notarization is under
or make a mark to sign on his behalf; detention.
i. Acknowledgments;
ii. the signature of the notary public is a xed in the ii. A person shall not perform a notarial act if the person
ii. oaths and a rmations;
presence of two disinterested and una ected witnesses involved as signatory to the instrument or document
iii. Jurats; to the instrument or document; —
iv. signature witnessings; iii. both witnesses sign their own names; 1. is not in the notary's presence personally at the
v. copy certi cations; and time of the notarization; and
iv. the notary public writes below his signature:
vi. any other act authorized by these Rules. "Signature a xed by notary in presence of (names and 2. is not personally known to the notary public or
addresses of person and two [2] witnesses)"; and otherwise identi ed by the notary public through
b. A notary public is authorized to certify the a xing of a competent evidence of identity as de ned by
signature by thumb or other mark on an instrument or v. the notary public notarizes his signature by
these Rules.
document presented for notarization if: acknowledgment or jurat.
e. Disquali cations. — A notary public is disquali ed
i. the thumb or other mark is a xed in the presence of d. Prohibitions
from performing a notarial act if he:
the notary public and of two (2) disinterested and i. A notary public shall not perform a notarial act
una ected witnesses to the instrument or document; i. is a party to the instrument or document that is to be
outside his regular place of work or business;
notarized;
ii. both witnesses sign their own names in addition to provided, however, that on certain exceptional
the thumb or other mark; occasions or situations, a notarial act may be ii. will receive, as a direct or indirect result, any
performed at the request of the parties in the commission, fee, advantage, right, title, interest, cash,

property, or other consideration, except as provided by

7. Sanctions. — Punishable Acts. — The Executive Judge shall spouses could no longer execute said documents and appear before
these Rules and by law; or
cause the prosecution of any person who: Atty. Quesada since they have long been deceased. Section 2 (b) of
iii. is a spouse, common-law partner, ancestor, Rule IV of the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice stresses the
a. knowingly acts or otherwise impersonates a notary public;
descendant, or relative by a nity or consanguinity of necessity of the a ant's personal appearance before the notary
the principal within the fourth civil degree. b. knowingly obtains, conceals, defaces, or destroys the seal, public.
notarial register, or o cial records of a notary public; and
4. Notarial register. — Refers to a permanently bound book Notarization of a document is not an empty act or routine. It
with numbered pages containing a chronological record of c. knowingly solicits, coerces, or in any way in uences a is invested with substantive public interest, such that only those
notarial acts performed by a notary public. notary public to commit o cial misconduct. who are quali ed or authorized may act as notaries public.
Notarization converts a private document into a public document,
A notary public shall keep only one active notarial register at Mabini v. Kintanar 2018 thus, making that document admissible in evidence without further
any given time.
proof of its authenticity. A notarial document is by law entitled to
WON Kintanar committed misconduct by notarizing his wife's
5. Jurisdiction of notary public and place of notarization. full faith and credit upon its face. Courts, administrative agencies
affidavit of loss in 2002.
— A person commissioned as notary public may perform and the public at large must be able to rely upon the
notarial acts in any place within the territorial jurisdiction of NO. In Ylaya v. Atty. Gacott, the Court made an express acknowledgment executed by a notary public and appended to a
the commissioning court. pronouncement that the subject documents therein notarized in private instrument.
See prohibitions for place of notarization. 2000 and 2001 were not covered by the 2004 Rules on Notarial
Practice.
6. Competent evidence of identity. — Refers to the
Here, at the time of such notarization, it was the 1917 Revised In Re Atty. Diuyan 2018
identi cation of an individual based on:
Administrative Code that covered notarial practice. As elucidated in
a. at least one current identi cation document issued by an WON Diuyan should he held administratively liable for notarizing
Alilano and Ylaya, during the e ectivity of said Code, a Notary
o cial agency bearing the photograph and signature a Deed of Partition on the basis of the affiants' CTCs.
Public was not disallowed from notarizing a document executed by
of the individual; or a relative. Neither was there a prohibition for a Notary Public to NO. The Court nds nothing irregular with respondent's act of
b. the oath or a rmation of notarize a document executed by his or her spouse. notarizing the Deed of Partition in 2003 on the basis of the a ants'
CTCs. The law applicable at the time of the notarization only
i. one credible witness not privy to the instrument,
required the presentation of the CTCs.
document or transaction who is personally known to
the notary public and who personally knows the Zarcilla v. Quesada 2018 En Banc Thus, it was incorrect for the IBP to have applied the 2004 Rules on
individual, or of Notarial Practice in holding respondent liable for notarizing the
WON Quesada should be disbarred. YES. Here, Atty. Quesada
Deed of Partition. To reiterate, the Deed was notarized in 2003. The
ii. two credible witnesses neither of whom is privy to the violated the notarial law for his act of notarizing the: (1) Deed of
2004 Rules on Notarial Practice were not yet in e ect at that time.
instrument, document or transaction who each Sale; and the (2) Joint A davit purportedly executed by the spouses
personally knows the individual and shows to the Zarcilla for the reconstitution of TCT, when in both occasions the
notary public documentary identi cation.

Muntuerto v. Alberto 2019 En Banc its owner. As such, Atty. Sentillas could not have properly veri ed
3. Jurat refers to an act in which an individual on a single
whether the person who appeared before was in fact complainant
A lawyer who notarizes documents without a notarial occasion:
Conrado.
commission, and assists and abets the unauthorized practice 3.1. appears in person before the notary public and
of law by a non-lawyer, deliberately violates the Lawyer's By a xing their notarial seal on the instrument, respondents
presents an instrument or document;
Oath and transgresses the canons of the CPR. Sentillas and Mata, in e ect, proclaimed to the world that
3.2. is personally known to the notary public or
Alberto should be subjected to strong disciplinary action for 1) all the parties therein personally appeared before them;
identi ed by the notary public through competent
notarizing the documents without authorization or commission to 2) they are all personally known to them; evidence of identity as de ned by these Rules;
do so. The commission, which is the grant of authority to perform
3) they were the same persons who executed the instruments; 3.3. signs the instrument or document in the presence
notarial acts, is
of the notary; and
4) they inquired into the voluntariness of execution of the
1. issued upon due application by the Executive Judge of the
instrument; and 3.4. takes an oath or a rmation before the notary
province or city where the applicant is to have a regular
public as to such instrument or document.
place of work or business 5) they acknowledged personally before them that they
voluntarily and freely executed the same 4. The Rules prohibit the notary public from performing a
2. after a summary hearing conducted by the Executive Judge
notarial act if the signatory is not in his/her presence at the
when in truth and in fact, respondents Sentillas and Mata notarized
3. following the publication of the notice of summary hearing time of the notarization.
the documents without properly ascertaining the identity of the
in a newspaper of general circulation in said province or
persons who appeared before them and the genuineness of their 5. Atty. Amores did not present any proof that Irene was
city, and
signatures. These infractions are reprehensible constituting not only indeed physically in his presence upon the signing and
4. after posting of the notice of summary hearing in a dishonesty but also malpractice. notarization of the document.
conspicuous place in the o ces of the Executive Judge and
5.1. It goes without saying that Irene had signed the
of the Clerk of Court.
document elsewhere, scanned it, and then sent it
Clearly, the exercise of the authority to notarize cannot simply be Kiener v. Amores 18 Nov 2020 electronically to Atty. Amores for the latter to
done by anyone. print, reproduce, notarize, and use for the
1. Notarization is not an empty, meaningless routinary act,
designated purpose.
but one invested with substantive public interest.
5.2. If indeed Irene had personally appeared before
Lopez v. Mata 2020 1.1. It converts a private document into a public
him, he should have asked her right then and there
document, making it admissible in evidence
WON respondents be sanctioned for violation of the 2004 Rules on to a x her signature to each and every copy of the
without further proof of its authenticity.
Notarial Practice. document, not just to one copy.
2. Here, Atty. Amores performed a jurat when he notarized
6. Atty. Amores also failed to indicate the serial number of his
YES. A CTC cannot be considered competent evidence of the Secretary's Certi cate with Irene signing as the
notarial commission in the concluding part of the notarial
identity as it does not bear the photograph and signature of Corporate Secretary.

certi cate of the Secretary's Certi cate as required by the

2.2. He also transgressed Canon 7 of the CPR, which 3.1. The presumption of regularity in the performance
rules.
mandates that every lawyer shall "uphold at all of o cial duty is upheld.
7. Thus, Atty. Amores violated the Rules on Notarial times the integrity and dignity of the legal
4. A lawyer who has been suspended from the practice of law
Practice. profession."
by the Court must refrain from performing all functions
7.1. He also failed to adhere to Canon 1 of the CPR, 3. Advincula v. Macabata emphasized that good moral which would require the application of his legal knowledge
which requires every lawyer to uphold the character is a continuing condition to preserve membership within the period of suspension.
Constitution, obey the laws of the land, and in the Bar in good standing.
4.1. The practice of law includes any activity, in or out
promote respect for the law and legal processes,
4. Atty. Rivera's conduct during the course of the of court, which requires the application of law,
and
administrative proceedings manifests a blatant disregard to legal procedure, knowledge, training, and
7.2. Rule 1.01, Canon 1 of the CPR, which prohibits a his oath "to obey the laws as well as the legal orders of the experience.
lawyer from engaging in any unlawful, dishonest, duly constituted authorities therein."
4.2. It comprises the performance of acts which are
immoral, and deceitful conduct.
4.1. He failed to comply with the directives of the characteristic of the legal profession, or rendering
See Ethics Case Digest No. 11 Investigating Commissioner to submit his Answer any kind of service which requires the use in any
and Position Paper without justi able reason. degree of legal knowledge or skill.
4.2. He ignored the scheduled mandatory conferences 5. Notarizing of documents constitutes a practice of law.
Manzano v. Rivera 03 Nov 2020 EN BANC despite receipt of notices.
5.1. A lawyer, during the period of his/her suspension,
1. Section 11 of the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice is clear See Ethics Case Digest No. 13 is barred from engaging in notarial practice as
that only a person who is commissioned as notary public he/she is deemed not a member of the Philippine
may perform notarial acts in any place within the territorial Bar in good standing, which is one of the essential
jurisdiction of the commissioning court for a period of two requisites to be eligible as a notary public.
Cansino v. Sederiosa 06 Oct 2020 EN BANC
(2) years commencing the rst day of January of the year in 6. Here, Sederiosa remained to be a duly commissioned
which the commissioning is made. 1. Atty. Sederiosa engaged in the practice of law during the
notary public from January 8, 2016 to December 31, 2017.
period of his suspension.
2. Here, it was su ciently proven that Atty. Rivera was not 7. Atty. Sederiosa's willful disobedience to a lawful order of
commissioned as a notary public at the time he notarized 2. In an attempt to evade any liability, Atty. Sederiosa
this Court constitutes a breach of the Lawyer's Oath.
the Answer. lamentably resorted to lies when he denied receipt of the
Court's December 7, 2015 Resolution. 7.1. His actuations amounted to gross deceit and
2.1. His act of making it appear that he was a duly malpractice, or gross misconduct in violation of
commissioned notary public is in blatant disregard 3. The registry receipt constitutes a prima facie proof that the
Rule 1.01, Rule 7.03, Canons 7, 9, 10 and 15 of
of the Lawyer's Oath to obey the laws, i.e. the suspension order had been delivered to and received by
the CPR.
Notarial Law, and to do no falsehood. Atty. Sederiosa.

See Ethics Case Digest No. 18 when not in use, the o cial seal of the notary public
8. The fact that Atty. Sederiosa actively engaged in notarial
must be kept safe and secure and shall be accessible
practice despite revocation of his commission is
only to him or the person duly authorized by him.
indisputably contemptuous.
Ick v. Amazona 26 Feb 2020 D. The negligence of Belaro likewise extended to his
9. In the most recent case of Zafra III v. Atty. Pagatpatan the
1. The complained act does not constitute any violation of the reportorial duties as Notary Public as he entered the
Court meted the most severe penalty of disbarment against
Rules of Court, the Notarial Rules, nor the CPR. questioned documents in his Notarial Registry Book.
therein respondent who continued to practice law for over
11 years despite the Court's suspension order. 2. Respondent merely performed his duty when he attested to E. Belaro failed to discharge with delity the sacred duties of
the fact that the a ant personally appeared and signed the his o ce which are dictated by public policy and impressed
See Ethics Case Digest No. 17 with public interest.
said letter before him.
3. The truth or falsity of the contents of the letter is the F. Belaro should be meted the penalty of TWO years
responsibility of the a ant and not of the respondent, suspension and revocation of his notarial commission for
Elanga v. Pasok 29 Sep 2020 EN BANC
especially since no substantial evidence was presented to having violated the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice. The
1. Atty. Pasok notarized the document evidencing the REM prove that he knowingly notarized a false document. Court nds that a suspension from the practice of law for
and received part of the proceeds thereof as expressly stated six months is warranted.
in the Agreement. See Ethics Case Digest No. 25
See Ethics Case Digest No. 29
1.1. By notarizing the mortgage document and
subsequently receiving part of the proceeds
thereof, Atty. Pasok violated Rule 4, Section 3 of Ang v. Belaro, Jr. 11 Dec 2019
the 2004 Rules of Notarial Practice. Judicial Ethics
Atty. Belaro is liable for breach of notarial law and for violation of
1.2. Atty. Pasok was disquali ed from notarizing the the CPR. II Code of Judicial Conduct
REM document since he will directly or indirectly A. The act of notarization converts a private document into a New Code of Judicial Conduct of the Philippine
gain from the mortgage's proceeds, as he in fact did public document resulting in the document's admissibility Judiciary
thereafter. in evidence without further proof of its authenticity.
Sources
2. The Elangas proved with substantial evidence that Atty. B. The Court disagrees with the IBP in that the signatures in
Pasok committed several infractions pertaining to his the Deed of Absolute Sale and in the Acknowledgement Qualities
participation in relevant documents concerning the Receipt were not the genuine signatures of Belaro.
opposing parties not only as a retained counsel but also as a Independence
C. Belaro is still administratively liable. As observed by the
notary public, and which involved monetary considerations
which he improperly received.
IBP, the EJS bore his notarial seal. Integrity
1. The 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice clearly states that,

Impartiality Marces, Sr. v. Arcangel disciplinary action.
WON Judge Arcangel is guilty of serious misconduct, grave abuse of We are convinced, however, that respondent approached Judge
Propriety
authority, harassment, and immorality. Cosico at least twice asking him to cancel the notice of lis pendens,
Equality thereby, trying to in uence the course of the litigation in the subject
YES, as to misconduct. The charges have not only been proven by case in violation of Rule 2.04, Canon 2 of the Code of Judicial
Competence and Diligence substantial and convincing evidence, but have actually been Conduct.
admitted by respondent judge. Thus, complainant alleges that he
Disquali cation of Judicial O cers Thus, the Court found Judge De Guzman GUILTY OF
was informed by Judge Sarabia that the warrants had been issued by
SERIOUS MISCONDUCT for in uencing the course of
him upon the request of respondent judge. This allegation is
Compulsory litigation in the Civil Case in evident violation of Rule 2.04, Canon
supported by a handwritten note of respondent judge. Instead of
2 of the Code of Judicial Conduct.
being delivered to the warrant o cer, the warrants were actually
Voluntary
given to Mrs. Cañas.
Discipline and Administrative Jurisdiction Over It is clear that (1) respondent intervened in the feud between the
Members of the Judiciary Garcia v. Valdez
complainant’s family and the Cañas family and (2) such interference
Supreme Court was not limited to the barangay mediation proceedings but extended WON Judge Valdez violated the Code of Judicial Ethics.
as well to the various stages of the con ict. These acts of
Lower Court Judges and Justices YES. Aside from the acts of interference, the respondent judge can
respondent judge must be viewed not as single, isolated
be faulted with authorized practice of law. Clearly, his interest in the
actuations but in their totality and in the context of the
administrative cases before the DARAB cannot be considered as
A Sources enmity between the two feuding families. Thus viewed we nd
merely cursory or that of a disinterested third party or observer as he
the actuations of respondent improper and censurable.
purported to be. He spoke in behalf of the defendants and he
1. New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary;
advanced their cause, making him in e ect as their legal advocate.
2. Code of Judicial Conduct.
OCA v. De Guzman, Jr. The use of court hours for matters or business falling outside the
ambit of judicial concerns can also be imputed to the respondent
B Qualities WON Judge De Guzman is guilty of misconduct. judge. Under extant premises, the respondent judge utilized
improperly the resources of the court. Respondent judge has failed
YES, as to trying to in uence the course of the litigation in the
1 Independence to conduct himself in the manner prescribed by the provisions of
subject case.
Canon 2 of the Code of Judicial Conduct which Canon 2 directs
Judicial independence is a prerequisite to the rule of law and a In the absence of fraud, dishonesty, corruption or bad faith in the avoidance of impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in
fundamental guarantee of a fair trial. A judge shall therefore issuing the order lifting the notice of lis pendens, this act of all activities.
uphold and exemplify judicial independence in both its individual respondent which pertains to his judicial capacity is not subject to
and institutional aspects. WHEREFORE, the Court RESOLVED to REPRIMAND

respondent. litigants in his court, the investigation revealed that respondent WON Judge Marigomen guilty of gross ignorance of the law,
committed acts unbecoming of a judge, in particular, talking to a manifest bias and deliberate falsehood or dishonesty.
prospective litigant in his court, recommending a lawyer to the
YES. Respondent’s questioned acts do not conform to Canons 3
2 Integrity litigant, and preparing the Motion to Withdraw as Counsel of Atty.
and 5 of the New Code of Judicial Conduct.
Robert Juanillo, which pleading was led in his court and was acted
Integrity is essential not only to the proper discharge of the upon by him. Respondent’s claim that he allowed the protestee’s counsel, Atty.
judicial o ce but also to the personal demeanor of judges. Roeles, to testify over the objection of the protestant’s counsel
The said acts of respondent violate Section 1 of Canon 2 (Integrity),
because the latter failed to submit a memorandum in support of the
2013 En Banc Section 2 of Canon 3 (Impartiality), and Section 1 of Canon 4
OCA v. Necessario, et al objection, is belied by the records of the case. Thus, in a pleading
(Propriety).
captioned “Manifestation,” the protestant’s counsel submitted a
WON the judges and personnel of the MTCC and RTC in Cebu City
memorandum of authorities on the matter. Respondent also indeed
are guilty of gross ignorance of the law, gross neglect of duty or gross
failed to state in his decision why he invalidated 90 ballots in favor of
inefficiency and gross misconduct, and in turn, warrant the most 3 Impartiality the protestant and to specify the ballots being set aside, thereby
severe penalty of dismissal from service.
violating the Constitution.
Impartiality is essential to the proper discharge of the judicial
YES. The OCA found that Judges Necessario, Acosta, Tormis, and
o ce. It applies not only to the decision itself but also to the
Rosales are all guilty of gross ine ciency or neglect of duty when
process by which the decision is made.
they solemnized marriages without following the proper procedure 4 Propriety
laid down by law, particularly the Family Code. The respondent The Law Firm of Chavez v. Justice Dicdican, etc.
judges violated Canons 2 and 6 of the Canons of Judicial Ethics Propriety and the appearance of propriety are essential to the
which exact competence, integrity and probity in the performance WON Justice Dicdican violated the Code of Judicial COnduct. performance of all the activities of a judge.
of their duties. The actuations of these judges are not only
NO. Aside from his naked allegations, conjecture and speculations, Reyes v. Duque 2010 En Banc
condemnable, it is outright shameful.
he failed to present any other evidence to prove his charges. Hence,
Judges Necessario, Acosta, Tormis and Rosales were all the presumption that respondent regularly performed his duties WON Judge Duque is guilty of impropriety and gross misconduct.
DISMISSED from the service. prevails. On the other hand, respondent Justice adequately YES. Substantial evidence pointed to Judge Duque's liability for
explained that since his voluntary inhibition from the case, he no
impropriety and gross misconduct when he sexually assaulted
longer participated in the case and his perceived participation in the
Reyes. Judge Duque merely attempted to destroy the credibility of
Tobias v. Limsiaco, Jr 2011 issuance of the assailed Resolution was a result of a typographical
Reyes when he insinuated that she could be a "woman of ill repute
mistake.
WON Judge Limsiaco violated the New Code of Judicial Conduct. or a high class prostitute" or one whose "moral value is at its lowest
level." However, no judge has a right to solicit sexual favors from a
YES. Although Tobias failed to prove by substantial evidence her party litigant even from a woman of loose morals.
allegation that respondent o ers "package deals" to prospective Salazar v. Marigomen
Had Judge Duque not retired, his misconduct would have

merited his dismissal from the service. did not allow her to do so, is feeble. bickering with the SCP counsel.
Conclusion. Respondent had been previously administratively YES. Her unnecessary bickering with SCP’s legal counsel, her
sanctioned in City Government of Tagbilaran vs. Judge Hontanosas, expressions of exasperation over trivial procedural and negligible
J. King & Sons v. Hontanosas Jr. for violating Circular No. 4, enjoining judges of inferior courts lapses, her snide remarks, as well as her condescending attitude, are
from playing in or being present in gambling casinos. Thus, the fact conduct that the Court cannot allow. They are displays of
WON Judge Hontanosas is guilty of improper conduct, gross
that respondent is guilty of three counts of serious o enses, i.e., two arrogance and air of superiority that the Code abhors. In these
ignorance of the law, and negligence in the performance of his duty.
counts of Gross Misconduct and one count Gross Ignorance of the lights, the respondent exhibited conduct unbecoming of a judge and
YES.
Law or Procedure, and also of one count of Simple Misconduct, thus violated Section 6, Canon 6 and Section 1, Canon 2 of the
On the alleged demand for P250K. — Improper solicitation further aggravated by the nding of guilt in a previous New Code of Judicial Conduct.
from litigants is a grave o ense that carries an equally grave penalty. administrative case against him, justi es the imposition of the
WON she committed impropriety by posting pictures in social
In the present case, the credible testimonies of the King brothers penalty of dismissal from the service.
networking site Friendster.
meet the required quantum of evidence which justi es our
conclusion that respondent indeed demanded P250K from them. YES. The New Code of Judicial Conduct does not prohibit a judge
Such conduct is a violation of Rule 1.01, Canon 1, and Rule Lorenzana v. Austria 2014 from joining or maintaining an account in a social networking site
2.01, Canon 2 of the Code of Judicial Conduct. such as Friendster. Section 6, Canon 4 recognizes that judges, like
WON she acted with grave incompetence and gross ignorance of the any other citizen, are entitled to freedom of expression.
We agree with the Investigating Justice’s nding that respondent is
law.
guilty of gross ignorance of the law for not holding a full-blown Section 6, Canon 4 of the New Code of Judicial Conduct, however,
hearing on the motion to lift attachment and for violating the YES, only as to the creation of the management committee. To also imposes a correlative restriction on judges: in the exercise of their
three-day notice rule. When the law violated is elementary, a constitute gross ignorance of the law, it is not enough that the freedom of expression, they should always conduct themselves in
judge is subject to disciplinary action. decision, order or actuation of the judge in the performance of his a manner that preserves the dignity of the judicial o ce and
o cial duties is contrary to existing law and jurisprudence. It must the impartiality and independence of the Judiciary.
As to the matter of the approval of the counter-bond, respondent
also be proven that he was moved by bad faith, fraud, dishonesty
utterly failed to exercise due care in examining the supporting papers Based on Sections 1 and 2 of Canon 4 of the New Code, we hold
or corruption or had committed an error so egregious that it
therefor. The respondent should know the basic requirements that the respondent disregarded the propriety and appearance of
amounted to bad faith.
before approving a surety bond or a judicial bond such as propriety required of her when she posted Friendster photos of
counter-bond. With respect to the action of the respondent in ordering the herself wearing an “o -shouldered” suggestive dress and made
creation of a management committee without rst conducting an this available for public viewing.
It is indeed grossly improper for respondent to meet with a litigant
evidentiary hearing for the purpose, however, we nd the error to be
at his home and to frequent the karaoke bar owned by such litigant, Imposable Penalty
so egregious as to amount to bad faith, leading to the conclusion of
enjoying the use thereof for free. Respondent thereby received
gross ignorance of the law, as charged. Under Section 8, Rule 140, as amended by A.M. No. 01-8-10-SC,
bene ts from a litigant appearing in his court. Respondent’s defense
gross ignorance of the law or procedure is classi ed as a serious
that his wife o ered to pay but the management of the karaoke bar WON she committed conduct unbecoming of a judge through her
charge. On the other hand, conduct unbecoming of a judge is

classi ed as a light o ense under Section 10, Rule 140. Since this is WON Torres is guilty for the delay in the subject civil case. decisions in the Pancho, Tomboc and Del Rosario cases,
her rst o ense, the Court nds it fair and proper to temper the respectively, though speculative, absent clear evidence that
YES. Judges are oft-reminded of their duty to promptly act upon
penalty for her o enses. respondent Judge received monetary considerations, the same,
cases and matters pending before their courts. Rule 3.05, Canon 3
however, from a reasonable point of view, would seriously arouse
of the Code of Judicial Conduct, directs judges to “dispose of the
the suspicion of a reasonable mind that something is wrong. In
court’s business promptly and decide cases within the required
5 Equality other words, while not conclusively and clearly proving the charge
periods.” Canons 6 and 7 of the Canons of Judicial Ethics further
of graft and corruption, the same casts a cloud of suspicion upon
exhort judges to be prompt and punctual in the disposition and
Ensuring equality of treatment to all before the courts is essential the integrity, impartiality and propriety of which respondent Judge
resolution of cases and matters pending before their courts.
to the due performance of the judicial o ce. is expected to possess and manifest.
Here, more than four years after being submitted for resolution,
2010 Respondent Judge exhibited acts amounting to gross ignorance of
Correa v. Belen Civil Case No. 20191 was still awaiting decision by respondent.
the law and procedure in handling the cases cited in the Audit
Respondent irrefragably failed to decide the case within the 30-day
WON Judge Belen is guilty of Misconduct. Report.
period prescribed by the Revised Rule on Summary Procedure.
YES. A judge must consistently be temperate in words and in Records do not show that respondent made any previous attempt to Judge Dilag is found guilty of serious charges falling under Section
actions. Respondent Judge Belen's insulting statements, tending to report and request for extension of time to resolve the case. 8 of Rule 140, namely, "gross misconduct constituting violations of
project complainant's ignorance of the laws and procedure, coming the Code of Judicial Conduct" and "gross ignorance of the law or
Section 9, Rule 140 of the Rules of Court, as amended by A.M. No.
from his inconsiderate belief that the latter mishandled the cause of procedure," as well as "gross negligence or ine ciency."
01-8-10-SC, classi es undue delay in rendering a decision as a
his client is obviously and clearly insensitive, distasteful, and Considering that Judge Dilag had already been administratively
less serious charge for which the penalty is suspension from o ce
inexcusable. Such abuse of power and authority could only invite sanctioned in De Jesus v. Dilag wherein he was ned in the amount
without salary and other bene ts for one month to three months, or
disrespect from counsels and from the public. Patience is one virtue of P30K for gross ignorance of the law, Judge Dilag's already grave
a ne of P10K-20K.
that members of the bench should practice at all times, and courtesy o enses are further aggravated. Therefore, this Court imposes upon
to everyone is always called for. Judge Dilag the extreme administrative penalty of DISMISSAL
Conduct unbecoming of a judge is classi ed as a light o ense Verginesa-Suarez v. Dilag FROM THE SERVICE.
under Section 10, Rule 140, penalized under Section 11 (c) thereof.
WON Judge Dilag is liable for gross misconduct, gross ignorance of
the law and procedure, and gross negligence and inefficiency. Cañeda v. Menchavez
6 Competence and Diligence YES. Judge Dilag should be made accountable for gross WON Judge Menchavez violated the Code of Judicial Conduct for the
misconduct constituting violations of the Code of Judicial Philippine Judiciary.
Competence and diligence are prerequisites to the due
Conduct, speci cally Sections 1 and 2 of Canon 2; Section 2 of
performance of judicial o ce. YES. Bringing out a gun for everyone present in the court to see,
Canon 3; and, Section 1 of Canon 4.
even for purposes of maintaining order and decorum in the court, is
Valdez v. Torres 2012 In the case at bench, the existence of the two (2) sets of con icting

otherwise in the controversy, or has any other interest that

inexcusable in the absence of overt acts of physical aggression by a a. A judge may, in the exercise of his sound discretion, disqualify
could substantially be a ected by the outcome of the
party before the court. himself from sitting in a case, for just or valid reasons other
proceedings.
than those mentioned.
In view of the foregoing, we nd the respondent liable for vulgar
b. Grounds for Compulsory Inhibition of a Judge
and unbecoming conduct de ned under Section 10, Rule 140 as a b. A judge may not be legally prohibited from sitting in a
light charge punishable by a ne of not less than P1K but not i. Actual Bias or Prejudice. — In Umale v. Villaluz, a litigation, but when circumstances appear that will induce
exceeding P10K. judge inhibited himself from trying a robbery case due to doubt to his honest actuations and probity in favor of either
his personal knowledge of the case. party, or incite such state of mind, he should conduct a careful
self-examination.
ii. Economic Interest of Judge or his Family. — In
C Disqualification of Judicial O cers Oktubre v. Velasco, a municipal judge, as private c. A judge should not be disquali ed because he was a classmate
complainant, caused three criminal complaints to be led (or a co-member in a fraternity) of one of the counsels if there
1 Compulsory before his own court. He also issued a warrant of arrest is no proof that such a relationship results in actual bias or
and subpoenas before nally inhibiting himself from prejudice.
a. Sec 5 Canon 3 makes an enumeration when judges should hearing the cases.
d. The mere fact that a counsel who is appearing before a judge
disqualify themselves. The cases include
iii. Reviewing Own Cases. — In Sandoval v. CA the was one of those who recommended him to the Bench is not a
i. Actual bias or prejudice concerning a party or personal Supreme Court found that an Associate Justice who only valid ground from voluntary inhibition.
knowledge of the disputed evidentiary facts; partly presided over a case in the trial court and who did
e. The objecting party to his competency may, in writing, le
ii. Judge previously served as a lawyer or is a material witness not render the nal decision cannot be said to have been
with the subject o cial his objection and its grounds. The said
on the matter; placed in a position where he had to review his own
o cial may, in accordance with his determination of the
decision and, as such, was not legally bound, on this
iii. The judge or a member of his family has a material interest question of his disquali cation, either:
ground, to inhibit himself as ponente of the case.
in the outcome of the controversy; i. proceed with the trial or
iv. Previously Served as Counsel. — A judge may validly
iv. Judge previously served as an executor, administrator, disqualify himself due to his bias and prejudice. ii. withdraw therefrom.
guardian, trustee, or lawyer, in the controversy; Disquali cation was also allowed when the judge had been
v. That the judge’s ruling in a lower court is the subject of previously associated with a party as counsel, had Discipline and Administrative
review; notarized the a davit of a person to be presented as D Jurisdiction Over Members of the
vi. Relation of the judge by consanguinity or a nity to a
witness, or if he was a material witness to a case. Judiciary
party litigant within the sixth civil degree or to counsel
within the fourth civil degree;
2 Voluntary 1 Supreme Court
vii. The judge knows that his or her spouse or child has a a) Impeachment. — may be removed from o ce on
nancial interest as an heir, legatee, creditor, duciary or impeachment for, and conviction of, culpable violation of the

Constitution, treason, bribery, graft and corruption, other

Complaints involving graft and corruption and violations of
high crimes, or betrayal of public trust (Sec 2 Art XI 1987
ethical standards, including anonymous complaints, led
Constitution). Marcelo v. Barcillano 2017
against Members of the Supreme Court shall be referred to the
b) The sole disciplining authority of all impeachable o cers, Committee on Ethics and Ethical Standards which shall have As a magistrate, Judge Barcillano, Jr. is expected to be an
including Justices of the Supreme Court, is Congress. the task of preliminarily investigating and of submitting its embodiment of professionalism, but the exact opposite was shown
Impeachment, though a political process, also serves as an ndings and recommendations to the Supreme Court en banc, towards PO1 Marcelo. Rather than giving respect to a police o cer
administrative disciplinary proceeding against an impeachable in accordance with the Internal Rules of the Supreme Court. who was on-duty at the time, Judge Barcillano, Jr. expressed
o cer as they are not subject to the ordinary disciplinary (Sec 1 R140) mockery and a condescending attitude, or with conceited show of
proceeding initiated by the Judiciary or the Executive. superiority.
b) Grounds
2 Lower Court Judges and Justices i) Misconduct. — “Misconduct” implies a wrongful

intention and not a mere error or judgment. For Tuvillo v. Laron 2016 En Banc
a) Proceedings for the discipline of Justices of the CA, the
serious or gross misconduct to exist, there must be
Sandiganbayan, CTA and Judges and personnel of the lower By having an a air with a married woman, Judge Laron's
reliable evidence showing that the judicial acts
courts, including the Shari'a Courts, and the o cials and immorality and serious misconduct have repercussions not only on
complained of were corrupt or inspired by an
employees of the O ce of the Jurisconsult, Court the judiciary but also on the millions OFWs. While Wilfredo was
intention to violate the law, or were in persistent
Administrator, Deputy Court Administrator, Assistant Court working hard abroad to earn for his family, Judge Laron was
disregard of well-known legal rules.
Administrator and their personnel, may be instituted, motu sleeping with his wife in his bed in his house and spending his
proprio, by the Supreme Court, in the Judicial Integrity The commission of two or more administrative hard-earned dollars.
Board. It may also be instituted o enses alleged in the same administrative complaint may
aggravate the o ense and render the same serious, which
i) by way of a veri ed complaint, supported by a davits
will warrant dismissal of the judge from the service.
of persons who have personal knowledge of the facts McLaren v. Gonzales 2017
alleged therein; or,
Re Anonymous Letter Complaint Respondent's act of not wearing the judicial robe during court
2017 En Banc
ii) by authentic documents which may substantiate said Against Judge Samson sessions is violative of Administrative Circular No. 25 s. 1989.
allegations, or upon an anonymous complaint, Under Section 9(4), Rule 140 of the Revised Rules of Court,
When respondent Roque applied for the position of Utility Worker
supported by public records of indubitable integrity; violation of Supreme Court rules, directives and circulars is
I in her court, respondent Judge Samson knew that he was not yet
or, considered a less serious charge.
discharged from probation and yet she recommended respondent
iii) where their material averments may easily be veri ed, Roque for the position in a recommendation letter, which forms
ii) Gross Ignorance of the Law. —
and may be substantiated and established by other part of the employment record of respondent Roque in the Court.
competent evidence. Her act violates Canon 2 of the Code of Judicial Conduct. Balanay v. White 2016

Respondent admits allowing Adamas six consecutive furloughs to Gamboa-Roces v. Perez 2017
6. Willful failure to pay just debt;
attend regular sessions of the Sangguniang Bayan of the
The explanation given by Judge Perez was too imsy. His being 7. Borrowing money or property from lawyers and litigants in
Municipality of Oras, Eastern Samar based on very urgent motions
inexperienced as a newly appointed judge and his explanation that a case pending before the court;
that did not contain notice of hearing and were not heard in open
the delay was not intended to prejudice the plainti s are not
court. 8. Immorality;
persuasive because it is his duty to resolve the cases within the
Thus, in Villanueva v. Judge Buaya, therein respondent judge was reglementary period as mandated by law and the rules. These 9. Gross ignorance of the law or procedure;
held administratively liable for gross ignorance of the law for excuses only show his lack of diligence in discharging administrative 10. Partisan political activities; and
granting an ex parte motion for bail without conducting a hearing. responsibilities and professional competence in court management.
A judge is expected to keep his own listing of cases and to note 11. Alcoholism and/or vicious habits.
A TSN "is supposed to be a faithful and exact recording of all
matters that transpired during a court proceeding." Respondent's therein the status of each case so that they may be acted upon Less Serious Charge
act of directing her subordinate to alter the TSN by incorporating accordingly and without delay.
1. Undue delay in rendering a decision or order, or in
therein statements pertaining to substantial matters that were not Under Sections 9 and 11, Rule 140 of the Rules of Court, as transmitting the records of a case;
actually made during the hearing constitutes gross misconduct. amended by A.M. No. 01-8-10-SC, undue delay in rendering a
2. Frequent n and unjusti ed absences without leave or
decision is a less serious charge.
habitual tardiness;
DOJ v. Mislang 2016 En Banc c) Sanctions imposed by the Supreme Court on erring 3. Unauthorized practice of law;
members of the judiciary 4. Violation of Supreme Court rules, directives, and circulars;
Judge Mislang manifested serious lack of knowledge and
understanding of the basic legal principles on prejudicial question 5. Receiving additional or double compensation unless
Serious Charges
and on jurisdiction in petitions for suspension of criminal action speci cally authorized by law;
based on prejudicial questions. 1. Bribery, direct or indirect;
6. Untruthful statements in the certi cate of services; and
Considering Judge Mislang's repeated infractions and obstinate 2. Dishonesty and violations of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt
7. Simple Misconduct.
refusal to correct his ways despite previous warnings, the Court is Practices Law (R.A. No. 3019);
constrained to impose the penalty of DISMISSAL in this case. Light Charges
3. Gross misconduct constituting violations of the Code of
Judicial Conduct; 1. Vulgar and unbecoming conduct;
iii) Gross Ine ciency. — Like misconduct,
ine ciency as a ground for disciplinary action must 4. Knowingly rendering an unjust judgment or order as 2. Gambling in public;
be serious or one which is weighty or momentous and determined by a competent court in an appropriate 3. Fraternizing with lawyers and litigants with pending
not tri ing. Negligence in the performance of duty, if proceeding; case/cases in his court; and
reckless in character, could amount to serious or 5. Conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude; 4. Undue delay in the submission of monthly reports.
inexcusable ine ciency.

a. If the respondent is guilty of a SERIOUS charge: Tan-Yap v. Patrick 2019 Section 5 of Canon 6 likewise directs judges to perform all judicial
duties, including the delivery of reserved decisions, e ciently, fairly
i. Dismissal from the service, forfeiture of all or part of the Respondent judge violated Canon 2, Sections 1 and 2, and
and with reasonable promptness. Rules prescribing the time within
bene ts as the Court may determine, and disquali cation Canon 4, Sections 1 and 2, of the New Code of Judicial Conduct
which certain acts must be done are indispensable to prevent
from reinstatement or appointment to any public o ce, for the Philippine Judiciary.
needless delays in the orderly and speedy disposition of cases. Thus,
including government-owned or controlled corporations.
With respect to respondent judge's act of assisting his wife in the 90-day period is mandatory.
Provided, however, that the forfeiture of bene ts shall in preparing a motion to intervene and a xing his signature thereon,
Judge Guiling incurred delay in rendering judgment in twenty-three
no case include accrued leave credits; the Court agrees with respondent judge that the same does not
(23) criminal cases and forty (40) civil cases, and in resolving
ii. Suspension from o ce without salary and other bene ts constitute private practice of law. In OCA v. Judge Floro, Jr., we held:
motions or incidents in seventeen (17) criminal cases and sixty-three
for more than three (3) but not exceeding six (6) months; What is envisioned by 'private practice' is more than an isolated (63) civil cases. Worse, when given the chance to explain his side,
or court appearance, for it consists in frequent customary action, a respondent judge did not o er any explanation as to why there was
iii. A ne of more than P20,000.00 but not exceeding succession of acts of the same nature habitually or customarily delay.
P40,000.00. holding one's self to the public as a lawyer.
Classi ed as less serious charges under Section 9, 14 Rule 140 of
b. If the respondent is guilty of a LESS SERIOUS charge: To be sure, it does not escape the Court's attention that the title the Rules of Court are undue delay in rendering decisions or orders,
"Judge" is appended to respondent judge's name appearing on the and violation of Supreme Court rules, directives and circulars.
i. Suspension from o ce without salary and other bene ts
motion to intervene. Since respondent judge was asking for relief Meanwhile, under Section 10 of the same Rule 140, undue delay in
for not less than one (1) month nor more than three (3)
from the RTC through the subject motion, he should not have used the submission of monthly reports is considered a light o ense.
months; or
therein his title "Judge". For even if he did not intend to take undue
ii. A ne of not more than P10,000.00 but not exceeding advantage of his title, it nevertheless gave the appearance of
P20,000.00. impropriety considering the circumstances of the case. Philippine Investment Two v. Mendoza 2018
c. If the respondent is guilty of a LIGHT charge: Indeed, the aforementioned inappropriate actions of respondent
Even granting that Judge Mendoza had been motivated by good
i. A ne of not less than P1,000.00 but not exceeding judge constitute Conduct Unbecoming of a Judicial O cer.
intentions leading him to disregard the laws governing TROs, these
P10,000.00; and/or Under Sections 10 and 11, Rule 141 of the Rules of Court,
personal motivations cannot relieve him from the administrative
unbecoming conduct is a light charge.
ii. Censure; consequences of his actions as they a ect his competency and
conduct as a judge in the discharge of his o cial functions. Gross
iii. Reprimand; ignorance of the law or incompetence cannot be excused by a
iv. Admonition with warning. OCA v. Guiling, et al 2019 En Banc claim of good faith.
Article VIII, Section 15 (1) of the 1987 Constitution mandates Judge Mendoza's failure to apply the settled laws and jurisprudence
Survey of Recent Jurisprudence on Judicial Ethics
lower court judges to decide a case within the reglementary period on the issuance of TROs constitutes gross ignorance of the law
of ninety (90) days. The New Code of Judicial Conduct under which merits administrative sanction. Section 8(9), Rule 140 of the

Rules of Court classi es gross ignorance as a serious charge. Tejano v. Marigomen 2017 En Banc
Considering the blatant violation of the law and rules committed by
Without a standing warrant of arrest, a judge not assigned to the Judge Cabrera-Faller and her grievous exercise of discretion, the
province, city, or municipality where the case is pending has no appropriate penalty should be DISMISSAL from the service.
Abiog v. Cañete 2018
authority to grant bail. To do so would be gross ignorance of the
Respondent judge occupied a portion of the Halls of Justice at law.
Brooke's Point as her residential quarters. Palma v. Omelio 2017
The Halls of Justice must strictly be used for o cial functions As a duly-authorized solemnizing o cer, Judge Omelio is expected
Alfelor v. Diaz 2017 En Banc
only, in accordance with Administrative Circular No. 3-92. Section to know that marriage should not be tri ed with, and its sanctity
3 of A.M. No. 01-9-09-SC reiterates the said prohibition. While the Court agrees with the OCA that Judge Diaz was careless and inviolability should never be undermined, especially by such a
in convicting Alfelor in the nine (9) checks subject of the BP Blg. 22 lame ground as picture-taking. Worse, although he was supposedly
Respondent judge ought to have known that the local government
cases which were not ra ed to his sala, it does not and cannot merely doing a re-enactment, Judge Omelio claimed to have
was not obligated to pay her additional allowance or RATA. Under
dismiss this act as simple inadvertence. Such carelessness can only be allowed additional witnesses/godparents to a x their signatures in
A.M. No. 01-8-10-SC, violation of Supreme Court rules, directives,
considered as gross ignorance of the law. the marriage certi cate that was issued and signed by Judge Murcia.
and circulars is considered a less serious charge.
Finally, all the guests were deceived into believing that Judge Omelio
was solemnizing a real marriage and not just a mere re-enactment.
Re Anon Letter-Complaint v. Marcos v. Cabrera-Faller 2017 En Banc The said acts of respondents amounted to gross misconduct
2018 En Banc
Justice Pizarro constituting violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct, a serious
When Judge Cabrera-Faller issued the warrants, she also archived
charge.
Justice Pizarro, as a magistrate of the CA, is clearly a government the case. She, however, did not cite any ground in A.C. No. 7-A-92
o cial directly involved in the administration of justice; and in the for the suspension of the proceedings. What she did was
performance of such function, he exercises discretion. Thus, by unprecedented.
Nava II v. Artuz 2017 En Banc and 2020 Resolution
gambling in a casino, Justice Pizarro violated the prohibition from
Judge Cabrera-Faller showed manifest bias and partiality, if not gross
gambling in casinos as provided under Section 14(4)(a) of P.D. No. Judge Artuz is guilty of Grave Misconduct, Dishonesty, and
ignorance of the law, when she issued the Order recalling the
1869. Falsi cation of o cial document for her false statements in her
warrants of arrest against accused Alim, Amante and Rosales
Further, Justice Pizarro also violated Canons 2 and 4 of the New claiming that they were issued inadvertently. Although no direct two (2) PDS and for her willful de ance of Court directives.
Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary. Justice evidence was presented to show that Judge Cabrera-Faller was Artuz deliberately and calculatedly lied in her answers to the subject
Pizarro is guilty of conduct unbecoming of a member of the in uenced by improper considerations, the Court cannot close its questions in her two (2) PDS to conceal the truth and make it
judiciary. eyes in the manner by which Criminal Case No. 11862-13 was appear that she is quali ed for the judgeship position which she now
dismissed. Her actuations put in serious doubts her integrity and holds. Indeed, it is inconceivable for her not to have been aware of
honesty, both as a person and a member of the Bench. any of the pending cases against her since an administrative case led

against her had been pending before the DOJ long before she subject to the control and supervision of the Presiding Judge. complaint or the desistance of a complainant does not
submitted her application with the JBC. necessarily warrant the dismissal of an administrative
Judge Buyucan should likewise be held administratively liable for
complaint.
Artuz's misconduct likewise constitutes a contravention of Section conduct unbecoming of a judge for his inappropriate actions and
27, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court, which enjoins a judge, at the use of intemperate language. The incident narrated by the audit 4. Respondent, instead of granting complainant's Motion to
pain of disbarment or suspension, from committing acts of deceit or team was never denied by Judge Buyucan. Release Seized Items, issued the Order, thereby authorizing
for willfully disobeying the orders of the Court. She is himself, the court personnel and the government
DISMISSED from service e ective immediately. prosecutor to personally verify the authenticity of the
Concerned Lawyers of Bulacan v. rearm licenses at Camp Crame at the expense of
In the 2020 Resolution, she has likewise been DISBARRED for 2017 En Banc
Villalon-Pornillos complainant.
violating the Lawyer's Oath, Rule 1.01 of Canon 1, Canon 7,
Rule 8.01 of Canon 8, Rule 10.01 of Canon 10, and Canon 11 Judicial clemency is an act of mercy removing any disquali cation 5. OCA Circular No. 11-2011, citing Del Rosario vs. People,
of the CPR. from the erring judge. It can be granted only if there is a showing provides that certi cations issued by the FEO Records
that it is merited; thus, proof of reformation and a showing of Section are su cient proof of the fact of possession or
potential and promise are indispensable. non-possession of a valid license to own or possess rearms
Re Justice Lantion 2017 En Banc or explosives in the o ense of Illegal Possession of Firearms.
Here, records are bereft of bowing that respondent has exhibited
remorse for her past misdeeds, which occurred more than eight (8) 6. This only means that FEO-issued certi cations are
Here, not only are the two handwritten letter-complaints unveri ed,
years ago. Apart from respondent's submission to the Court's su cient evidence, and thus, should be accepted by the
they are also unsupported by any a davits or documents which
disciplinary authority, there were no signs of repentance showing courts in determining the presence or absence of a valid
would validate the charges against the respondents. Even if the
that at the very least, she accepted the judgment of the Court in her license or permit to own or possess rearms.
Court sets aside technicality, the handwritten letters of the
complainants are couched in general terms that contain no material, case. In fact, she even sees nothing wrong with her actions. 7. Accordingly, it is not the duty of respondent to personally
relevant and substantial allegation to support the accusation of The petition for judicial clemency is DENIED. verify the authenticity of the Certi cation of the FEO, or
continuous and widespread selling of a favorable decision in the rearm licenses of complainant and Brahim.
CA-CDO. The complaints are thus dismissed.
8. It was thus highly irregular, if not anomalous, for
Maulana v. Judge Noel, Jr. 15 Mar 2021 respondent to issue the Order.
1. Respondent committed gross ignorance of procedural rules 9. As regards the recommended penalty, the Court deems it
OCA v. Buyucan 2017 En Banc
when he issued the Order. appropriate to impose a penalty of suspension from o ce
Judge Buyucan should be held administratively liable for simple without salary and any bene ts for three (3) months instead
2. The complaint should not be dismissed solely on the basis
neglect of duty. Although the custody, submission, and of a ne of P20K.
of complainant's a davit of desistance.
monitoring of monthly reports of collections and deposits were
mainly the responsibility of the clerk of court, he is, however, 3. The Court has always held that the withdrawal of a See Ethics Case Digest No. 5

A Demand Letter REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES )

III Practical Exercises City/Municipality of ____________ ) S.S.
[DATE]
Demand Letter [NAME OF ADDRESSEE]
BILL OF SALE
[ADDRESS]
Deed of Sale of Real Property and Deed of Sale of RE: [SUBJECT]
Personal Property KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:
Contract of Lease Dear [NAME], I, [NAME OF SELLER], Filipino, single, and resident of
[ADDRESS OF SELLER] for and in consideration of the amount
We are writing on behalf of our client [NAME], in the matter of
Special Power of Attorney [SUBJECT].
of [AMOUNT IN WORDS PESOS] (PhP xxx,xxx.xx), paid to me
today by [NAME OF BUYER], Filipino, single and resident of
Veri cation and Certi cate of Non-forum Shopping Records disclose that [SUMMARY OF BASIC FACTS [ADDRESS OF BUYER] do hereby SELL, TRANSFER and
SUPPORTING YOUR CLIENT’S DEMAND/CAUSE OF CONVEY absolutely and unconditionally unto said [NAME OF
Judicial A davit ACTION]. BUYER] the following property:
Notarial Certi cates We wish to inform you that your acts constitute violation of (Description of property)
[APPLICABLE LAW OR CONTRACTUAL STIPULATION].
Jurat I own and have the right to sell and transfer the title and ownership
Accordingly, a demand is hereby made upon you to settle the of the above–described property; I will defend the same against the
Acknowledgment amount of [AMOUNT] within ____ days from the receipt of this claims of any and all persons whatsoever.
letter. Otherwise, we will be constrained to nd recourse in the
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have signed this instrument this __th
Motions courts of law and le the necessary legal action against you to protect
day of [MONTH, YEAR] at [PLACE OF SIGNING].
the interest of our client.
for Summary Judgment (sgd).
We trust that you will give this matter your urgent attention.
to Dismiss [NAME OF SELLER]
SIGNED IN THE PRESENCE OF:
to Declare in Default Yours,
_________________ _________________
Atty. Juan dela Cruz
Quitclaims in Labor Cases
Information in Criminal Cases [PLUS ACKNOWLEDGMENT]

Deed of Sale of Real Property and Deed
B
of Sale of Personal Property

Unilateral Deed of Sale of Registered Land [If Seller is married, include spousal consent as follows:] (Description: state the nature of each piece of land and its
improvements, situations and boundaries, area in square meters, e.g.
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES ) With my consent:
“Bounded on the N. by ____________; on the E. by
City/Municipality of ____________ ) S.S.
(sgd.) ___________; on the S. by ____________; and on the W. by
[NAME OF SPOUSE OF SELLER] ____________; with an area of ________ square meters, more or
DEED OF ABSOLUTE SALE less.”)
THAT the SELLER does hereby declare that the boundaries of the
_________________ _________________
foregoing land are visible by means of [MONUMENTS, CREEKS,
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:
[PLUS ACKNOWLEDGMENT] TREES ETC.] that the permanent improvements existing thereon
I, [NAME OF SELLER], Filipino, single/married to [SPOUSE, IF consist of [LIST VARIOUS IMPROVEMENTS, IF NONE,
APPLICABLE], and resident of [ADDRESS OF SELLER] for and Unilateral Deed of Sale of Unregistered Land STATE SO.]; that the land is assessed for the current year at (PhP
in consideration of the amount of [AMOUNT IN WORDS xxx.xx) as per Tax Declaration No. _________, and that the
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES )
PESOS] (PhP xxx,xxx.xx), paid to me today by [NAME OF property is in present possession of the SELLER.
City/Municipality of ____________ ) S.S.
BUYER], Filipino, single and resident of [ADDRESS OF BUYER]
The above described real estate, not having been registered under
do hereby SELL, TRANSFER and CONVEY absolutely and
Act No. 496 nor under the Spanish Mortgage Law, I have agreed to
unconditionally unto said [NAME OF BUYER] that certain DEED OF ABSOLUTE SALE register this instrument under the provisions of Sec. 194 of the
parcel(s) of land, together with the buildings and improvements
Revised Administrative Code, as amended by Sec. 113 of P.D 1159.
thereon situated in the [CITY/MUNICIPALITY OF ____], free
from all liens and encumbrances whatsoever and more particularly KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have signed this instrument this __th
described as follows: day of [MONTH, YEAR] at [PLACE OF SIGNING].
I, [NAME OF SELLER], Filipino, single/married to [SPOUSE, IF
(Technical Description of property as indicated in the title) APPLICABLE], and resident of [ADDRESS OF SELLER] for and (sgd).
in consideration of the amount of [AMOUNT IN WORDS [NAME OF SELLER]
of which I am the registered owner in fee simple, my title thereto
PESOS] (PhP xxx,xxx.xx), paid to me today by [NAME OF
being evidenced by [TRANSFER/ORIGINAL CERTIFICATE [If Vendor is married, include spousal consent as follows:]
BUYER], Filipino, single and resident of [ADDRESS OF BUYER]
TITLE NO.__________], issued by the Register of Deeds of
do hereby SELL, TRANSFER and CONVEY absolutely and (sgd.)
[CITY/MUNICIPALITY].
unconditionally unto said [NAME OF BUYER] that certain
[NAME OF SPOUSE OF SELLER]
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have signed this instrument this __th parcel(s) of land, together with the buildings and improvements
day of [MONTH, YEAR] at [PLACE OF SIGNING] thereon situated in the [CITY/MUNICIPALITY OF ____], free SIGNED IN THE PRESENCE OF:
(sgd). from all liens and encumbrances whatsoever and more particularly _________________ _________________
described as follows:
[NAME OF SELLER] [PLUS ACKNOWLEDGMENT]

Bilateral Deed of Sale of Registered Land encumbrances whatsoever. legal age, single/married to [SPOUSE, IF APPLICABLE],
(LESSOR) and resident of [ADDRESS], and [NAME OF
That it is hereby mutually agreed that the BUYER shall bear all
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES ) LESSEE], of legal age, single and resident of [ADDRESS]
expenses for the execution and registration of this deed of sale.
City/Municipality of ____________ ) S.S. (LESSEE), WITNESSETH that:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have signed this contract on
DEED OF ABSOLUTE SALE 1. In consideration of a monthly rental of [AMOUNT IN
this __th day of [MONTH, YEAR] at [PLACE OF SIGNING].
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: WORDS PESOS] (PhP xxx,xxx.xx) and the covenants made
(sgd.) (sgd.) below, the LESSOR hereby LEASES to the LESSEE a(n)
This DEED OF ABSOLUTE SALE is made, executed and entered
[NAME OF BUYER] [NAME OF SELLER] [PROPERTY] located at [ADDRESS OF PROPERTY TO
into by:
BE LEASED] covered by [TCT/TAX DEC. NO.] for a
BUYER SELLER
[NAME OF SELLER], Filipino, single/married to [SPOUSE, IF period of TWELVE (12) MONTHS from signing of this
APPLICABLE], and resident of [ADDRESS OF SELLER] [If Buyer and/or Seller are married, include spousal consent as contract.
(SELLER) follows:]
2. The LESSEE covenants, as follows:
-and- With my consent:
2.1. To pay the rentals on or before the fth day of each
[NAME OF BUYER], Filipino, single/married to [SPOUSE, IF (sgd.) (sgd.) month, without need of demand at the residence of
APPLICABLE] and resident of [ADDRESS OF BUYER] LESSOR;
[NAME OF SPOUSE OF BUYER] [NAME OF SPOUSE OF
(BUYER)
SELLER] 2.2. To keep the premises in good and habitable condition,
WITNESSETH making the necessary repairs inside and outside the
That the SELLER is the registered owner in fee simple of a parcel of house;
_________________ _________________
land with improvements situated in the [CITY/MUNICIPALITY 2.3. Not to make major alterations and improvements
OF ____] with [TRANSFER/ORIGINAL CERTIFICATE [PLUS ACKNOWLEDGMENT FOR TWO-PARTY without the written consent of the LESSOR and in
TITLE NO.__________], issued by the Register of Deeds of INSTRUMENT] the event of such unauthorized major alterations and
[CITY/MUNICIPALITY] and more particularly described as improvements, surrendering ownership over such
follows: improvements and alterations to the LESSOR upon
(Technical Description of property as indicated in the title) C Contract of Lease expiration of this lease;
That the SELLER for and in consideration of the amount of IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have signed this contract on
CONTRACT OF LEASE the date and the place rst mentioned.
[AMOUNT IN WORDS PESOS] (PhP xxx,xxx.xx), does hereby
SELL, TRANSFER and CONVEY absolutely and unconditionally KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: (sgd.) (sgd.)
unto the BUYER that certain parcel(s) of land, together with the This Agreement made and entered into at [PLACE] this ____ day [NAME OF LESSOR] [NAME OF LESSEE]
buildings and improvements thereon free from all liens and of [MONTH, YEAR] by and between [NAME OF LESSOR], of

and lawful attorney-in-fact to act for and in my name, place and

LESSOR LESSEE (C) To receive payment from the sale of my property more
stead and to perform the following acts:
particularly described as follows:
[If Lessor is married, include spousal consent as follows:] With my
(A) To purchase real property or properties situated anywhere
consent: [DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY]
in the Philippines, in an amount acceptable to him/her;
(sgd.) HEREBY GRANTING unto said attorney-in-fact full power and
(B) To sign and/or execute any deed conveyance to e ect the
authority to execute and perform every act necessary to render
[NAME OF SPOUSE OF LESSOR] sale of the property in my name; and
e ective the power to sell the foregoing properties, as though I
SIGNED IN THE PRESENCE OF: myself have performed it, and HEREBY APPROVING ALL that (C) To receive all documents pertinent to the purchase of any
_________________ _________________ he/she may do by virtue hereof with full right of substitution of property:
his/her person and revocation of this instrument.
[PLUS ACKNOWLEDGMENT FOR TWO-PARTY HEREBY GRANTING unto said attorney-in-fact full power and
INSTRUMENT] IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto a xed my signature on authority to execute and perform every act necessary to render
this __th day of [MONTH, YEAR], in [PLACE OF e ective the power to purchase properties, as though I myself have
EXECUTION OF INSTRUMENT]. performed it, and HEREBY APPROVING ALL that he/she may
do by virtue hereof with full right of substitution of his/her person
D Special Power of Attorney __________________ __________________
and revocation of this instrument.
for Sale of Real Property [NAME OF PRINCIPAL] [NAME OF AGENT]
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto a xed my signature on
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES ) Signed in the presence of: this __th day of [MONTH, YEAR], in [PLACE OF
City/Municipality of ____________ ) S.S. __________________ __________________ EXECUTION OF INSTRUMENT].
SPECIAL POWER OF ATTORNEY [PLUS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT] __________________ __________________
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: [NAME OF PRINCIPAL] [NAME OF AGENT]
for Purchase of Real Property
I, [NAME], of legal age, Filipino citizen, with residence and postal Signed in the presence of:
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES )
address at [ADDRESS], do hereby NAME, CONSTITUTE, AND
City/Municipality of ____________ ) S.S. __________________ __________________
APPOINT [NAME OF AGENT/ATTORNEY IN FACT], of legal
age, Filipino citizen, with postal address at [ADDRESS], as my true SPECIAL POWER OF ATTORNEY [PLUS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT]
and lawful attorney-in-fact to act for and in my name, place and KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: for Representation in Actions
stead and to perform the following acts:
I, [NAME], of legal age, Filipino citizen, with residence and postal REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES )
(A) To sell, o er for sale, and come to an agreement as to the address at [ADDRESS], do hereby NAME, CONSTITUTE, AND City/Municipality of ____________ ) S.S.
purchase price; APPOINT [NAME OF AGENT/ATTORNEY IN FACT], of legal
SPECIAL POWER OF ATTORNEY
(B) To sign for me and in my name; and age, Filipino citizen, with postal address at [ADDRESS], as my true

of fact and of documents to avoid unnecessary proof;

KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:
I, [NAME], of legal age, Filipino citizen, Corporate Secretary of
5) The limitation of the number of witnesses; Verification and Certificate of
E
[CORPORATION] (“ABC”), a corporation duly organized and 6) The advisability of a preliminary reference of issues to a Non-forum Shopping
existing under Philippine laws, by virtue of this authority given to commissioner;
me pursuant to Board Resolution duly issued by the Board of I, [NAME], Filipino, of legal age, with residence at [ADDRESS] do
7) The propriety of rendering judgment on the pleadings,
Directors of [“ABC”] in its meeting on [DAY MONTH YEAR], as hereby state that:
or summary judgment, or of dismissing the Case
evidenced by the secretary’s certi cate attached hereto, do hereby
should a valid ground therefor be found to exist; 1. I am the [PARTY e.g. COMPLAINANT/PETITIONER
NAME, CONSTITUTE, AND APPOINT [NAME OF
8) The advisability or necessity of suspending proceedings; etc.] in the above-entitled case;
AGENT/ATTORNEY IN FACT], of legal age, Filipino citizen,
with postal address at [ADDRESS], to be [“ABC”]’s true and lawful and 2. I caused the preparation of the foregoing [DESIGNATION
attorney-in-fact in Civil Case No. 21324 entitled [TITLE] (“Case”), 9) Such other matters as may aid in the prompt OF THE PLEADING e.g. PETITION, COMPLAINT
to act for on its behalf to: disposition of this Case. etc.];
(A) Appear for and represent [ABC] whether at the original or (D) Negotiate, conclude, enter into, and execute a compromise 3. I have read its contents and a rm that they are true and
appellate stage, and whether as appellant of appellee, or amicable settlement of the Case, if appropriate. correct to the best of my own personal knowledge and
petitioner or respondent; authentic documents in our possession;
HEREBY GRANTING unto said attorney-in-fact full power and
(B) Sign, under oath or otherwise, all necessary and appropriate authority to execute and perform every act necessary, as though ABC 4. I have not commenced any other action or proceeding
pleadings, motions, veri cations, certi cations, papers and itself has performed it, and HEREBY APPROVING ALL that involving the same issues in the Supreme Court, the Court
documents; he/she may do by virtue hereof with full right of substitution of of Appeals, or any other tribunal or agency;
(C) Act as agent and appear on behalf of [ABC] in the his/her person and revocation of this instrument. 5. To the best of my knowledge no other such action or
mandatory conciliation, mediation conference, judicial IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto a xed my signature on proceeding is pending in the Supreme Court, the Court of
dispute resolution, and pre-trial proceedings and all other this__th day of [MONTH, YEAR], in [PLACE OF EXECUTION Appeals, or any other tribunal or agency and if I should
hearings in the Case, with full power and authority to OF INSTRUMENT]. thereafter learn that a similar action or proceeding has been
consider: led or is pending before the Supreme Court, the Court of
__________________ __________________ Appeals, or any other tribunal or agency, I undertake to
1) The possibility of an amicable settlement or of
[NAME OF PRINCIPAL] [NAME OF AGENT] report that fact within ve (5) days therefrom to this
submission to alternative modes of dispute resolution;
Honorable Court.
Signed in the presence of:
2) The simpli cation of issues;
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto signed this instrument
__________________ __________________
3) The necessity or desirability of amending the pleadings; this __th day of [MONTH, YEAR] at [PLACE OF SIGNING].
[PLUS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT]
4) The possibility of obtaining stipulations or admissions (sgd.)

[NAME OF AFFIANT] Q3: [QUESTION] G Notarial Certificates

A ant A: [ANSWER]
[PLUS JURAT] IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto signed this instrument 1 Jurat
this __th day of [MONTH, YEAR] at [PLACE OF SIGNING].
(sgd.) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME in the
In Re Letter Complaint of Fabiana 2013 En Banc [CITY/MUNICIPALITY of _______________] on this ___ day
[NAME OF AFFIANT]
of [MONTH, YEAR], a ant exhibiting before me his Government
If there are pending actions involving the same parties and/or related
A ant Issued ID no. _______________ issued on [DATE OF
question of law and/or fact, the a ant must render complete
ISSUANCE] at [PLACE OF ISSUANCE] and valid until [DATE
statements of the present status thereof.
OF EXPIRY].
ATTESTATION AND OFFER
(Sgd.)
I, [NAME OF LAWYER], of legal age, with o ce address [OFFICE
F Judicial A davit ADDRESS OF LAWYER], do hereby certify that: NOTARY PUBLIC
I propounded questions to [NAME] and faithfully recorded or Doc. No.

JUDICIAL AFFIDAVIT Page No.
caused to be recorded the questions I asked and the corresponding
I, [NAME], of legal age, [SINGLE/MARRIED], answers that [NAME] gave, as above stated. Book No.
[CITIZENSHIP], residing at [ADDRESS], employed as Series of [YEAR]
Neither I nor any other person then present or assisting
[OCCUPATION/PROFESSION] at [OFFICE ADDRESS], after
[HIM/HER] coached [HIM/HER] regarding [HIS/HER] answers
having been duly sworn to in accordance with law and fully
and which testimony is being o ered to prove: [ENUMERATE
conscious that I do so under oath and that I may face criminal 2 Acknowledgment
THE PURPOSE OF THE OFFER].
liability for false testimony or perjury in way of answers to the
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto signed this instrument Two-Party Instrument
questions propounded to me during the examination conducted on
[DATE] by [NAME OF LAWYER], with o ce address [OFFICE this __th day of [MONTH, YEAR] at [PLACE OF SIGNING]. Republic of the Philippines )
ADDRESS OF LAWYER], do hereby depose and state: (sgd.) City of ____________ ) S.S.
Q1: [QUESTION] [NAME OF LAWYER]

A: [ANSWER] [PLUS JURAT WHICH INCLUDES THE DETAILS OF THE BEFORE ME, this ___ day of [MONTH, YEAR] in the [CITY/
WITNESS AND LAWYER] MUNICIPALITY OF __________], personally appeared:
Q2: [QUESTION]
NAME TYPE OF I.D AND I.D NO. DATE/PLACE
A: [ANSWER]
ISSUED __________________________________

_____________________________ MUNICIPALITY OF __________], personally appeared [NAME 4. An acknowledgment is the act of one who has executed a deed
__________________________________ OF AFFIANT], representing to be [POSITION IN THE in going before some competent o cer or court and declaring
_____________________________ CORPORATION] of [NAME OF CORPORATION] with it to be his act or deed.
__________________________________ [VALID IDENTIFICATION DOCUMENT]
_____________________________ (No.________________) issued by the [OFFICIAL AGENCY] on Intestate Estate of Jose Uy v. Maghari III 2015 En Banc
[DATE OF ISSUANCE], known to me to be the same person who
Known to me and to me known to be the same persons who Apart from the signature itself, additional information is required to
executed the foregoing instrument, and who acknowledged to me
executed the foregoing instrument, and who acknowledged to me be indicated as part of a counsel's signature:
that the same is his free act and deed.
that the same is their free act and deed.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have set my hand and a xed my 1) Per Rule 7, Section 3 of the Rules of Court, a counsel's
[OPTIONAL : If the instrument consists of 2 or more pages, include address must be stated;
Notarial seal on the day, year and place written.
the following after the 1st paragraph:
(Sgd.) 2) In Bar Matter No. 1132, this court required all lawyers to
This instrument, consisting of ___ pages, including the page on indicate their Roll of Attorneys number;
which this acknowledgment is written, has been signed on the left NOTARY PUBLIC
3) In Bar Matter No. 287, this court required the inclusion of
margin of each and every page thereof by ___________ and his Doc. No. the "number and date of their o cial receipt indicating
witnesses (if any), and sealed with my Notarial seal.] Page No. payment of their annual membership dues to the
Book No. Integrated Bar of the Philippines for the current year"; in
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have set my hand and a xed my
Series of [YEAR] lieu of this, a lawyer may indicate his or her lifetime
Notarial seal on the day, year and place written.
membership number;
(Sgd.) Notes
4) In accordance with Section 139 of the Local Government
NOTARY PUBLIC 1. A jurat is that part of an a davit in which the o cer certi es
Code, a lawyer must indicate his professional tax receipt
that the instrument was sworn to before him. It is not a part of
Doc. No. number;
a pleading but merely evidences the fact that the a davit was
Page No.
properly made. 5) Bar Matter No. 1922 required the inclusion of a counsel's
Book No.
MCLE Certi cate of Compliance or Certi cate of
Series of [YEAR] 2. The jurat in the petition in the case also begins with the words
Exemption; and
"subscribed and sworn to me."
Affiant Representing a Corporation 6) This court's Resolution in A.M. No. 07-6-5-SC required
3. To subscribe literally means to write underneath, as one's
Republic of the Philippines ) the inclusion of a counsel's contact details.
name; to sign at the end of a document. To swear means to put
City of ____________ ) S.S. on oath; to declare on oath the truth of a pleading, etc. These pieces of information, in the words of Galicto v. Aquino
Accordingly, in a jurat, the a ant must sign the document in III, "protect the public from bogus lawyers."
the presence of and take his oath before a notary public or any
BEFORE ME, this ___ day of [MONTH, YEAR] in the [CITY/
other person authorized to administer oaths.

H Motions render judgment on the Complaint, and for such other reliefs as 2 to Dismiss
may be just and equitable in the premises.
[VENUE], [DATE]. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
1 for Summary Judgment REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
[NAME OF COUNSEL]
NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION
Attorney for Defendant
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES BRANCH [#], [VENUE]
[ADDRESS]
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT Roll No. [1234]
NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION [PLAINTIFF]
PTR No. [1234] / [Place] / [Date]
BRANCH [#], [VENUE] IBP No. [1234] / [Place] / [Date] Plainti , Civil Case No.: 123984
MCLE Compliance No. [1234] -versus-
[PLAINTIFF]
[DEFENDANT], For: [NATURE OF ACTION]
Plainti , Civil Case No.: 123984
NOTICE OF HEARING Defendant.
-versus-
The undersigned will submit the foregoing Motion to Dismiss for x------------------------------------------x
[DEFENDANT], For: [NATURE OF ACTION] the consideration and approval of the Honorable Court on [DATE] .
Defendant. at [TIME].
x------------------------------------------x COPIES FURNISHED MOTION TO DISMISS

. [NAME OF COUNSEL] COMES NOW the defendant by his undersigned counsel, and to
Attorney for Plainti this Honorable Court respectfully moves that the complaint be
MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [ADDRESS] dismissed on the following grounds:
COMES NOW the PLAINTIFF by his undersigned counsel, and [BRANCH CLERK OF COURT]
[GROUNDS]
to this Honorable Court respectfully moves that summary Regional Trial Court of [VENUE]
Branch [NUMBER] Discussion
judgment be rendered on the following grounds:
[ARGUMENTS]
[GROUNDS]
EXPLANATION PRAYER
Discussion
This motion will be served on Plainti ’s counsel by registered mail WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that the complaint be
[ARGUMENTS]
due to lack of time and distance between his o ce and the o ce of dismissed.
PRAYER
the undersigned. [VENUE], [DATE].
WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that this Honorable Court

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES complaint may warrant.

[NAME OF COUNSEL]
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
Attorney for Defendant Other just and equitable reliefs prayed for.
NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION
[ADDRESS]
BRANCH [#], [VENUE] [VENUE], [DATE].
Roll No. [1234]
PTR No. [1234] / [Place] / [Date] [NAME OF COUNSEL]
IBP No. [1234] / [Place] / [Date] [PLAINTIFF] Attorney for Plainti
MCLE Compliance No. [1234] Plainti , Civil Case No.: 123984 [ADDRESS]
Roll No. [1234]
-versus- PTR No. [1234] / [Place] / [Date]
NOTICE OF HEARING [DEFENDANT], For: [NATURE OF ACTION] IBP No. [1234] / [Place] / [Date]
MCLE Compliance No. [1234]
The undersigned will submit the foregoing Motion to Dismiss for Defendant.
the consideration and approval of the Honorable Court on [DATE]
x------------------------------------------x
at [TIME].
. NOTICE OF HEARING
COPIES FURNISHED
The undersigned will submit the foregoing Motion to Declare in
[NAME OF COUNSEL] MOTION TO DECLARE DEFENDANT IN DEFAULT Default for the consideration and approval of the Honorable Court
Attorney for Plainti COMES NOW the Plainti by his undersigned counsel and to this on [DATE] at [TIME].
[ADDRESS] Honorable Court respectfully moves that the Defendant be declared COPIES FURNISHED
[BRANCH CLERK OF COURT] in default. Plainti respectfully states that:
Regional Trial Court of [VENUE] [NAME OF COUNSEL]
1. The records of the Honorable Court show that the Attorney for Defendant
Branch [NUMBER]
Defendant was served with copy of the summons and of [ADDRESS]
the complaint, together with annexes thereto on [DATE]; [BRANCH CLERK OF COURT]
EXPLANATION 2. Upon veri cation however, the records show that Regional Trial Court of [VENUE]
Defendant [NAME] has failed to le his Answer within the Branch [NUMBER]
This motion will be served on Plainti ’s counsel by registered mail
due to lack of time and distance between his o ce and the o ce of reglementary period speci ed by the Rules of Court despite
the undersigned. the service of the summons and the complaint;
EXPLANATION
PRAYER
This motion will be served on Defendant’s counsel by registered
WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that the Defendant mail due to lack of time and distance between his o ce and the
3 to Declare in Default
[NAME] be declared in default pursuant to the Rules of Court and o ce of the undersigned.
that the Honorable Court proceed to render judgment as the

admission of liability on the part of my employer and is

-versus-
voluntarily accepted by me and will, if need be, serve as full
I Quitclaims in Labor Cases and nal settlement of any amount(s) due me or any claims [ACCUSED], For: [CRIME]
or cause of action, either past, present, future, which I may Accused.
Republic of the Philippines ) have in connection with my employment with my
City/Municipality of ____________ ) S.S. x------------------------------------------x
employer;
.
WAIVER, RELEASE AND QUITCLAIM 5. As such, I nally make manifest that I have no further
I, [NAME], of legal age, [SINGLE/MARRIED], claim(s) or cause of action against my employer nor against INFORMATION
[CITIZENSHIP], residing at [ADDRESS], after being sworn to in any person(s) connected with the administration and
The Undersigned accuses _____________________ of the crime
accordance with law, depose and state: operation of the latter and forever release the latter from any
of [CRIME], committed as follows:
and all liability.
1. That by these presents, I hereby state that I have voluntarily
FOR BIGAMY:
resigned as [POSITION HELD] of [EMPLOYER]; IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto signed this instrument
this ___day of [MONTH, YEAR] at [PLACE OF SIGNING]. That on or about ________ 200_, in the City of ________ and
2. That I hereby acknowledge to have received from my
within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the said accused,
employer the sum of [AMOUNT IN WORDS] (Sgd.)
being then legally married to _____________________, and
([P###.##]) which is in full and nal satisfaction of my [NAME OF AFFIANT] without such marriage having been legally dissolved and thus valid
salary and other bene ts that may be due me for the service
A ant and existing, did wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously contract a
which I have rendered for the latter employer;
second marriage with _____________________ in the City of
(JURAT)
3. That I hereby declare that I have no further claims ________.
whatsoever against my employer, its President, members of
FOR THEFT:
the Board, o cers or any of its sta and that I hereby release
and forever discharge all of them from any and all claims, J Information in Criminal Cases That on or about ________ 200_, in the City of ________ and
demands, cause of action of whatever nature arising out of within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the said accused,
my employment with the latter; REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES then ___ years old and without any known address, willfully,
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT unlawfully and feloniously, with intent to gain, without force upon
4. I further agree that this WAIVER, RELEASE AND
NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION things or violence upon persons and without the knowledge and
QUITCLAIM may be pleaded in bar to any suit or
BRANCH [#], [VENUE] consent of _____________________, the owner, took a
proceeding (Civil, SSS, PhilHealth, Medicare, Labor, etc.)
_____________ valued at __________________ Pesos
to which either I, or my heirs and assigns, may have against
PEOPLE OF THE (P________.00) to the prejudice of said owner.
my employer in connection with my employment with the
latter and that the payment which I have received as PHILIPPINES FOR ATTEMPTED RAPE:
Criminal Case No.: 123984
provided herein should not in any way be construed as an Plainti , That on or about ________ 200_, in ________ City, the accused

did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously enter the conducted by me in accordance with law; that I examined the
____________________________
house of _____________________, a married woman, and nding Complainant and her witnesses; that there is reasonable ground to
that her husband was away, with lewd designs and by means of force believe that the o ense charged had been committed and that the Assistant City Prosecutor
and intimidation, commenced directly by overt acts to commit the accused is probably guilty thereof; that the accused was informed of
NB: If Information is led after inquest (and not preliminary
crime of attempted rape upon her person, to wit: while the Complaint and of the evidence submitted against him and was
investigation), add:
_____________________ was cooking lunch, the accused seized given the opportunity to submit controverting evidence; and that
her from behind, threw her to the oor, raised her skirt, pulled the ling of this Information is with the prior authority and 1. Place where accused is actually detained;
down her underwear and attempted to penetrate her with his sexual approval of the City Prosecutor. 2. Full name and address of evidence custodian;
organ and would have succeeded in doing so had not her loud
____________________________ 3. Detailed description of recovered items, if any.
protests and vigorous resistance brought her neighbors to her
assistance, causing the accused to ee from the premises without Assistant City Prosecutor Source of Legal Forms:
completing all the acts of execution. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME this __th day of UP BOC 2020 Legal Ethics and Practical Exercises Reviewer
FOR FRUSTRATED MURDER: _________ 200_ in ________ City.
That on or about ________ 200_, in ________ City, the accused ____________________________

did then and there take a loaded ________ pistol, directly aim the City Prosecutor
same rearm at the person of _____________________, an invalid
Bail Recommended: P10,000.00
septuagenarian, and, at point-blank range, with intent to kill,
discharge the rearm twice against the person of said Replace Certificate of PI to this if necessary
_____________________, in icting on said
_____________________ two (2) wounds on his chest and CERTIFICATION AS TO CONDUCT OF INQUEST
stomach, which wounds would have been fatal had not timely I hereby certify that the accused was lawfully arrested without a
medical assistance been rendered to the said warrant and that, upon being informed of his rights, refused to
_____________________. waive the provisions of Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code and,
CONTRARY TO LAW [with the aggravating circumstance of for this reason, an Inquest was conducted; that based on the
(AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE)]. complaint and the evidence presented before me without any
countervailing evidence submitted by the accused, despite
____________________________
opportunity to do so, there is reasonable ground to believe that the
Assistant City Prosecutor accused has committed the crime of theft and should, thus, be held
CERTIFICATE OF PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION for said crime; that this Information was with the prior authority of
the City Prosecutor.
I hereby certify that a preliminary investigation in this case was

2023 Remedial Law and Ethics Syllabus Based eREVIEWER v2.01 1 - Compressed

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2023 Remedial Law and Ethics Syllabus Based eREVIEWER v2.01 1 - Compressed

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Remedial Law and Ethics

Syllabus-based eReviewer for the 2023 Bar

eCodal+Pro by RGL 2 of 279

the proper forum under the rules of procedure, or as

eCodal+Pro by RGL 3 of 279

eCodal+Pro by RGL 4 of 279

eCodal+Pro by RGL 5 of 279

eCodal+Pro by RGL 6 of 279

suspension of the privilege of the writ or the

eCodal+Pro by RGL 7 of 279

eCodal+Pro by RGL 8 of 279

eCodal+Pro by RGL 9 of 279

eCodal+Pro by RGL 10 of 279

eCodal+Pro by RGL 11 of 279

kind, attorney's fees, litigation expenses, and costs, the amount

eCodal+Pro by RGL 12 of 279

if there are more than one, or from the corresponding

eCodal+Pro by RGL 13 of 279

eCodal+Pro by RGL 14 of 279

eCodal+Pro by RGL 15 of 279

eCodal+Pro by RGL 16 of 279

eCodal+Pro by RGL 17 of 279

eCodal+Pro by RGL 18 of 279

eCodal+Pro by RGL 19 of 279

notice, whenever required by the court. Release of the

eCodal+Pro by RGL 20 of 279

eCodal+Pro by RGL 21 of 279

eCodal+Pro by RGL 22 of 279

eCodal+Pro by RGL 23 of 279

regardless of which party is successful, amount to res

eCodal+Pro by RGL 24 of 279

single cause of action for damages, actual as well as

eCodal+Pro by RGL 25 of 279

eCodal+Pro by RGL 26 of 279

eCodal+Pro by RGL 27 of 279

pooling of resources by the DTI, TESDA,

eCodal+Pro by RGL 28 of 279

may properly go forward. title.

eCodal+Pro by RGL 29 of 279

3. Actions against non-residents. — Actions that may be

eCodal+Pro by RGL 30 of 279

eCodal+Pro by RGL 31 of 279

subrogation or any other relief, in respect of his opponent's

eCodal+Pro by RGL 32 of 279

eCodal+Pro by RGL 33 of 279

or a davit shall be heard or admitted by the court;

eCodal+Pro by RGL 34 of 279

the joinder of an ordinary action, such as an action

eCodal+Pro by RGL 35 of 279

Commissioner of Customs v. PTT Philippines Trading erroneous customs duties assessment.

eCodal+Pro by RGL 36 of 279

eCodal+Pro by RGL 37 of 279

eCodal+Pro by RGL 38 of 279

eCodal+Pro by RGL 39 of 279

eCodal+Pro by RGL 40 of 279

counsel's residence, if known, with a person of

eCodal+Pro by RGL 41 of 279

electronically, unless express permission is granted by the

eCodal+Pro by RGL 42 of 279

eCodal+Pro by RGL 43 of 279

shall, within ﬁve (5) calendar days from receipt of the

eCodal+Pro by RGL 44 of 279

defendant’s o ce or regular place of business, or