Syllabus / Course Outline

REMEDIAL LAW REVIEW I

(CIVIL PROCEDURE)

1st Semester School Year 2023-2024

Prepared by

MARIO R.L. LUNA1

COURSE DESCRIPTION

Civil Procedure Course involving the study of

Rules 1 to 71 of the Rules of Court; the appropriate
provisions of the Constitution; Batas Pambansa
Bilang 129; R.A. No. 11576, An Act Further
Expanding the Jurisdiction of First-Level Courts;
R.A. No. 7160, and other rules, and jurisprudence.

COURSE OBJECTIVES

To prepare the students in successfully passing

the Bar Examinations specifically the mastery of the
pertinent provisions of the Rules of Court, the basic
principles and applicable jurisprudence. The course

1
Professor of Remedial Law: Polytechnic University of the Philippines
(PUP); Manila Law College; University of Asia and the Pacific Institute
of Law; San Pablo Colleges; and North Eastern Mindanao State
University (NEMSU). Pre-Bar Reviewer in Remedial Law: PUP Bar
Review Center; Villasis Law Center; Free Online Law School of the
Philippines. MCLE Lecture in different providers; Member: Integrated
Bar of the Philippines (IBP) – RSM Chapter; Prosecutors League of the
Philippines; Tau Kappa Phi Fraternity, FEU Institute of Law; The
Phantoms Riders Club; The Fraternal Order of Eagles – Philippine
Eagles. Deputy City Prosecutor (Retired), Antipolo City; Author:
Disquisition and Jurisprudence on Remedial Law, Volumes I to IV, 2023
Edition, published by Central Book Supply, Inc.

1
is also intended to equip the students with adequate
knowledge of the Rules of Procedure which is
indispensable in the practice of law before our
courts.

PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS

1. Remedial law ensures enforcement of substantive rights.

2. Substantive law vs. remedial law.
3. Judicial power is the totality power a court exercises.
4. The hierarchy of courts; doctrine of judicial stability; doctrine
of judicial immutability; res judicata; the law of the case
doctrine.
5. Essence of due process; procedural and substantive due
process.
6. The power of the Supreme Court to promulgate rules of
procedure.
7. The power of judicial review; independence of the judiciary.
8. Edgar T. Barroso v. Hon. Judge George E. Ornelio, et al., G.R.
No. 194767, October 14, 2015.
9. Rey Nathaniel C. Furong v. Hon. Conchita C. Carpio, G.R. No.
234401, December 5, 2019.
10. Conchita Carpio Morales v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No.
217126-27, November 10, 2015.
11. Salvador Estipona, Jr., v. Hon. Frank Lobrigo, et al.,
G.R. No. 226679, August 15, 2017.

CLASSIFICATION OF JURISDICTION – THE PHILIPPINE

COURT SYSTEM

1. Jurisdiction and venue.

2. Classification of jurisdiction.
3. Original vs. appellate jurisdiction.
4. General vs. special jurisdiction.
5. Exclusive vs. concurrent jurisdiction.
6. Jurisdiction distinguish from exercise of jurisdiction.
7. In civil proceedings, venue is procedural not jurisdictional.
8. A party may be estopped from questioning the court’s
jurisdiction.
9. Adherence to jurisdiction; doctrine of primary jurisdiction.

2
 10. Jurisdiction vs. Exercise of Jurisdiction.
11. First Sarmiento Property Holdings, Inc., v. Philippine
Bank of Communications, G.R. No. 202836, June 19, 2018.
12. Connie L. Servo v. Philippine Deposit Insurance Corp.,
G.R. No. 234401, December 5, 2019.
13. Lucila David, et al., v. Cherry S. Calilung, G.R. No.
241036, January 26, 2021.
14. Manuel Luis C. Gonzales, et al., v. GJH Land, Inc., et al.,
G.R. No. 202664, November 20, 2015.
15. Yusuke Fukusume v. People, G.R. No. 143647,
November 11, 2005.

THE SUPREME COURT

1. Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.

2. Questions on the constitutionality of a law.
3. Cases in which the jurisdiction of any lower court is in issue.
4. Criminal Cases where penalty imposed is reclusion perpetua.
5. Automatic review in cases where life imprisonment or
reclusion perpetua is imposed.
6. Review of decision of the Court of Appeals.
7. Review of judgment of Constitutional Commissions.
8. Cases in which only an error or question of law is involved.
9. Discretion of Supreme Court to review cases.
10. Prohibition against increasing appellate jurisdiction.
11. Republic of the Philippines v. Maria Lourdes P.A. Sereno,
G.R. No. 237428, June 19, 2018.
12. Cabib Alonto Tanog v. Hon. Rasad G. Balindong, G.R.
No. 187464, November 25, 2015.

THE RULE-MAKING POWER OF THE SUPREME COURT

1. Rules of Court
2. Requirements as to Validity of Rules
3. Extent and Scope of the Power to Promulgate Rules of
Pleading and Practice
4. Force and Effect of the Rules

3
 5. Authority of the Supreme Court to suspend rules
6. Salvador Estipona, Jr. y Asuela v. Hon. Frank E. Lobrigo, G.R.
No. 226679, August 15, 2017

THE COURT OF APPEALS, SANDIGANBAYAN, AND THE

COURT OF TAX APPEALS

1. Classification of Jurisdiction of the Court of Appeals.

2. Appeals from Other Quasi-Judicial Agencies to the Court of
Appeals.
3. Jurisdiction of the Court of Appeals Includes Awards of
Damages.
4. Appellate Jurisdiction of the Court of Appeals over Quasi-
Judicial Bodies.
5. Only Decisions in Exercise of Quasi-Judicial Functions Are
Appealable to the Court of Appeals.
6. Jurisdiction of the Court of Appeals Where Issues Are Purely
Legal.
7. Jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan under R.A. No. 8249.
8. Appellate Jurisdiction of the Court of Tax Appeals under R.A.
No. 9282.
9. Exclusive Original Jurisdiction of the Court of Tax Appeals
over Criminal Offenses.
10. Jurisdiction of the Court of Tax Appeals over Tax
Collection Cases.
11. Herarc Corporation Realty v. The Provincial Treasuer of
Batangas, et al., G.R. No. 210736, September 5, 2018.
12. Danilo A. Duncano vs. Hon. Sandiganbayan and Hon.
Office of the Special Prosecutor, G.R. No. 191894, July 15,
2015

THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS / FAMILY COURTS

1. Jurisdiction of the Regional Trial Courts; Family Courts.

2. Cases not within the Exclusive Jurisdiction of any Court,
Tribunal, Persons or Body Exercising Judicial or Quasi-Judicial
Functions.
3. R.A. No. 8799 – Jurisdiction of the Securities and Exchange
Commission transferred to the Regional Trial Court.

4
 4. First Sarmiento Property Holdings, Inc. v. Philippine Bank of
Communications, G.R. No. 202836, June 19, 2018.
5. Atty. Pablo B. Franciso v. Melanion Del Castillo, et al., G.R.
No. 236726, September 14, 2021.
6. Trifon B. Tumaodos v. San Miguel Yamamura Packaging
Corp., G.R. No. 241865, February 19, 2020.
7. People v. Hon. Ma. Theresa Dela Torre-Yadao, et al., G.R.
Nos. 162144-54, January 26, 2021.

METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURTS, MUNICIPAL TRIAL

COURTS IN CITIES, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS, AND
MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURTS

1. Jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Trial Courts and the Municipal

Trial Courts. (R.A. No. 11576, An Act Further Expanding the
Jurisdiction of First Level Courts)
2. Jurisdiction of the MTC in Forcible Entry and Unlawful
Detainer Cases.
3. Jurisdiction Over Cases Covered by Barangay Conciliation, and
Cases Covered by the Rules on Expedited Procedures in the
First Level Courts (Administrative Matter No. 08-8-7-SC, as
amended, approved on March 1, 2022)
4. Alona G. Roldan v. Spouses Clarence I. Barrios, et al., G.R.
No.214803, April 23, 2018.

KATARUNGANG PAMBARANGAY LAW

1. Barangay justice system.

2. A pre-condition for filing a complaint.
3. Disputes subject of a barangay settlement.
4. Parties who do not actually reside in the same city or
municipality are not required to submit their disputes to the
lupon.
5. Sections 408 to 420, R.A. No. 7160, the Local Government
Code of 1991.
6. Barangay conciliation process is not jurisdictional.
7. Prescriptive period of offenses interrupted.
8. The parties must appear in person; representative or lawyers
not allowed.
9. Settlement has the force and effect of a final judgment.

5
RULE 1 – GENERAL PROVISIONS

1. In what courts applicable.

2. An action is a demand of one’s legal rights.
3. Special proceeding is an application to establish a status, a
right, or a fact.
4. Rules of Court shall not apply to election cases, land
registration cases and insolvency proceedings.
5. Civil action is commenced by filing a complaint.
6. The court acquires jurisdiction over the case upon payment of
the prescribed fee.
7. Indigents exempt from payment of legal fees.
8. Republic of the Philippines exempt from paying legal fees.
9. The rules of procedure ought not to be applied in a very rigid,
technical sense.
10. No vested rights in the rules of procedure.
11. Spouses Aurora Tojong Su, et al., v. Eda Bontilao, et al.,
G.R. No. 238892, September 4, 2019.
12. Rodrigo Sumiran v. Spouses Generoso Damaso, et al.,
G.R. No. 162518, August 19, 2009.

RULE 2 – CAUSE OF ACTION

1. Cause of action.
2. Cause of action is determined by its averments.
3. If the allegations in the complaint furnish sufficient basis by
which the complaint can be maintained, the same should not
be dismissed.
4. Failure to state a cause of action refers to the insufficiency of
the allegation in the pleading.
5. Difference between failure to state a cause of action and lack
of cause of action.
6. One suit for a single cause of action.
7. Splitting of cause of action.
8. The filing of more than one complaint for the same violation
of a right a ground for the dismissal of the others.
9. Joinder of causes of action

6
 10. Misjoinder of causes of action not a ground for
dismissal.
11. Partition and rescission cannot be joined in a single
cause of action.
12. Misjoinder of causes of action and parties do not involve
a question of jurisdiction of the court to hear and proceed
with the case.
13. Juana Complex I Homeowners Association, Inc., et al.,
v. Fil-Estate Land, Inc., et al., G.R. No. 152272, March 5,
2012.
14. Heirs of Faustina Mesina, et al., v. Heirs of Domingo
Fian, Sr., et al., G.R. No. 201816, April 2013.
15. Leticia Naguit Aquino, et al., v. Cesar B. Quiazon, et al.,
G.R. No. 201248, March 11, 2015.

RULE 3 – PARTIES TO CIVIL ACTIONS

1. Legal capacity to sue and be sued.

2. Sole proprietorship has no juridical personality.
3. Petition for declaration of absolute nullity of marriage may be
filed only by the husband or wife.
4. Corporation as a real party in interest.
5. Both indispensable and necessary parties are considered as
real parties in interest.
6. The joinder of indispensable parties is mandatory.
7. Non-joinder of indispensable parties is not a ground for
dismissal of action.
8. Anyone of the co-owners may bring an action for the recovery
of co-owned property.
9. Civil action may be prosecuted or defended by a
representative.
10. Spouses shall sue or be sued jointly.
11. Permissive joinder of partis where there is common
question of law or fact.
12. Inclusion of indispensable parties at any stage of the
proceedings.
13. Non-joinder is not a ground to dismiss; the proper
remedy is to implead the indispensable parties.
14. Necessary part should be joined as a party to obtain
complete relief.

7
 15. Class suit.
16. Derivative suit of stockholders under R.A. No. 8799.
17. Alliance of Quezon City Homeowner’s Association, Inc.
v. The Quezon City Government, et al., G.R. No. 230651,
September 17, 2018.
18. Lucila David, et al., v. Cherry S. Calilung, G.R. No.
241036, January 26, 2021.
19. Roger v. Navarro v. Jose L. Escobedo, et al., G.R. No.
153788, November 27, 2009.
20. Rebecca Pacana-Conteras, et al., v. Rovila Water
Supply, Inc., G.R. No. 168979, December 2, 2013.
21. Atty. Syvia Banda, et al., v. Eduardo Ermita, G.R. No.
166620, April 20, 2020.

RULE 4 – VENUE OF ACTIONS

1. Venue of actions.
2. Venue distinguished from jurisdiction.
3. Real and personal actions.
4. When the rules on venue do not apply.
5. Venue of real actions.
6. Venue of personal actions.
7. Absent qualifying or restrictive words, venue shall either be
that stated in the law or the rule or the one agreed in the
contract.
8. BPI Family Savings Bank, Inc., vs. Spouses Benedicto and
Teresita Yujuico, G.R. No. 175796, July 22, 2015.
9. Virgilio C. Briones v. Court of Appeals, et al., G.R. No. 204444,
June 14, 2015.
10. Auction In Malinta, Inc., v. Warrant Embes Luyaben,
G.R. No. 173979, February 12, 2007.

RULE 5 – PROCEDURE IN TRIAL COURTS

1. Uniform procedure before trial courts.

2. Rule on Summary Procedure
3. Pleadings and verification.
4. The complaint.

8
 5. The summons.
6. The answer.
7. Counterclaims within the coverage of the rule on summary
procedure.
8. Effect of failure to answer.
9. Prohibited pleadings and motions.
10. Videoconference.
11. Service pursuant to international convention.
12. Preliminary conference.
13. Appearance at preliminary conference.
14. Appeals in summary procedure.
15. Refer to Rules on Expedited Procedures in the First
Level Courts, A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC, March 1, 2022.
16. Civil cases governed by the Rule on Summary
Procedure.
17. Money claims governed by the Rule on Small Claims
18. The prohibited pleadings and motions in cases governed
the Rule on Summary Procedure.

RULE 6 – KINDS OF PLEADINGS

1. Pleadings; purpose of pleadings.

2. The pleadings allowed.
3. Complaint.
4. Sufficiency of the complaint; the ultimate facts.
5. Legal conclusions need not be pleaded.
6. The answer.
7. Negative and affirmative defenses.
8. The defense of collateral attack on the validity of a title of a
piece of land not allowed.
9. Defense may raise a counterclaim.
10. Compulsory counterclaim will be barred if not set up.
11. Permissive and counterclaims, distinguished.
12. Motion to dismiss and counterclaim are incompatible
remedies.
13. Pleadings allowed in small claim cases and cases
covered by the Rules on Summary Procedure.

RULE 7 – PARTS OF A PLEADING

9
 1. Parts of a pleading: caption; the body; relief; signature and
address.
2. The general prayer is broad enough to justify the grant of a
relief not specifically prayed for.
3. Verification of a pleading is a formal requirement, not
jurisdictional.
4. Submission of certification of non-forum shopping is not
jurisdictional.
5. Failure of the other co-owners to sign the verification and
certification against forum shopping is not fatal.
6. The requirement that petitioner should sign the certificate of
non-forum shopping applies to corporation.
7. The president of a corporation may sign the certification of
non-forum shopping even without a board resolution.
8. Failure to comply with the requirements against forum
shopping is not a ground for the immediate dismissal of the
complaint.
9. Distinction between absence of verification and absence of
certification against forum shopping.
10. Ramon K. Ilusorio, et al., v. Sylvia K. Ilusorio, G.R. No.
210475, April 11, 2018.
11. Conchita Gloria, et al., v. Builders Savings and Loan
Association, Inc., G.R. No. 179874, June 22, 2015.
12. Societe Des Produits, Nestle, S.A. v. Puregold Price
Club, Inc., G.R. No. 217194, September 6, 2017.
13. Tolentino vs. Spouses Latagan, G.R. No. 179874, June
22, 2015.
14. Barangay Tongonon, Ormoc City v. Hon. Apolinario M.
Buaya, et al., G.R. No. 204183, June 20, 2018.

RULE 8 – MANNER OF MAKING ALLEGATIONS IN

PLEADINGS

1. Statement of ultimate facts.

2. Allegations in the complaint and not its caption which give
meaning to the pleading.
3. Alternative causes of action or defenses.
4. Conditions precedents.
5. Capacity of party to sue and be sued.
6. Allegations of fraud or mistake.

10
 7. Action or defense based on document.
8. Contesting a written instrument.
9. Denial as a defense.
10. Defense must specify each material allegation he does
not admit.
11. Allegations not denied deemed admitted.
12. Alternative defenses.
13. Manuel Luis C. Gonzales, et al., v. GJH Land, Inc., et al.,
G.R. No. 202664, November 20, 2015.

RULE 9 – EFFECT OF FAILURE TO PLEAD

1. Defenses and objections not pleaded deemed admitted.

2. Defenses of lack of jurisdiction cannot be waived.
3. Duty of the court to dismiss an action.
4. Compulsory counterclaim or cross-claim not set up barred.
5. Court may declare defending party who fails to answer in
default.
6. A party in default loss his right to present his defense.
7. The fact that defendant did not file an answer does not mean
that the judgment shall be in favor of the plaintiff.
8. Party in default may file a motion to set aside the order of
default.
9. Remedies available in favor of a party in default.
10. A defendant in default may be benefited by the answer
of his co-defendant.
11. In cases of annulment of marriage failure to answer is
not a ground to declare the respondent in default.
12. The court cannot validly issue an order of default in
probate proceedings.
13. Roberto Otero v. Rogero Tan, G.R. No. 200134, August
15, 2012.
14. Migdonio Racca, et al., v. Maria Lolita A. Echague, G.R.
No. 237133, January 20, 2021.

RULE 10 – AMENDED AND SUPPLEMENTAL PLEADINGS

1. Amendments of pleadings.
2. Amendments as a matter of right.

11
 3. Amendments by leave of court.
4. After a responsive pleading has been filed, substantial
amendments may be made only by leave of court.
5. Courts should be liberal in allowing amendments.
6. Devaluation of the peso is not a factor for allowing the
amendment of a complaint.
7. Amendment which seeks to set up a cause of action after it
has accrued is not permissible.
8. Supplemental pleadings.
9. Effect of amendment of pleading on jurisdiction.
10. Migdonio Racca, et al., v. Maria Lolita A. Echague, G.R.
No. 237133, January 20, 2021.
11. Service of new summons of amended complaints
12. Ma. Corazon M. Ola vs. People, G.R. No. 195547,
December 2, 2015.
13. Lisam Enterprises, Inc., v. Banco De Oro Unibank, Inc.,
et al., G.R. No. 143264, April 23, 2012.
14. Republic of the Philippines v. Tetro Enterprises, Inc.,
G.R. No. 183015, January 15, 2014.
15. Central Bank Board of Liquidators v. Banco Filipino
Savings and Mortgage Bank., G.R. No. 173399, February 21,
2017.

RULE 11 – WHEN TO FILE RESPONSIVE PLEADINGS

1. Answer to the complaint.

2. Reply.
3. Motion for extension of time to file a pleading, other than an
answer, is prohibited.

RULE 12 – BILL OF PARTICULARS

1. Motion for a definite statement or bill of particulars.

2. When bill of particulars may be required.
3. When bill of particulars not required.
4. Effect of non-compliance.
5. Stay of period to file responsive pleading.

12
 6. Palm Avenue Holding Co., Inc., et al., v. Sandiganbayan, G.R.
No. 173082, August 6, 2014.

RULE 13 – FILING AND SERVICE OF PLEADINGS,

JUDGMENTS AND OTHER PAPERS

1. Filing of pleading and service.

2. Notice must be given to the attorney of record.
3. Notice to the client and to any other lawyer, not the counsel
of record, is not notice of law.
4. Manner of filing of pleadings to the clerk of court.
5. Modes of service.
6. Efficient Use of Paper Rule; E-Filing (A.M. No. 10-3-7-SC and
A.M. No. 11-9-4-SC, as revised, approved on February 22,
2022).
7. Francis C. Cervantes vs. City Service Corporation, etc., G.R.
No. 191616, April 18, 2016.

RULE 14 – SUMMONS

1. The function of summons.

2. The necessity of determining whether the action is in
personam, in rem, and quasi in rem for the purpose of issuing
summons.
3. Issuance of summons.
4. By whom summons is served.
5. Summons valid until duly served; issuance of alias summons.
6. Service shall be served personally to the defendant.
7. Substituted service of summons.
8. Substituted service of summons at defendant’s house or
residence.
9. Substituted service of summons at defendant’s office or
regular place of business.
10. Jurisdiction in rem cannot be acquired unless there is
seizure of the land through publication.
11. Service of summons upon spouses.
12. Extraterritorial service of summons.
13. Effect of voluntary appearance of the defendant.
14. Issuance of summons is governed by the Rules of Court.

13
 15. Bobie Rose D.V. Frias v. Rolando F. Alcayde, G.R. No.
194262, February 28, 2018.
16. Eleonor Sarol v. Spouses George Gordon Diao, et al.,
G.R. No. 244129, December 9, 2020.
17. Nation Petroleum Gas, Inc., v. RCBC, G.R. No. 183370,
August 17, 2015.
18. Prudential Bank (now Bank of the Philippine Islands) v.
Amador A. Magdamit, Jr., G.R. No. 183795, November 12,
2014.
19. Benjamin H. Cabanez vs. Marie Joseph Solana a.k.a.
Ma. Josephine S. Cabanez, G.R. No. 200180, June 6, 2016.
20. Green Star Express, Inc., and Fruto Sayson vs. Nissin-
Universal Robina Corporation, G.R. No. 181517, July 6, 2015.

RULE 15 – MOTIONS

1. Motion in general.
2. Non-Litigious Motions.
3. Litigious Motions.
4. Prohibited Motions.
5. Motion to dismiss is prohibited, exceptions.
6. Motion for postponement is a prohibited pleading.
7. A motion shall state the relief sought to be obrained.
8. Dismissal of action with prejudice.
9. Marilou S. Laude and Mesehilda S. Laude vs. Hon. Roline M.
Ginez-Jabalde, etc., G.R. No. 217456, November 24, 2015

MOTION TO DISMISS

1. Motions to dismiss is a prohibited motion.

2. Grounds to dismiss civil actions.
3. Dismissal with prejudice.
4. That the court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter is a
ground for dismissal.
5. That there is another action pending between the same
parties to the same cause of action is a ground for dismissal.
6. That the cause of action is barred by a prior judgment is a
ground for dismissal.

14
 7. That the cause of action is barred by the statute of limitations
is a ground for dismissal.
8. Failure to comply with the requirements on certification
against forum shopping shall be cause for the dismissal of the
case.
9. That the court has no jurisdiction over the person of the
defending party is not a ground for dismissal.
10. That venue is improperly laid is not a ground for
dismissal.
11. That the plaintiff has no legal capacity to sue is not a
ground for dismissal.
12. Failure to state a cause of action may be raised at the
earliest stages of the proceedings by way of an affirmative
defense in the answer.
13. That the claim on which the action is founded is
unenforceable under the provisions of the statute of frauds is
not a ground for dismissal.
14. Defenses and objections not pleaded in a motion to
dismiss or answer are deemed waived, exceptions.
15. Court will not dismiss the civil action absent a motion.
16. An order denying a motion to dismiss may only be
reviewed by appeal.
17. Effect of dismissal.
18. Glynna Foronda-Crystal v. Aniana Lawas Son, G.R. No.
221815, November 29, 2017.

RULE 17 – DISMISSAL OF ACTIONS

1. Dismissal of actions upon notice by plaintiff; two-dismissal

rule.
2. Where the plaintiff moves for the dismissal of the complaint of
which a counterclaim has been interpose, the dismissal shall
be limited to the complaint.
3. Dismissal upon motion by plaintiff.
4. Dismissal due to the fault of plaintiff.
5. Dismissal of action because of failure of plaintiff to appear or
because of failure to prosecute.
6. Dismissal with prejudice or without prejudice.
7. Alex Raul B. Blay v. Cynthia B. Bana, G.R. No. 232189, March
7, 2018

15
 8. Shimizu Philippines Contractors, Inc. v. Mrs. Leticia B.
Magsalin, et al., G.R. No. 170026, June 20, 2012

RULE 18 - PRE-TRIAL

1. Pre-trial when conducted; pre-trial mandatory.

2. Nature and purpose of pre-trial.
3. Parties should disclose issues of law and fact at the pre-trial.
4. Appearance of parties; both client and counsel must appear.
5. Effect of failure to appear at the pre-trial.
6. Pre-Trial Brief; Effect of failure pre-trial brief.
7. Parties are bound by the delimitation of issues agreed upon
during the pre-trial.
8. Referral to court-annexed mediation.
9. Referral to judicial dispute resolution.
10. Rebecca Pacana-Contreras vs. Rovila Water Supply,
Inc., G.R. No. 168979, December 2, 2013.
11. Spouses Sergio C. Pascual and Emma Servillion Pascual
vs. First Consolidated Rural Bank, Inc., et al., G.R. No.
202597, February 8, 2017.

RULE 19 – INTERVENTION

1. Person who has legal interest may intervene.

2. Intervention is ancillary to the existing litigation.
3. Intervention is not a matter of right.
4. Time within which to file a motion to intervene.
5. Pleadings-in-intervention.
6. SM Land, Inc., vs. BCDA, G.R. No. 203655, September 7,
2015.

RULE 21 – SUBPOENA

1. Subpoena duces tecum; subpoena ad testificandum.

2. Service of subpoena.
3. Quashing of subpoena.
4. Person present in court may be required to testify.
5. Compelling attendance by issuing a warrant.

16
 6. Failure of a witness to obey subpoena may constitute
contempt.

RULE 22 – COMPUTATION OF TIME

1. Period of time prescribed by the Rules of Court or by law.

2. Effect of interruption of the running of the prescriptive period.

RULE 23 – DEPOSITIONS PENDING ACTION (DEPOSITIONS

AND DISCOVERY)

1. Different modes of discovery.

2. Depositions pending action, when may be taken.
3. Scope of the examination of a deponent.
4. Deposition, its concept.
5. Purposes of taking deposition.
6. Deposition may supplement the pleadings.
7. Use of deposition at the trial.
8. Substitution of parties does not affect the right to use
depositions.
9. Objection to admissibility of deposition.
10. Taking of a deposition will not make the deponent the
witness of the party taking the deposition.
11. Introducing in evidence the deposition will make the
deponent the witness of the offeror.
12. Deposition upon written interrogatories.
13. People v. Sergio, G.R. No. 240053, October 9, 2019.

RULE 24 – DEPOSITIONS BEFORE ACTION OR PENDING

APPEAL (PERPETUATION OF TESTIMONY)

1. Perpetuation of testimony.
2. Depositions before action; contents of petition; notice and
service.
3. Order and examination; reference to court; use of deposition
4. Depositions pending appeal.

RULE 25 – INTERROGATORIES TO PARTIES

1. Filing and service of written interrogatories.

17
 2. Answers to interrogatories.
3. Objections to interrogatories.
4. Effect of refusal to answer.
5. Calling the adverse party to the witness stand is not allowed
unless written interrogatories are first served.

RULE 26 – ADMISSION BY ADVERSE PARTIES

1. Request for admission.

2. Implied admission by adverse party.
3. Scope of a request for admission.
4. If allegations in the complaint are already denied, a defendant
cannot be compelled to deny them anew.
5. Effect of admission.
6. Effect of failure to file and serve request for admission.
7. Lilia S. Duque, et al., vs. Spouses Bartolome D. Yu, Jr., and
Juliet O. Yu, et al., G.R. No. 226130, February 19, 2018
8. Spouses Ramon Villuga, et al., v. Kelly Hardware and
Construction Supply, Inc., G.R. No. 176570, July 18, 2012

RULE 27 – PRODUCTION OR INSPECTION OF DOCUMENTS

OR THINGS

1. Motion for production or inspection of documents or things.

2. Effect of refusal to obey the order requiring him to produce
document or other thing for inspection.
3. Philippine Health Insurance Corporation vs. Our Lady of
Lourdes Hospital, G.R. No. 193158, November 11, 2015

RULE 28 – PHYSICAL AND MENTAL EXAMINATION OF

PERSONS

1. Physical and mental examination when may be ordered.

2. Order for examination.
3. Report of findings.

RULE 29 – REFUSAL TO COMPLY WITH MODES OF

DISCOVERY (REFUSAL TO MAKE DISCOVERY)

18
 1. Refusal to answer.
2. Contempt of court.

RULE 30 – TRIAL

1. Schedule of trial.
2. Continuous trial dates for plaintiff and defendant.
3. Trial dates may be shortened.
4. Period within which the court shall decide.
5. Adjournments and postponements.
6. Requisites of motion to postpone trial for absence of
evidence.
7. Order of trial.
8. Oral offer of exhibits.

RULE 31 – CONSOLIDATION OF TRIALS

1. Civil actions may be consolidated.

2. Separate trials.

RULE 32 – TRIAL BY COMMISSIONER

1. The court may order that trial be referred to a commissioner.

2. The power of commissioner.
3. Proceedings before the commissioner.
4. Report of commissioner.

RULE 33 – DEMURRER TO EVIDENCE

1. Defendant may for move for dismissal.

2. Defendants who present a demurrer to the plaintiff’s evidence
retain the right to present their own evidence.
3. Action on demurrer to evidence.
4. Demurrer to evidence in civil actions distinguished from
demurrer to evidence in a criminal actions.
5. Republic vs. Bakunawa, G.R. No. 180418, August 28, 2013
6. Lilia S. Duque, et al., vs. Spouses Bartolome D. Yu, Jr., and
Juliet O. Yu, et al., G.R. No. 226130, February 19, 2018.

19
RULE 34 – JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS

1. Judgment upon motion of a party.

2. Grounds for a motion on judgment on the pleadings.
3. When answer fails to tender an issue.
4. Judgment on the pleadings and summary judgment
distinguished.
5. Action on motion for judgment on the pleadings.
6. Eugenia D. Polido vs. Hon. Court of Appeals, et al., G.R. No.
170632, July 10, 2007
7. Asian Construction & Development Corp., vs. Sannaedle,
LTD., G.R. No. 181676, July 11, 2014
8. GSIS vs. Prudential Guarantee and Assurance, Inc., G.R. No.
165585, November 20, 2013
9. Eugenio Basbas, et al., vs. Beata Sayson, et al., G.R. No.
172660, August 24, 2011

RULE 35 – SUMMARY JUDGMENTS

1. Summary judgment for claimant.

2. In summary judgment trial is dispensed with.
3. Summary judgment is permitted only if there is no genuine
issue.
4. Motion for summary judgment may be done prior to the pre-
trial.
5. Summary judgment for defending party
6. Trial despite a motion for summary judgment.
7. Spouses Ramon Villuga, et al., vs. Kelly Hardware and
Construction Supply, Inc., G.R. No. 176570, July 18, 2012
8. YKR Corporation vs. Philippine Agri-Business Center
Corporation, G.R. No. 101838, October 20, 2014

RULE 36 – JUDGMENTS, FINAL ORDERS AND ENTRY

THEREOF

1. Judgment and final orders shall be in writing.

2. The parties to a litigation should be informed of how it was
decided, with an explanation of the factual and legal reasons
that led to the conclusions of the court.

20
 3. A decision violating the provisions of Section 14, Article VIII of
the Constitution is void.
4. Memorandum decisions.
5. Period to decide cases.
6. Rendition and Entry of Judgment.
7. Carolina Que Villongco, et al., vs. Cecilia Que Yabut, et al.,
G.R. No. 225022, February 5, 2018
8. Solid Homes, Inc., vs. Evelena Laserna, et al., G.R. No.
166051, April 8, 2008

RULE 37 – NEW TRIAL OR RECONSIDERATION

1. Grounds for new trial and motion for reconsideration.

2. Newly discovered evidence is a ground for new trial.
3. Action upon motion for new trial or motion for
reconsideration.
4. Second motion for new trial.
5. No second motion for reconsideration.
6. Effect of granting a motion for new trial.
7. Partial new trial or reconsideration.
8. Effect of order for partial new trial
9. Remedy against order denying a motion for new trial or
reconsideration.
10. Fresh-Period Rule.
11. Philippine Deposit Insurance Corporation vs. Manu
Gidwani, G.R. No. 234616, June 20, 2018

RULE 38 – RELIEF FROM JUDGMENTS, ORDERS, OR OTHER

PROCEEDINGS

1. Petition for relief from judgment, order or other proceedings.

2. Petition for relief from denial of appeal.
3. The remedy of petition for relief from judgment or order when
available.
4. Relief from judgment not available where other relief could
have been availed of the by the relief from judgment not
available where other relief could have been availed of the by
the exercise of reasonable diligence.
5. Time for filing a petition for relief from judgment, orders and
other proceeding.

21
 6. The sixty (60) days and six (6) months period are non-
extendible.
7. Answer to the petition for relief from judgment.
8. Remedies to set aside a final and executory judgments.
9. Collateral or direct attack against a judgment.
10. Madarang vs. Spouses Morales, G.R. No. 199283, June
9, 2014

RULE 39 – EXECUTION, SATISFACTION AND EFFECT OF

JUDGMENTS

1. Execution upon judgments or final orders.

2. Prevailing party is entitled to writ of execution.
3. Objection to execution.
4. Motion for execution of judgment is non-litigious motion.
5. Execution as a matter of right and discretionary execution.
6. Execution must conform to the dispositive portion.
7. The dispositive portion of a decision shall prevail over the
opinion of the court.
8. Executory judgment and interlocutory order.
9. Compromise agreement is immediately executory and not
appealable.
10. Supervening events preventing the execution of the
judgment on compromise agreement.
11. Execution pending appeal.
12. Stay of execution of judgment.
13. Good reasons for execution pending appeal.
14. Immediately executory judgment not stayed by appeal.
15. Judgment when barred by statute of limitations.
16. Execution in case of death of party.
17. Execution of judgments for money.
18. Execution of judgment by levy.
19. Garnishment of debts and credits.
20. Conveyance, delivery of deeds, or other specific acts.
21. Sale of real or personal property.
22. Delivery or restitution of real property.
23. Property exempted from execution.
24. The Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children
Act of 2004, an exception to the general rule that retirement
benefits are exempt from execution.
25. Redemption of real property sold.

22
 26. Writ of possession.
27. A final judgment is conclusive of the rights of the
parties.
28. Felicitas L. Salazar vs. Remedios Felias, et al., G.R. No.
213972, February 5, 2018.
29. Pension and Gratuity Management Center, GHQ, AFP,
Camp Aguinaldo v. AAA, CA - G.R. No. SP No. 04359-MIN,
G.R. No. 201292, August 1, 2018.
30. Anama vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 187021, January
25, 2012.
31. Roberto A. Torres, et al., vs. Antonia F. Aruego, G.R.
No. 201271, September 20, 2017.
32. Ma. Corazon M. Ola vs. People, G.R. No. 195547,
December 2, 2015.
33. Metro Manila Shopping Mecca Corporation vs. Toledo,
G.R. No. 190818, November 10, 2014.
34. National Electrification Administration v. Maguindanao
Electric Cooperative, Inc., et al., G.R. Nos. 192595-96, April
11, 2018.
35. Pulumbarit, Sr., vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 153745-
46, October 14, 2015.
36. Philippine National Bank vs. Sps. Victoriano & Jovita
Faricia Rivera, G.R. No. 189577, April 20, 2016.

RULE 40 – APPEAL FROM MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS TO

THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS

1. Appeal from a judgment or final order of the Municipal Trial

Courts.
2. When to appeal to the Regional Trial Court.
3. How appeal taken to the Regional Trial Court.
4. Perfection of appeal.
5. Appeal from orders dismissing case without trial.

RULE 41 – APPEAL FROM THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS

1. Subject of appeal.
2. If both questions of law and of facts are present, the remedy.
is to file a petition for review with the Court of Appeals.

23
 3. No appeal may be taken from an interlocutory order.
4. Petition for certiorari and appeal of the main action are
available remedies from an interlocutory order.
5. Modes of Appeal from the Regional Trial Court.
6. Appeal from the Regional Trial Court to the Court of Appeals
raising only questions of law is improper and shall be
dismissed outright.
7. Period of appeal.
8. The provisions of the law and the rules concerning the
manner and period of appeal are mandatory and jurisdictional
requirements.
9. Payment of appellate court docket fees mandatory and
jurisdictional.
10. Notice of appeal.
11. Notice of appeal and petition for review.
12. Perfection of appeal.
13. First Sarmiento Property Holdings, Inc., vs. Philippine
Bank of Communications, G.R. No. 202836, June 19, 2018.
14. Leviste Management System, Inc., vs. Legaspi Towers
200, Inc., et al., G.R. No. 199353, April 4, 2018.
15. BF Citiland Corporation vs. Marilyn B. Otake, G.R. No.
173351, July 29, 2010.
16. Lourdes Valderama vs. Sonia Argueless, et al., G.R. No.
223660, April 2, 2018.
17. Alonzo Gipa, et al., vs. Southern Luzon Institute, G.R.
No. 177425, July 18, 2014.

RULE 42 – PETITION FOR REVIEW FROM THE REGIONAL

TRIAL COURTS TO THE COURT OF APPEALS

1. Petition for review on appeal with the Court of Appeals.

2. The remedy of adverse decision by the Regional Trial Court
exercising its appellate jurisdiction is to file a verified petition
for review with the Court of Appeals.
3. Effect of failure to comply with requirements as to form and
contents of the petition for review.
4. Action of the Court of Appeals on the petition.
5. Effect of perfection of appeal.
6. Submission for decision.
7. BF Citiland Corporation vs. Marilyn B. Otake, G.R. No. 173351,
July 29, 2010.

24
 8. Intramuros vs. Offshore Construction Development Company,
G.R. No. 196795, Marcy 7, 2018.

RULE 43 – APPEALS FROM THE COURT OF TAX APPEALS

AND QUASI-JUDICIAL AGENCIES TO THE COURT OF
APPEALS

1. Scope of the rule on appeal to the Court of Appeals.

2. The right to appeal is not a natural right or a part of due
process; it is merely a statutory privilege.
3. Period within which to appeal to the Court of Appeals.
4. How appeal taken to the Court of Appeals.
5. The petitioner should not assume that its motion for extension
of time would be granted by the appellate court.
6. Petition for certiorari does not interrupt the principal action.
7. The remedy of an aggrieved party from a resolution issued by
the Civil Service Commission is to file a petition for review.
8. Decision of the Office of the Ombudsman in administrative
disciplinary cases may be elevated to the Court of Appeals.
9. Case deemed submitted for decision upon filing of last
pleading.
10. Levi Strauss & Co., vs. Atty. Ricardo B. Blancaflor, G.R.
No. 206779, April 20, 2016.
11. Fernando A. Melendres v. Ombudsman Ma. Merceditas
M. Gutierrez, G.R. No. 194346, June 18, 2018.
12. ABS-CBN Publishing, Inc., vs. Director of the Bureau of
Trademarks, G.R. No. 217916, June 20, 2018.

RULE 44 – PROCEDURE IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

1. Title of cases and transmittal of record.

2. Docketing of case.
3. Appellant’s brief.
4. It the citations in the appellant’s brief could sufficiently enable
the Court of Appeals to locate the records referred to, then
there is substantial compliance.
5. Appellee’s brief.
6. Appellant’s reply brief.
7. Filing of memoranda in lieu of briefs.
8. Questions that may be raised on appeal.

25
 9. Dr. Gil J. Rich v. Guillermo Paloma III, et al., G.R. No.
210538, March 7, 2018.
10. Analyn De Los Santos, et al., v. Joel Lucenio, et al., G.R.
No. 215659, March 19, 2018.

RULE 45 – APPEAL BY CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME

COURT

1. Filing of petition with Supreme Court.

2. Petition for review under Rule 45 covers only questions of
law.
3. Direct appeal from RTC to the Supreme Court.
4. Where the order if already final, the remedy is a petition on
certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court.
5. Exceptions to the rule that only questions of law shall be
raised in an appeal by certiorari.
6. Questions of law and fact, distinguished.
7. Time for filing appeal by certiorari to the Supreme Court.
8. Decision of a Division of the Court of Tax Appeals may further
be reviewed first en banc.
9. Maria Cecilia Ocbanda vs. People, G.R. No. 208137, June 8,
2016.
10. Armilyn Morillo vs. People, etc., G.R. No. 198270,
December 9, 2015.
11. Ma. Corazon M. Ola vs. People, G.R. No. 195547,
December 2, 2015.
12. Rogen Allen Bigler vs. People, G.R. No. 210972, March
19, 2016.
13. Nelson Tenido y Silvestre vs. People, G.R. No. 211642,
March 9, 2016.
14. Damaso T. Ambray and Ceferino T. Ambray, Jr., vs.
Sylvia A. Tsourous, Carmencita Ambray, etc., G.R. No.
209264, July 5, 2016.
15. Bangko Sentral Ng Pilipinas vs. Feliciano P. Legaspi,
G.R. No. 205966, March 2, 2016.
16. Republic of the Philippines v. Nora Fe Sagun, G.R. No.
187567, February 15, 2012.
17. Herarc Realty Corporation v. The Provincial Treasurer of
Batangas, et al., G.R. No. 210736, September 5, 2018.

26
RULE 46 – ORIGINAL CASES FILED IN THE COURT OF
APPEALS

1. Title of cases before the Court of Appeals.

2. To what actions applicable.
3. Jurisdiction over the person of the respondent.
4. The Court of Appeals acquires jurisdiction over the person of
the respondent upon service of the order or voluntary
submission.
5. Effect of failure to file comment.
6. Province of Leyte v. Energy Development Corporation, G.R.
No. 203124, June 22, 2015.

RULE 47 – ANNULMENT OF JUDGMENTS OR FINAL ORDERS

AND RESOLUTIONS

1. Annulment by the Court of Appeals of judgments of the

Regional Trial Courts.
2. Annulment of judgment involves exercise of original
jurisdiction.
3. Grounds for annulment.
4. Annulment of judgment may be based either on the ground of
want of jurisdiction or is obtained by extrinsic fraud.
5. Statutory requirements for the remedy of annulment of
judgment.
6. The remedy of annulment is to be availed of only if the
ordinary remedies of new trial, other remedies are no longer
available.
7. Action to annul a final judgment will lie only if the fraud is
extrinsic or collateral in character.
8. Annulment is a remedy independent of the case where the
judgment sought to be annulled is rendered.
9. The objective of annulment of judgment is to set aside the
judgment and grant the petitioner and opportunity to
prosecute his cause or to ventilate his defense.
10. Annulment of judgment cannot be resorted to in
criminal cases.

27
 11. Petition for annulment should be accompanied with
affidavits of witnesses or documents establishing the cause of
action or defense.

12. Effect of judgment of annulment.

13. Bobie Rose D.V. Frias vs. Rolando F. Alcayde, G.R. No.
194262, February 28, 2018.
14. Tung Hui Chung and Tong Hong Chang vs. Shih Chiu
Huang a.k.a. James Shi, G.R. No. 170679, March 9, 2016.
15. Pinausukan Seafood vs. Far East Bank & Trust Co., G.R.
No. 159926, January 20, 2014.
16. People v. Hon. Bricio Ygana, G.R. No. 159222, June 26,
2007.

RULE 48 – PRELIMINARY CONFERENCE

1. Preliminary conference during the pendency of a case.

2. Binding effect of the results of the preliminary conference.

RULE 49 – ORAL ARGUMENT

1. Conduct of oral argument.

RULE 50 – DISMISSAL OF APPEAL

1. Grounds for dismissal of appeal before the Court of Appeals.

2. Appeal erroneously taken to the Court of Appeals shall be
dismissed.
3. Noli Alfonso, et al., Spouses Henry and Liwanag Andres, G.R.
No. 166236, July 29, 2010.
4. Lourdes Valderama v. Sonia Argueles, et al., G.R. No. 223660,
April 2, 2018.

RULE 51 – JUDGMENT

1. When a case is deemed submitted for judgment.

2. Form of decision of the Court of Appeals.
3. An assignment of error is essential to appellate review.

28
 4. The appellate court may reverse the decision of the trial court
on grounds other than those raised as errors on appeal.
5. Promulgation of judgment of the Court of Appeals and its
execution.
6. Execution of judgment.
7. Spouses Campos v. Republic of the Philippines, G.R. No.
184371, March 5, 2015.
8. Trinidad Diaz-Enriquez v. Director of Lands, Court of Appeals,
et al., G.R. No. 168065, September 6, 2017.

RULE 52 – MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

1. Period for filing motion for reconsideration before the Court of

Appeals.
2. Second motion for reconsideration.
3. Stay of execution of judgment.

RULE 53 – NEW TRIAL

1. Motion for new trial before the Court of Appeals.

2. Procedure in new trial.

RULE 54 – INTERNAL BUSINESS BEFORE THE COURT OF

APPEALS

1. Distribution of cases among divisions.

RULE 55 – PUBLICATION OF JUDGMENT AND FINAL

RESOLUTIONS

1. Publication of judgments and final resolution of the Court of

Appeals.

RULE 56 – CASES ORIGINALLY FILED WITH THE SUPREME

COURT

1. Original cases filed with the Supreme Court.

2. Rules applicable in original cases.

29
 3. Mode of appeal to Supreme Court.
4. Grounds for dismissal of appeal.
PROVISIONAL REMEDIES

RULE 57 – PRELIMINARY ATTACHMENT

1. Concept of preliminary attachment.

2. Nature and scope of preliminary attachment.
3. Classification of preliminary attachment.
4. A writ of preliminary attachment effectively functions as a
lien.
5. Writ of attachment may be issued by the trial court, the Court
of Appeals or the Supreme Court ex parte or upon motion.
6. The sheriff must take actual possession of the property.
7. Attachment of real and personal property.
8. Levy of real property must be recorded in the registry of
property.
9. Levy of personal property.
10. Levy of stocks or shares in a corporation.
11. Attachment of debts and credits and other personal
property not capable of manual delivery.
12. When attached property may be sold after levy on
attachment and before entry of judgment.
13. Discharge of attachment upon giving counter-bond.
14. Satisfaction of judgment bond.
15. Satisfaction of judgment out of the property attached.
16. Balance due collected upon an execution; excess
delivered to judgment obligor.
17. Sofia Torres, et al., v. Nicanor Satsatin, et al., G.R. No.
166759, November 25, 2009.
18. Watercraft Venture Corporation vs. Wolfe, G.R. No.
181721, September 9, 2015.

RULE 58 – PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

1. Calculated to prevent a further perpetuation of a wrong or the

doing of any act.
2. Granted only to actual and existing substantial rights.
3. Writ of preliminary injunction is provisional.
4. Court with territorial jurisdiction to issue writ of preliminary
injunction.

30
5. Grounds for issuance of preliminary injunction.
6. No court has the power to interfere by injunction with the
judgments of a court of concurrent jurisdiction.
7. Preliminary injunction cannot be availed of to restrain a public
officer from the performance of duty imposed by law.
8. Exceptions to the rule that public officers in the performance
of their duties may not be restrained by injunction.
9. Injunction cannot be used to oust a party from his possession
of a property.
10. The law proscribes court injunctions on government
projects.
11. No court, except the Supreme Court may issue
temporary restraining order against government infrastructure
projects.
12. Courts cannot direct government agencies to accept or
reject bid and awards contract; exceptions.
13. Regional Trial Courts may issue injunctive relief against
government infrastructure projects when there are compelling
constitutional violations.
14. Writs of injunction or prohibition will not lie to restrain
criminal prosecution.
15. Exception to the rule that injunction will not be granted
to restrain a criminal prosecution.
16. Injunction shall not issue in any case involving labor
disputes.
17. Preliminary injunction not granted without hearing.
18. Difference between preliminary injunction and a
restraining order.
19. Grounds for objection to, or for motion of dissolution of
injunctions or restraining order.
20. When final injunction granted.
21. Heirs of Melencio Yu v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No.
182371, September 4, 2013.
22. PSBA v. Tolentino, G.R. No. 159277, December 21,
2004.
23. Bureau of Customs, et al., v. Hon. Paulino Q. Gallegos,
et al., G.R. No. 220832, February 28, 2018.
24. Dynamic Builders & Construction Co. (Phil.), Inc., v.
Hon. Ricardo P. Presbitero, Jr., et al., G.R. No. 174202, April
7, 2015.

31
 25. First Sarmiento Property Holdings, Inc., v. Philippine
Bank of Communications, Inc., G.R. No. 202836, June 19,
2018.
26. Manuela Azucena Mayor v. Edwin Tiu, et al., G.R. No.
203770, November 23, 2016.

RULE 59 – RECEIVERSHIP

1. Purpose of receivership.
2. Who shall be appointed as receiver?
3. Power of a receiver.
4. Termination of receivership.

RULE 60 – REPLEVIN

1. Nature and concept.

2. Application for replevin.
3. Malayan Insurance Company, Inc., vs. Diana P. Alibudbud,
G.R. No. 20911, April 20, 2016.

RULE 61 – SUPPORT PENDENTE LITE

1. Verified application for support pendente lite.

2. Support under the Family Code of the Philippines.
3. Order granting pendente lite.
4. Support in criminal cases.
5. Restitution when the person providing support pendente lite is
not liable.

SPECIAL CIVIL ACTIONS

RULE 62 – INTERPLEADER

1. Interpleader, its concept.

2. When is interpleader proper.
3. Answer to an action for interpleader and other pleadings.

32
 4. Determination of the respective rights.

RULE 63 – DECLARATORY RELIEF AND SIMILAR REMEDIES

1. Declaratory relief, its concept.

2. Person who may file petition for declaratory relief.
3. Parties in a petition for declaratory relief.
4. Failure to demonstrate immediate danger to sustain direct
injury is a ground for dismissal of a petition for declaratory
relief.
5. Action for quieting of title.
6. Removing a cloud upon a title of a piece of land.
7. Notice of lis pendenss.
8. Conversion into an ordinary action.
9. Lourdes Valderama v. Sonia Arguelles, et al., G.R. No.
223660, April 2, 2018.

RULE 64 – REVIEW OF JUDGMENTS AND FINAL ORDERS OR

RESOLUTIONS OF THE COMMISSIONS ON ELECTIONS AND
THE COMMISSION ON AUDIT

1. Mode of review.
2. Time to file petition.
3. Non-compliance with the material date rule is a ground for
dismissal.
4. Petition for certiorari shall not stay execution.

RULE 65 – CERTIORARI, PROHIBITION AND MANDAMUS

1. Petition for certiorari.

2. Petition for certiorari is a remedy when a tribunal acted
without or in excess of its jurisdiction or with grave abuse of
discretion.
3. Petitioner has no other plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in
the ordinary course of law.
4. A petition for certiorari covers errors of jurisdiction or grave
abuse of discretion.
5. The People may assail a judgment of acquittal only via
petition for certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court.

33
6. It is the Solicitor General that may represent the People in
criminal proceedings in the Supreme Court and the Court of
Appeals.
7. Certiorari being an extraordinary remedy must strictly observe
the rules laid down granting the relief.
8. Certiorari may be availed of to assail interlocutory order.
9. A party cannot substitute the special civil action of certiorari
for the remedy of appeal.
10. As a general rule, a motion for reconsideration is a
prerequisite for the availment of a petition for certiorari.
11. The decision of the Ombudsman may be reviewed via
petition for certiorari.
12. Petition for prohibition.
13. Mandamus, its concept.
14. Grounds for the issuance of a writ of mandamus.
15. Mandamus is not an appropriate remedy to enforce
private contract right but only in matters relating to a public
duty.
16. The only time discretion of the prosecutor will stand
review by mandamus is where there is abuse of discretion.
17. Writ of Mandamus is a command from a court of law
requiring performance of a ministerial duty.
18. Mandamus will not issue to compel an official to do
anything which is not his duty to do.
19. When and where to file a petition for certiorari,
prohibition and mandamus.
20. Petition for certiorari is the remedy for decisions on
small claims.
21. Amando P. Cortes v. Office of the Ombudsman
(Visayas), G.R. Nos. 187896-97, June 10, 2013.
22. National Power Corporation v. The Court of Appeals, et
al., G.R. No. 206167, March 19, 2018.
23. Rural Bank of Mabitac of Laguna, Inc. v. Melanie M.
Canicon, et al., G.R. No. 196015, June 27, 2018.
24. Spouses Humberto P. Delos Santos, et al., v.
Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company, G.R. No. 153852,
October 24, 2012.
25. Malayang Manggagawa Ng Stayfast Phils., Inc. v. NLRC,
G.R. No. 155306, August 28, 2013.
26. Jerome R. Canlas v. Gonzalo Benjamin A. Bongolan,
G.R. No. 199625, June 6, 2018.

34
 27. A.L. Ang Network v. Mondejar, G.R. No. 200804,
January 22, 2014.

RULE 66 – QUO WARRANTO

1. Quo warranto, its concept.

2. An action by Government against individuals.
3. When the qualification for the position is in issue, the proper
remedy is quo warranto.
4. The Solicitor General or public prosecutor must commence an
action for quo warranto when directed by the President.
5. The Solicitor General or public prosecutor may, with the
permission of the court, commence an action for quo
warranto.
6. An individual claiming title to a public office may commence
an action for quo warranto.
7. Petition for quo warranto against a person for usurping a
public office, position or franchise.
8. Venue in an action for quo warranto.
9. Judgment in an action for quo warranto where respondent is
found guilty.
10. The one (1) year limitation to file an action for quo
warranto.
11. Republic of the Philippines v. Maria Lourdes P.A. Sereno,
G.R. No. 237428, June 19, 2018.

RULE 67 – EXPROPRIATION

1. The power of eminent domain.

2. Verified complaint for the purpose of expropriation.
3. Plaintiff may take or enter upon the possession of the real
property upon depositing an amount equivalent to the
assessed value.
4. Defenses and objections in expropriation proceedings.
5. Court may issue an order of expropriation declaring that the
plaintiff may take the property.
6. Determination of the value of the property by court appointed
commissioners.

35
 7. Proceedings by court appointed commissioners.
8. Right of the plaintiff to enter upon the property after
judgment and payment of compensation.
9. When plaintiff can immediately enter into possession of the
real property in relation to R.A. No. 8974.
10. Guidelines for Expropriation Proceedings of National
Infrastructure Projects, Sec. 4, R.A. No. 9874.

RULE 68 – FORECLOSURE OF REAL ESTATE MORTGAGE

1. Concept of foreclosure of mortgage.

2. Complaint in an action for the foreclosure.
3. Court having jurisdiction in judicial foreclosure of real estate.
4. Sale of mortgage property.
5. Notice of the execution sale to the judgment obligor.
6. Confirmation of sale.
7. Judicial sale of real estate may be set aside.
8. Rights of the mortgagor to pay the amount of debt for the
purpose of freeing the property from lien before the finality of
the order of confirmation.
9. Subsequent sale of the property before confirmation.
10. Right to redeem the property under the General Banking
Act. (R.A. No. 8791)
11. Equity of redemption and right of redemption.
12. Disposition of proceeds of sale realized from the
foreclosure sale.
13. Rights of the second mortgagee.
14. Foreclosure prior to maturity.
15. Deficiency judgment.
16. Registration in the registry of deeds.
17. Extrajudicial foreclosure (R.A. 3135, as amended).
18. Roma Fe C. Villalon vs. Rural Bank of Agoo, Inc., G.R.
No. 239986, July 8, 2019.

RULE 69 – PARTITION

1. Partition of real estate among parties in interest.

2. Complaint for partition.

36
 3. Order of partition.
4. The parties being co-owners, the remedy is to file an action
for partition.
5. Appointment of commissioners to make partition when parties
fail to agree upon the partition.
6. Partition of personal property.
7. Fortunato Anzures v. Spouses Erlinda Ventanilla and Arturo
Ventanilla, G.R. No. 222297, July 9, 2018.

RULE 70 – FORCIBLE ENTRY AND UNLAWFUL DETAINER

1. The only question that courts resolve in ejectment

proceedings is who is entitled to the physical possession of
the premises.
2. Person that may institute forcible entry and unlawful detainer.
3. Courts in ejectment cases decide questions of ownership only
if it is necessary to decide the question of possession.
4. Action for unlawful detainer against lessee shall commenced
only after demand to pay or comply with the conditions and
vacate.
5. The court may dismiss the case outright or issue summons.
6. Answer.
7. Effect of failure to answer.
8. Rules on Expedited Procedures in the First Level Courts.
9. Action to recover possession of real property after the
expiration or termination of a right to hold possession.
10. An action for unlawful detainer is brought against a
possessor who unlawfully withhold possession.
11. Plaintiff must show that the supposed acts of tolerance
have been present right from the start of the possession.
12. Distinction between ejectment and recovery of
possession and/or ownership.
13. Pleadings allowed; Rule on Summary Procedure.
14. Preliminary conference; appearance of parties.
15. Submission of affidavits and position papers.
16. Period for rendition of judgment in forcible entry and
unlawful detainer cases; Rules on Summary Procedure –
Rules on Expedited Procedure.

37
 17. Referral to the Barangay Lupon for conciliation; R.A. No.
7160, the Local Government Code of 1991; Rules on
Expedited Procedure.
18. Prohibited pleadings and motions.
19. Resolving the defense of ownership.
20. Registered owner of real property is entitled to
possession.
21. Judgment in forcible entry and unlawful detainer cases.
22. Immediate execution of judgment.
23. Milagros Diaz, etc., Spouses Gaudencio Punzalan and
Teresita Punzalan, G.R. No. 203075, March 16, 2016.
24. Conchita Gloria, et al., v. Builders Savings and Loan
Association, Inc., G.R. No. 202324, June 4, 2018.
25. Eversley Childs Santitarium v. Spouses Anastacio and
Perla Barbarona, G.R. No. 195814, April 4, 2018.
26. Fatima O. De Gusman-Fuerte v. Spouses Silvino S.
Estomo and Conception Estomo, G.R. No. 223399, April 23,
2018.
27. The Iglesia De JesuCristo Jerusalem Nueva of Manila,
Philippines, Inc., v. Loida Dela Cruz, G.R. No. 208284, April23,
2018.

RULE 71 – CONTEMPT

1. Contempt of court.
2. Power of the court to punish for contempt.
3. The difference between civil contempt and criminal contempt.
4. To constitute contempt, the act must be done willfully and for
an illegitimate or improper purpose.
5. Good faith is a defense in contempt proceedings.
6. Direct contempt; indirect contempt.
7. The sub judice rule in contempt cases.
8. Proceedings for indirect contempt may be initiated by the
court motu proprio or by a formal charge.
9. Where to file a charge for indirect contempt.
10. Remedy of a person adjudged in direct contempt.
11. Judgment in a case of indirect contempt may be
appealed.
12. Contempt against quasi-judicial entities.

38
 13. Bro. Bernard Oca, et al., v. Laurita Custodio, G.R. No.
199825, July 26, 2017.
14. Digital Telecommunications Phils., Inc., vs. Cantos, G.R.
No. 180200, November 25, 2013.
15. Hansel M. Marantan vs. Jose Manuel Diokno, G.R. No.
205956, February 12, 2014.
16. Masakazu Uematsu v. Alma N. Balinon, G.R. No.
234812, November 25, 2019.

RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CASES

1. General provisions
2. Civil Procedure
3. Pleadings and parties
4. Prohibited pleadings and motions
5. Verified complaint
6. Who may file
7. Citizen suit
8. Service of the complaint on the government or its agencies
9. Issuance of Temporary Environmental Protection Order

NOTE:
1. Reference: Luna, Disquisition and Jurisprudence on Remedial
Law, Volumes 1 and 4, 2023 Edition, published by Central
Book Supply, Inc. Available online at Shoppee.

39