1

Rule 70:FORCIBLE ENTRY AND UNLAWFUL DETAINER COUNTING OF 1-YEAR PERIOD

It is not talking about ownership, it focuses merely on who is the 1st in possession.
4blue95:issue on ownership cannot be raised, however, it can be resolved only when it
is necessary for the adjudication of an issue in possession.
WHO MAY INSTITUTE PROCEEDINGS AND WHEN
A. Forcible entry (Deprivation): a person deprived of possession of any land or building by force,
intimidation, threat, strategy or stealth (FITSS)
B. Unlawful Detainer (Unlawful holding)
1. lessor, vendor, vendee or other person against whom possession of any and or building is
unlawfully withheld;
2. legal representatives or assigns of any such lessor, vendor, vendee, or other person against
whom possession of any land or building is unlawfully withheld.
A. FORCIBLE ENTRY
General Rule: Counted from the date of the entry or taking of possession by use of force,
intimidation, threat, or strategy
The mere act of going to the property and excluding the lawful possessor therefrom
necessarily implies the exertion of force. (Bunyi v. Factor, G.R. No. 172547, 2009)
Exception: In case of stealth, the one-year period should be counted from the demand to
vacate upon knowledge or discovery of such entry.
It is essential in unlawful detainer cases of this kind, that plaintiff's supposed acts of
tolerance must have been present right from the start of the possession which is later
sought to be recovered. (Zacarias v. Anacay, G.R. No. 202354, 2014)

Against whom may action be maintained? Jurisprudential Requisites for Forcible Entry

1. The action of forcible entry and detainer may be maintained only against one in 1. First, the plaintiffs must allege their prior physical possession of the property;
possession at the commencement of the action;
2. Tenant with right of possession may bring action against another tenant; 2. Second, they must also assert that they were deprived of possession either by force,
3. vendor may bring action for ejectment against vendee upon failure to pay the
intimidation, threat, strategy, or stealth; and
installments;
4. forcible entry and unlawful detainer lie even against the very owner of property.
3. Third, the action must be filed within one year from the time the owners or legal
possessors learned of their deprivation of physical possession of the land or building.
FORCIBLE ENTRY UNLAWFUL DETAINER (Dela Cruz v. CA, G.R. No. 139442, 2006)
(Detentacion) (Desahucio)
Possession of the land by the defendant is Possession is inceptively lawful but it becomes
unlawful from the beginning as he acquires illegal by reason of the reason of the
possession by force, intimidation, threat, termination of his right to the possession of the
Strategy or Stealth property under his contact w/ the plaintiff
No previous demand for the defendant to Demand is jurisdictional if the ground is non-
vacate the premises is necessary payment of rentals or failure to comply with
lease contract
The plaintiff must prove that he was in prior The plaintiff need not have been in prior B. UNLAWFUL DETAINER
physical possession of the premises until he physical possession
was deprived thereof by the defendant a. In unexpired lease contracts:
The 1 year period is generally counted from Period is counted from the date of last demand
the date of actual on the land or last latter of demand
General Rule: Counted from the date of the last demand to pay and vacate in case of
non-payment of rent or non-compliance with the conditions of the lease. (Esteban v.
MERALCO, G.R. No. 197725, 2013)

Exception: When subsequent demands were merely reminders of the original demand,
THREE KINDS OF ACTION FOR RECOVERY OF POSSESSION the 1-year period starts from the original demand. (Desbarats v. Vda. de Laureano, G.R.
No. L-21875, 1966)

ACCION ACCION ACCION b. In occupation by mere tolerance:

INTERDICTAL PUBLICIANA REINVIDICATORIA
Summary action for the A plenary action for the An action for the recovery of From the date of revocation of permit (i.e. demand to vacate (See Republic v. Sunvar
recovery of physical recovery of the real right of ownership, which necessarily Realty, G.R. No. 194880, 2012)
possession where the possession when the includes the recovery of
dispossession has NOT dispossession has lasted for possession
lasted for more than one year more than one year
(CAN BE FILED
ANYTIME) Jurisprudential Requisites for Unlawful Detainer
All cases of forcible entry RTC has jurisdiction if the RTC ha jurisdiction if the
and unlawful detainer value of the property exceeds value of the property exceeds A complaint sufficiently alleges a cause of action for unlawful detainer if it recites the
irrespective of the amount of P20,000 outside Metro P20,000 outside Metro following:
damages or unpaid rentals Manila P50,000 within Metro Manila; P50,000 within
sought to be recovered should Manila. MTC has jurisdiction Metro Manila. MTC has 1. Initially, possession of property by the defendant was by contract with or by
be brought to the MTC. if the value of the property jurisdiction if the value of the tolerance of the plaintiff;
does not exceed the above property does not exceed the
amounts. above amounts 2. Eventually, such possession became illegal upon notice by plaintiff to defendant of
the termination of the latter’s right of possession;
4blue95: Forcible Entry and Unlawful Detainer are real actions. It is known as Accion Interdictal.
It should be filed within 1 year ,if lampas ,then it is now Accion Publiciana 3. Thereafter, the defendant remained in possession of the property and deprived the
4blue95: The Rule on Summary Procedure applies only in cases filed before the MTC. When the plaintiff of the enjoyment thereof; and
decision of the MTC is appealed to the RTC the applicable rules are those of the latter court,
(Refugia vs. CA, 258 SCRA 347)
4. Within one year from the last demand on defendant to vacate the property, the
plaintiff instituted the complaint for ejectment. (Zacarias v. Anacay, G.R. No.
202354, 2014)
Accion Interdictal

Exclusive original jurisdiction over forcible entry and unlawful detainer suits is with the
MTC. (B.P. Blg. 129, as amended, Sec. 33[2])
Amount of rents and damages claimed does not affect the jurisdiction of the MTC because PRIOR PHYSICAL POSSESSION
they are only incidental or accessory to the main action.
However, municipal courts have no jurisdiction over a forcible entry/unlawful detainer case
involving agricultural tenants. Jurisdiction is with the HLURB.
General Rule: Prior physical possession is required for the action to prosper.

Accion Publiciana and Accion Reinvindicatoria
RTC has jurisdiction where the assessed value of the property exceeds P20,000 or, in Metro
Manila, P50,000;
MTC has jurisdiction if the assessed value does not exceed said amounts. (B.P. Blg. 129, as
amended, Sec. 33).
Where the basic issue is not possession but interpretation, enforcement and/or rescission of
the contract, the same is no longer an ejectment suit. (Villena v. Chavez, G.R. No. 148126,
2003)
Exception: Possession can be acquired not only by material occupation, but also by the fact
that a thing is subject to the action of one's will or by the proper acts and legal formalities
established for acquiring such right. Because possession can also be acquired by juridical
acts to which the law gives the force of acts of possession, e.g., donations, succession,
execution and registration of public instruments, inscription of possessory information
titles and the like, it has been held that one need not have actual or physical occupation of
every square inch of the property at all times to be considered in possession. (Nunez v.
SLTEAS Phoenix, G.R. No. 180542, 2010)
 2

PLEADINGS ALLOWED General Rule: JUDGMENT of the MTC against the defendant in ejectment
proceedings is IMMEDIATELY EXECUTORY.
The only pleadings allowed to be filed are the complaint, compulsory counterclaim and
crossclaim pleaded in the answer, and the answers thereto. All pleadings shall be verified. Exception(what defendant should do to stay the execution):
(Sec. 5, Rule 70)
1. the defendant perfects his APPEAL;
2. he files sufficient SUPERSEDEAS BOND to pay the rents, damages and
ACTION ON THE COMPLAINT costs acquiring down to the time of judgment appealed form;

The court may: WHERE SUPERSEDEAS BOND NOT REQUIRED:

a. Dismiss the case outright on any of the grounds for the dismissal of a civil action which a.where the monetary award in the judgment of the inferior court has been
are apparent therein; or deposited with the court;

b. If no ground for dismissal is found, it shall forthwith issue summons. (Sec. 5, Rule 70) b.where the judgment of the lower court did not make findings with
respect to any amount in arrears, damages or costs against the defendant.

PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AND PRELIMINARY MANDATORY
INJUNCTION
The court may grant preliminary injunction to prevent the defendant from committing
further acts of dispossession against the plaintiff.
A possessor deprived of his possession through forcible entry or unlawful detainer may,
within five (5) days from the filing of the complaint, present a motion for the issuance of a
writ of preliminary mandatory injunction to restore him in his possession.
The court shall decide the motion within 30 days from the filing thereof. (Sec. 15, Rule 70)
2022 Note: If the case is PENDING, the petition for preliminary injunction may only be
filed by the plaintiff;
if the case is on APPEAL, the petition may be filed by either the plaintiff or the defendant.
4blue95: it is not payment of bond that execution stays, but the timeliness
of payment.
3. he DEPOSITS with he appellate court the amount of rent due from time to
time under the contract or in the absence of a contract, the reasonable value
of the use and occupation of the premises on or before the 10th day of each
succeeding month or period(SO EVERY MONTH ,coz if not, then execution
sets in)
2022 Note: If the defendant can no longer pay this shall not defeat the appeal. He will,
however, be compelled to surrender possession of the property as the plaintiff will be
entitled to execution as a matter of right.
Upon motion of the plaintiff, within 10 days from the perfection of the appeal to the RTC
in forcible entry and unlawful detainer cases, the latter may issue a writ of preliminary
mandatory injunction to restore the plaintiff in possession if the court is satisfied that the
defendant’s appeal is frivolous or dilatory, or that the appeal of the plaintiff is prima facie
meritorious. (Sec. 20, Rule 70)

Note: In forcible entry and unlawful detainer cases, the judgment of the RTC against the
defendant shall be immediately executory, without prejudice to a further appeal that may
WHEN DEMAND IS NECESSARY be taken therefrom. (Sec. 21, Rule 70)
The judgment is immediately executory in order to avoid injustice to a lawful possessor.
Two-fold Demand
2022 Note: The judgment is immediately executory only when the judgment is against the
In unlawful detainer cases, unless there exists a stipulation to the contrary, such actions defendant. If the judgment is in favor of the defendant, such is not immediately executory
shall only be commenced after demand is made on the lessee in any of the following and can be executed only after the lapse of the regular 15-day period to appeal without the
forms: plaintiff having perfected the same.
a. To pay and vacate; or
b. To comply with the conditions of the lease and vacate. Even if RTC judgments in unlawful detainer cases are immediately executory, preliminary
injunction may still be granted. There need only be clear showing that there exists a right
A mere notice giving the lessee the alternative either to pay the rental or vacate the to be protected and that the acts against which the writ is to be directed violate said right.
premises does not comply with Section 2. (Vda. de Murga v. Chan, G.R. No. L-24680, (Benedicto v. CA, G.R. No. 157604, 2005)
1980)

The term “vacate” need not be stated if there are other terms definitively implying that the Ejectment suits are not suspended or barred by other actions such as the following:
tenant should vacate (Golden Gate Realty Corporation v. IAC, G.R. No. 74289, 1987)
However, the Golden Gate ruling will not apply if the demand is ambiguous. (La Campana 1. Injunction;
v. CA, G.R. No. L88246, 1993). 2. consignation of rentals;
3. Accion publiciana;
4. Writ of possession case;
Form of Demand 5. Quieting of title
6. Specific Performance with damages;
1. Written notice served upon the person found on the premises, or by posting such 7. Reformatiion of instrument;
notice on the premises if no person be found thereon (Sec. 2, Rule 70); 8. reconveyance of property or accion reinvindicatoria;
2. By substituted service or registered mail; 9. annulment of sale, or title, or document, annulment of deed of sale with
3. Jurisprudence provides that demand upon a tenant may be oral, but sufficient assumption of mortgage and/or to declare the same an equitable mortgage;
evidence must be adduced to show that there was indeed a demand like testimonies annulment of sale with damages. (enumeration from Feria p. 615)
from disinterested and unbiased witnesses. (Jakihaca v. Aquino, G.R. No. 83982,
1990) Ejectment case is a real action, which is not extinguished by the death of a party. (Cañiza
vs. CA, 268 SCRA 640)
2022 Note: If several demands were made, the one year period is counted from the last
demand letter received, unless the subsequent demands were merely in the nature of
reminders of the original demand, in which case the one-year period is counted from the
first demand. Prohibited Pleadings and Motions
1. Motion to DISMISS the complaint except on the ground of lack of
jurisdiction over the subject matter, or failure to comply with Section 12.
Effect of non-compliance with demand 2. Motion for a BILL OF PARTICULARS;
3. Motion for NEW TRIAL, OR FOR RECONSIDERATION OF A
The lessor may proceed against the lessee if the demand is not complied with AFTER: JUDGMENT, OR FOR REOPENING OF TRIAL;
a. 15 days in the case of land; or 4. Petition for RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT;
b. 5 days in case of buildings. 5. Motion for EXTENSION of time to file pleadings, affidavit or any other
paper;
6. MEMORANDA;
Prior demand in unlawful detainer is NOT required when: 7. Petition for CERTIORARI, MANDAMUS, OR PROHIBITION against any
Interlocutory order issued by the court.
a. The purpose of the action is to terminate the lease because of expiry of term and 8. Motion to declare the defendant in DEFAULT;
not because of failure to pay rentals; 9. DILATORY motions for postponement
b. Purpose of suit is not for ejectment but for enforcement of terms of contract; or 10. REPLY;
c. When the defendant is not a tenant but a mere intruder. In which case it is forcible 11. THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINTS;
entry, which does not require prior demand. (RIANO 2016 ed., p. 353-354) 12. INTERVENTIONS

Are third persons bound by a judgment in an ejectment case?
General Rule: YES, provided his possession can be traced from the title of the defendant e.g.,
sublessee.
Exception
1. if the property was acquired before the action;
2. if the property is covered by a Torrens Title and the certificate does not state that
the property is subject to a pending action and he bought the same in good faith.
The judgment binds and may be executed against sub-lessees who have not been impleaded since
their right to stay is only subsidiary to that of the lessees. Once the right of the latter disappears,
they have nothing to stand on, unless they claim an understanding or relation with the owner.
Judgment for ejectment cannot been forced against a co-owner who was not made a party to the
action. (Cruzcosa vs. Conception, 11 Phil. 147)
Section 17. Judgment
The court can award DAMAGE in ejectment cases PROVIDED the damages refer only to:
a. the fair reasonable value of the use and enjoyment of the property or the rent
arising from the loss of possession.
b. Rent in arrears
c. Liquidated damage since they are already part of the contract. (Azcuna Jr., vs. CA,
265 SCRA 215)
Atty’s fees cannot be considered damages. (De Laureano vs. Adil 72 SCRA 148)
4blue95. Judgment conclusive only on possession; not conclusive in actions involving title or
ownership
Is formal contract a prerequisites in unlawful detainer?
The existence of a formal contract is NOT necessary in unlawful detainer. Even if there is no
formal contact between the parties there an be an unlawful detainer because implied contracts are
covered by ejectment proceedings. Possession by tolerance crease an implied to vacate the
premises upon demand by the owner. (Peran vs. CFI of Sorsogon)
Questions to be resolved in an action for forcible entry are:
First, who had actual possession over the piece of real property?
Second, was the possessor ousted therefrom within one year from the filing of the complaint by
force, intimidation, threat, strategy or stealth?
Third, does the plaintiff ask for restoration of his possession? (DIZON vs. Concina, 30 SCRA
897)
Section 20. Preliminary mandatory Injunction in case of appeal
 RTC may issue writ of preliminary mandatory injunction on motion of plaintiff
within 10 days from the perfection of the appeal.
Section 21. Immediate execution on appeal to Court of Appeals or Supreme Court
The judgment of the RTC against the defendant shall be immediately executory, without prejudice
to a further appeal that may be taken therefrom.
It is mandatory for the RTC to order execution of the appealed judgment upon failure of defendant
to make the monthly deposit of current rentals. (Dehesa vs. Macalalag, 81 SCRA 543)
Prior notice of judgment is required for immediate execution. (Dy vs. CA, 195 SCRA 585)
4blue95: once tapos na lahat, which means no more appeal, the execution of the judgment shall be
with the MTC and not with the RTC or CA.
Q: A borrowed from the Development Bank of the Philippines (DBP) the amount of P1 million
secured by the titled land of his friend B who, however, did not assume personal liability for the
loan. A defaulted and DBP filed an action for judicial foreclosure of the real estate mortgage
impleading A and B as defendants. In due course, the court rendered judgment directing A to pay
the outstanding account of P1.5 million (principal plus interest) to the bank. No appeal was taken
by A on the Decision within the reglementary period. A failed to pay the judgment debt within the
period specified in the decision. Consequently, the court ordered the foreclosure sale of the
mortgaged land. In that foreclosure sale, the land was sold to the DPB for P1.2 million. The sale
was subsequently confirmed by the court, and the confirmation of the sale was registered with the
Registry of Deeds on 05 January 2002. On 10 January 2003, the bank filed an ex parte motion
with the court for the issuance of a writ of possession to oust B from the land. It also filed a
deficiency claim for P800, 000.00 against A and B. The deficiency claim was opposed by A and
B.
a. Resolve the motion for the issuance of a writ of possession. A: In judicial foreclosure of banks
such as DBP, the mortgagor of debtor whose real property has been sold on foreclosure has the
right to redeem the property sold within one year after the date (or registration of the sale).
However, the purchaser at the auction sale has the right to obtain a writ of possession after the
finality of the order confirming the sale (Sec. 3, Rule 68; Sec. 47, RA 8791). The motion for writ
of possession, however, cannot be filed ex parte. There must be a notice of hearing.
b. Resolve the deficiency claim of the bank. (2003 Bar)
A: The deficiency claim of the bank may be enforced against the mortgage debtor A, but it cannot
be enforced against B, the owner of the mortgaged property, who did not assume personal liability
for the loan.
Q: Laura was the lessee of an apartment unit owned by Louie. When the lease expired, Laura
refused to vacate the property. Her refusal prompted Louie to file an action for unlawful detainer
against Laura who failed to answer the complaint within the reglementary period. Louie then filed
a motion to declare Laura in default should the motion be granted? Explain your answer. (2017
BAR)
A: No. The motion should not be granted because it is a prohibited pleading Under Section 19(h)
of the Rules on Summary Procedure, a motion to declare defendant in default is among the
pleadings that are prohibited in cases covered by said Rule. Considering that an action for
unlawful detainer is covered by the Rules on Summary Procedure, Louie’s motion to declare
Laura in default is a prohibited pleading, and thus, should not be granted.
3
Q: On 10 January 1990, X leased the warehouse of A under a lease contract with a period of 5
years. On 08 June 1996, A filed an unlawful detainer case against X without a prior demand for X
to vacate the premises. a. Can X contest his ejectment on the ground that there was no prior
demand for him to vacate the premises? A: Yes. X can contest his ejectment on the ground that
there was no prior demand to vacate the premise. (Sec. 2, Rule 70; Casilan v. Tomassi, G.R. No.
L-16574, February 28, 1964; Lesaca v. Cuevas, G.R. No. L-48419, October 27, 1983) b. In case
the Municipal Trial Court renders judgment in favor of A, is the judgment immediately executory?
(1997 Bar) A: Yes, because the judgment of the Municipal Trial Court against the defendant X is
immediately executory upon motion unless an appeal has been perfected, a supersedeas bond has
been filed and the periodic deposits of current rentals, if any, as determined by the judgment will
be made with the appellate court. (Sec. 19, Rule 70)
Q: In an action for unlawful detainer in the Municipal Trial Court (MTC), defendant X raised in
his Answer the defense that plaintiff A is not the real owner of the house subject of the suit. X
filed a counterclaim against A for the collection of a debt of P80,000 plus accrued interest of
P15,000 and attorney’s fees of P20,000.
a. Is X’s defense tenable
A: No. X’s defense is not tenable if the action is filed by a lessor against a lessee. However, if the
right of possession of the plaintiff depends on his ownership then the defense is tenable.
b. Does the MTC have jurisdiction over the counterclaim? (1998 Bar)
A: The counterclaim is within the jurisdiction of the Municipal Trial Court which does not exceed
P100,000, because the principal demand is P80,000, exclusive of interest and attorney’s fees (Sec
33, B.P. Blg. 129, as amended). However, inasmuch as all actions of forcible entry and unlawful
detainer are subject to summary procedure and since the counterclaim is only permissive, it cannot
be entertained by the Municipal Trial Court. (Sec. 1, Revised Rule on Summary Procedure)
Q: The spouses Juan reside in Quezon City. With their lottery winnings, they purchased a parcel
of land in Tagaytay City for P100,000.00. In a recent trip to their Tagaytay property, they were
surprised to see hastily assembled shelters of light materials occupied by several families of
informal settlers who were not there when they last visited the property three (3) months ago. To
rid the spouses’ Tagaytay property of these informal settlers, briefly discuss the legal remedy you,
as their counsel, would use; the steps you would take; the court where you would file your remedy
if the need arises; and the reason/s for your actions. (2013 Bar) A: As counsel of spouses Juan, I
will file a special civil action for forcible entry. The Rules of Court provides that a person
deprived of the possession of any land or building by force, intimidation, threat, strategy or stealth
may at any time within (one) 1 year after such withholding of possession bring an action in the
proper Municipal Trial Court where the property is located. This action which is summary in
nature seeks to recover the possession of the property from the defendant which was illegally
withheld by the latter. (Sec. 1, Rule 70) An ejectment case is designed to restore, through
summary proceedings, the physical possession of any land or building to one who has been
illegally deprived of such possession, without prejudice to the settlement of the parties’ opposing
claims of juridical possession in appropriate proceedings. (Heirs of Olarte v. Office of the
President, G.R. No. 177995, June 15, 2011) However, before instituting the said action, I will first
endeavor to amicably settle the controversy with the informal settlers before the appropriate
Lupon or Barangay Chairman. If there is no agreement reached after mediation and conciliation
under the Katarungang Pambarangay Law, I will secure a certificate to file action and file the
complaint for ejectment before the MTC of Tagaytay City where the property is located since
ejectment suit is a real action regardless of the value of the property to be recovered or claim for
unpaid rentals. (BP 129 and Sec. 1, Rule 4)
Q: BB files a complaint for ejectment in the MTC on the ground of non-payment of rentals against
JJ. After two days, JJ files in the RTC a complaint against BB for specific performance to enforce
the option to purchase the land subject of the ejectment case. What is the effect of JJ’s action on
BB’s complaint? Explain. (2000 Bar) A: There is no effect. The ejectment case involves
possession de facto only. The action to enforce the option to purchase will not suspend the action
of ejectment for non-payment or rentals. (Willmon Auto Supply Corp. v. Court of Appeals, G.R.
No. 97637, April 10, 1992)
Q: Landlord, a resident of Quezon City, entered into a lease contract with Tenant, a resident of
Marikina City, over a residential house in Las Pinas City. The lease contract provided, among
others, for a monthly rental of P25,000.00, plus ten percent (10%) interest rate in case of
nonpayment on its due date. Subsequently, Landlord migrated to the United States of America
(USA) but granted in favor of his sister Maria, a special power of attorney to manage the property
and file and defend suits over the property rented out to Tenant. Tenant failed to pay the rentals
due for five (5) months.Maria asks your legal advice on how she can expeditiously collect from
Tenant the unpaid rentals plus interests due.
a. What judicial remedy would you recommend to Maria? A: I will advise Maria to immediately
send a letter to the tenant demanding the immediate payment of the unpaid rentals plus interests
due. If the tenant refuses, Maria can avail any of the following remedies: 1. A complaint under
A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC or the Rules of Procedure for Small claims cases. Maria should nonetheless
waive the amount in excess of P100,000 in order for her to avail of the remedy under the said
Rules. 2. A complaint for collection of sum of money under the Rules on Summary Procedure,
since Maria is only claiming the unpaid rentals and interest due from tenant. 3. If the tenant
refuses or is unable to pay the rentals within 1 year from the last demand to vacate and pay, I
would advise Maria to file an action for Unlawful Detainer.
b. Where is the proper venue of the judicial remedy which you recommended? A: If Maria decides
to file a complaint for collection of sum of money under the Rules of Summary Procedure or
Small Claims, the venue is the residence of the plaintiff or defendant, at the election if the plaintiff
(Sec. 2, Rule 4). Hence it may be in Quezon City or Marikina City, at the option of Maria. If
Maria files an action for inlawful detainer, the same shall be commenced and tried in the
Municipal Trial Court of the municipality or city wherein the real property involved, or a portion
thereof is situated (Sec. 1, Rule 4). Therefore, the venue is Las Pinas City.
c. If Maria insists on filing an ejectment suit against Tenant, when do you reckon the one (1)-year
period within which to file the action? (2014 Bar) A: The reckoning point for determining the
oneyear period within which to file the action is the receipt if the last demand to vacate and pay
(Sec. 2, Rule 70).
Q: Mr. Sheriff attempts to enforce a Writ of Execution against X, a tenant in a condominium unit,
who lost in an ejectment case. X does not want to budge and refuses to leave. Y, the winning
party, moves that X be declared in contempt and after hearing, the court held X guilty of indirect
contempt. If you were X’s lawyer, what would you do? Why? (2012 Bar) A: If I were X’s lawyer,
I would file a petition for certiorari under Rule 65. The judge should not have acted on Y’s motion
to declare X in contempt. The charge of indirect contempt is intiated through a verified petition
(Sec.4, Rule 71). The writ was not directed to X but to the sheriff which was directed to deliver the
property to Y. As the writ did not command the judgment debtor to do anything, he cannot be
guilty of the facts described in Rule 71 which is “disobedience of or resistance to a lawful writ,
process, order, judgment, or command of any court.” The proper procedure is for the sheriff to
oust X availing of the assistance of peace officers pursuant to Section 10(c) of Rule 39.(Lipa v.
Tutaan, L-16643, September 29, 1983; Medina v. Garces, L25923, July 15, 1980; Pascua v. Heirs
of Simeon, G.R. No. L- 47717, May 2, 1988; Patagan v. Panis, G.R. No. 55630, April 8, 1988)
 4

RULE 71:CONTEMPT

It is a defiance of the authority, justice or dignity of the court, such conduct as tends to bring
the authority and administration of the law into disrespect or to interfere with or prejudice INDIRECT CONTEMPT
parties litigant or their witnesses during the litigation. (Halili vs. CIR, 136 SCRA 112).
to be punished AFTER CHARGE AND HEARING
PURPOSE AND NATURE OF POWER: The power to punish for contempt is INHERENT in all
courts, its existence is essential to the preservation of order in judicial proceedings and to the
enforcement of judgment, orders, and mandates of the courts, and, consequently, to he due REMEDY
administration of justice. May be appealed to the proper court as in criminal cases, but execution shall not be suspended
until bond is filed. (Sec. 11, Rule 71)
The exercise of the power to punish for contempt has dual aspect, primarily, the proper
punishment of guilty party for his disrespect to the courts, and secondarily, his compulsory
performance of some ac or duty required of him by the court and which he refuses to perform. PUNISHMENT IF COMMITTED AGAINST:

Q: A filed a complaint for the recovery of ownership of land against B who was represented by her
counsel X. in the course of the trial, B died. However, X failed to notify the court of B’s death.
The court proceeded to hear the case and rendered judgment against B. After the Judgment
became final, a writ of execution was issued against C, who being B’s sole heir, acquired the
property. Did the failure of counsel X to inform the court of B’s death constitute direct contempt?
(1998 Bar) A: No. It is not direct contempt under Sec. 1 of Rule 71, but it is an indirect contempt
within the purview of Sec. 3 of Rule 71. The lawyer can also be subject of disciplinary action.
(Sec. 16, Rule 3)
A. RTC or a court of equivalent or higher rank: Fine not exceeding P30,000 or
imprisonment not exceeding 6 months or both.
B. MTC: Fine not exceeding P5,000 or imprisonment not exceeding 1 month or
both. (Sec. 7, Rule 71)
2022 Note: The penalty is immediately executory, unless a bond is filed.

GROUNDS OF INDIRECT CONTEMPT

a. MISBEHAVIOR of an officer of a court in the PERFORMANCE of his official

duties or in his official transactions;

CLASSES OF CONTEMPT 4blue95:Power to DISBAR is separate from Power to CONTEMPT, as such, filing of one
will not bar the other.

1) As to manner of commission b. DISOBEDIENCE of or resistance to a lawful, writ, process, order, or judgment.

Unauthorized intrusion to any real property after being ejected;
DIRECT INDIRECT
Committee in the presence of or so near a Not committed within presence of court In cases of disobedience of or resistance to lawful, writ, process, order, or judgments the
court following must be present:
Summary in nature There is charge and hearing 1. Order must be specified
2. order must be lawful; and
Remedy is certiorari or prohibition Remedy is appeal
3. Disobedience should be willful
Certiorari/prohibition suspends execution Immediately executory unless a bond is filed
provided there is a bond
If the court has jurisdiction when it rendered judgment, the same cannot be disobeyed
Punishment: if committed against: Punishment: if committed against: however erroneous it may be.
RTC – fine not exceeding P2,000 or RTC – fine not exceeding P30,000 or
imprisonment not exceeding 10 days or both imprisonment not exceeding 6 months or both
MTC - fine not exceeding P200 or MTC – fine not exceeding P5,000 or c. Any ABUSE OR ANY UNLAWFUL INTERFERENCE w/the proceedings not
imprisonment not exceeding 1 day or both imprisonment not exceeding 1 month or both. constituting direct contempt.
4blue95: accused can appeal and if such appeal is granted by court thereby exonerating his 4blue95: ex is publication on newspaper during trial w/c would embarrass the court
liability,the other party cannot appeal anymore (or else it would tantamount to double jeopardy)
d. Any IMPROPER CONDUCT tending to degrade the administration of justice;
e. ASSUMING TO BE AN ATTORNEY or an officer of the court w/o authority;
2) As to nature f. FAILURE to obey a subpoena duly served;
g. RESCUE or attempted rescue, of a person or property in the custody of an officer.
a. CIVIL CONTEMPT - consist in failing to do something ordered to be done by a court or a
judge in a civil case for the benefit of the opposing party therein.
> defendant’s intent in committing the contempt is immaterial since the purpose of civil contempt
proceedings is remedial. Hence, good faith is not a defense.
> purpose is primarily compensatory or remedial. TWO MODES OF COMMENCING A PROCEEDING FOR INDIRECT CONTEMPT
b. CRIMINAL CONTEMPT – is a conduct that is directed against the authority and dignity of a 1. Commence motu propio by court in order(issued by judge) or other formal charge
court or of a judge acting judicially, as in unlawfully assailing or discrediting the authority and by the court requiring the respondent to show cause why he should not be punished
dignity of the court or judge, or in doing a duly forbidden act. for contempt;
 intent is necessary. 4blue95: The first procedure applies only when the indirect contempt is committed
 Purpose is primarily punitive against a court or judge possessed and clothed with contempt power.
 State is the real prosecutor
2. a verified petition charging indirect contempt with supporting particulars and
certified true copies of the necessary documents and papers.

CRIMINAL CONTEMPT CIVIL CONTEMPT 4blue95:The second mode applies if the contemptuous act was committed NOT
Purpose is to vindicate public authority Purpose is to protect and enforce the civil against a court or a judicial officer with authority, to punish contemptuous acts.
rights and remedies of the litigants (Nazareno vs. Barnes, 136 SCRA 57)
Conduct directed against the dignity or Failure to do something ordered by the court
authority of the court for the benefit of a party 4blue95:Without charge and hearing, court acquires no jurisdiction to punish for
If accused is acquitted, there can be no appeal If judgment is for respondent, there can be an indirect contempt. (Esparagoza vs. Tan, 94 Phl 749)
appeal
4blue95:Formal information be the prosecuting officer is not necessary to begin
In special judgment under rule 39 Section 11. the person required by the judgment to obey the contempt proceedings, all Rule 71 requires is that there be a charge in writing duly
same nay be punished for contempt if he disobeyed. NO contempt however lies in judgments for filed in court and an opportunity given to the person charged to be heard by himself
money (Section 9) and judgments for specific act (Section 10) under Rule 39. or counsel.

Note that a losing party in an ejectment case does not commit contempt by mere refusal to leave
the premises. But if such party had been dispossessed pursuant to a court order, but subsequently
disturbs the possession of the prevailing party, he now commits contempt. WHERE CHARGE TO BE FILED

4blue95:if you’re ejected, and you’re still inside ,then ,that’s not contempt but the moment you go
out and you return,then that is already contempt.
TWO-FOLD ASPECT:
1. Proper punishment for the disrespect to the court or its order; and
 If committed against a Regional Trial Court or a court of equivalent or higher rank,
or against an officer appointed by it, the charge may be filed with such court.
 If committed against a lower court, the charge may be filed with the Regional Trial
Court of the place in which the lower court is sitting;
but the proceedings may also be instituted in such lower court subject to appeal to
the Regional Trial Court.

2. To compel the guilty party’s performance of some act or duty required of him by the
court. (Halili v. CIR, G.R. No. L-24864, 1985)
 5

DIRECT CONTEMPT

PUNISH SUMMARILY (no hearing)

GROUNDS OF DIRECT CONTEMPT

a. MISBEHAVIOR in the presence of or near a court as to obstruct or
interrupt the proceedings;
b. DISRESPECT towards the court
c. OFFENSIVE personalities towards others; and
d. REFUSAL to be sworn or to answer as witness or to subscribe an
affidavit or deposition

Remedy:

1. He cannot appeal, but he may file certiorari or prohibition under Rule 65.
2. Execution of judgment shall be suspended pending resolution of the petition, provided:
a. He files a bond fixed by the court which rendered the judgment; and
b. Conditioned that he will abide by and perform the judgment should the petition
be decided against him (Sec. 2, Rule 71)

Punishment for Contempt

1. RTC or court of equal or higher rank: Fine not exceeding P2,000 or

imprisonment not exceeding 10 days or both.
2. MTC: Fine not exceeding P200 or imprisonment not exceeding 1 day or both.
(Sec. 1, Rule 71)

4blue95 Note: If contempt consists in the refusal or omission to do an act which is

yet within the power of the respondent to perform, he may be imprisoned by order
of the court concerned until he performs it.

WHEN IMPRISONMENT SHALL BE IMPOSED

When the contempt consists in the refusal or omission to do an act which is yet in the power of the
respondent to perform, he may be imprisoned by order of the court concerned until he performs it.
(Sec. 8, Rule 71)
The reason for indefinite incarceration in civil contempt proceedings, in proper cases, is that it is
remedial, preservative, or coercive in nature. The punishment is imposed for the benefit of a
complainant or a party to a suit who has been injured. Its object is to compel performance of the
orders or decrees of the court, which the contemnor refuses to obey although able to do so. In
effect, it is within the power of the person adjudged guilty of contempt to set himself free.
(Montenegro v. Montenegro, G.R. No. 156829, 2004)

CONTEMPT AGAINST QUASI-JUDICIAL BODIES

Unless otherwise provided by law, this Rule shall apply to contempt committed against persons,
entities, bodies or agencies exercising quasijudicial functions, or shall have suppletory effect to
such rules as they may have adopted pursuant to authority granted to them by law to punish for
contempt. The Regional Trial Court of the place wherein the contempt has been committed shall
have jurisdiction over such charges as may be filed therefor. (Sec. 13, Rule 71)

Power of Contempt by the Senate in Inquiries in Aid of Legislation

The period of imprisonment under the inherent power of contempt by the Senate
during inquiries in aid of legislation should only last until the termination of the
legislative inquiry under which the said power is invoked. Accordingly, as long as
there is a legitimate legislative inquiry, then the inherent power of contempt by the
Senate may be properly exercised. Conversely, once the said legislative inquiry
concludes, the exercise of the inherent power of contempt ceases and there is no
more genuine necessity to penalize the detained witness. (Balag v. Senate of the
Philippines, G.R. No. 234608, 2018)

Q: Ms. R received a subpoena ad testificandum from a Regional Trial Court (RTC) directing her
to appear and testify in a case. Despite notice and without any sufficient justification, Ms. R failed
to appear. This prompted the RTC to issue a show-cause order directing Ms. R to explain, within
ten (10) days, why she should not be cited for contempt for her nonappearance despite receipt of
the subpoena. Ms. R, however, did not file her comment. After due hearing with notice to the
parties, the RTC cited her in indirect contempt, and consequently, ordered her arrest. Ms. R moved
to quash the warrant issued for her arrest, claiming that a formal charge should have been filed
against her, and that the same should have been docketed and prosecuted as a separate case against
her. She thus claimed that since this procedure was not followed, the order citing her in contempt
is null and void.

a. Is Ms. R's contention tenable? Explain.

A: No. Under Section 4, Rule 71, a person may be charged with indirect contempt only by
either two (2) alternative ways, namely: (1) By a verified petition, if initiated by a party; or
(2) By an order or any other formal charge requiring the respondent to show cause why he
should not be punished for contempt, if made by a court against which the contempt is
committed. In short, a charge of indirect contempt must be initiated through a verified
petition, unless the charge is directly made by the court against which the contemptuous act
is committed. Here, it was the court who initiated the contempt charge against Mr. R. Hence,
his contention is untenable. (Peralta v. Omelio, A.M. No. RTJ-11-2259, October 22, 2013)
b. What is the proper mode of appeal should Ms. R decide to assail her contempt citation?
Will the filing of such appeal automatically result in the suspension of the execution of
judgment? Explain. (2019 Bar) A: The proper remedy of Mr. R is to file a petition for
certiorari or prohibition under Rule 65. The execution of the judgment shall be suspended
pending resolution of such petition, provided such person file a bond fixed by the court
which rendered the judgment and conditioned that he will abide by and perform the
judgment should the petition be decided against him. (Section 2, Rule 71)