Civil Procedure Lecture

January 9, 2021

Topic: Causes of Action-Rule 2

If A filed a complaint against B for a collection of money (1M), after the complaint was received, B
will file a motion to dismiss, this has now been erased/ amended.

In the answer, incorporate the grounds as an affirmative defenses, the grounds for the motion to
dismiss shall be incorporated in the answer as the affirmative defense and the court will treat it as if
a motion to dismiss had been filed and then once the court denies it the case will proceed to pre-trial,
after the pre-trial, trial , resumption of evidence, a shortcut.
Q: What happens if the court grants a motion to dismiss, an affirmative defense?

A: The case will be dismissed.

The plaintiff’s remedy is to file for an appeal.

Q: What happens if the court denies the motion to dismiss?

A: The trial will push through.

Section 4: Splitting Causes of Action. A party may not institute more than one suit on the basis of a
single cause of action. If he violates this, this is tantamount to Sec. 4, Splitting of Causes of Action

• It is like forum-shopping- PROHIBITED

Example:
A borrowed 1M money from B’s bank, and to secure the loan he mortgaged his car
worth 600k. The loan shall be paid in three installments. After three months, A defaulted. Can
the B still collect, and file for a foreclosure of chattel mortgage and at the same time file a
collection suit against A?

Answer:
NO, that is tantamount to splitting of causes of action, because the cause of action is
only one, which is the collection of money. What B should do is foreclosure of the mortgage
with damages (other options may do). You cannot file a case for foreclosure and then file
another case for collection of money for this will be tantamount to splitting of cause of action.
Options of B

• Foreclosure of the car + damages

• File for collection of the sum of money+ damages + legal interest (6% per annum) if there is
no agreement, but if there is agreement, the agreement will prevail provided it is not
excessive or it is not unconscionable.
Q: If two properties are mortgaged in one loan and are located in different areas, the property that
was first foreclosed was in Area A and the next is in Area B, is this also an example of splitting of a
cause of action?
A: No, because the plaintiff only opted to foreclose, he no longer opted to collect. He only opted to choose
one cause of action, which is to foreclose the property.
Note: Sec.5, Rule 2 Although the law prohibits splitting cause of action, it does not prohibit
joinder of causes of action.

Ex: collection of sum of money with damages

Recovery of ownership with damages with prayer for issuance of temporary restraining order

On the basis of one action, there is joinder.

In one court, the plaintiff may file and incorporate/ join several causes of action provided it complies
with rules on joinder of parties under Rule 3 of Sec 6.

Splitting of causes of
action
LAW
Joinder of causes of
action

TOTALITY RULE – (d) Sec 5, Rule 2

- exclusively when the claims in the causes of action are principally for the recovery of money
or collection of sum of money
- The aggregate claim shall be the test of jurisdiction
- The test of jurisdiction will be the total amount of the claim

Q: Speaking of totality, how will you know which court has jurisdiction over the case?
A: MTC- does not exceed 300k (small claims), exclusive of costs and interest

Q: IF the claim has already exceeded 300k, example 320k, does the first level court
automatically lose jurisdiction?
A: No, the excess becomes a waiver on the part of the plaintiff

Note: While the law prohibits splitting of causes of action, it allows joinder of causes of
action

Jurisdiction of the court will be determined as to what type of action the plaintiff chooses.

Ex: If he opts for the collection of money, he should file in the RTC because the amount of
claim exceeds 300k
Q: How about if you opt to file for damages only?
A: Since damages is capable of pecuniary estimation, again if the amount of claim does not
exceed 300k, MTC, otherwise, RTC.

RTC- court of general jurisdiction

Sec 6, Rule 2- Misjoinder of Causes of Action
• Not a ground to dismiss a case
 • A mis joined action may, on motion of a party or upon the initiative of the court may be
severed or may proceed separately.
• As defendant, you cannot file as an affirmative defense or move for the dismissal of a case by
way of citing it in the affirmative defense that an action had been mis joined for it is not a
ground for the dismissal of a case.
• Just like parties, the court can just add or drop the name of the parties, the case can still
proceed.
The enumerations under Sec 12 of Rule8 by which an affirmative defense could be incorporated are
EXCLUSIVE.

Rule 3: Parties

Who May be parties?

1. Natural persons
2. Jurdical Persons
3. Entities authorized by law

Plaintiff- complaining party, claiming party, complainant, offended party

- In criminal cases, the victim

Defendant- the original defending party

Q: Why does the law define the defendant as the original defending party?
The law speaks of the plaintiff being the claiming party, and the defendant as the original
defending party. Is there an instance in law where the plaintiff would be the defendant?

A: The plaintiff would be the defendant if the original defending party files for a counterclaim
against the original plaintiff.
In the defendant’s counterclaim, the law considers him a plaintiff with respect to his
counterclaim, and the original plaintiff would become the defendant.

Ex: In a case of simple collection of a sum of money, in the complaint, 100k for small claims.
In the answer, the defendant will say as affirmative defense the admission that he owed 100k
but he already paid 200k because of the excessive interest which was 20% per month, my
counterclaim is to collect from him the excess.
In the counterclaim of the defendant, the original plaintiff becomes the defendant and the
original defending party becomes the plaintiff with respect to the counterclaim.

Remember: The court treats the counterclaim as a separate case.

In criminal case, you cannot file a counterclaim against the victim or offended party.
This is one of the distinctions between a criminal case and a civil case.

In civil case, you can file a counterclaim. In criminal case, there is no such thing as a
counterclaim.

In fact, when a case is dismissed, it is always without prejudice to the right of the defendant
to prosecute his counterclaim.
Ex: collection of sum of money in the amount of 100k with an interest rate of 10% per month,
he has been paying 10k per month for 5 years, and when he defaulted the plaintiff filed for a
case against defendant, naturally, the defendant will file a counterclaim against the original
plaintiff for he has been paying the unconscionable interest on the plaintiff.

The right of the defendant to collect against the plaintiff is a counterclaim and, in that
counterclaim, the defendant is now the plaintiff. The plaintiff is considerd by the court as the
defendant.

*** NOT Allowed in criminal cases, no countercharge in criminal cases in the same counter
affidavit.

Real Party in Interest

- the party who stands to be benefited or injured in the suit, or the party entitled to the avails
of the suit.

Benefited-PLAINTIFF
Injured- Defendant

Q: What happens when a real party in interest is omitted in a complaint or what happens if
the real party in interest is omitted in an answer?

e.g. There are 5 owners of a property, but 4 only filed a case, one is omitted who is also btw a
real party in interest or defendants, 5 owners of a property, you only named 4 as defendants;
a ground for dismissal on what grounds? When a real party in interest is not impleaded in the
complaint or a real party in interest is not impleaded in an answer…

A: Yes, on the ground of lack of cause of action, because if you are not a real party in interest,
the law considers you as having no locus standi, no right to sue.

A, B, C, and D can just simply authorize E to institute the action against the defendants by way
of filing a special power or execution of a special power of attorney. But who are the real party
of interest here?

A: The beneficiaries/ the owners…

A, B, C, D represented by E VS F( Defendant)

If there is no SPA, and only E will file a case against F, then the case is susceptible to dismissal
for lack of cause of action. E has no locus standi or right to sue.

The filing of motion to dismiss, under Rule 16 is now prohibited, and now been transposed
to Sec 12 of Rule 8, which enumerates the specific affirmative defenses which may be invoked
by the party. Any of the grounds to a motion to dismiss may now be invoked in an affirmative
defense provided under Sec 12 of Rule 8 and then the court will treat it as if a motion to
dismiss have been filed.
 Indispensable Parties
- A real party in interest without
whom no final determination can be
had of an action
Effect of Non-inclusion in the Pleading
Susceptible to dismissal such party
is not impleaded in the complaint
Necessary Parties
- Not indispensable but who ought to
be joined as a party to the case if
complete relief is to be accorded as
to those already parties, or for a
complete determination or
settlement of the claim subject of the
action
- Not susceptible to dismissal

Let us say there are 4 owners of a property, when you sue them, all of them must be named.
If you miss to join a co-owner, 3 were only named, then the case is susceptible for dismissal
for not impleading an indispensable party.

How
Ex: A civil case is filed to recover a real property that had already been sold by the original owners.
You filed a civil case against the new owners. Is it necessary to implead the old owners so there may
be a complete relief?

Answer: It is not. But the law does not prohibit impleading both the previous owner and the new
owner, the original owner who already sold the property is considered a necessary party only.
Failure to implead a necessary party is not a ground for dismissal. You will only implead him if
complete relief is to be accorded…

If co-owners of property are considered indispensable parties. Failure to implead them will result
in the dismissal of the action.

Note: Husband and wife are pro-forma parties. If husband bought a property, and exclusively named
the same in his name The name of the wife, although not written in the document is an invisible name
in the title, by operation of law, because the property is acquired during the marriage, considered
absolute community (Art.88, FC)

Spouses are considered pro forma parties. Whether you name them or not, they are included
in the complaint as spouses.

Example: If the name of the wife is not included in the foreclosure of a certain property, it will
not prevent the court from foreclosing the property.
Any suit against one, will always be against the absolute community, but without prejudice to the
right of action by one spouse towards the other.
Proforma- not indispensable parties; suit to the absolute community
If the court directs the plaintiff to include a necessary party in the complaint, but the plaintiff
did not obey, what will be the effect?
A:It is a ground for dismissal for failure of the plaintiff to comply with a lawful order of the
court. ( Rule 17, Sec 3)

Unwilling Plaintiff- a party who is supposed to be a plaintiff but whose consent to be joined as a
plaintiff cannot be obtained as when he refuses to be a party to the action.
Remedy: Under Sec 10 of Rule 3, said unwilling co-plaintiff may be made a defendant, and the reason
therefor shall be stated in the complaint.

Class Suit requisites:

1. The subject matter of the controversy must be of common or general interest to many
persons;
2. The persons are so numerous that it is impracticable to join all as parties;
3. The parties actually before the court are sufficiently numerous and representative as to fully
protect the interests of all concerned; and
4. The representatives sue or defend for the benefit of all