2023 Blue Notes Remedial Law

ATENEO CENTRAL
BAR OPERATIONS 2023 REMEDIAL LAW, LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS WITH PRACTICAL EXERCISES
Back to TOC Page 2 of 508

ATENEO CENTRAL

ATENEO CENTRAL

ATENEO CENTRAL
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. GENERAL PRINCIPLES IN REMEDIAL LAW ........................................................................ 14

A. SUBSTANTIVE LAW AS DISTINGUISHED FROM REMEDIAL LAW .......................... 14
B. RULE-MAKING POWER OF THE SUPREME COURT ................................................ 14
C. PRINCIPLE OF JUDICIAL HIERARCHY ........................................................................ 15
D. DOCTRINE OF NON-INTERFERENCE OR DOCTRINE OF JUDICIAL STABILITY .... 16
II. JURISDICTION......................................................................................................................... 18
A. CLASSIFICATION OF JURISDICTION ........................................................................... 18
1. ORIGINAL VS. APPELLATE ........................................................................................ 18
2. GENERAL VS. SPECIAL.............................................................................................. 18
3. EXCLUSIVE VS. CONCURRENT ................................................................................ 18
B. DOCTRINES OF HIERARCHY OF COURTS AND ADHERENCE OF JURISDICTION 18
C. JURISDICTION OF VARIOUS PHILIPPINE COURTS AND TRIBUNALS .................... 19
1. SUPREME COURT ...................................................................................................... 20
2. COURT OF APPEALS .................................................................................................. 21
3. COURT OF TAX APPEALS.......................................................................................... 22
4. SANDIGANBAYAN ....................................................................................................... 23
5. REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS ........................................................................................ 25
6. FAMILY COURTS ......................................................................................................... 26
7. MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS – MeTC, MTC and MCTC ............................................ 27
D. ASPECTS OF JURISDICTION ........................................................................................ 30
1. JURISDICTION OVER THE SUBJECT MATTER ....................................................... 30
2. JURISDICTION OVER THE PARTIES ........................................................................ 32
3. JURISDICTION OVER THE ISSUES ........................................................................... 32
4. JURISDICTION OVER THE RES OR THE PROPERTY IN LITIGATION .................. 32
E. JURISDICTION vs. EXERCISE OF JURISDICTION ...................................................... 33
F. JURISDICTION vs. VENUE ............................................................................................. 33
G. JURISDICTION OVER CASES COVERED BY BARANGAY CONCILIATION, AND
CASES COVERED BY THE RULES ON EXPEDITED PROCEDURES IN THE FIRST
LEVEL COURTS....................................................................................................................... 33
III. CIVIL PROCEDURE ................................................................................................................ 37

A. GENERAL PROVISIONS ................................................................................................. 38
ATENEO CENTRAL
B. KINDS OF ACTIONS........................................................................................................ 38
1. IN REM .......................................................................................................................... 38
2. IN PERSONAM ............................................................................................................. 38
3. QUASI IN REM ............................................................................................................. 38
C. CAUSE OF ACTION......................................................................................................... 40
D. PARTIES TO CIVIL ACTION (RULE 3)........................................................................... 41
E. VENUE .............................................................................................................................. 45
F. PLEADINGS ..................................................................................................................... 48
1. KINDS ........................................................................................................................... 48
2. PARTS OF A PLEADING ............................................................................................. 54
3. MANNER OF MAKING ALLEGATIONS....................................................................... 57
4. EFFECT OF FAILURE TO PLEAD (RULE 9) .............................................................. 60
5. AMENDED AND SUPPLEMENTAL PLEADINGS ....................................................... 62
6. WHEN TO FILE RESPONSIVE PLEADINGS (RULE 11) ........................................... 64
G. FILING AND SERVICE OF PLEADINGS (Rule 13) ....................................................... 65
1. RULES ON PAYMENT OF DOCKET FEES; EFFECT OF NON-PAYMENT ............. 65
2. 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) .................................... 66
H. SUMMONS ....................................................................................................................... 67
1. NATURE AND PURPOSE OF SUMMONS IN RELATION TO ACTIONS IN
PERSONAM, IN REM, AND QUASI IN REM ....................................................................... 67
2. WHO MAY SERVE SUMMONS ................................................................................... 68
3. VALIDITY OF SUMMONS AND ISSUANCE OF ALIAS SUMMONS .......................... 68
4. PERSONAL SERVICE ................................................................................................. 69
5. SUBSTITUTED SERVICE ............................................................................................ 70
6. CONSTRUCTIVE SERVICE ........................................................................................ 73
7. EXTRA-TERRITORIAL SERVICE ................................................................................ 73
8. PROOF OF SERVICE .................................................................................................. 74
I. MOTIONS ......................................................................................................................... 74
1. MOTIONS IN GENERAL .............................................................................................. 74
2. NON-LITIGIOUS MOTIONS ......................................................................................... 75
3. LITIGIOUS MOTIONS .................................................................................................. 75
4. PROHIBITED MOTIONS .............................................................................................. 75
5. MOTION FOR BILL OF PARTICULARS ...................................................................... 76

ATENEO CENTRAL
J. DISMISSAL OF ACTIONS ............................................................................................... 77

1. WITH PREJUDICE V. WITHOUT PREJUDICE ........................................................... 77
2. DISMISSALS WHICH HAVE AN EFFECT ON ADJUDICATION ON THE MERITS .. 78
K. PRE-TRIAL ....................................................................................................................... 78
1. NATURE AND PURPOSE ............................................................................................ 78
2. APPEARANCE OF PARTIES; EFFECT OF FAILURE TO APPEAR .......................... 79
3. PRE-TRIAL BRIEF; EFFECT OF FAILURE TO FILE .................................................. 80
L. INTERVENTION ............................................................................................................... 81
M. SUBPOENA ...................................................................................................................... 83
N. COMPUTATION OF TIME ............................................................................................... 84
O. MODES OF DISCOVERY ................................................................................................ 85
1. DEPOSITIONS (RULES 23 and 24) ............................................................................ 85
2. INTERROGATORIES TO PARTIES (RULE 25) .......................................................... 87
3. ADMISSION BY ADVERSE PARTY (RULE 26) .......................................................... 88
4. PRODUCTION AND INSPECTION OF DOCUMENTS OR THINGS (RULE 27) ....... 89
5. PHYSICAL AND MENTAL EXAMINATION OF PERSONS (RULE 28) ...................... 90
6. REFUSAL TO COMPLY WITH MODES OF DISCOVERY (RULE 29) ....................... 90
P. TRIAL (RULE 30) ............................................................................................................. 91
1. SCHEDULE OF TRIAL ................................................................................................. 92
2. ADJOURNMENTS AND POSTPONEMENTS ............................................................. 92
3. REQUISITES OF MOTION TO POSTPONE TRIAL ON THE GROUND OF ILLNESS
OF A PARTY OR COUNSEL ................................................................................................ 92
Q. CONSOLIDATION OR SEVERANCE (RULE 31) ........................................................... 93
R. DEMURRER TO EVIDENCE (RULE 33) ......................................................................... 94
1. GROUNDS .................................................................................................................... 94
2. EFFECT OF ORDER DENYING DEMURRER TO EVIDENCE .................................. 94
S. JUDGMENTS AND FINAL ORDERS .............................................................................. 96
1. JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS (RULE 34) ........................................................... 96
2. SUMMARY JUDGMENT (RULE 35) ............................................................................ 98
3. RENDITION AND ENTRY OF JUDGMENTS AND FINAL ORDERS (RULE 36) ..... 100
T. POST JUDGMENT REMEDIES ..................................................................................... 102
1. MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL OR RECONSIDERATION ............................................. 102
2. APPEALS .................................................................................................................... 106
3. PETITION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT (Rule 38) ............................................ 125

ATENEO CENTRAL
4. ANNULMENT OF JUDGMENTS AND FINAL ORDERS AND RESOLUTIONS (Rule

47) 127
5. COLLATERAL ATTACK OF JUDGMENTS ............................................................... 130
U. EXECUTION, SATISFACTION AND EFFECT OF JUDGMENTS ................................ 130
IV. PROVISIONAL REMEDIES .................................................................................................. 146

A. NATURE AND PURPOSE, AND JURISDICTION OVER PROVISIONAL REMEDIES
146
B. PRELIMINARY ATTACHMENT ..................................................................................... 146
C. PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION ........................................................................................ 162
D. RECEIVERSHIP (RULE 59) ........................................................................................... 174
E. REPLEVIN (RULE 60) .................................................................................................... 177
V. SPECIAL CIVIL ACTIONS .................................................................................................... 182

A. JURISDICTION AND VENUE ........................................................................................ 182
B. INTERPLEADER ............................................................................................................ 183
C. DECLARATORY RELIEF AND SIMILAR REMEDIES ................................................. 184
D. CERTIORARI, PROHIBITION , AND MANDAMUS ...................................................... 186
1. DEFINITIONS AND DISTINCTIONS .......................................................................... 186
2. REQUISITES, WHEN, AND WHERE TO FILE .......................................................... 187
3. EXCEPTIONS TO FILING OF MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION BEFORE FILING
PETITION ............................................................................................................................ 194
E. QUO WARRANTO ......................................................................................................... 194
F. EXPROPRIATION .......................................................................................................... 198
1. TWO STAGES IN EVERY ACTION FOR EXPROPRIATION ................................... 198
2. ORDER OF EXPROPRIATION .................................................................................. 199
3. ASCERTAINMENT OF JUST COMPENSATION ...................................................... 200
4. RIGHTS OF PLAINTIFF UPON JUDGMENT AND PAYMENT ................................. 203
G. FORECLOSURE OF REAL ESTATE MORTGAGE (RULE 68) ................................... 204
1. KINDS OF FORECLOSURE (JUDICIAL FORECLOSURE AND EXTRAJUDICIAL
FORECLOSURE) ................................................................................................................ 204
2. THE GENERAL BANKING LAW OF 2000 ................................................................. 212
H. PARTITION ..................................................................................................................... 212
I. FORCIBLE ENTRY AND UNLAWFUL DETAINER ...................................................... 216

ATENEO CENTRAL
1. DIFFERENTIATED FROM ACCION PUBLICIANA AND ACCION REIVINDICATORIA

217
J. CONTEMPT .................................................................................................................... 220
VI. SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS ................................................................................................... 225

A. SETTLEMENT OF ESTATE OF DECASED PERSONS............................................... 225
1. VENUE AND PROCESS ............................................................................................ 226
2. SUMMARY SETTLEMENT OF ESTATES ................................................................. 229
3. ALLOWANCE OR DISALLOWANCE OF WILLS ....................................................... 232
4. CLAIMS AGAINST THE ESTATE .............................................................................. 236
5. PAYMENT OF DEBTS OF THE ESTATE .................................................................. 238
6. SALES, MORTGAGES AND OTHER ENCUMBRANCES OF PROPERTY OF
DECEDENT ......................................................................................................................... 239
7. DISTRIBUTION AND PARTITION ............................................................................. 242
B. GUARDIANSHIP ............................................................................................................ 243
1. VENUE ........................................................................................................................ 244
2. APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIANS ............................................................................. 244
3. GENERAL POWERS AND DUTIES OF GUARDIANS.............................................. 246
4. TERMINATION OF GUARDIANSHIP ........................................................................ 248
C. WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS ........................................................................................ 250
1. WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS IN RELATION TO CUSTODY OF MINORS.............. 261
D. CHANGE OF NAME ....................................................................................................... 263
E. CANCELLATION AND CORRECTION OF ENTRIES IN THE CIVIL REGISTRY ....... 266
F. CLERICAL ERROR LAW .............................................................................................. 266
G. WRIT OF AMPARO ........................................................................................................ 268
H. WRIT OF HABEAS DATA ............................................................................................. 274
I. RULES OF PROCEDUREE FOR ENVIRIONMENTAL CASES ................................... 276
1. TEMPORARY ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ORDER ..................................... 276
2. WRIT OF CONTINUING MANDAMUS ...................................................................... 276
3. WRIT OF KALIKASAN ................................................................................................ 277
VII. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE .................................................................................................... 281

A. GENERAL CONCEPTS ................................................................................................. 282
1. CRIMINAL JURISDICTION – CONCEPT AND REQUISITES FOR EXERCISE ...... 282

ATENEO CENTRAL
2. WHEN INJUNCTION MAY BE ISSUED TO RESTRAIN CRIMINAL PROSECUTION

288
B. PROSECUTION OF CRIMINAL OFFENSES (Rule 110) ............................................. 290
C. PROSECUTION OF CIVIL ACTION (RULE 111) ......................................................... 308
D. PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION (RULE 112) ............................................................. 314
1. EXECUTIVE VS. JUDICIAL DETERMINATION OF PROBABLE CAUSE ................ 319
E. ARREST (RULE 113) ..................................................................................................... 326
1. ARREST WITHOUT WARRANT, WHEN LAWFUL ................................................... 327
2. REQUISITES OF A VALID WARRANT OF ARREST ................................................ 330
3. DETERMINATION OF PROBABLE CAUSE FOR ISSUANCE OF WARRANT OF
ARREST .............................................................................................................................. 330
F. BAIL (RULE 144) ........................................................................................................... 332
1. NATURE ..................................................................................................................... 332
2. WHEN A MATTER OF RIGHT; EXCEPTIONS.......................................................... 333
3. WHEN A MATTER OF DISCRETION ........................................................................ 335
G. ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA (RULE 116) ..................................................................... 343
1. SEARCHING INQUIRY (PEOPLE V. PAGAL, G.R. NO. 241257, SEPTEMBER 29,
2020) .................................................................................................................................... 346
2. IMPROVIDENT PLEA ................................................................................................. 347
H. MOTION TO QUASH (RULE 117) ................................................................................. 349
1. GROUNDS .................................................................................................................. 349
2. DOUBLE JEOPARDY ................................................................................................. 353
3. PROVISIONAL DISMISSAL ....................................................................................... 354
I. PRE-TRIAL (RULE 118) ................................................................................................ 356
1. PRE-TRIAL AGREEMENT ......................................................................................... 358
2. NON-APPEARANCE DURING PRE-TRIAL .............................................................. 358
3. PRE-TRIAL ORDER ................................................................................................... 358
J. TRIAL (RULE 119) ......................................................................................................... 360
1. TRIAL IN ABSENTIA .................................................................................................. 364
2. EXAMINATION OF WITNESS FOR THE PROSECUTION ...................................... 364
3. REQUISITES FOR DISCHARGE OF ACCUSED TO BECOME A STATE WITNESS
365
4. EFFECTS OF DISCHARGE OF ACCUSED AS STATE WITNESS ......................... 366
5. DEMURRER TO EVIDENCE ..................................................................................... 366
6. REVISED GUIDELINES ON CONTINUOUS TRIAL (A.M. NO. 15-06-10-SC) ......... 368
ATENEO CENTRAL
K. JUDGMENT (RULE 120) ............................................................................................... 371

1. Promulgation of judgment ........................................................................................... 372
L. MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL OR RECONSIDERATION (RULE 121) ............................ 375
M. APPEAL (RULE 122) ..................................................................................................... 377
N. SEARCHES AND SEIZURE (RULE 126) ...................................................................... 382
O. PROVISIONAL REMEDIES IN CRIMINAL CASES (RULE 127) ................................. 392
P. THE RULE ON Cybercrime Warrants (A.M. NO. 17-11-03-SC) ................................. 392
VIII. EVIDENCE .......................................................................................................................... 396

A. GENERAL CONCEPTS ................................................................................................. 397
1. PROOF VS. EVIDENCE ............................................................................................. 397
2. BURDEN OF PROOF VS. BURDEN OF EVIDENCE ................................................ 397
3. EQUIPOISE RULE...................................................................................................... 397
B. ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE (RULE 128) ............................................................... 397
1. REQUISITES FOR ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE ................................................ 397
2. RELEVANCE OF EVIDENCE AND COLLATERAL MATTERS ................................ 398
3. MULTIPLE ADMISSIBILITY ....................................................................................... 399
4. CONDITIONAL ADMISSIBILITY ................................................................................ 399
5. CURATIVE ADMISSIBILITY ....................................................................................... 400
6. DIRECT AND CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE ......................................................... 400
7. POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE EVIDENCE.................................................................... 401
8. COMPETENT AND CREDIBLE EVIDENCE .............................................................. 401
C. JUDICIAL NOTICE AND JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS (RULE 129) ................................. 401
D. OBJECT (REAL) EVIDENCE (RULE 130, A) ............................................................... 409
1. REQUISITES OF ADMISSIBILITY ............................................................................. 410
2. EXCLUSIONARY RULE ............................................................................................. 411
E. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE ........................................................................................ 419
1. DEFINITION ................................................................................................................ 419
2. ORIGINAL DOCUMENT RULE [formerly the Best Evidence Rule]........................... 419
3. SECONDARY EVIDENCE; SUMMARIES ................................................................. 422
4. PAROL EVIDENCE RULE.......................................................................................... 425
F. TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE (RULE 130, C) ................................................................... 431
1. QUALIFICATIONS OF WITNESSES ......................................................................... 431
2. DISQUALIFICATIONS OF WITNESSES ................................................................... 431

ATENEO CENTRAL
3. TESTIMONIAL PRIVILEGE ........................................................................................ 440

4. ADMISSIONS AND CONFESSIONS ......................................................................... 441
5. PREVIOUS CONDUCT AS EVIDENCE..................................................................... 448
6. TESTIMONIAL KNOWLEDGE ................................................................................... 449
7. HEARSAY RULE AND EXCEPTIONS TO THE HEARSAY RULE ........................... 449
8. OPINION RULE .......................................................................................................... 462
9. CHARACTER EVIDENCE .......................................................................................... 463
G. BURDEN OF PROOF, BURDEN OF EVIDENCE AND PRESUMPTIONS (RULE 131)
465
H. PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE (RULE 132) ............................................................. 477
1. EXAMINATION OF WITNESS ................................................................................... 477
2. AUTHENTICATION AND PROOF OF DOCUMENTS ............................................... 488
3. OFFER AND OBJECTION ......................................................................................... 494
I. JUDICIAL AFFIDAVIT RULE (A.M. NO. 12-8-8-SC) .................................................... 498
J. WEIGHT AND SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE (RULE 133) ......................................... 501
K. RULES ON ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE (A.M. NO. 01-7-01-SC) .................................. 503
PART II ...................................................................................................................................... 508

ATENEO CENTRAL

ATENEO CENTRAL
I. GENERAL PRINCIPLES IN REMEDIAL It does not originate

LAW from the legislature
but has the force and
effect of law if not in
TOPIC OUTLINE UNDER THE 2023 Originates from the
conflict with
SYLLABUS legislature
substantive law.
(Alvero v. De La
General Principles in Remedial Law Rosa, G.R. No. L-
A. Substantive law vs. Remedial law 286, 1946)
B. Rule-making power of the Supreme
Court
B. RULE-MAKING POWER OF THE
C. Principle of Judicial Hierarchy
D. Doctrine of non-interference/Judicial SUPREME COURT
Stability
Power to Promulgate Procedural Rules
REMEDIAL LAW The Supreme Court shall have the power to
It is a branch of law that prescribes the methods promulgate rules concerning the protection and
of enforcing rights and obligations created by enforcement of constitutional rights, pleading,
substantive law. (Bustos v. Lucero, G.R. No. L- practice, and procedure in all courts, the
2068, 1948) admission to the practice of law, the Integrated
Bar, and legal assistance to the under-privileged
(PHIL. CONST. art. VIII, §5[5])
A. SUBSTANTIVE LAW AS
DISTINGUISHED FROM Applicability of the Rules of Court
REMEDIAL LAW The Rules of Court shall apply in all courts,
except as otherwise provided by the Supreme
SUBSTANTIVE LAW REMEDIAL LAW Court (Rule 1, Sec. 2)
Substantive law is
that part of the law General Rule: The Rules will not be applicable
which creates, in the following cases: (NICOLE)
defines and regulates 1. Election Cases;
rights, or which 2. Land Registration;
regulates the rights 3. Cadastral Cases;
and duties which give 4. Naturalization;
Remedial law
rise to a cause of 5. Insolvency proceedings; and
prescribes the
action; that part of the 6. Other cases not provided for in the Rules
method of enforcing
law which courts are of Court.
rights or obtaining
established to
redress for their
administer; as Exception: The Rules of Court will be applicable
invasions.
opposed to adjective in the above mentioned cases by analogy or in a
(Primicias v. Ocampo,
or remedial law, suppletory character and whenever practicable
G.R. No. L-6120,
which prescribes the and convenient. (Rule 1, Sec. 4)
1953)
method of enforcing
rights or obtains Application of procedural rules to pending
redress for their actions; exception
invasion. General Rule: The retroactive application of
(Bustos v. Lucero, procedural laws does not violate any personal
G.R. No. L-2068, rights because no vested rights may attach to nor
1948) rise therefrom. (In the Matter to Declare in
No vested rights may Contempt of Court Hon. Simeon Datumanong,
attach to nor arise G.R. No. 150274, 2006)
Makes vested rights
therefrom (Go v.
possible.
Sunbanun, G.R. No. Exception: The rule does not apply where the
168240, 2011) statute itself expressly or by necessary
Retroactive in implication provides that pending actions are
Prospective in application. (Calacala excepted from its operation, or where to apply it
application. v. Republic, G.R. No. to pending proceedings would impair vested
154415, 2005) rights. Under appropriate circumstances, courts
ATENEO CENTRAL
may deny the retroactive application of 10. Peculiar legal and equitable circumstances
procedural laws in the event that to do so would attendant to each case;
not be feasible or would work injustice. (Tan v. 11. In the name of substantial justice and fair
CA, G.R. No. 136368, 2002) play;
12. Importance of the issues involved; and
1. LIMITATIONS ON THE RULE-MAKING 13. Exercise of sound discretion by the judge
POWER OF THE SUPREME COURT guided by all the attendant circumstances.
a. The rules shall provide a simplified and (Labao v. Flores, G.R. No. 187984, 2010)
inexpensive procedure for the speedy
disposition of cases; Power to Discipline Judiciary Employees for
b. The rules shall be uniform for courts of the Non-Compliance with Rules and Regulations
same grade; and The Civil Service Commission has administrative
c. The rules shall not diminish, increase, or jurisdiction over the civil service. However, the
modify substantive rights. (PHIL. CONST. art. Constitution provides that the Supreme Court is
VIII, § 5) given exclusive administrative supervision over
all courts and judicial personnel. Only the
2. POWER OF THE SUPREME COURT Supreme Court can oversee the judges’ and court
TO AMEND AND SUSPEND personnel’s compliance with all laws, rules and
PROCEDURAL RULES regulations. No other branch of government may
intrude into this power, without running afoul of
Power to Relax/Suspend Procedural Rules the doctrine of separation of powers.
The Supreme Court has the sole prerogative to
amend, repeal or even establish new rules for a Administrative jurisdiction over a court employee
more simplified and inexpensive process, and the belongs to the Supreme Court, regardless of
speedy disposition of cases. (Neypes v. Court of whether the offense was committed before or
Appeals, G.R. No. 141524, 2005). after employment in the judiciary. (Sarah Ampong
v. CSC, GR No. 167916, 26 August 2008)
The courts have the power to relax or suspend
technical or procedural rules or to except a case C. PRINCIPLE OF JUDICIAL
from their operation when compelling reasons so HIERARCHY
warrant or when the purpose of justice requires it; A higher court will not entertain direct resort to it
what constitutes good and sufficient cause that unless the redress cannot be obtained in the
would merit suspension of the rules is appropriate courts (Santiago v. Vasquez, G.R.
discretionary upon the courts. (Commissioner of Nos. 99289-90, 1993).
Internal Revenue v. Migrant Pagbilao
Corporation, G.R. No. 159593, 2006) HIERARCHY OF COURTS
Direct recourse to this Court is improper because
Reasons that would warrant the suspension the Supreme Court is a court of last resort and
of the Rules: must remain to be so in order for it to satisfactorily
1. Most persuasive and weighty reasons; perform its constitutional functions, thereby
2. To relieve a litigant from an injustice not allowing it to devote its time and attention to
commensurate with his failure to comply with matters within its exclusive jurisdiction and
the prescribed procedure; preventing the overcrowding of its docket. (Dy v.
3. Good faith of the defaulting party by Bibat-Palamos, G.R. No. 196200, 2013)
immediately paying within a reasonable time
from the time of the default; Exceptions to the Doctrine
4. The existence of special or compelling A direct invocation of the Supreme Court’s
circumstances; original jurisdiction to issue a writ of certiorari
5. The merits of the case; should be allowed only when there are special
6. A cause not entirely attributable to the fault or and important reasons, clearly and specifically
negligence of the party favored by the set out in the petition. (First United v. Poro Point,
suspension of the rules; GR No. 178799, 2009) These cases are:
7. A lack of any showing that the review sought a. Ground of special and important reasons
is merely frivolous and dilatory; clearly stated in the petition;
8. The other party will not be unjustly prejudiced b. When dictated by public welfare and the
thereby; advancement of public policy;
9. Fraud, accident, mistake or excusable
negligence without appellant's fault;
ATENEO CENTRAL
c. When demanded by the broader interest

of justice;
d. When the challenged orders were patent
nullities;
e. When analogous exceptional and
compelling circumstances called for and
justified our immediate and direct
handling of the case. (for a-e, Republic v.
Caguioa, G.R. No. 174385, 2013)
f. When there are genuine issues of
constitutionality that must be addressed
at the most immediate time (The Diocese
of Bacolod v Commission on Elections,
G.R. 205728, 2015)
g. When the issues raised are of
transcendental importance (Rama v
Moises, G.R. 197146, 2017)
D. DOCTRINE OF NON-
INTERFERENCE OR DOCTRINE
OF JUDICIAL STABILITY
This principle holds that courts of equal and

coordinate jurisdiction cannot interfere with each
other’s orders. (Lapu-lapu Development and
Housing Corp v. Group Management Corp, G.R.
No. 141407, 2002).

ATENEO CENTRAL

ATENEO CENTRAL
II. JURISDICTION A. CLASSIFICATION OF

JURISDICTION
I. Jurisdiction
1. ORIGINAL VS. APPELLATE
A. Classification of Jurisdiction
1. Original vs. Appellate ORIGINAL APPELLATE
2. General vs. Special
3. Exclusive vs. Refers to a court
Refers to court where
Concurrent where a case is
a case arises
B. Doctrines of Hierarchy of reviewed.
Courts and Adherence of
Jurisdiction
C. Jurisdiction of Various 2. GENERAL VS. SPECIAL
Philippine Courts and GENERAL SPECIAL
Tribunals
1. Supreme Court Courts which take
Those which can take
2. Court of Appeals cognizance of all
cognizance of special
3. Court of Tax Appeals cases, civil or criminal,
jurisdiction for a
4. Sandiganbayan of a particular nature,
particular purpose, or
5. Regional Trial Courts or courts whose
are clothed with
6. Family Courts judgment are
special powers for the
7. Metropolitan Trial conclusive until
performance of
Courts, Municipal Trial modified or reversed
specified duties,
Courts, Municipal Trial on direct attack, and
beyond which they
8. Courts in cities, and who are competent to
have no authority of
Municipal Circuit Trial decide on their own
any kind.
Courts (Republic Act jurisdiction.
No. (RA) 11576, An Act
Further Expanding the 3. EXCLUSIVE VS.
Jurisdiction of First- CONCURRENT
Level Courts)
D. Aspects of Jurisdiction EXCLUSIVE CONCURRENT
1. Jurisdiction Over the
Held by courts which
Subject Matter
have jurisdiction over
2. Jurisdiction Over the Held by courts that
the same subject
Parties have jurisdiction over a
matter and within the
3. Jurisdiction Over the subject matter to the
same territory and
Issues exclusion of other
wherein litigants may
4. Jurisdiction Over the courts.
in the first instance
Res or the Property in
resort to either court
Litigation
indifferently.
E. Jurisdiction vs. exercise of
jurisdiction
F.Jurisdiction vs. Venue B. DOCTRINES OF HIERARCHY OF
G. Jurisdiction over cases COURTS AND ADHERENCE OF
covered by Barangay JURISDICTION
Conciliation, Small Claims
Cases and cases covered by Doctrine of Hierarchy of Courts
Summary Procedure See previous discussion on Hierarchy of Courts.
Continuity Of Jurisdiction/Adherence Of
Jurisdiction
Once jurisdiction has attached, it cannot be
ousted by subsequent happenings or events,
although the event is of such character which
would have prevented jurisdiction from attaching
in the first instance. Once jurisdiction has been
ATENEO CENTRAL
acquired by the court, it retains that jurisdiction C. JURISDICTION OF VARIOUS

until it finally disposes of the case (Baritua v. PHILIPPINE COURTS AND
Mercader, G.R. No. 136048, 2001). TRIBUNALS
General Rule: A law enacted during the General Rule
pendency of a case which transfers jurisdiction to The jurisdiction of the court is determined by the
another court does not affect cases prior to its statute in force at the time of the commencement
enactment. of the action. (Narra Nickel Mining v. Redmont,
G.R. No. 195580, 2014)
Exceptions:
1. When the new law expressly provides for Exception
retroactive application; Unless such statute provides for its retroactive
2. When the change of jurisdiction is application, as where it is a curative legislation.
curative in character (Vda. de Ballesteros (Atlas Fertilizer v. Navarro, G.R. No. 72074,
v. Rural Bank of Canaman, G.R. No. 1987)
176250, 2010).
The courts acquire jurisdiction over a case only
Applications of the Doctrine upon payment of the prescribed docket fee.
1. Jurisdiction of the court is not lost by the (Pacific Redhouse Corp v. EIB Securities, G.R.
mere fact that a judge ceases to be in No. 184036, 2010)
office (Victory Liner v. Belosillo, A.M. No.
MTJ-00-1321, Mar. 10, 2004); When several courts have concurrent jurisdiction,
2. Retirement of the public official during the the first court which acquires jurisdiction retains it
pendency of an administrative case does to the exclusion of the others. (Nenaria v. Veluz,
not render the case moot and academic G.R. No. L-4683, 1952)
(Office of the Ombudsman v. Dechaves,
G.R. No. 176702, Nov. 13, 2013) Note: The Jurisdiction tables below are based on
3. Finality of the judgment does not deprive Primer-Reviewer on Remedial Law, Sixth (2020)
the court of its jurisdiction over the case, edition by Atty. Manuel R. Riguera; Civil
as it retains the jurisdiction to enforce and Procedure Annotated Vol. 1. 2013 Ed. by Justice
execute it. What is lost is the power to Jose Y. Feria† and Atty. Maria Concepcion S.
amend, modify, or alter the judgment. Noche; and Guide Notes and Cases on Tax
(Echegaray v. Secretary of Justice, G.R. Remedies 2018 ed. by Dean Lily K. Gruba
132601, Jan. 19, 1999).

ATENEO CENTRAL
1. SUPREME COURT
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
Exclusive
Petitions for certiorari, prohibition or mandamus against:

1. Court of Appeals.
2. Commission on Elections.
3. Commission on Audit.
4. Sandiganbayan.
5. Court of Tax Appeals.
Concurrent
1. With the CA 1. Petitions for certiorari, prohibition or mandamus against:

a. RTCs
b. NLRC (Note: All such petitions over NLRC cases should be filed with the CA
unless there are compelling and exceptional circumstances.
2. With the CA 1. Petitions for certiorari, prohibition or mandamus against courts of the first level
and RTC and other bodies
2. Petitions for habeas corpus and quo warranto
3. With RTC 1. Actions against ambassadors, other public ministers, and consuls
4. With the SB 1. Petitions for certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, habeas corpus, injunctions and
ancillary writs in aid of its appellate jurisdiction and over petitions of similar
nature, including quo warranto in PCGG cases
3. With the CA, 1. Petition for a writ of amparo (S3 Rule on the Writ of Amparo)
SB and RTC 2. Petition for a writ of habeas data (S3 Rule on the Writ of Habeas Data)
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
1. Petitions for review on certiorari against:

a. CA
b. SB
c. RTC in cases involving:
i. Constitutionality or validity of a treaty, international or executive agreement, law,
presidential decree, proclamation, order, instruction, ordinance, or regulation
ii. Legality of tax, impost, assessment, toll or penalty in relation thereto
iii. Jurisdiction of a lower court
iv. Pure error or question of law (cf. criminal cases, Tan v. People, 381 SCRA 75.
Note that appeals from MTC decisions even if on pure question of law is to the
RTC and that an appeal from the RTC’s decision is rendered in the exercise of
appellate jurisdiction is to the CA even if on pure question/s of law [S2(c) R42]
d. CTA en banc (Sec. 19, of R.A. 1125 as amended by R.A. 9282)
e. Final judgment or order in a writ of amparo or habeas data case (S19, Rule on the Writ
of Amparo; S19 Rule on the Writ of Habeas Data)

ATENEO CENTRAL
2. COURT OF APPEALS
Exclusive
1. Actions for annulment of judgments of the RTCs

2. Special civil action for certiorari against an RTC order approving or disapproving the rehabilitation
plan or any order issued after the approval of the rehabilitation plan (2013 Financial Rehabilitation
Rules of Procedure, Rule 6)
Concurrent
1. With the SC 1. Petitions for certiorari, prohibition or mandamus against:

a. RTCs
b. NLRC (Note: All such petitions over NLRC cases should be filed with the CA
unless there are compelling and exceptional circumstances.
2. With the SC, 1. Petitions for certiorari, prohibition or mandamus against courts of the first level
and RTC and other bodies
3. With the SC, 1. Petition for writ of amparo.
SB and RTC 2. Petition for writ of habeas data.
1. Ordinary Appeals from:

Appeal 1. RTCs, except in cases exclusively appealable to the SC
2. Family Courts
3. Special Commercial Courts
2. Appeal by Appeals from:

Petition for 1. Civil Service Commission
Review (R43) 2. Securities and Exchange Commission
3. Land Registration Authority
4. Social Security Commission
5. Office of the President
6. Civil and Aeronautics Board
7. Bureau of Patents, Trademarks and Technology Transfer
8. National Electrification Administration
9. Energy Regulatory Commission
10. National Telecommunications Commission
11. Department of Agrarian Reform under RA 6657
12. Government Service Insurance System
13. Employees’ Compensation Commission
14. Insurance Commission
15. Philippine Atomic Energy Commission
16. Board of Investments
17. Construction Industry Arbitration Commission
18. Voluntary Arbitrators authorized by law
19. Any other quasi-judicial agency, instrumentality, board, or commission in the
exercise of its quasi-judicial functions

ATENEO CENTRAL
Per Sec. 19 of RA 1125 as amended by RA 9282 decisions of the CTA en banc

are appealable to SC via R45; decisions of the CTA division denying a motion
for reconsideration are appealable to the CTA en banc by way of petition for
review.
3. Petition for 1. Appeals from RTC in cases appealed thereto from the lower courts
review (R42) 2. Appeals from RTC acting as a Special Agrarian Court (S60 of the
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law)
3. COURT OF TAX APPEALS
CTA EN BANC: APPELLATE JURISDICTION
1. Decisions or resolution on MRs or MNTs of the CTA DIVISION in the exercise of its exclusive
appellate jurisdiction
- Cases from administrative agencies – Bureau of Internal Revenue, Bureau of Customs,
Department of Finance, Department of Trade and Industry, Department of Agriculture
- Local tax cases by the RTC (original jurisdiction)
- Tax collection cases by the RTC (original jurisdiction) involving final and executory assessments
for taxes, fees, charges, and penalties, where the principal amount of taxes and penalties claimed
is less than P1,000,000.
2. Decisions, resolutions, or order on MRs or MNTs in the CTA DIVISION in the exercise of its
exclusive original jurisdiction
- Tax collection cases
- Cases involving criminal offenses arising from violation of the NIRC or TCC and other laws
administered by the BIR or BOC
3. Decisions, resolutions, or orders of the RTC in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction
- Local tax cases
- Tax collection cases
- Criminal offenses arising from violations of the NIRC or TCC and administered by the BIR or BOC
4. Decisions of the CBAA in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction over cases involving assessment
and taxation of real property originally decided by the provincial or city board of assessment appeals
CTA DIVISION: GENERAL/CIVIL MATTERS
1. Decisions from the COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE in cases involving

- disputed assessments, refunds of internal revenue taxes, fees or other charges, penalties in
relation thereto, or
- other matters arising under the National Internal Revenue Code (NIRC) or other laws
administered by the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR).
2. Inaction by the COMMISSIONER INTERNAL REVENUE in cases involving
- disputed assessments, refunds of internal revenue taxes, fees or other charges, penalties in
relation thereto, or other matters arising under the NIRC or other laws administered by the BIR,
where the NIRC provides a specific period of action, in which case the inaction shall be deemed
a denial.
3. Decisions, orders or resolutions of REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS
- in local tax cases originally decided or resolved by them in the exercise of their original
jurisdiction.
4. Decisions of the COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS
- in cases involving liability for custom duties, fees or other money charges, seizure, detention or
release of property affected, fines, forfeitures or other penalties in relation thereto, or other
matters arising under the Customs Law or other laws administered by the Bureau of Customs.
5. Decisions of the SECRETARY OF FINANCE

ATENEO CENTRAL
-
on customs cases elevated to him/her automatically for review from decisions of the
Commissioner of Customs which are adverse to the Government under Section 2315 of the
TCC.
6. Decisions of the SECRETARY OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY
- in the case of non-agricultural product, commodity or article; and
Decisions of the SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE
- in the case of agricultural product, commodity or article involving dumping and countervailing
duties under Sections 301 and 302, respectively, of the TCC and safeguard measures under
the RA 8800, where either party may appeal the decision to impose or not to impose said duties.
CTA DIVISION: CRIMINAL CASES
i. Original Criminal cases arising from violations of the:

Jurisdiction 1. National Internal Revenue Code.
2. Tariff and Customs Code.
3. Other laws administered by the BIR or the Bureau of Customs,
if the principal tax or fee (exclusive of penalties and charges) is P1,000,000 or more.
ii. Appellate Appeals from judgments of the RTC in their original or appellate jurisdiction in the
Jurisdiction same criminal offenses decided by them, if principal tax or fee (exclusive of penalties
and charges) is less than P1,000,000 or where there is no specified amount claimed.
TAX COLLECTION CASES
i. Original Over tax collection cases involving final and executory assessment for taxes, fees,
Jurisdiction charges and penalties, if the principal amount of taxes and fees (exclusive of charges
and penalties) claimed is P1,000,000 or more.
ii. Appellate Judgments of the RTC in tax collection cases originally decided by them or in the
Jurisdiction exercise of its appellate jurisdiction, if the principal amount of taxes and fees,
exclusive of penalties and charge is less than P1,000,000.
4. SANDIGANBAYAN
(as amended by Section 4, R.A. 10660, promulgated April 16, 2015)

EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL
1. Violations of RA No. 3019, as amended, otherwise known as the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices
Act, RA No. 1379, otherwise known as An Act Declaring Forfeiture in favor of the State any Property
Found to have been Unlawfully Acquired by any Public Officer or Employee and Providing for the
Proceedings therefor, and Chapter II, Section 2, Title VII, Book II of the Revised Penal Code, where
one or more of the accused are officials occupying the following positions in the government, whether
in a permanent, acting or interim capacity, at the time of the commission of the offense:
a. Officials of the executive branch occupying the positions of regional director and higher, otherwise
classified as Grade ‘27’ and higher, of the Compensation and Position Classification Act of 1989
(Republic Act No. 6758), specifically including:
i. Provincial governors, vice-governors, members of the sangguniang panlalawigan, and
provincial treasurers, assessors, engineers, and other provincial department heads:
ii. City mayors, vice-mayors, members of the sangguniang panlungsod, city treasurers,
assessors, engineers, and other city department heads;
iii. Officials of the diplomatic service occupying the position of consul and higher;
iv. Philippine army and air force colonels, naval captains, and all officers of higher rank;
ATENEO CENTRAL
v. Officers of the Philippine National Police while occupying the position of provincial director
and those holding the rank of senior superintendent and higher;
vi. City and provincial prosecutors and their assistants, and officials and prosecutors in the Office
of the Ombudsman and special prosecutor;
vii. Presidents, directors or trustees, or managers of government-owned or controlled
corporations, state universities or educational institutions or foundations.
b. Members of Congress and officials thereof classified as Grade ‘27’ and higher under the
Compensation and Position Classification Act of 1989;
c. Members of the judiciary without prejudice to the provisions of the Constitution;
d. Chairmen and members of the Constitutional Commissions, without prejudice to the provisions
of the Constitution; and
e. All other national and local officials classified as Grade ‘27’ and higher under the Compensation
and Position Classification Act of 1989.
Note: In case private individuals are charged as co-principals, accomplices or accessories with the
public officers or employees, including those employed in government-owned or controlled
corporations, they shall be tried jointly with said public officers and employees in the proper courts
which shall exercise exclusive jurisdiction over them.
Note: In cases where none of the accused are occupying positions corresponding to Salary Grade
‘27’ or higher, as prescribed in the said RA No. 6758, or military and PNP officers mentioned above,
exclusive original jurisdiction thereof shall be vested in the proper regional trial court, metropolitan
trial court, municipal trial court, and municipal circuit trial court, as the case may be, pursuant to their
respective jurisdictions as provided in BP Blg. 129, as amended.
2. Other offenses or felonies whether simple or complexed with other crimes committed by the public
officials and employees mentioned in subsection a. of this section in relation to their office.
3. Civil and criminal cases filed pursuant to and in connection with Executive Order Nos. 1, 2, 14 and
14-A, issued in 1986.
Note: Any provisions of law or Rules of Court to the contrary notwithstanding, the criminal action and
the corresponding civil action for the recovery of civil liability shall at all times be simultaneously
instituted with, and jointly determined in, the same proceeding by the Sandiganbayan or the
appropriate courts, the filing of the criminal action being deemed to necessarily carry with it the filing
of the civil action, and no right to reserve the filing of such civil action separately from the criminal
action shall be recognized.
Note: Where the civil action had heretofore been filed separately but judgment therein has not yet
been rendered, and the criminal case is hereafter filed with the Sandiganbayan or the appropriate
court, said civil action shall be transferred to the Sandiganbayan or the appropriate court, as the case
may be, for consolidation and joint determination with the criminal action, otherwise the separate civil
action shall be deemed abandoned.
4. Petitions for the issuance of the writs of mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, habeas
corpus, injunctions, and other ancillary writs and processes in aid of its appellate jurisdiction and over
petitions of similar nature, including quo warranto, arising or that may arise in cases filed or which
may be filed under Executive Order Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14-A, issued in 1986. Note that the jurisdiction
over these petitions shall not be exclusive of the Supreme Court.
EXCLUSIVE APPELLATE
The Sandiganbayan shall exercise exclusive appellate jurisdiction over final judgments, resolutions or
orders of RTC whether in the exercise of their own original jurisdiction or of their appellate jurisdiction as
provided in R.A. 10660.

ATENEO CENTRAL
Note: The procedure prescribed in BP Blg. 129, as well as the implementing rules that the Supreme Court
has promulgated and may hereafter promulgate, relative to appeals/petitions for review to the Court of
Appeals, shall apply to appeals and petitions for review filed with the Sandiganbayan. In all cases elevated
to the Sandiganbayan and from the Sandiganbayan to the Supreme Court, the Office of the Ombudsman,
through its special prosecutor, shall represent the People of the Philippines, except in cases filed pursuant
to Executive Order Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14-A, issued in 1986.
5. REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS
Exclusive
1. Civil Cases 1. Civil actions in which the subject of litigation is incapable of pecuniary
estimation
2. Civil actions which involve the title to, or possession of, REAL property, or any
interest therein, where the assessed value of the property involved exceeds
P400,000, except actions forcible entry and unlawful detainer which are
cognizable by the MeTC, MTC, MCTC.
3. Actions in admiralty and maritime jurisdiction where the demand or claim
exceeds P2,000,000.
4. Matters of probate, both testate and intestate, where the gross value of the
estate exceeds P2,000,000.
5. Cases not within the exclusive jurisdiction of any court, tribunal, person or
body exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions.
6. Civil actions and special proceedings falling within the exclusive original
jurisdiction of a Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court and of the Special
Agrarian Courts as now provided by law.
7. Other cases in which the demand, exclusive of interest, damages of whatever
kind, attorney’s fees, litigation expenses, and costs or the value of the
property in controversy, exceeds P2,000,000.
IMPORTANT: If the claim for damages is the main cause of action, the
amount thereof shall be considered in determining the jurisdiction of the
court.
2. Criminal Cases Criminal cases not within the exclusive jurisdiction of any court, tribunal or body,
such as the following:
1. Penalty provided by law exceeds 6 years imprisonment, irrespective of
fine.
2. Under (a) above not falling under the original jurisdiction of the
Sandiganbayan where none of the principal accused are occupying
positions corresponding to salary grade “27” or higher, or military and PNP
officers occupying the rank of superintendent or higher, or their
equivalent.
3. Only penalty provided by law is a fine exceeding P4K.
4. Violations of the:
a. Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002.
b. Anti-Violence against Women and their Children Act of 2004
(specifically, those involving violence against women and children as
defined under Section 5).
c. Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law.
d. Omnibus Election Code.
N.B.: Family Courts have exclusive original jurisdiction over criminal cases where
one or more of the accused is below 18 years old, or when one or more of the
victims is a minor at the time of the commission of the offense. However, if the

ATENEO CENTRAL
victim has already died, such as in homicide cases, the regular courts can have
jurisdiction. (People v Dela Torre-Yadao,G.R. Nos. 162144-54, 2012)
3. Other Cases 1. Actions for recognition and enforcement of an arbitration agreement or for
vacation, setting aside, correction or modification of an arbitral award, and
any application with a court for arbitration assistance and supervision.
2. Actions for determination of just compensation to land under the CARL.
3. R.A. 10660 (promulgated April 16, 2015):
The REGIONAL TRIAL COURT shall have exclusive original jurisdiction
where the information involving civil and criminal cases filed pursuant to and
in connection with Executive Order Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14-A (1986):
a. Does not allege any damage to the government or any bribery; or
b. Alleges damage to the government or bribery arising from the same or
closely related transactions or acts in an amount not exceeding One
million pesos (P1,000,000.00).
Note: Subject to the rules promulgated by the Supreme Court, the cases
falling under the jurisdiction of the Regional Trial Court under Section 4 of
R.A. 10660 shall be tried in a judicial region other than where the official holds
office.
Concurrent
1. With the SC 1. Actions against ambassadors, other public ministers, and consuls
2. With the SC and 1. Petitions for certiorari, prohibition or mandamus against courts of the first level
CA and other bodies
3. With the SC, CA 1. Petition for a writ of amparo (S3 Rule on the Writ of Amparo)
and SB 2. Petition for a writ of habeas data (S3 Rule on the Writ of Habeas Data)
4. With the Claims not exceeding P100K. This is applicable if the subject of the action is
Insurance incapable of pecuniary estimation; otherwise, jurisdiction is concurrent with the
Commissioner MeTC.
Cases decided by the MeTC, MTC, MTCC and MCTC in their respective territorial Jurisdiction.
SPECIAL JURISDICTION
The SC may designate certain branches of the RTC to handle exclusively criminal cases, juvenile and
domestic relations cases, agrarian cases, urban land reform cases which do not fall under the jurisdiction
of quasi-judicial bodies and agencies, and/or such other special cases as the SC may determine in the
interest of a speedy and efficient administration of justice.
6. FAMILY COURTS
ORIGINAL AND EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION
1. Criminal cases where one or more of the accused is 15≤x<18 years old, or where one or more
of the victims is a minor at the time of the commission of the offense: provided, that if the minor
is found guilty, the court shall promulgate sentence and ascertain any civil liability which the
accused may have incurred. The sentence, however, shall be suspended without need of
application pursuant to the Child and Youth Welfare Code (PD 603).
2. Petitions for guardianship, custody of children, habeas corpus in relation to the latter.

ATENEO CENTRAL
3. Petitions for adoption of children and revocation thereof.

4. Complaints for annulment of marriage, declaration of nullity of marriage and those relating to
marital status and property relations of husband and wife or those living together under different
status and agreements, and petitions for dissolution of conjugal partnership or gains
5. Petitions for support and/or acknowledgment.
6. Summary judicial proceedings brought under the provisions of the Family Code of the Philippines
(E.O No. 209).
7. Petitions for declaration of status of children as abandoned, dependent or neglected children;
petitions for voluntary or involuntary commitment of children; the suspension, termination, or
restoration of parental authority and other cases cognizable under the Child and Youth Welfare
Code (PD 603), Authorizing the Ministry of Social Services and Development to Take Protective
Custody of Child Prostitutes and Sexually Exploited Children, and for Other Purposes (E.O. 56),
and other related laws.
8. Petitions for constitution of the family home.
9. Cases against minors cognizable under the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2005.
10. Violations of Special Protection of Children against Child Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination
Act (RA 7610), as amended by RA 7658 and RA 9231.
11. Cases of domestic violence against:
a. Women – which are acts of gender-based violence that results, or are likely to result in
physical, sexual or psychological harm or suffering to women; and other forms of
physical abuse such as battering or threats and coercion which violate a woman’s
personhood, integrity and freedom of movement; and
b. Children – which include the commission of all forms of abuse, neglect, cruelty,
exploitation, violence, and discrimination and all other conditions prejudicial to their
development
If an act constitutes a criminal offense, the accused or batterer shall be subject to criminal proceedings
and the corresponding penalties.
If any question involving any of the above matters should arise as an incident in any case pending in the
regular courts, said incident shall be determined in that court.
7. MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS – MeTC, MTC and MCTC
Exclusive
1. Civil cases 1. Civil actions and probate proceedings, testate and intestate, including the grant
of provisional remedies in proper cases, where the value of the personal
property, estate or amount of demand does NOT exceed P2,000,000, exclusive
of interest, damages of whatever kind, attorney’s fees, litigation expenses, and
costs, the amount of which must be specifically alleged. However, interest,
damages of whatever kind, attorney’s fees, litigation expenses, and costs shall
be included in the determination of the filing fees.
2. Admiralty and maritime cases where the demand or claim does NOT exceed
P2,000,000.
Where there are several claims or causes of action between the same or different
parties, embodied in the same complaint, the amount of the demand shall be the
totality of the claims in all the causes of action irrespective of whether the causes
of action arose out of the same or different transactions.
3. Forcible entry and unlawful detainer regardless of value of property involved, with
jurisdiction to determine the issue of ownership only to resolve the issue of
possession.

ATENEO CENTRAL
4. Civil actions which involve title to, or possession of, REAL property, or any
interest therein where the assessed value of the property or interest therein does
NOT exceed P2,000,000, exclusive of interest, damages of whatever kind,
attorney’s fees, litigation expenses, and costs. In cases of land not declared for
taxation purposes, the value of such property shall be determined by the
assessed value of the adjacent lots.
5. Inclusion and exclusion of voters.
2. Criminal EXCEPT in cases falling within the exclusive original jurisdiction of the RTC or SB—
cases 1. Violations of city or municipal ordinances committed within their respective
territorial jurisdiction.
2. Offenses punishable with imprisonment NOT exceeding 6 years irrespective of
the amount of fine, and regardless of other imposable accessory or other
penalties, including the civil liability arising from such offenses or predicated
thereon, irrespective of kind, nature, value or amount thereof.
3. Offenses under (2) above include those NOT falling within the exclusive original
jurisdiction of the SB where none of the accused is occupying positions
corresponding to salary grade ‘27’ or higher.
4. Offenses involving damage to property through criminal negligence.
5. In cases where the only penalty provided by law is a fine of not more than P4K.
DELEGATED JURISDICTION
Cadastral or land registration cases covering lots where there is no controversy or opposition, or
contested lots where the value of which does NOT exceed P100K, such value to be ascertained by the
affidavit of the claimant or by agreement of the respective claimants if there are more than one, or from
the corresponding tax declaration of the real property. These cases are assigned and not automatically
delegated.
SPECIAL JURISDICTION
In the absence of all the RTC Judges in a province of city—

1. Hear and decide petitions for writ of habeas corpus.
2. Hear and decide applications for bail in criminal cases.
SUMMARY PROCEDURE
1. Civil cases 1. Forcible entry and unlawful detainer, irrespective of the amount of damages or
unpaid rentals sought to be recovered. Where attorney’s fees are awarded, the
same shall not exceed P100,000
2. All civil actions, except probate proceedings, admiralty, and maritime actions,
and small claims cases, where the total amount of the plaintiff’s claim does not
exceed P2,000,000, exclusive of interest, damages of whatever kind, attorney’s
fees, litigation expenses, and costs
3. Complaints for damages where the claim does not exceed P2,000,000,
exclusive of interest and costs
4. Cases for enforcement of barangay amicable settlement agreements and
arbitration awards where the money claim exceeds P1,000,000, provided that
no execution has been enforced by the barangay within 6 months from the date
of the settlement or date of receipt of the award or from the date the obligation
stipulated or adjudged in the arbitration award becomes due and demandable,
pursuant to Section 417, Charter VII of RA No. 7160
5. Cases solely for the revival of judgment of any MeTC, MTCC, MTC, MCTC,
pursuance to Rule 39, Section 6 of ROC
6. The civil aspect of a violation of BP 22, if no criminal action has been instituted
therefor.
ATENEO CENTRAL
2. Criminal 1. Traffic violations.

cases 2. Rental law violations.
3. Violations of city or municipal ordinances.
4. Violations of B.P. 22 (Bouncing Checks Law).
5. All other cases where penalty does NOT exceed 1 year, or a fine not exceeding
P50,000, or both, regardless of other imposable penalties, accessory or
otherwise, or of the civil liability arising therefrom. In offenses involving damage
to property through criminal negligence under Art. 365 of the RPC, this Rule
shall govern where the impossible fine does not exceed P150,000.

ATENEO CENTRAL
D. ASPECTS OF JURISDICTION It is the power to deal with the general subject

involved in the action. It refers to jurisdiction of the
Definition class of cases to which the particular case
The power and authority of the court to hear, try belongs. (Allied Domecq v. Villon, G.R. No.
and decide a case. (Cuenca v. PCGG, G.R. No. 156264, 2004)
159104-05, 2007)
Error Of Jurisdiction v. Error Of Judgment
It is also the power to enforce its determination as ERROR OF ERROR OF
it is only through the judgment and its execution JUDGMENT JURISDICTION
that the power of the court is made efficacious
and its jurisdiction complete. As long as the court An error of jurisdiction
acts within its is one where the act
Four Concepts of Jurisdiction jurisdiction, any complained of was
1. Jurisdiction over the Subject Matter; alleged errors issued by the court
2. Jurisdiction over the Parties; committed in the without or in excess
3. Jurisdiction over the Issues; and exercise of its of jurisdiction,
4. Jurisdiction over the Res or the Property in discretion will correctable by an
Litigation amount to nothing appeal (Cabrera v.
more than mere errors Lapid, G.R. No.
Objections To Jurisdiction Over Subject of judgment (Cabrera 129098, 2006).
Matter v. Lapid, G.R. No.
Defenses and objections not pleaded either in a 129098, 2006). Errors of jurisdiction
motion to dismiss or in the answer are deemed are correctible only by
waived. (Rule 9, Sec. 1) the extraordinary writ
of certiorari (Tolentino
Effects Of Estoppel On Objections To v. Leviste, G.R. No.
Jurisdiction 156118, 2004).
While jurisdiction over the subject matter may be
raised at any stage of the proceedings, a party
may still be barred from raising it on the ground How Jurisdiction is Conferred
of estoppel or laches. (Tijam v. Sibonghanoy, Jurisdiction over the subject matter is conferred
G.R. No. L-21450, 1968). only by the Constitution or the law. It cannot be
contingent upon the action or inaction of the
Estoppel by laches, to bar a litigant from asserting court. (Republic v. Bantigue, G.R. No. 162332,
the court’s absence or lack of jurisdiction, only 2012)
supervenes in exceptional cases similar to the
factual milieu of Tijam v. Sibonghanoy. The fact Effect of Lack of Jurisdiction Over the Subject
that a person attempts to invoke unauthorized Matter of the Action
jurisdiction of a court does not estop him from If it had no jurisdiction, but the case was tried and
thereafter challenging its jurisdiction over the decided upon the theory that it had jurisdiction,
subject matter, since such jurisdiction must arise the parties are not barred, on appeal, from
by law and not by mere consent of the parties. assailing such jurisdiction, for the same must
(Figueroa v. People, G.R. No. 147406, 2008) exist as a matter of law, and may not be conferred
by consent of the parties or by estoppel.
Courts are not only courts of law but also of
equity. Thus, where the respondent did not Any judgment, order or resolution issued without
vigorously question the jurisdiction of the court jurisdiction is void and cannot be given any
and instead actively participated for ten years, a effect. This rule applies even if the issue on
motion to dismiss based on lack of jurisdiction jurisdiction was raised for the first time on appeal
would render the effort, time and expenses of the or even after final judgment. (Magno v. People,
parties for naught. (Bernardo v. Heirs of Villegas, G.R. No. 171542, 2011)
G.R. No. 183357, 2010)
Jurisdiction Over the Subject Matter Cannot
1. JURISDICTION OVER THE Be Conferred By The Following:
SUBJECT MATTER 1. Administrative policy of any court;

ATENEO CENTRAL
2. A court’s unilateral assumption of all the causes of action, irrespective of whether

jurisdiction; the causes of action arose out of the same or
3. Contract; different transactions. (B.P. Blg. 129, Sec. 33[1];
4. Compromise, Pantranco North Express v. Standard Insurance,
5. An erroneous belief by the court that it G.R. No. 140746, 2005)
has jurisdiction;
6. Acquiescence of the court; or The Jurisdictional Amount Excludes:
7. Silence, waiver, or failure to object 1. Interest;
2. Damages of whatever kind;
Exceptions 3. Attorney’s fees; and
1. Estoppel by laches (Tijam v. 4. Litigation expenses and costs
Sibonghanoy, G.R. No. L-21450, 1968); (Except where damages/interest is the main
2. Estoppel by deed or estoppel in pais cause of action or part thereof, in which case, the
(Soliven v. Fastforms, G.R. No. 139031, amount of damages and interest shall be included
2004) in the jurisdictional amount)
How Jurisdiction is Determined Doctrine Of Primary Jurisdiction
Jurisdiction is based on the allegations in the Courts will not resolve a controversy involving a
initiatory pleading. The defenses in the answer question which is within the jurisdiction of an
are deemed irrelevant and immaterial in its administrative tribunal, especially where the
determination. De la Cruz v. Court of Appeals, question demands the exercise of sound
(G.R. No. 139442, December 6, 2006) administrative discretion requiring the special
knowledge, experience and services of the
Thus, if by the averments of the complaint, the administrative tribunal to determine technical and
court has jurisdiction, it does not lose that intricate matters of fact. (Paloma v. Mora, G.R.
jurisdiction just because the defendant makes a No. 157783, 2005)
contrary allegation in his motion or answer or
because the court believes that the plaintiff’s Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies
claims are ridiculous and therefore, untrue. General Rule: The rule on exhaustion of
(Tomas Claudio Memorial College, Inc., v. Court administrative remedies provides that if a remedy
of Appeals, G.R. No. 124262, 1999) within the administrative machinery can still be
resorted to by giving the administrative officer
The exclusion of the term damages of whatever concerned every opportunity to decide on a
kind in determining the jurisdictional amount matter that comes within his jurisdiction, then
under Section 19 (8) and Section 33 (1) of B.P. such remedy should be exhausted first before the
Blg. 129, as amended by R.A. No. 7691, applies court’s judicial power can be sought.
to cases where the damages are merely
incidental to or a consequence of the main cause Exceptions:
of action. However, in cases where the claim When the proceeding before the administrative
for damages is the main cause of action, or agency is merely investigative, as opposed to
one of the causes of action, the amount of adjudicative. (Republic v. Transunion Corp, G.R.
such claim shall be considered in determining No. 191590, 2014)
the jurisdiction of the court. (Sante v. Claravall,
G.R. No. 173915, 2010) Jurisprudence has held that the special civil
action of certiorari will lie even without a party first
The assessed value must be alleged in the availing itself of a MR if, among other exceptions,
complaint to determine which court has the order challenged is a patent nullity, or the
jurisdiction over the action. (Heirs of Julao v. issue raised is one purely of law. (Puerto Del Sol
Spouses de Jesus, G.R. No. 176020, 2014) Palawan, Inc. v. Gabaen, G.R. No. 212607,
March 27, 2019)
Totality Rule
Where there are several claims or causes of Effect of Failure to Observe Exhaustion of
action between the same or different parties, Administrative Remedies
embodied in the same complaint, the amount of Failure to observe the doctrine of exhaustion of
the demands shall be the totality of the claims in administrative remedies does not affect the

ATENEO CENTRAL
jurisdiction of the Court. We have repeatedly

stressed this in a long line of decisions. The only If no motion to dismiss has been filed at all, the
effect of non-compliance with this rule is that it will objection of lack of jurisdiction over the person
deprive the complainant of a cause of action, may be pleaded as an affirmative defense in the
which is a ground for a motion to dismiss. defendant’s answer.
If not invoked at the proper time, this ground is Special Appearance

deemed waived and the court can take Special appearance operates as an exception to
cognizance of the case and try it. (Republic v. the general rule on voluntary appearance;
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 112708-09, 1996)
Accordingly, objections to the jurisdiction of the
2. JURISDICTION OVER THE court over the person of the defendant must be
PARTIES explicitly made, i.e., set forth in an unequivocal
manner; and
Jurisdiction over the parties is the power of a
court to render personal judgment or to subject Failure to do so constitutes voluntary submission
the parties in a particular action to the judgment to the jurisdiction of the court, especially in
or other rulings rendered in an action. instances where a pleading or motion seeking
(Villagracia v. Fifth Shari’a Court, G.R. No. affirmative relief is filed and submitted to the court
188832, 2014) for resolution. (Optima Realty Corp v. Heirtz PH
Exclusive Cars, G.R. no. 183035, 2013)
How Jurisdiction Over The Plaintiff Is
Acquired: 3. JURISDICTION OVER THE
Jurisdiction over the plaintiff is acquired by his ISSUES
filing of the complaint or petition or other initiatory
pleading. (Davao Light & Power, G.R. No. 93262, The power of the court to try and decide the
1991) issues raised in the pleadings of the parties.
(Reyes v. Diaz, G.R. No. L-48754, 1941)
Effect of Unauthorized Complaint
An unauthorized complaint does not produce any How conferred and determined:
legal effect. Hence, the court should dismiss the General Rule: It is conferred and determined by
complaint on the ground that it has no jurisdiction the pleadings of the parties that present the
over the complaint and the plaintiff. (Palmiano- issues to be tried and determine whether or not
Salvador v. Angeles, G.R. No. 171219, 2012) the issues are of fact or of law.
How Jurisdiction Over The Defendant Is Exceptions:

Acquired It may be conferred:
1. By stipulation of the parties - as when
Jurisdiction over the defendant is acquired either in the pre-trial, the parties enter into
by a valid service of summons upon him or by his stipulations of facts and documents or enter
voluntary submission to the court’s authority. into an agreement simplifying the issues of the
case.
If a motion has been filed and objection to the 2. By waiver or failure to object to the
lack of jurisdiction over the person which presentation of evidence on a matter not
ground was already available at the time of filing, raised in the pleadings.
was not pleaded, it is deemed waived pursuant
to the omnibus motion rule. 4. JURISDICTION OVER THE
RES OR THE PROPERTY IN
However, when it appears from the pleadings or LITIGATION
the evidence on record that the court has no
jurisdiction over the subject matter, that there is Jurisdiction over the res or property in litigation is
another action pending between the same parties acquired either by:
for the same cause, or that the action is barred by
a prior judgment or by statute of limitations, the
court shall dismiss the claim.

ATENEO CENTRAL
1. Actual or constructive seizure of the property F. JURISDICTION vs. VENUE

under legal process, whereby it is brought into
the custody of the law; or
2. As a result of the institution of legal VENUE JURISDICTION
proceedings, in which the power of the court is
recognized and made effective (Biaco v. The place where the
The authority to hear
Philippine Countryside Rural Bank, G.R. No. action is to be heard or
and adjudicate an
161417, 2007) tried (Manila Railroad
action (Veneracion v.
Company v. Attorney
Mancilla, G.R. No.
It is sometimes a remedy of the plaintiff who General, G.R. No. L-
158238, 2006)
cannot acquire jurisdiction over the person of 7688, 1912)
a defendant. In that case, the action is A matter of procedural A matter of
converted from one in personam to one in law substantive law
rem. (Villareal v. CA, G.R. No. 107314, 1998)
Establishes a relation Establishes a relation
If the action is in rem or quasi in rem, jurisdiction between plaintiff and between the court
over the person of the defendant is not required. defendant, or petitioner and the subject
What is required is jurisdiction over the res and respondent matter
although summons must be served upon the
defendant in order to satisfy the requirements of May be conferred by
due process (Gomez v. CA, G.R. No. 127692, the act or agreement of
2004) the parties (e.g. the
parties can include the
The complaint to redeem a land subject of a free following stipulation in a
patent is a civil action incapable of pecuniary contract of lease: “In
estimation. Jurisdiction of the court is determined case of dispute arising
Fixed by law and
by the allegations in the complaint and the from this contract, a
cannot be conferred
character of the relief sought. His cause of action party shall file a suit
by agreement of the
being one for specific performance, it is incapable with the Regional Trial
parties
of pecuniary estimation and cognizable by the Court of Pasig City” OR
RTC. (Heirs of Bautista v. Lindo, G.R. No. “In case of dispute
208232, 2014) arising from this
contract, a party shall
E. JURISDICTION vs. EXERCISE OF file a suit exclusively
JURISDICTION with the Regional Trial
Court of Pasig City”
Jurisdiction is the power or authority of the court Not a ground for a motu Lack of jurisdiction
to hear, try and decide a case, and not the proprio dismissal over the subject
decision rendered therein. (Republic of the (except in cases matter is a ground for
Philippines v. Asset Privatization Trust, G.R. No. subject to Summary a motu proprio
141241, 2005). Procedure) dismissal
Exercise of jurisdiction refers to the exercise of May be waived only in
this power or authority. Where there is jurisdiction civil cases. In criminal
over the subject matter, the decision on all other Cannot be waived
cases, the venue is
questions arising in the case is but an exercise of jurisdictional.
jurisdiction. (Republic of the Philippines v. Asset
Privatization Trust, G.R. No. 141241, 2005).
G. JURISDICTION OVER CASES
COVERED BY BARANGAY
CONCILIATION, AND CASES
COVERED BY THE RULES ON
EXPEDITED PROCEDURES IN
THE FIRST LEVEL COURTS

ATENEO CENTRAL
Small Claims General Rule:

Actions before the MeTCs, MTCCs, MTCs, and ALL disputes between individuals/natural
MCTCs for payment of money where the value of persons are subject to barangay conciliation
the claim does not exceed P1,000,000, exclusive pursuant to the Revised Katarungang
of interests and costs. Pambarangay Law and prior recourse thereto is
a pre-condition before filing a complaint in court
Venue or any government offices is allowed.
A small claims case is filed with the MTC in the
city: There must have been confrontation between the
1. Where the plaintiff resides; parties before the lupon chairman or pangkat and
2. Where the defendant resides; or a showing that there was no settlement reached
3. If the plaintiff is engaged in the business or that it was repudiated by the parties before a
of lending, banking and similar activities, complaint, petition, action or proceeding may be
in the city where the defendant resides, if filed or instituted in court or in a government office
the plaintiff has a branch in that city. for adjudication.
Cases Covered: Exceptions:

1. Purely civil in nature where the claim or 1. Where one party is the government, or any
relief prayed for by the plaintiff is solely for subdivision or instrumentality thereof;
payment or reimbursement of sum of 2. Where one party is a public officer or
money; and employee and the dispute relates to the
2. The civil aspect of criminal actions, either performance of his official functions;
filed before the institution of the criminal 3. Where the dispute involves real properties
action, or reserved upon the filing of the located in different cities and municipalities,
criminal action in court. (Revised Rules of unless the parties thereto agree to submit
Criminal Procedure, Rule 111) their difference to amicable settlement by an
appropriate Lupon;
Claims or Demands Covered: 4. Any complaint by or against corporations,
1. For money owed under any of the partnerships or juridical entities, since only
following: individuals shall be parties to Barangay
a) Contract of Lease; conciliation proceedings either as
b) Contract of Loan and other credit complainants or respondents [Sec. 1, Rule
accommodations; VI, Katarungang Pambarangay Rules];
c) Contract of Services; 5. Disputes involving parties who actually reside
d) Contract of Sale of personal property, in barangays of different cities or
excluding the recovery of the personal municipalities, except where such barangay
property, unless it is made the subject of units adjoin each other and the parties
a compromise agreement between the thereto agree to submit their differences to
parties amicable settlement by an appropriate
2. The enforcement of a barangay amicable Lupon;
settlement or an arbitration award where the 6. Offenses for which the law prescribes a
money claim does not exceed P1,000,000, maximum penalty of imprisonment exceeding
provided that no execution has been one [1] year or a fine of over P5, 000.00;
enforced by the barangay within 6 months 7. Offenses where there is no private offended
from the date of the settlement or date of party;
receipt of the award or from the date the 8. Disputes where urgent legal action is
obligation stipulated or adjudged in the necessary to prevent injustice from being
arbitration award becomes due and committed or further continued, specifically
demandable, pursuant to Section 417, the following:
Chapter VII of RA No. 7160. (A.M. No. 08-8- a) Criminal cases where accused is under
7-SC) police custody or detention [Sec. 412 (b) (1),
Revised Katarungang Pambarangay Law];
KATARUNGANG PAMBARANGAY b) Petitions for habeas corpus by a person
(A.C. No. 14-93) illegally deprived of his rightful custody over

ATENEO CENTRAL
another or a person illegally deprived of or on Agreement to Arbitrate:

acting in his behalf; The parties may, at any stage of the proceedings,
c) Actions coupled with provisional remedies agree in writing to have the matter in dispute
such as preliminary injunction, attachment, decided by arbitration by the Lupon Chairman or
delivery of personal property and support Pangkat.
during the pendency of the action;
d) Actions which may be barred by the Statute RULE ON SUMMARY PROCEDURE
of Limitations. The rule shall govern the summary procedure in
9. Any class of disputes, which the President the Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial
may determine in the interest of justice or Courts in Cities, Municipal Trial Courts, and the
upon the recommendation of the Secretary of Municipal Circuit Trial Courts in cases falling
Justice; within their jurisdiction.
10. Where the dispute arises from the
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (Secs. Cases Covered:
46 & 47, R. A. 6657); See jurisdiction table for Municipal Trial Courts
11. Labor disputes or controversies arising
from employer-employee relations (Montoya Exception:
v. Escayo, et al., G.R. No. 82211-12, 1989); The Rule on Summary Proceedings shall not
(Art. 226, Labor Code) apply to a civil case where the plaintiff’s cause of
12. Actions to annul judgment upon a action is pleaded in the same complaint with
compromise that may be filed directly in court another cause of action subject to the ordinary
(Sanchez v. Tupaz, G.R. No. 76690, 1988) procedure.
A case filed in court without compliance with Nor is it applicable to a criminal case where the
prior barangay conciliation, which is a pre- offense charged is necessarily related to another
condition for formal adjudication, may be criminal case subject to the ordinary procedure.
dismissed upon motion of defendant/s on the
ground of failure to comply with a condition Appeal:
precedent. The non-referral of a case for The judgment or final order shall be appealable
barangay conciliation is not jurisdictional in to the appropriate Regional Trial Court;
nature, thus it necessitates a motion to dismiss
before it may be considered by the Court. The judgment of the RTC on the appeal shall be
final, executory, and unappealable. (A.M. No. 08-
A prior recourse to barangay conciliation is a pre- 8-7-SC)
condition before filing a complaint in court or any
government offices. Non-compliance with the
said condition precedent could affect the
sufficiency of the plaintiff’s cause of action and
make his complaint vulnerable to dismissal on
ground of lack of cause of action or prematurity;
but the same would not prevent a court of
competent jurisdiction from exercising its power
of adjudication over the case before it, where the
defendants failed to object to such exercise of
jurisdiction. (Sps. Santos v. Sps. Lumbao, G.R.
No. 169129, 2007)
Interruption of Prescriptive Period:

While the dispute under mediation, conciliation,
or arbitration, the prescriptive periods for offenses
and cause of action under existing laws shall be
interrupted upon filing of the complaint with the
Punong Barangay.

ATENEO CENTRAL

ATENEO CENTRAL
III. CIVIL PROCEDURE Adjudication on the Merits

K. Pre-Trial (Rule 18)
1. Nature and Purpose
TOPIC OUTLINE UNDER THE 2023 2. Appearance of Parties; Effects of Failure
SYLLABUS to Appear
3. Pre-Trial Brief; Effect of Failure to File
A. General Provisions (Rule 1) L. Intervention (Rule 19)
B. Kinds of Action M. Subpoena (Rule 21)
1. In Rem N. Computation of Time (Rule 22)
2. In Personam O. Modes of Discovery
3. Quasi In Rem 1. Depositions (Rules 23 and 24, See
C. Cause of Action (Rule 2) People v. Sergio, G.R. No. 240053,
D. Parties to Civil Actions (Rule 3) October 9, 2019)
E. Venue (Rule 4) 2. Interrogatories to Parties (Rule 25)
F. Pleadings 3. Admission by Adverse Party (Rule 26)
1. Kinds (Rule 6) 4. Production or Inspection of Documents
2. Parts of a Pleading (Rule 7) or Things (Rule 27)
3. Manner of Making Allegations (Rule 8) 5. Physical and Mental Examination of
a. In General Persons (Rule 28)
b. Action or Defense Based on 6. Refusal to Comply With Modes of
Document Discovery (Rule 29)
c. Specific Denial P. Trial (Rule 30)
d. Affirmative Defenses 1. Schedule of Trial
4. Effect of Failure to Plead (Rule 9) 2. Adjournments and Postponements
5. Amended and Supplemental Pleadings 3. Requisites of Motion to Postpone Trial
(Rule 10) for Illness of Party or Counsel
6. When to File Responsive Pleadings Q. Consolidation or Severance (Rule 31)
(Rule 11) R. Demurrer to Evidence (Rule 33)
G. Filing and Service (Rule 13) 1. Grounds
1. Rules on Payment of Docket Fees; 2. Effect of Order Denying Demurrer to
Effect of Non-Payment Evidence
2. Efficient Use of Paper Rule; E-filing S. Judgments and Final Orders
(A.M. No. 10-3-7-SC and A.M. No. 11-9- 1. Judgments on the Pleadings (Rule 34)
4-SC, as revised, approved on February a. Grounds
22, 2022) b. Action on Motion for Judgment on
H. Summons (Rule 14) the Pleadings
1. Nature and Purpose of Summons in 2. Summary Judgments (Rule 35)
Relation to Actions In Personam, In a. Effect of Order Denying a Motion
Rem, and Quasi In Rem for Summary Judgment
2. Who May Serve Summons 3. Rendition and Entry of Judgments and
3. Validity of Summons and Issuance of Final Orders (Rule 36)
Alias Summons T. Post-Judgment Remedies
4. Personal Service 1. Motion for New Trial or Reconsideration
5. Substituted Service (Rule 37)
6. Constructive Service a. Remedy Against Denial
7. Extraterritorial Service b. Fresh-Period Rule
8. Proof of Service 2. Appeals
I. Motions (Rule 15) a. Nature of Right to Appeal
1. In General b. Judgments and Final Orders
2. Non-litigious Motions Subject to Appeal
3. Litigious Motions c. Matters Not Appealable; Available
4. Prohibited Motions Remedies
5. Motion for Bill of Particulars (Rule 12) d. Doctrine of Finality/Immutability of
J. Dismissal of Actions (Rule 17) Judgment
1. With Prejudice vs. Without Prejudice e. Modes of Appeal (Period,
2. Dismissals Which Have an Effect of an

ATENEO CENTRAL
Perfection, Issues to be Raised) Venue For Real and Personal Actions

1. Appeal from Municipal Trial ● A REAL ACTION is local, i.e., its venue
Courts to Regional Trial Courts depends upon the location of the
(Rule 40) property involved in the litigation.
2. Appeal from the Regional Trial ● A PERSONAL ACTION is transitory,
Courts (Rule 41) i.e., its venue depends upon the
3. Petition for Review form the residence of the plaintiff or the defendant
Regional Trial Court to the at the option of the plaintiff.
Court of Appeals (Rule 42)
4. Appeals from the Court of Tax B. KINDS OF ACTIONS
Appeals, Civil Service
Commission, and Quasi- ACTIONS IN REM, IN PERSONAM AND QUASI
Judicial Agencies (Rule 43) IN REM
5. Appeals by Certiorari to the
Supreme Court (Rule 45) 1. IN REM
6. Review of Judgments or Final ● A proceeding to determine the
Orders of the Commission on state or condition of a thing.
Audit and Commission on ● Directed against the thing itself.
Elections (Rule 64) ● Jurisdiction over the person of
7. Dismissal, Reinstatement, and the defendant is not required;
Withdrawal of Appeal Only jurisdiction over the
3. Petition for Relief from Judgment (Rule res/thing is required.
38) ● Judgment is binding on the
4. Annulment of Judgment (Rule 47) whole world.
5. Collateral Attack on Judgments ● E.g. probate and cadastral
U. Execution, Satisfaction, and Effect of proceedings.
Judgments (Rule 39)
2. IN PERSONAM
A. GENERAL PROVISIONS ● An action to impose a
responsibility or liability upon a
CIVIL ACTION: action that seeks to enforce or person directly.
protect a right or to prevent a wrong. ● Directed against a particular
person.
SPECIAL CIVIL ACTION: an independent action ● Jurisdiction over thj<m.e person
based on specific grounds. of the defendant is required.
● Judgment is binding only upon
CRIMINAL ACTION: action that seeks to the parties impleaded or their
prosecute an act or omission punishable by law. successors in interest.
● E.g. actions for specific
SPECIAL PROCEEDING: a remedy by which a performance and actions for
party seeks to establish a status, right or a breach of contract.
particular fact. To initiate a special proceeding, a
petition and not a complaint should be filed. 3. QUASI IN REM
● It is a proceeding, the purpose of
REAL ACTION: Actions which affect title to or which is to subject the interest of
possession of real property or an interest therein. a named defendant over a
These are actions where personal property is particular property to an
sought to be recovered or damages for breach of obligation or lien burdening it.
contract are sought. ● Directed against particular
persons.
PERSONAL ACTION: All other kinds of actions ● Jurisdiction over the person of
that are not real (e.g. action is recovery of sum of the defendant is not required as
money). long as jurisdiction over the res
is acquired.

ATENEO CENTRAL
● Judgment is binding upon the Purpose: To make the court’s disposition of the
particular persons. criminal case of no effect whatsoever on the
● E.g. actions for partition and separate civil case. Purpose is to enforce civil
foreclosure of real estate liability arising from the tort/quasi-delict
mortgages.
Requisites
Actions Capable And Incapable Of Pecuniary 1. May be brought by the offended party;
Estimation 2. Shall proceed independently of criminal
All civil actions incapable of pecuniary estimation action; and
falls under the exclusive original jurisdiction of the 3. Shall require only a preponderance of
Regional Trial Court. (B.P. 129, Sec. 1(1)). evidence. (Rule 111, Sec. 3)
Capable of Pecuniary Estimation Note: Rule on Double Recovery – An offended

If it is primarily for the recovery of a sum of party cannot recover damages twice for the same
money, the claim is considered capable of act or omission charged in the criminal action .
pecuniary estimation. (Id.) (Rule 111, Sec. 3)
Example: action for a sum of money Commencement Of Action

A civil action commences upon filing of the
Incapable of Pecuniary Estimation original complaint in court.
When the primary relief sought is for something
other than collection of a sum of money or If an additional defendant is impleaded in a later
transfer of title/possession over a property. The pleading, the action is commenced with regard to
sum of money or the transfer of property must be him on the date of the filing of such later pleading.
INCIDENTAL to the primary relief sought. (Rule 1, Sec. 5)
Example: specific performance, support, or The Payment of Docket Fees

foreclosure of mortgage, or annulment of The payment of docket fees is an essential
judgment requirement of due process. Both the filing of the
complaint or appropriate initiatory pleading AND
Independent Civil Action the payment of the prescribed docket fee vests a
Independent civil actions refer to those provided trial court with jurisdiction over the subject matter
for in Articles 32, 33, 34 and 2176 of the Civil or nature of the action.
Code of the Philippines.
● Article 32 of the Civil Code: Violation, HOWEVER, where the filing of the initiatory
impediment or impairment of a person’s pleading is not accompanied by payment of the
rights and liberties by any public officer or docket fee, the court may allow payment of the
employee, or any private individual. fee within a reasonable time but in no case
● Article 33 of the Civil Code: Cases of beyond the applicable prescriptive or
defamation, fraud, and physical injuries a reglementary period.
civil action for damages, entirely
separate and distinct from the criminal The same rule applies to permissive
action. counterclaims, third party claims,
● Article 34 of the Civil Code: When a compulsory counterclaim or cross-claim.
member of a city or municipal police force (Korea Technologies v. Lerma, G.R. No. 143581,
refuses or fails to render aid or protection 2008).
to any person in case of danger to life or
property, such peace officer shall be Where the judgment awards a claim not
primarily liable for damages, and the city specified in the pleading, or if specified the
or municipality shall be subsidiarily same has been left for determination by the
responsible therefor. court, the additional filing fee therefor shall
● Article 2176 of the Civil Code: The constitute a lien on the judgment. (Sun
provision on quasi-delicts Insurance Office Ltd. v. Asuncion G.R. No.
79937-38, 1989)

ATENEO CENTRAL
C. CAUSE OF ACTION deleted. Failure to

state a cause of
A cause of action is an act or omission of one action is now an
party in violation of the legal rights of another. affirmative defense
under Sec. 12(4),
Elements of a cause of action (ROB): Rule 8 of the New
1. Legal Right of the plaintiff; Rules.)
2. Correlative Obligation of the defendant to
respect plaintiff’s right; (Asia Brewery, Inc. v. Equitable PCI Bank, G.R.
3. Act or omission (i.e. Breach) of the defendant No. 190432, April 25, 2017)
in violation of plaintiff’s legal right.
A complaint whose cause of action has not yet
A single act or omission can be violative of accrued cannot be cured or remedied by an
various rights at the time, but where there is only amended or supplemental pleading alleging the
one delict or wrong, there is but one single cause existence or accrual of a cause of action while the
of action regardless of the number of rights case is pending. Such an action is prematurely
violated. (Joseph v. Bautista, G.R. No. L-41423, brought and is, therefore, a groundless suit,
1989) which should be dismissed by the court upon
proper motion seasonably filed by the defendant.
A party may not institute more than one suit for a (Swagman v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 161135,
single cause of action. (Rule 2, Sec. 3) 2005)
Cause of Action Test Of Sufficiency Of A Cause Of Action

A wrongful act or omission committed by the Whether or not admitting the facts alleged, the
defendant in violation of the rights of the plaintiff. court could render a valid verdict in accordance
with the prayer of the complaint. (See Misamis
Right of Action Occidental II Cooperative v. David, G.R. No.
A right to relief granted by law to a party to 129928, 2005). The insufficiency must appear on
institute an action against a person who has the face of the complaint.
committed a delict or wrong against him/her.
Splitting A Single Cause Of Action
Note: A cause of action is not affected by A party may not institute more than 1 suit for a
affirmative defenses (e.g. fraud, prescription, single cause of action (Rule 2, Sec. 3)
estoppel etc.). A right of action may be lost or
waived (e.g. through prescription if a complaint is Test/s: To ascertain whether two suits relate to a
not filed within the prescriptive period.) single or common cause of action, several tests
exist:
Failure To State A Cause Of Action 1. Whether the same evidence would support
FAILURE TO STATE LACK OF CAUSE and sustain both the first and second causes
A CAUSE OF OF ACTION of action (same evidence test)
ACTION 2. Whether the defenses in one case may be
used to substantiate the complaint in the
Insufficiency of the Insufficiency of the other.
allegations in the factual basis for the 3. Whether the cause of action in the second
pleading action case existed at the time of the filing of the first
complaint. (Umale v. Canoga, G. R. No.
Raised before a Raised after the 167246, 2011)
responsive pleading plaintiff has rested its
has been filed. case. Singleness of Cause of Action in Contracts
General Rule: A contract embraces only one
Remedy is to file a Remedy is to file a cause of action because it may be violated only
Motion to Dismiss Demurrer to Evidence once even if it contains several stipulations.
under Rule 16. (Note: under Rule 33, Sec. (Quiogue v. Bautista, G.R. No. L-13159, 1962)
Rule 16 of the New 1.
Rules was entirely

ATENEO CENTRAL
Exception: A contract to do several things at action may, on motion of a party or on the

several times is divisible in its nature. (Blossoms initiative of the court, be severed and proceeded
& Co. v. Manila Gas Corporation, G.R. No. L- with separately. (Rule 2, Sec. 6)
32958, 1930)
D. PARTIES TO CIVIL ACTION (RULE
Exception to exception: When a contract of 3)
lease provides for the payment of the rent in
separate installments, each installment may be Who May Be Parties: (NJE)
considered an independent cause of action, but Only the following may be parties to a civil action
in an action upon such a lease for the recovery of 1. Natural persons;
rent, the installments due at the time the action 2. Juridical persons; and
was brought must be included in the complaint, 3. Entities authorized by law.
and failure to do so constitutes a bar to a
subsequent action for such overdue rent. (Larena
v. Villanueva, G.R. No. L-29155, 1928) PLAINTIFF DEFENDANT
Remedy of defendant Does not only refer to

The one who files the
The remedy then of the defendant is to raise the the original defending
complaint.
affirmative defense of either: party.
1. Litis Pendentia: If the first action is
pending when the second action is filed. If a counterclaim is
2. Res Judicata: If a final judgment had The term may refer to filed against the
been rendered in the first action when the claiming party, the original plaintiff, the
the second action is filed. counter-claimant, the latter becomes a
cross-claimant or the defendant and the
Joinder of Causes of Action: as many causes third-party plaintiff. former, a plaintiff in the
of action as a party may have against another in counterclaim.
one pleading alone. It is not compulsory, but
merely permissive. It may also apply to a It may also pertain to a
defendant who files a defendant in a
Requisites For A Valid Joinder Of Causes Of counterclaim, a cross- counterclaim, the
Action: claim or a third party cross-defendant, or the
1. The party joining the causes of action shall complaint. (Rule 3, third-party defendant.
comply with the rules on joinder of parties Sec. 1) (Rule 3, Sec. 1)
2. The joinder shall not include special civil
actions or actions governed by special rules; The Juridical Persons Who May Be Parties To
3. Where the causes of action are between the A Civil Action:
same parties but pertain to different venues 1. The State and its political subdivisions;
or jurisdictions, the joinder may be allowed in 2. Other corporations, institutions and
the Regional Trial Court provided one of the entities for public interest or purpose, created
causes of action falls within the jurisdiction of by law; and
said court and the venue lies therein; and 3. Corporations, partnerships and
4. Where the claims in all the causes of action associations for private interest or purpose to
are principally for recovery of money, the which the law grants a juridical personality,
aggregate amount claimed shall be the test separate and distinct from that of each
of jurisdiction. (Rule 2, Sec. 5) shareholder, partner or member (Civil Code,
Art. 44)
Note: Joinder does NOT include special civil
actions or those actions governed by special Remedies When A Party Impleaded Is Not
rules, i.e., ejectment, REM foreclosure and Authorized To Be A Party:
partition. 1. If PLAINTIFF - a motion to dismiss
(NOW: an affirmative defense) may be raised
Misjoinder Of Causes Of Action on the ground that the plaintiff has no legal
Misjoinder of causes of action is NOT a ground capacity to sue. (Rule 16, Sec. 1[d])
for dismissal of an action. A misjoined cause of

ATENEO CENTRAL
2. If DEFENDANT - the complaint may be and the judgment rendered therein shall be
dismissed on the ground of failure to state a without prejudice to the rights of such necessary
cause of action (NOW: through an affirmative party. (Agro Conglomerates, Inc. v. CA, G.R. No.
defense) (Rule 16, Sec. 1[g]) 117660, 2000)
Real Party in Interest Duty of a Pleader When a Necessary Party is

One who stands to be benefited or injured by the NOT Joined:
judgment in the suit, or the party entitled to the 1. Set forth the name of the said necessary
avails of the suit. (Rule 3, Sec. 2) party, if known; and
2. State the reason why the necessary party
“Interest” must be real which is a present is omitted (Rule 3, Sec. 9)
substantial interest as distinguished from a mere
expectancy or a future, contingent subordinate or Note: If the reason given for the non-joinder of
consequential interest (Rayo v. Metrobank, G.R. the necessary party is found by the court to be
No. 165142, 2007). unmeritorious, it may order the pleader to join the
omitted party if jurisdiction over his person may
General Rule: Only parties to a contract may be obtained. Failure to comply with such order
sue. without justifiable cause shall be deemed a
waiver of the claim against such party. (Rule 3,
Exceptions: Sec. 9)
1. A beneficiary of a stipulation pour autrui
may demand fulfillment of the contract. (Civil Representatives as Parties
Code, Art. 1311). A beneficiary is a real party Even where the action is allowed to be
in interest/indispensable party. prosecuted or defended by a representative party
2. Those who are not principally or or someone acting in a fiduciary capacity, the
subsidiarily obligated in a contract may show beneficiary shall be included in the title of the
the detriment that could result from it i.e., case and shall be deemed to be the real party in
when contracts entered into in fraud of interest (Rule 3, Sec. 3)
creditors may be rescinded when the
creditors cannot collect the claims due them. Note: Impleading the beneficiary as a party is
(Civil Code, Art. 1318) mandatory.
Indispensable Party Example: The attorney in fact of the principal

A real party-in-interest without whom NO FINAL plaintiff filed the complaint in his residence. An
DETERMINATION can be had of an action. (Rule attorney in fact is not a real party in interest.
3, Sec. 7) Absence of an indispensable party Hence, his residence is immaterial.
renders all subsequent actions of the court null
and void for want of authority to act. (MWSS v. Indigent Party
Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 126000, 1998) A party may be authorized to litigate as an
indigent if the court is satisfied that the party is
Outright dismissal is not the immediate remedy one who has no money or property sufficient and
for failure to implead an indispensable party; available for food, shelter and basic necessities.
parties may be dropped or added at any stage
upon motion of any party or on court’s own The application and the hearing to litigate as an
initiative; only when the order of the court to indigent litigant may be made ex parte.
implead an indispensable party goes unheeded
may the case be dismissed. (Riano, 2014, p. 279) If one is authorized to litigate as an indigent, such
authority shall include an exemption from the
Necessary Party payment of docket fees, and of transcripts of
He is ought to be joined as a party if complete stenographic notes, which the court may order to
relief is to be accorded as to those already be furnished by him/
parties; he should be joined whenever possible.
However, the amount of the docket and other
The non-inclusion of a necessary party does NOT lawful fees, which the indigent was exempt from
prevent the court from proceeding in the action,

ATENEO CENTRAL
paying, shall be lien on the judgment rendered in A real party in interest is the party who stands
the case favorable to the indigent. to be benefited or injured by the judgment in the
suit, or the party entitled to the avails of the suit.
A lien on the judgment shall not arise if the court
provides otherwise. (Rule 3, Sec. 21) Legal Standing or locus standi is the ability of
a party to demonstrate to the court sufficient
When an application to litigate as an indigent connection to and harm from the law or action
litigant is filed, the court shall determine if the challenged to support that party’s participation in
applicant complies with the income and property the case. (White Light v. City of Manila, G.R. No.
standards prescribed in the present Section 19 of 122846, 2009)
Rule 14: that is, the applicant’s gross income and
that of the applicant’s immediate family do not Compulsory And Permissive Joinder Of
exceed an amount double the monthly minimum Parties
wage of an employee; AND the applicant does General Rule: Joinder of parties is not
not own real property with a fair market value of compulsory, but merely permissive.
more than Three Hundred Thousand Pesos (PhP
300,000.00). Exception: When it refers to joinder of
indispensable parties. (Rule 3, Sec. 7)
If the trial court finds that the applicant MEETS
the income and property requirements, the Requisites for Joinder of Parties:
authority to litigate as indigent litigant is 1. The right to relief should arise out of the
automatically granted and the grant is a matter of SAME transaction or series of transactions;
right. However, if the trial court finds that one or and
both requirements have NOT BEEN MET then it 2. That there exists a common question of law
would set a hearing to enable the applicant to or fact.
prove that the applicant has “no money or
property sufficient and available for food, shelter Note: Same transaction means that it pertains to
and basic necessities for himself and his family.” transactions connected with the same subject
(Spouses Algura v. City of Naga, G.R. No. matter of the suit.
150135, 2006)
Note: The plaintiff is mandated to implead all the
Spouses as Parties indispensable parties, considering that the
General Rule: Husband and wife shall sue or be absence of one such party renders all
sued jointly. subsequent actions of the court null and void for
want of authority to act, not only as to the absent
Exceptions: parties, but even as to those present. (Riano,
1. When the litigation pertains to the exclusive 2014, p. 278)
property of a spouse or when there is
abandonment. (See Rule 3, Sec. 4) Misjoinder And Non-Joinder Of Parties
2. A petition for declaration of absolute nullity A party is MISJOINED when he is made a party
of a void marriage may be filed solely by the to the action although he should not be
husband or wife (A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC) impleaded.
3. A petition for legal separation may be filed
only by the husband or wife (A.M. No. 02-11- A party is NOT JOINED when he is supposed to
11-SC) be joined but is not impleaded in the action.
Minors or Incompetents as Parties Note: Neither of the two is a ground for the
A suit may be brought by OR against a minor or dismissal of an action, as parties may be dropped
incompetent but with the assistance of his father, or added by order of the court or on motion of any
mother, guardian, or if he has none, a guardian party OR on its own initiative at any stage of the
ad litem. (Rule 3, Sec. 5) action and on such terms as are just.
Distinction Between Real Party In Interest And However, the FAILURE TO OBEY the order of
Locus Standi the court to drop or add a party is a ground for the

ATENEO CENTRAL
dismissal of the complaint, because it is a Requirement of a license

disobedience to the order of a court. An unlicensed foreign corporation doing business
in the Philippines CANNOT sue before Philippine
Class Suit courts.
A class suit is an action where one or more may
sue for the benefit of all if the requisites for said On the other hand, an unlicensed foreign
action are complied with. corporation NOT doing business in the
Philippines CAN sue before Philippine courts.
Requisites of a Class Suit: (Van Zuiden v. GTVL, G.R. No. 147905, 2007)
1. Subject matter of the controversy of
common or general interest to many Effect Of Death Of Party Litigant
persons; Whenever a party to a pending action dies, and
2. Persons are so numerous that it is the claim is not thereby extinguished, it shall be
impracticable to join all as parties; the duty of his counsel to:
3. The parties actually before the court are 1. Inform the court within thirty (30) days after
sufficiently numerous and representative; such death of the fact thereof, and
and 2. Give the name and address of his legal
4. The representatives sue or defend for the representative or representatives. (Rule 3,
benefit of all. (Juana Complex I Sec. 16)
Homeowners Association v. Fil-Estate
Land, G.R. No. 152272, 2012) Failure of counsel to comply with this duty shall
be a ground for disciplinary action.
Common Interest
As a requisite for a class suit to prosper, common The heirs of the deceased may be allowed to be
interest in the subject matter (e.g., money, land, substituted for the deceased, without requiring
chattel) of the litigation is required. the appointment of an executor or administrator
and the court may appoint a guardian ad litem for
Adequacy of Representation the minor heirs. (Rule 3, Sec. 16)
In determining the question of fair and adequate
representation of members of a class, the court Note [not per se a ground for dismissal]: It has
must consider: been ruled that "mere failure to substitute a
a. Whether the interest of the named party is deceased party is not sufficient ground to nullify a
coextensive with the interest of the other trial court's decision. The party alleging nullity
members of the class; must prove that there was an undeniable violation
b. The proportion of those made a party, as it so of due process. (Spouses Rabamonte v Spouses
bears, to the total membership of the class; Lucero, G.R. 237812, October 2, 2019
and
c. Any other factor bearing on the ability of the
named party to speak for the rest of the class. Examples of claims NOT extinguished by
(Banda v. Ermita, G.R. No. 166620, 2010) death are:
1. Recovery of real and personal property
Suits Against Entities Without Juridical against the estate;
Personality 2. Enforcement of liens on such properties;
When two or more persons not organized as an and
entity with juridical personality enter into a 3. Recovery for an injury to person or property
transaction, they may be sued under the name by by reason of tort or delict committed by the
which they are generally or commonly known. deceased. (Riano, 2014, p. 289)
In the answer of such defendant, the names and Rules in Cases where the Action Survives
addresses of the persons composing said entity Death of the Party
must all be revealed. (Rule 3, Sec. 15)
Contractual Money Claim
Note: These entities may be a defendant but not ● Plaintiff dies: Plaintiff’s heirs or legal
a plaintiff as the provision states “may be sued.” representatives will be substituted for him
and the case will proceed.

ATENEO CENTRAL
● Defendant dies Where the deceased has no heirs, the court

○ Before entry of final judgment. shall require the appointment of an executor or
The case shall not be dismissed administrator; if the heir is a minor, a guardian ad
but shall be allowed to continue litem. (Rule 3, Sec. 16)
until entry of final judgment.
(Rule 3, Sec. 20). The judgment It Is Possible That the Court May Order the
favorable to the plaintiff shall be Opposing Party to Procure the Appointment
filed as a money claim against of an Executor or Administrator for the Estate
the estate. of the Deceased When:
○ After entry of final judgment 1. The counsel for the deceased does not
but before execution. File name a legal representative; or
judgment as a claim against the 2. There is a representative named but he
estate. The plaintiff cannot move fails to appear within the specified period.
to execute under Rule 39. (Rule 3, Sec. 16)
○ After levy or execution but
before auction sale. The All court charges in procuring such
property actually sold may be appointment, if defrayed by the opposing party
sold for the satisfaction of the may be recovered as costs. (Rule 3, Sec. 16)
judgment obligation. (Rule 39,
Sec. 7[c]) Death or Separation of Party Who is a Public
Officer
Non-Contractual Money Claim
● Substitution of parties. Requisites:
1. satisfactory proof by any party that
If the deceased left an heir and the claim is not there is substantial need for continuing
extinguished by death, the heir may be allowed or maintaining the action;
to be substituted for the deceased without need 2. the successor adopts or continues or
for an appointment of an administrator or threatens to adopt or continue the acts
executor. of his or her predecessor;
● Service of summons is NOT necessary to 3. the substitution must be effected within
effect such substitution as the court shall 30 days after the successor assumes
order such legal representative to appear office or within the time granted by the
and be substituted for the deceased court; and,notice of the application to
within thirty (30) days from notice. the other party.
● Substitution of the deceased by his (Rufus v. Jardine, G.R. No. 141834, 2007).
representative or heir is made by the
order of substitution and its service. E. VENUE
● Non-compliance with the rule on
substitution of a deceased party renders Venue v. Jurisdiction
the proceedings and judgment null See table under Discussion on Jurisdiction
because the trial court acquired no
jurisdiction over the persons of the legal Determining Venue
representatives or of the heirs on whom
the trial and judgment would be binding REAL ACTION PERSONAL ACTION
on. (Brioso v. Rili-Mariano, G.R. No.
132765, 2003) Venue is local; Venue is Transitory.
hence, the action Hence, the Action
When Formal Substitution is Not Necessary may be commenced May Be Commenced
Formal substitution of heirs is not necessary and tried: and Tried:
when the heirs themselves voluntarily appeared, 1. Where the
participated in the case and presented evidence In the proper court plaintiff or any of
in defense of deceased defendant. (Vda. de which has jurisdiction the principal
Salazar v. CA, G.R. No. 121510, 1995) over the area wherein plaintiffs reside;
the real property 2. Where the
defendant or any of

ATENEO CENTRAL
tried in the court of the place where the plaintiff

involved, or a portion the principal
resides.
thereof, is situated. defendants
Forcible entry and resides; or
When the action affects the property of the
detainer actions shall 3. In the case of
defendant located in the Philippines, the action
be commenced and a non-resident
may be commenced where the property or any
tried in the municipal defendant, where
portion thereof is situated or found.
trial court of the he may be found.
municipality or city
The proper venue in an action for revival of
wherein the real All at the election of
judgment depends on the determination of
property involved, or a the PLAINTIFF.
whether the present action for revival of judgment
portion thereof, is
is a real action or a personal action. The
situated. (Rule 4, Sec.
allegations in the complaint for revival of
1)
judgment determine whether it is a real action or
a personal action. (Infante v. Aran Builders, G.R.
Residence means physical or actual habitation No. 156596, 2006)
or actual residence or place of abode, (Fule v.
CA, G.R. No. L-40502, 1976) whether permanent When The Rules On Venue Do Not Apply
or temporary as long as he resides with continuity The rules on venue are not applicable in any of
and consistency therein. (Dangwa Transportation the following cases:
Co v. Sarmiento, G.R. No. L-22795, 1977) 1. Where a specific rule or law provides
otherwise; or
When there is more than one plaintiff in a 2. Where the parties have validly agreed in
personal action case, the residences of the writing before the filing of the action on the
principal parties should be the basis for exclusive venue thereof. (Rule 4, Sec. 4)
determining the proper venue.
First Exception: Where a specific rule or law
If Defendant Does Not Reside But IS FOUND provides otherwise.
in the Philippines
When it is a personal action, the action may be Venue of Derivative Suits
commenced and tried in the court of the place Regional Trial Court which has jurisdiction
where the plaintiff resides or where the over the principal office of the corporation,
defendant may be found (e.g. If the defendant partnership, or association concerned.
is U.S. resident, but is on vacation in Makati,
summons may be served on defendant in Where the principal office of the corporation,
Makati). partnership or association is registered in the
Securities and Exchange Commission as
If there are several defendants, but one of them Metro Manila, the action must be filed in the
is a resident or a nonresident but can be found in city or municipality where the head office is
the Philippines, the action may be commenced located. (Rule 1 of A.M. No. 01-2-04-SC,
where the plaintiff resides or where the resident Section 5)
defendant resides or where the nonresident
defendant may be found. Venue of Action of Nullity of Marriage
Where plaintiff resides, where the defendant
When it is a real action (e.g., recovery of real resides or where their conjugal home is
property), the action may be commenced where located.
the property or any portion thereof is situated
or found. Venue of Adoption
Where the prospective parents reside.
If None of the Defendants Reside in the
Philippines and None are Found in the Venue of Probate
Philippines If the decedent died in the Philippines: Where
When the action affects the personal status of the deceased last resided at his time of death.
the plaintiff, the action may be commenced and

ATENEO CENTRAL
If the decedent died abroad: In any of the he actually resides at the time of the
provinces where he has property. commission of the offense or where the
libelous matter is printed and first
Writ of habeas corpus on residence of published. (Revised Penal Code, Art.
minor 360)
General Rule: Regional Trial Court where the
minor is supposed to be found. Note: The civil action shall be filed in the same
court where the criminal action is filed and vice
Exception: When place is unknown or minor versa. (Revised Penal Code, Art. 360)
cannot be found, it can be filed in the Court of
Appeals or the Supreme Court. EFFECTS OF STIPULATIONS ON VENUE
Second Exception: Where the parties have The Stipulation on Venue Must Be:
validly agreed in writing before the filing of the 1. In writing;
action on the exclusive venue thereof. 2. Made before the filing of the action; and
3. Exclusive as to the venue.
Example: “In case of dispute arising from this
contract, a party shall file a suit exclusively In the absence of qualifying or restrictive
with the Regional Trial Court of Pasig City to words, the stipulation should be deemed as
the exclusion of all other courts”. merely an agreement on an additional forum, not
as limiting venue to the specified place. (Sps.
Venue of Libel Lantin v. Lantion, G.R. No. 160053, 2006)
General rule:
1. The criminal and civil action for damages Exclusive venue stipulation embodied in a
2. in cases of written defamations contract restricts or confines parties thereto
3. shall be filed simultaneously or ONLY when the suit relates to breach of said
separately contract (Uniwide v. Cruz, G.R. No. 171456,
a. with the RTC of the province or 2007). If the complaint was assailing the validity
city where the libelous article is of the written instrument itself, the parties
printed and first published or should be filed in accordance with the general
b. where any of the offended rules on venue. (Briones v. Court of Appeals,
parties actually resides at the G.R. No. 204444, 2015)
time of the commission of the
offense. Waiver of Venue
The ground of improperly laid venues must be
Exception: raised seasonably, else it is deemed waived.
1. Where one of the offended parties is a Where the defendant failed to [either file a motion
public officer whose office is in the City of to dismiss on the ground of improper venue or]
Manila at the time of the commission of include the same as an affirmative defense, he is
the offense, the action shall be filed in the deemed to have waived his right to object to
RTC of the City of Manila, or of the city or improper venue.
province where the libelous article is
printed and first published. Venue for a case for revival of judgment
The proper venue depends on the determination
2. In case such public officer does not hold of whether the present action for revival of
office in the City of Manila, the action judgment is a real action or a personal action.
shall be filed in the RTC of the province ● If the action for revival of judgment
or city where he held office at the time of affects title to or possession of real
the commission of the offense or where property, or interest therein, then it is a
the libelous article is printed and first real action that must be filed with the
published. court of the place where the real property
is located.
3. In case one of the offended parties is a ● If it is then a personal action that may be
private individual, the action shall be filed filed with the court of the place where the
in the RTC of the province or city where

ATENEO CENTRAL
plaintiff or defendant resides. (Infante v. ● Affirmative Defenses: An affirmative

Aran Builders, G.R. No. 156596, 2007) defense is an allegation of, a new matter
which, while hypothetically admitting the
F. PLEADINGS material allegations in the pleading of the
claimant, would nevertheless prevent or
1. KINDS bar recovery by him or her.
Specific Denial
PLEADING MOTION A specific denial is made by specifying each
material allegation of fact, the truth of which the
Is a submission of
Is an application for an defendant does not admit and, whenever
claims or defenses
order not included in practicable, setting forth the substance of the
for appropriate
the judgment matters upon which he relies to support his
judgment
denial. (UA vs. Wallem Philippines Shipping, Inc
Cannot be initiatory; G.R. No. 171337. July 11, 2012)
May be initiatory made in a case
already filed in court Failure to make a specific denial will be
considered an admission of that particular
May be oral when allegation in the complaint. (Rule 8, Sec. 11)
made in open court or
Must be written
in the course of a Three Modes of Specific Denial:
hearing or a trial 1. By specifying each material allegation of
the fact in the complaint, the truth of
Must be filed before May be filed after which the defendant does not admit, and
judgment judgment whenever practicable, setting forth the
substance of the matters which he will
Pleadings Allowed By The Rules Of Court: rely upon to support his denial;
a. Complaint 2. By specifying so much of an averment in
b. Answer the complaint as is true and material and
c. Counterclaim denying only the remainder
d. Cross-claim 3. By stating that the defendant is without
e. Third (fourth, etc. – party complaint) knowledge or information sufficient to
f. Complaint-in-intervention form a belief as to the truth of a material
g. Reply (only if the pleading replied to averment in the complaint, which has the
contains an actionable document) effect of a denial. (Republic v. Gimenez,
G.R. No. 174673, January 11, 2016,
(a) Complaint: The complaint is the pleading ponencia by J. Leonen)
alleging the plaintiff’s cause or causes of
action. The names and residences of the plaintiff Negative Pregnant: It is a denial pregnant with
and defendant must be stated in the complaint. the admission of the substantial facts in the
(Rule 6, Sec. 3) pleading responded to which are not squarely
denied. It was in effect an admission of the
(b) Answer: An answer is a pleading in which a averments it was directed at.
defending party sets forth his defenses. (Sec. 6,
Rule 4) It may be an answer to a complaint, a Example: A complaint, in par. 4, alleged that the
counterclaim or a cross-claim. plaintiff was unable to take actual possession of
the property because of the “unwarranted
Defenses: adverse claim of rights of ownership and
● Negative Defenses: Specific denial of possession by the defendant, alleging sale by a
the material fact or facts alleged in the certain Fe of said property to defendant, which if
pleading of the claimant essential to his true, had no right whatsoever to legally dispose
cause or causes of action. (Rule 6, Sec. the above-described property not being the
5) owner thereof.” In response, the answer of the
defendant stated: “The defendant denies the
material averments contained in par. 4, the truth

ATENEO CENTRAL
being, that the defendant never asserted title of 4. It must be cognizable by the regular courts
ownership to the property described in the of justice; and
complaint to anybody, much less to the herein 5. It is already in existence at the time that the
plaintiff in virtue of any deed of conveyance defending party files his answer
executed in favor of the defendant by one Fe, nor
claimed any possessory right over the said Test to Determine Whether a Counterclaim is
property, either by himself or through another. Compulsory or Permissive
1. Are the issues of fact or law raised by the
The Court held that there was a negative claim and the counterclaim largely the
pregnant in the defendant’s reply, which is to be same?
construed as an implied admission. Particularly, 2. Would res judicata bar a subsequent suit on
when the plaintiff alleged that his inability to take defendant’s claim absent the compulsory
actual possession of the parcel of land due to "an counterclaim rule?
unwarranted adverse claim of rights of ownership 3. Will substantially the same evidence support
and possession by the defendant," followed by an or refute plaintiff’s claim as well as the
allegation of how such claim was exercised, the defendant’s counterclaim? and
defendant’s denial is as to "the material 4. Is there any logical relation between the
averments contained in par. 4 of the Complaint," claim and the counterclaim? Affirmative
conjoined with his disclaimer of dominical or answers to the above queries indicate the
possessory rights in the manner alleged in the existence of a compulsory counterclaim.
complaint. It thus appeared that he denied the (See Financial Building v. FPA, G.R. No.
averments in par. 4, but he did not deny the fact 133119, 2000)
of ownership and right to possession of the
plaintiff. (Galofa v. Nee Bon Sing, G.R. No. L- Rule on Barring of Compulsory
22018, 1968) Counterclaims
It does not qualify as a specific denial but is General Rule: A compulsory counterclaim not
conceded to be actually an admission. (Riano, initially set up in the same action is barred. (Rule
Civil Procedure: A Restatement for the Bar, 2 nd 6, Sec. 6) If it is filed concurrently with the main
ed, 2009) action but in a different proceeding, it would be
abated on the ground of litis pendentia; if filed
(c) Counterclaims: A counterclaim is any claim, subsequently, it would meet the same fate on the
which a defending party may have against an ground of res judicata. (Alba, Jr. v. Malapajo,
opposing party. (Rule 6, Sec. 6). A counterclaim G.R. No. 198752, January 13, 2016).
is in itself a distinct and independent cause of
action and when filed, there are two simultaneous Exception
actions between the same parties. (Padilla v. A counterclaim not set up because of the
Globe Asiatique Realty Holdings Corporation, pleader’s oversight, inadvertence, excusable
G.R. No. 207376, August 6, 2014). neglect or when justice requires, may be set up,
by leave of court by amendment of the pleadings
A counterclaim may be COMPULSORY or before judgment (Rule 11, Sec. 10).
PERMISSIVE.
If a compulsory counterclaim matures or was
COMPULSORY COUNTERCLAIM acquired by a party after serving his answer, the
compulsory counterclaim is not deemed barred
Elements of Compulsory Counterclaim and may be pleaded by filing a supplemental
1. Arises out of or is necessarily connected answer or pleading before judgment. (Rule 11,
with the transaction or occurrence which is the Sec. 9)
subject matter of the opposing party’s claim;
2. It does not require for its adjudication the Note: NO NEED to pay docket fees for the
presence of third parties over whom the court compulsory counterclaim.
cannot acquire jurisdiction;
3. The court has jurisdiction over the amount
and nature of the case;

ATENEO CENTRAL
PERMISSIVE COUNTERCLAIM COMPULSORY PERMISSIVE

COUNTERCLAIM COUNTERCLAIM
A counterclaim is permissive if any of the Shall be contained in May be set up as an
elements of a compulsory counterclaim is absent the answer. If not set independent action
(see above). up it shall be barred. and will not be barred
if not contained in the
The most commonly treated feature of a answer.
permissive counterclaim is its absence of a
logical connection with the subject matter of the
Not an initiatory An initiatory pleading.
complaint. (International Container Terminal
pleading.
Services Inc. v. CA, G.R. No. 90530, 1992)
Does not require Requires certification
certification of forum against forum
A permissive counterclaim can be filed as a
shopping. shopping.
separate case altogether. There is a need to pay
for docket fees since it is seen as a different One which arises out It does not arise out
action altogether with defendants becoming or is necessarily of nor is it necessarily
‘plaintiffs’ in respect of such counterclaim. (Reillo connected with the connected with the
v. San Jose, G.R. No. 166393, 2009) transaction or subject matter of the
occurrence that is opposing party’s
The counterclaim must be existing at the time of the subject matter of claim.
the filing the answer, though not at the the opposing party’s
commencement of the action. claim.
No requirement for May require for its
The cause of action of the counterclaimant is not the presence of third adjudication the
eliminated by the mere dismissal of the main parties whom the presence of third
complaint. (Padilla v. Globe Asiatique, G.R. No. court cannot acquire parties over whom the
207376, 2014) jurisdiction over for court cannot acquire
its adjudication. jurisdiction.
Certificate of Non-Forum Shopping for Not required Requires docket fees.
Juridical Entities Failure to answer is Must be answered by
It is true that the power of a corporation to sue not a ground to be the party against
and be sued is lodged in the board of directors declared in default. whom it is interposed.
that exercises its corporate powers. Physical Otherwise, the party
acts of the corporation, like the signing of may be declared in
documents, can be performed only by natural default.
persons duly authorized for the purpose by If not raised in the Failure to set it up in
corporate by-laws or by a specific act of the board same action, it shall the same action does
of directors. (Republic v. Coalbrine Int’l., G.R. No. be barred. not bar its filing.
161838, 2010)
Effect On The Counterclaim When The
However, the following officials or employees of Complaint Is Dismissed
the company can sign the verification and The defending party has the right to prosecute the
certification without the need of a board counterclaim in the same or separate action
resolution: notwithstanding the dismissal of the complaint,
(1) The Chairperson of the Board of Directors; and without regard as to the permissive or
(2) The President of the Corporation; compulsory nature of the counterclaim. (Rule 17,
(3) The General Manager or Acting General Secs. 2 and 3)
Manager;
(4) Personnel Officer; and Three situations involving the effect of a
(5) An Employment Specialist in a labor case dismissal of a complaint on the counterclaim
already set up
This is not an exclusive list. The determination a. When the defendant does not file a motion
of the sufficiency of the authority is done on a to dismiss. Instead, he files an answer, which
case to case basis. (Pasos v. PNCC, G.R. No. includes a counterclaim, and utilizes certain
192394, 2013).

ATENEO CENTRAL
grounds for a motion to dismiss as affirmative 2. If the court cannot acquire jurisdiction
defenses. (Rule 16, Sec. 6) over third parties whose presence is
necessary for the adjudication of said
Note: Rule 16 under the New Rules has been cross-claim. In which case, the cross-
entirely deleted. Nevertheless, a dismissal of claim is considered PERMISSIVE;
the action where the counterclaim is raised 3. Cross claim that may mature or maybe
as an affirmative defense shall be without acquired after service of the answer.
prejudice to the prosecution in the same or
separate action of a counterclaim pleaded in A cross-claim which either matured or was
the answer. acquired by a party after serving his or her
pleading may, with permission of the court, be
b. When the plaintiff himself files a motion to presented as a cross-claim by supplemental
dismiss his complaint after the defendant has pleading before judgment (Rule 11, Sec. 9).
pleaded his answer with a counterclaim, and
the court grants the motion. Again, the A cross-claim cannot be set up for the first time
dismissal shall be without prejudice to the on appeal. (Loadmasters Customs Services v.
right of the defendant to prosecute his Glodel Brokerage Corp., G.R. No. 179446, 2011)
counterclaim in a separate action unless
within 15 days from notice of the motion he The dismissal of the complaint carries with it the
manifests his preference to have his dismissal of a cross-claim which is purely
counterclaim resolved in the same action. defensive, but not a cross-claim seeking an
(Rule 17, Sec. 2) affirmative relief. (Torres v. CA, G.R. No. L-
25889, 1973)
c. When complaint is dismissed through the
plaintiff’s fault and at a time when a e) Third, (Fourth, etc) Party Complaint: A claim
counterclaim has already been set up. The that a defending party may, with leave of court,
dismissal is without prejudice to the right of file against a person not a party to the action,
the defendant to prosecute his counterclaim called the third (fourth, etc.)—party defendant, for
in the same or separate action. (Rule 17, Sec. contribution, indemnity, subrogation or any other
3) relief, in respect of his opponent’s claim. (Rule 6,
Sec. 11)
d) Cross-Claims: A cross-claim is any claim by
one party against a co-party arising out of the Tests to Determine Whether the Third-Party
transaction or occurrence that is the subject Complaint is in Respect of Plaintiff’s Claim:
matter either of the original action or of a 1. Whether it arises out of the same
counterclaim therein. Such cross-claim may transaction on which the plaintiff’s claim is
cover all or part of the original claim. (Rule 6, Sec. based, or although arising out of another or
8) different transaction, is connected with the
plaintiff’s claim;
Requirements: 2. Whether the third-party defendant would
1. A claim by one party against a co-party; be liable to the plaintiff or to the defendant for
2. Must arise out of the transaction or all or part of the plaintiff’s claim against the
occurrence that is the subject matter original defendant; and
either of the original action or of a 3. Whether the third party defendant may
counterclaim; and assert any defenses that the third-party
3. The cross-claimant is prejudiced by the plaintiff has or may have to plaintiff’s claim.
claim against him by the opposing party. (Asian Construction & Dev’t Corp v. CA, G.R.
No. 160242, 2005)
Effect of Failure to File Cross-Claim
General Rule: A cross claim which is not set up Summons on third, fourth etc.-party defendant
in the action is barred. (Rule 9, Sec. 2) must be served for the court to obtain jurisdiction
over his person, since he is not an original party.
Exceptions:
1. When it is outside the jurisdiction of the Bringing new parties
court;

ATENEO CENTRAL
This is availed when none of the parties desired compulsory

to be brought into the action is a part of the main counterclaim,
action. or it may not,
in which case
Requisites for a third-party action it is called a
1. The party to be impleaded must not yet be a permissive
party to the action; counterclaim.
2. The claim against the third-party defendant
must belong to the original defendant;
3. The claim of the original defendant against (f) Complaint-In-Intervention
the third-party defendant must be based
upon the plaintiff's claim against the original INTERVENTION: A legal proceeding by which a
defendant; and person who is not a party to the action is
4. The defendant is attempting to transfer to the permitted by the court to become a party by
third-party defendant the liability asserted intervening in a pending action after meeting the
against him by the original plaintiff. conditions and requirements of the Rules of
(Philtranco Services v. Paras, G.R. No. Court. (Riano)
161909, 25 April 2012).
If the purpose of the motion for intervention is
Under Rule 6, Sec. 11 of the New Rules, the third to assert a claim against either or all of the
(forth, etc.) party complaint shall be denied original parties, the pleading shall be called a
admission, and the court shall require the COMPLAINT-IN-INTERVENTION. Meanwhile, if
defendant to institute a separate action, where: the purpose is to unite with the defending party in
a. the third (fourth, etc.) party defendant resisting a claim against the latter, the
cannot be located within 30 calendar pleading is called an ANSWER-IN-
days from the grant of such leave; INTERVENTION. (Rule 19, Sec. 3)
b. matters extraneous to the issue in the
principal case are raised; or The court has the full discretion in permitting or
c. the effect would be to introduce a new allowing a complaint-in-intervention.
and separate controversy into the action.
Requisites:
CROSS COUNTER- 3RD PARTY 1. Motion for intervention must be filed
CLAIM CLAIM COMPLAINT before judgment (Rule 19, Sec. 2);
2. Movant must show that he has the ff.
Against a
Against an legal interest in the (a) matter in
Against a co- person not a
opposing litigation, (b) the success of either
party party to the
party. parties, (c) against both parties; or (d)
action.
when he is so situated as to be adversely
No need for No need for Leave of affected by a distribution or disposition of
leave of leave of court is property in the custody of the court or an
court. court. required. officer thereof; (Rule 19, Sec. 1)
May arise out 3. Intervention must NOT unduly delay or
of or be prejudice the adjudication of the rights of
Must arise necessarily the original parties and that the movant’s
out of the connected rights may not be fully protected by a
transaction Must be in
with the separate proceeding. (Rule 19, Sec. 1);
that is the respect of
transaction 4. A copy of the pleading-in-intervention
subject the
or that is the shall be attached to the motion and
matter of the opponent’s
subject served on the original parties. (Rule 19,
original (Plaintiff)
matter of the Sec. 2).
action or of a claim.
opposing
counterclaim party’s claim Meaning of Legal Interest
therein.
in which The interest contemplated by law must be actual,
case, it is substantial, material, direct and immediate, and
called a not simply contingent or expectant. (Mactan-

ATENEO CENTRAL
Cebu International Airport Authority v. Heirs of compromise agreement

Miñoza, G.R. No. 186045, February 2, 2011) between the parties.
Time to File Answer-In-Intervention The RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR SMALL

The answer-in-intervention shall be filed within 15 CLAIMS CASES shall apply in All Actions
calendar days from notice of the order admitting which are:
the complaint-in-intervention, unless otherwise 1. Purely civil in nature where the claim or
fixed by the court. (Rule 19, Sec. 4) relief prayed for by the plaintiff is solely for
payment or reimbursement of sum of money.
g) REPLY: A pleading, the office or function of 2. The civil aspect of criminal actions either
which is to deny, or allege facts in denial or filed before the institution of the criminal
avoidance of new matters alleged by way of action, or reserved upon the filing of the
defense in the answer and thereby join or make criminal action in court. (Section 4, Rule of
issue as to such new matters. Procedure for Small Claims Cases)
If the plaintiff wishes to interpose any claims Venue

arising out of the new matters so alleged, such A small claims case is filed with the MTC in the
claims shall be set forth in an amended or city:
supplemental complaint. However, the plaintiff 1. Where the plaintiff resides;
may file a reply only if the defending party 2. Where the defendant resides; or
attaches an actionable document to his or her 3. If the plaintiff is engaged in the business
answer. (Rule 6, Sec. 10) of lending, banking and similar activities,
in the city where the defendant resides, if
Filing of a Reply is NOT Allowed, EXCEPT: the plaintiff has a branch in that city.
● When the defense in the answer is based
upon an actionable document (Rule 8, A small claims action is commenced by filing with
Sec. 7); the court an accomplished and verified
○ Otherwise, the genuineness and Statement of Claim in duplicate, accompanied
due execution of the document by a Certification of Non-forum Shopping, and
will be deemed admitted. two (2) duly certified photocopies of the
(Casent Realty v. Philbanking, actionable document/s subject of the claim, as
G.R. No. 150731, 2007) well as the affidavits of witnesses and other
● To set up affirmative defenses on the evidence to support the claim. (Section 5, Rule of
counterclaim. Procedure for Small Claims Cases)
PLEADINGS ALLOWED IN SMALL CLAIMS The defendant shall file his Response and serve
CASES AND CASES COVERED BY THE RULE the same upon the plaintiff. He shall file a
ON SUMMARY PROCEDURE Counterclaim with the Response IF the
counterclaim is
Small Claims Cases, as defined hereunder, 1. Within the coverage of the Rule exclusive
where the claim does not exceed One Million of interests and costs;
Pesos (₱1,000,000.00), exclusive of interest 2. Arises out of the same transaction or
and costs. event that is the subject matter of the plaintiff’s
claim;
The claim or demand may be: 3. Does not require the joinder of third
(a) For money owed under any of the parties; and
following: 4. Is not the subject of another pending
(1) Contract of Lease; action.
(2) Contract of Loan and other credit
accommodations; Prohibited Pleadings in Small Claims Cases
(3) Contract of Services; or 1. Motion to dismiss the complaint;
(4) Contract of Sale of personal 2. Motion for a bill of particulars;
property, excluding the recovery 3. Motion for new trial, or for reconsideration of
of the personal property, unless a judgment, or for reopening of trial;
it is made the subject of a 4. Petition for relief from judgment;

ATENEO CENTRAL
5. Motion for extension of time to file pleadings, Prohibited Pleadings

affidavits or any other paper; 1. Motion to dismiss the complaint or to
6. Memoranda; quash the complaint or information except on
7. Petition for certiorari, mandamus, or the ground of lack of jurisdiction over the
prohibition against any interlocutory order subject matter, or failure to comply with the
issued by the court; preceding section;
8. Motion to declare the defendant in default; 2. Motion for a bill of particulars;
9. Dilatory motions for postponement; 3. Motion for new trial, or for
10. Reply; reconsideration of judgment, or for opening of
11. Third-party complaints; and trial;
12. Interventions 4. Petition for relief from judgment;
5. Motion for extension of time to file
The RULE ON SUMMARY PROCEDURE shall pleadings, affidavits or any other paper;
apply to the following: 6. Memoranda;
1. Forcible entry and unlawful detainer, 7. Petition for certiorari, mandamus, or
irrespective of the amount of damages or prohibition against any interlocutory order
unpaid rentals sought to be recovered. issued by the court;
Where attorney’s fees are awarded, the 8. Motion to declare the defendant in
same shall not exceed P100,000 default;
2. All civil actions, except probate 9. Dilatory motions for postponement;
proceedings, admiralty, and maritime 10. Reply;
actions, where the total amount of the 11. Third party complaints;
plaintiff’s claim does not exceed 12. Interventions
P2,000,000, exclusive of interest,
damages of whatever kind, attorney’s 2. PARTS OF A PLEADING
fees, litigation expenses, and costs
3. Complaints for damages where the claim a. CAPTION
does not exceed P2,000,000, exclusive The caption contains the following:
of interest and costs 1. The name of the court;
4. Cases for enforcement of barangay 2. The title of the action; and
amicable settlement agreements and 3. The docket number, if assigned. (Rule 7,
arbitration awards where the money Sec. 1)
claim exceeds P1,000,000, provided that
no execution has been enforced by the b. BODY
barangay within 6 months from the date The body sets forth:
of the settlement or date of receipt of the 1. Its designation;
award or from the date the obligation 2. The allegation of the party’s claims and
stipulated or adjudged in the arbitration defenses;
award becomes due and demandable, 3. The reliefs prayed for; and
pursuant to Section 417, Charter VII of 4. The date of the pleading. (Rule 7, Sec. 2)
RA No. 7160
5. Cases solely for the revival of judgment Even without the prayer for a specific remedy,
of any MeTC, MTCC, MTC, MCTC, proper relief may be granted by the court if the
pursuance to Rule 39, Section 6 of ROC facts alleged in the complaint and the evidence
6. The civil aspect of a violation of BP 22, if introduced so warrant. (Prince Transport v.
no criminal action has been instituted Garcia, G.R. No. 167291, 2011)
therefor. (A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC)
c. SIGNATURE AND ADDRESS
Allowed Pleadings in Summary Procedure
Cases The complaint must be signed by the plaintiff OR
1. Complaint; counsel representing him/her indicating his/her
2. Compulsory Counterclaim; address.
3. Cross-Claims pleaded in the Answer;
4. Answers to these pleadings (Section 3, Insufficiency in form and substance, as a ground
Rules on Summary Procedure) for dismissal of the complaint, should not be

ATENEO CENTRAL
based on the title or caption, especially when the Certification Against Forum Shopping
allegations of the pleading support an action.
(Sps. Munsalud v. NHA, G.R. No. 167181, 2008) Forum Shopping consists of filing multiple suits
in different courts, either simultaneously or
An UNSIGNED PLEADING produces NO successively, involving the same parties, to ask
LEGAL EFFECT. The court is authorized, the courts to rule on the same related causes
however, to allow the pleader to correct the and/or to grant the same or substantially the
deficiency if the pleader shows, to the satisfaction same relief.
of the court, that the failure to sign the pleading
was due to the mere inadvertence and not to The certification against forum shopping is
delay the proceedings. (Rule 7, Sec. 3) executed by the PLAINTIFF or the PRINCIPAL
PARTY under oath and must be signed by the
d. VERIFICATION and CERTIFICATION party himself/herself and not merely by his
AGAINST FORUM SHOPPING attorney.
VERIFICATION A certification against forum shopping signed by

Generally, a pleading need not be verified counsel is a defective certification that is
EXCEPT only when verification is required by a equivalent to non-compliance with the
law or by a rule. (Rule 7, Sec. 4) requirement and constitutes a valid cause for the
dismissal of the petition. (Ty-De Zuzuarregui v.
Effect of Lack of Verification Villarosa, G.R. No. 183788, 2010)
A pleading which is required to be verified but
lacks the proper verification shall be treated as an The Certification Against Forum Shopping is
unsigned pleading which produces no legal effect a Sworn Statement Certifying to the Following
and is dismissible. Matters:
1. That the party has not commenced any
However, it has been held that the requirement action or filed any claim involving the same
regarding verification of a pleading is formal, not issues in any court, tribunal, or quasi-judicial
jurisdictional. The court may order the correction agency and, to the best of his/her knowledge,
of the pleading, if the attending circumstances are no such other action or claim is pending
such that the strict compliance with the rules may therein;
be dispensed with in order that the ends of justice 2. That if there is such other pending action
may thereby be served. (Republic v. Coalbrine or claim, a complete statement of the
International Philippines, Inc., G.R. No. 161838, present status thereof; and
2010) 3. That if he/she should thereafter learn that
the same or similar action or claim has been
The authorization of the affiant to act on behalf of filed or is pending, he/she shall report that fact
a party should be attached to the pleading, and within 5 days therefrom to the court wherein
shall allege the following attestations: his/her complaint or initiatory pleading has
been filed. (Rule 7, Sec. 5)
1. The allegations in the pleading are true
The certificate of non-forum shopping is a
and correct based on his or her personal
mandatory requirement in filing a complaint and
knowledge, or based on authentic
other initiatory pleadings asserting a claim or
documents;
relief. (Rule 7, Sec. 5)
2. The pleading is not filed to harass,
cause unnecessary delay, or
Failure to comply with the requirements is not
needlessly increase the cost of
curable by mere amendment of the pleading but
litigation; and
shall be cause for dismissal of the case,
3. The factual allegations therein have
WITHOUT prejudice, unless otherwise provided.
evidentiary support or, if specifically
Dismissal shall be UPON MOTION and AFTER
so identified, will likewise have
hearing.
evidentiary support after a reasonable
opportunity for discovery. (Rule 7,
Sec. 4)

ATENEO CENTRAL
To determine Forum Shopping, the test is to Where a general manager of a corporation signs
see whether, in the two or more cases the verification and certification against forum
pending, there is: shopping without attaching therewith a
1. Identity of parties; Corporate Secretary’s certificate or board
2. Identity of rights and causes; and resolution that he is authorized to sign for and
3. Identity of reliefs sought. on behalf of the petitioner-corporation, such
(Huibonhoa v. Concepcion, G.R. No. 153785, failure is NOT fatal to the complaint of the
2006) corporation. This is especially true where the
requisite board resolution was subsequently
Thus, forum shopping exists when the elements submitted to the court together with the pertinent
of litis pendentia are present or where a final documents. The dismissal on a purely technical
judgment in one case will amount to res judicata ground is frowned upon especially if it will result
in another. in unfairness. The rules of procedure ought not to
be applied in a very rigid, technical sense for they
Three Ways of Committing Forum Shopping have been adopted to help secure, not override,
1. Filing multiple cases based on the same cause substantial justice. (Mid-land Pasig Land
of action and with the same prayer, the Development Co. v. Mario Tablante, G.R. No.
previous not having been resolved (litis 162924, 2010)
pendencia);
2. Filing multiple cases based on the same cause Verification and Certification Against Forum
of action and with the same prayer, the Shopping When Petitioner is a Government
previous having been resolved with finality Entity
(res judicata); and Where the petitioner is a government entity
3. Filing multiple cases based on the same created by the Constitution, and headed by its
causes of action but with different prayers Chairman, there is no need for the Chairman
(splitting causes of action where the ground himself to sign the verification. Its representative,
for dismissal is also either litis pendentia or res lawyer or any person who personally knew the
judicata). truth of the facts alleged in the petition could sign
the verification.
Effect of Submission of False Certification or
Non-Compliance with the Undertakings HOWEVER, with regard to the certification of
Therein: non-forum shopping, the established rule is that it
1. Indirect contempt; and must be executed by the plaintiff or any of the
2. Without prejudice to the filing of principal parties and not by counsel. Failure to
administrative and criminal actions. show such authority to execute the petition on
behalf of the plaintiff or principal party renders the
Effects of Willful and Deliberate Forum petition dismissible. (People v. Iroy, G.R. No.
Shopping: 187743, 2010)
1. Shall be ground for summary dismissal of
the case with; Effect Of The Signature Of Counsel In A
2. Direct contempt; and Pleading
3. A cause for administrative sanctions.
1. The signature of counsel constitutes a
Requirement Of A Corporation Executing The certificate by him or her that he or she has read
Verification/ Certification Of Non-Forum the pleading and document; that to the best of his
Shopping or her knowledge, information, and belief, formed
after an inquiry reasonable under the
The certification may be executed by an circumstances:
authorized person as long as he/she is duly
authorized by the corporation and has personal a. It is not being presented for any
knowledge of the facts required to be disclosed in improper purpose, such as to harass,
the certification against forum shopping, the cause unnecessary delay, or needlessly
certification may be signed by the authorized increase the cost of litigation;
lawyer. (National Steel Corporation v. CA, G.R.
No. 134468, 2002)

ATENEO CENTRAL
b. The claims, defenses, and other legal

contentions are warranted by existing CERTIFICATE
law or jurisprudence, or by a non- VERIFICATION AGAINST FORUM
frivolous argument for extending, SHOPPING
modifying, or reversing existing
jurisprudence; Non-compliance or a
Non-compliance or a
defect therein, is
defect therein does
generally not curable
c. The factual contentions have not necessarily
by its subsequent
evidentiary support or, if specifically so render the pleading
submission or
identified, will likely have evidentiary fatally defective. The
correction thereof,
support after availment of the modes of court may order its
unless there is a need
discovery under these rules; and submission,
to relax the Rule on the
correction or act on
ground of "substantial
d. The denials of factual contentions the pleading
compliance" or
are warranted on the evidence or, if depending on the
presence of "special
specifically so identified, are reasonably attending
circumstances or
based on belief or a lack of information. circumstances.
compelling reasons.
2. If the court determines, on motion or motu Must be signed by all

proprio and after notice and hearing, that this the plaintiffs in a case;
rule has been violated, it may impose an those who did not sign
appropriate sanction or refer such violation to the will be dropped as
proper office for disciplinary action, on any parties.
attorney, law firm, or party that violated the rule, Substantially
complied with when Under justifiable
or is responsible for the violation. Absent
one who has ample circumstances,
exceptional circumstances, a law firm shall be
knowledge to swear however, as when all
held jointly and severally liable for a violation
to the truth of the the plaintiffs or
committed by its partner, associate, or
allegations in the petitioners share a
employee. The sanction may include, but shall
complaint signs the common interest and
not be limited to, non-monetary directive or
verification. invoke a common
sanction; an order to pay a penalty in court; or, if
cause of action or
imposed on motion and warranted for effective
defense, the signature
deterrence, an order directing payment to the
of only one of them
movant of part or all of the reasonable attorney’s
fees and other expenses directly resulting from substantially complies
the violation, including attorney’s fees for the filing with the Rule.
of the motion for sanction. The lawyer or law firm
cannot pass on the monetary penalty to the client.
(3a) (Rule 7, sec. 2) 3. MANNER OF MAKING
ALLEGATIONS
A Counsel Shall be Subject to Disciplinary
Action in the Following Cases: A. IN GENERAL
1. When he/she deliberately files an
unsigned pleading; Allegations In A Pleading
2. When he/she signs a pleading in violation
of the Rules; Every pleading shall contain in a
3. When he/she alleges in the pleading methodical and logical form, a plain,
scandalous or indecent matter; concise and direct statement of the ultimate
4. When he/she fails to promptly report to facts including the evidence on which the party
the court a change of his/her address. pleading relies for his claim or defense, as the
(Rule 7, Sec. 3) case may be. (Rule 8, Sec. 1)
Ultimate Facts: the essential and substantial

facts which form the basis of the primary right and

ATENEO CENTRAL
duty or which directly make up the wrongful acts 4. Legal existence of an organization; (Sec.
or omissions of the defendant. 4)
5. A party desiring to raise an issue as to
Evidentiary Facts: refer to those which are the legal existence or capacity of any party to
necessary to prove the ultimate fact or which sue or be sued in a representative capacity
furnish evidence of the existence of some other shall do so by SPECIFIC DENIAL which shall
facts include supporting particulars within the
pleader’s knowledge;
What are evidentiary facts? 6. Malice, intent, knowledge, or other
Every pleading stating a party’s claims or condition of the mind; (Sec. 5)
defenses shall also state: 7. Judgments of domestic or foreign courts,
1. Names of witnesses who will be tribunals, boards, or officers (no need to show
presented to prove a party’s claim or jurisdiction); and (Sec. 6)
defense; 8. Official document or act. (Sec. 9)
2. Summary of the testimonies provided
that the JUDICIAL AFFIDAVITS shall be Facts that must be averred particularly
attached to the pleading and form an Circumstances showing FRAUD or MISTAKE in
integral part thereof. Except if a party all averments of fraud or mistake. (Sec. 5)
presents meritorious reasons, only
witnesses whose judicial affidavits are B. ACTION OR DEFENSE BASED ON
attached shall be presented. DOCUMENT
3. Documentary and object evidence in
support of the allegations contained in Actionable Document: A document that serves
the pleading. (See Sec. 6, Rule 7) as the basis of the plaintiff’s cause of action or
defendant’s defense must be attached to the
Fraud, Mistake, Malice, Intent, Knowledge complaint or answer, as the case may be.
And Other Condition Of The Mind,
Judgments, Official Documents, And Acts Pleading an Actionable Document: The
In averments of fraud or mistake, the Pleader Must
circumstances constituting such fraud or mistake 1. The substance of the actionable
must be stated with PARTICULARITY. Malice, document shall be set forth in the
intent, knowledge or other conditions of the pleading, and the original or a copy
mind of a person may be averred GENERALLY. thereof shall be attached to the pleading
(Rule 8, Sec. 5) as an exhibit (Annex).
2. Note: A copy of the actionable document
In pleading a judgment or decision of a (in its entirety) is set forth in the pleading.
domestic or foreign court, judicial or quasi- (DELETED IN NEW RULE)
judicial tribunal, or of a board or officer, it is
sufficient to aver the judgment or decision without How to Contest an Actionable Document
setting forth matter showing jurisdiction to render 1. By specific denial under oath; and
it. An authenticated copy of the judgment or 2. By setting forth what is claimed to be the
decision shall be attached to the pleading. facts.
In pleading a document or an act, it is sufficient Effect of Failure to Specifically Deny Under

to aver that the document or act was issued or Oath an Actionable Document: Genuineness
done in compliance with law. (Rule 8, Sec. 9) and due execution of the document will be
deemed admitted.
Facts that May be Averred Generally ● Genuineness:
1. Conditions precedent (BUT there must ○ Not spurious, counterfeit, or of
still be an allegation that the specific condition different import on its face from
precedent has been complied with); (Sec. 3) the one executed by the party; or
2. Capacity to sue or be sued; (Sec. 4) ○ That the party whose signature it
3. Capacity to sue or be sued in a bears has signed it;
representative capacity; (Sec. 4) ○ That at the time it was signed, it
was in words and figures exactly

ATENEO CENTRAL
as set out in the pleadings (not

altered). However, such IMPLIED ADMISSION IS
● Due execution: This means that the DEEMED WAIVED if the party asserting the
document was: same has allowed the adverse party to present
○ Signed voluntarily and knowingly evidence contrary to the contents of such
by the party whose signature document without objection. (Central Surety v.
appears thereon; Hodges, G.R. No. L-28633, 1971)
○ If signed by somebody else, such
representative had the authority C. SPECIFIC DENIAL
to do so;
○ It was duly delivered, and that the Types of Specific Denials:
formalities were complied. 1. Absolute denial – The defendant specifies
each material allegation of fact the truth of
When Oath is NOT Required: which he does not admit and, whenever
1. When the adverse party was not a party practicable, sets forth the substance of the
to the instrument; or matters upon which he relies to support his
2. When compliance with an order for an denial. (Rule 8, Section 10)
inspection was refused.
2. Partial denial – The defendant specifies
Note: The document need not be formally offered the part of truth of which he admits and
in evidence. For it may be considered an denies only the remainder.
admitted fact. (Philamgen v. Sweet Lines, G.R.
No. 87434, 1992) 3. Denial by disavowal of knowledge – The
defendant alleges that he is without
The Following Defenses are NOT Waived knowledge or information to form a belief as
Despite Failure to Deny under Oath: to the truth of a material averment made in
1. Payment; the complaint. This must be made sincerely
2. Want or illegality of consideration; and in good faith.
3. Fraud;
4. Mistake; Effect Of Failure To Make A Specific Denial
5. Compromise;
6. Statute of Limitations; General Rule: Allegations NOT specifically
7. Estoppel; denied are deemed admitted.
8. Duress; and
9. Minority or imbecility. Exceptions:
1. Allegations as to the amount of
The aforementioned defenses are NOT unliquidated damages;
inconsistent with the genuineness and due 2. Allegations immaterial as to the cause of
execution of the document. action; and
3. Conclusion of law.
The Following Defenses are Waived:
1. Forgery in the signature; Striking Out of Pleading or Matter Contained
2. Unauthorized signature, as in the case of therein is initiated
an agent signing for his principal; 1. Upon motion by a party before responding
3. The corporation was not authorized under to a pleading;
its charter to sign the instrument; 2. Upon motion by a party within 20 days after
4. Want of delivery; or service of the pleading upon him if no
5. At the time the document was signed, it responsive pleading is permitted; or
was not in words and figures exactly as 3. Upon court’s own initiative at any time.
set out in the pleading.
Allegations of merely evidentiary or immaterial
Failure to specifically deny under oath the facts may be expunged from the pleading or may
genuineness and due execution of an actionable be stricken out upon motion.
document generally implies an admission of the
same by the other party.

ATENEO CENTRAL
D. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES Note: Failure to raise the affirmative defenses at

the earliest opportunity shall NOT constitute a
Affirmative Defenses: An affirmative defense is waiver thereof.
an allegation of a new matter which, while
hypothetically admitting the material allegations 4. EFFECT OF FAILURE TO
in the pleading of the claimant would PLEAD (RULE 9)
nevertheless prevent or bar recovery by him.
● The affirmative defenses include fraud, Failure To Plead Defenses And Objections
statute of limitations, release, payment, (Implied Admissions)
illegality, statute of frauds, estoppel,
former recovery, discharge in General Rule: Defenses and objections not
bankruptcy, and any other matter by way pleaded either in a motion to dismiss or in the
of confession and avoidance. answer are deemed waived. (Rule 9, Sec. 1)
Under Rule 8, Sec. 12 of the New Rules, Exceptions:

affirmative defenses shall be limited to the Grounds Not Deemed Waived (LLRP)
following: 1. Lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter;
1. Under Rule 8, Sec. 12: 2. Litis pendentia;
a. That the court has no jurisdiction 3. Res judicata or
over the person of the defending 4. Prescription (Statute of limitations)
party;
b. That venue is improperly laid; General Rule: Lack of jurisdiction over the
c. Lack of capacity to sue; subject matter may be raised at any stage of the
d. Failure to state a cause of action; proceedings, even on the first time on appeal.
e. Failure to comply with a condition
precedent Exception: Estoppel by laches (Tijam v.
As to these affirmative defenses, the court Sibonghanoy, G.R. No. L-21450, 1968)
shall motu propio resolve them within 30 days
from the filing of the answer. Failure To Plead A Compulsory Counterclaim
Or Cross-Claim
2. Under Rule 6, Sec. 5(b)(1)
a. Fraud; A compulsory counterclaim, or cross-claim, not
b. Statute of limitations; set up at the time a defending party files his
c. Release; answer, shall be BARRED.
d. Payment;
e. Illegality; An Amended Answer is proper if the
f. Statute of frauds; counterclaim or cross claim ALREADY EXISTED
g. Estoppel; at the time the original answer was filed, but due
h. Former recovery; to oversight, inadvertence, or excusable neglect,
i. Discharge in bankruptcy; and it was not set up.
j. Any other matter by way of
confession and avoidance. A Supplemental Answer is proper if the
As to these affirmative defenses, the court counterclaim or cross-claim matures or is
may conduct a summary hearing within 15 acquired AFTER the answer is filed.
days from the filing of the answer, which the
court shall resolve within 30 days from the Default
termination of the summary hearing. 1. Fails to file an answer within the time
allowed
3. Under Rule 6, Sec.5(b)(2) 2. Failure to file pre-trial brief (defendant)
a. No jurisdiction over the subject 3. Failure to appear at pre-trial (defendant)
matter; 4. Failure to comply with discovery (Rule
b. Litis pendentia 29)
c. Res judicata
Requisites Before a Party May be declared in
Default:

ATENEO CENTRAL
1. Summons has been validly and General Rule: A default order and consequently,
previously SERVED upon him; a default judgment are triggered by the failure to
2. Defendant FAILS TO ANSWER within file the required answer by the defending party.
the time allowed therefore;
3. There must be PROOF of such failure to Exceptions:
answer; Despite an answer being filed, a JUDGMENT BY
4. There must be a MOTION TO DECLARE DEFAULT may still be rendered in the following
the defendant in default; circumstances:
● Note: The court cannot motu proprio 1. If a party refuses to obey an order
declare defendant in default. If no motion requiring him to comply with the various
to declare a defendant in default, no modes of discovery; or
default order should be issued by the 2. If a party or officer or managing agent of
court. a party willfully fails to appear before the
officer who is to take his deposition.
Effects Of Order Or Declaration Of Default 3. If a defendant fails to appear at the pre-trial,
1. The court may render judgment on the the plaintiff is allowed to present his evidence
basis of the allegations and relief prayed ex parte and the court shall render judgment
for in the complaint or it may require the on the basis thereof.
plaintiff to present evidence. 4. The failure of a defendant to file the pre-trial
2. If the court requires plaintiff to submit brief warrants the same effect as failure to
evidence, the defaulting party may not appear at pre-trial.
take part in the trial.
3. The defaulting party is entitled to notice Order v. Judgment By Default
of subsequent proceedings. (Santos v. ORDER OF JUDGMENT BY
PNOC, G.R. No. 170943, September 23, DEFAULT DEFAULT
2008)
4. Being declared in default does not Issued by the court Rendered by a court
constitute a waiver of rights except that of upon plaintiff’s motion after a default order
being heard and of presenting evidence for failure of the has been issued or
in the trial court . defendant to file his after it has received,
responsive pleading ex parte, plaintiff’s
REMEDIES OF A PARTY DECLARED IN within the evidence.
DEFAULT reglementary period.
● Before judgment, file a verified motion to
set aside order of default on the ground Interlocutory Order – Final Order –
that the failure to file answer was due to Not appealable Appealable.
fraud, accident, mistake or excusable through ordinary
negligence and that he has a meritorious appeal.
defense (Sec. 3 (b), Rule 9)
● After judgment but before finality, file a
motion for new trial under Sec. 1 (a) of Failure to File an Answer in Cases covered by
Rule 37 or appeal under Sec. 2 Rule 41 the Rule on Summary Proceeding
on the ground that the judgment is The defendant who fails to file an answer
contrary to evidence or the law seasonably is NOT supposed to be declared in
● After finality of judgment, file a petition for default.
relief under Section of Rule 38
Instead, the court, motu proprio OR upon motion
Extent Of Relief That Can Be Awarded In A of the plaintiff, shall render judgment as may be
Judgment In Default warranted by the facts alleged in the complaint
● It shall not exceed the amount prayed for and limited to what is prayed for.
● It shall not be different in kind from that
prayed for Partial Default
● It shall not award unliquidated damages 1. The default asserting a claim states a
(Sec. 3, Rule 9) common cause of action against several
defending parties;

ATENEO CENTRAL
2. Some of the defending parties answer and It may be exercised at ANY time BEFORE a
the others fail to do so; and responsive pleading is SERVED. In the case of a
3. The answer interposes a common reply it may be amended at any time within ten
defense. (10) calendar days after it is SERVED. (Rule 10,
Sec. 2)
Effect of Partial Default
When a pleading asserts a claim against several Pleader has a right to amend his complaint before
defending parties and some file and serve their a responsive pleading is served even if it is to
answers but the others do not, the court shall try correct a jurisdictional defect.
the case against ALL the defending parties based
on the answers filed and render judgment upon When Amendment is a Matter of Right
the evidence presented where the claim states a 1. A COMPLAINT may be amended before an
common cause of action against them. (Rule 9, answer is served (regardless of whether a
Sec. 3(c)) new cause of action or change in theory is
introduced – thus, MAY be substantial)
The rule on partial default does not apply where 2. An ANSWER may be amended before a
the defenses of the answering defendants were reply is served upon the defendant
personal to them, such as forgery. (Luzon Surety 3. A REPLY may be amended any time within
Co v. Magbanua, G.R. No. L-41804, 1976) ten (10) days after it is served;
Actions Where Default Is Not Allowed A defect in the designation of the parties and
1. Annulment of marriage; other clearly clerical or typographical errors may
2. Declaration of nullity of marriage; be summarily corrected by the court at any stage
3. Legal Separation; of the action, at its initiative or on motion,
4. Special civil actions of certiorari, provided no prejudice is caused thereby to the
prohibition and mandamus where adverse party. (Rule 10, Sec. 4)
comment instead of an answer is
required to be filed; and Before the filing of any responsive pleading, a
5. Summary procedure. party has the absolute right to amend his
pleading, regardless of whether a new cause of
5. AMENDED AND action or change in theory is introduced. A
SUPPLEMENTAL motion to dismiss is not the responsive pleading
PLEADINGS contemplated by the Rule. (Bautista v. Maya-
Maya Cottages, G.R. No. 148361, 2005)
Amendments, In General
Proper when there is an event that was not The plaintiff may amend his complaint ONCE as
alleged in the pleadings due to inadvertence, a matter of right, i.e. without leave of court, before
oversight, etc., but happened before its filing. any responsive pleading is filed or served.
(Marcos-Araneta v. CA, G.R. No. 154096, 2008)
Pleadings MAY be Amended By:
1. Adding or striking out an allegation of a When New Service Of Summons Is Required
party; When defendants have not yet appeared in court
2. Adding or striking out the name of a and no summons has been validly served, new
party; summons for the amended complaint must be
3. Correcting a mistake in the name of a served on them. (Vlason Enterprises v. CA, G.R.
party; and No. 121662-64, 1999)
4. Correcting a mistake or inadequate
allegation or description in any other respect. Amendments By Leave Of Court
(Rule 10, Sec. 1)
Leave of Court is required
Amendment As A Matter Of Right 1. If the amendment is substantial; and
2. A responsive pleading had already been
A party may amend his pleading ONCE as a served.
matter of right. Subsequent amendments must be
WITH LEAVE of court.

ATENEO CENTRAL
Requisites Evidence. — When issues not raised by the

1. There must be a motion filed in court; pleadings are tried with the express or implied
2. Notice to the adverse party; and consent of the parties, they shall be treated in all
3. Opportunity to be heard afforded to the respects as if they had been raised in the
adverse party. pleadings. no amendment of such pleadings
deemed amended is necessary to cause them to
Substantial amendments can be done with leave conform to the evidence. (5a)
of court. It can substantially alter the cause of
action or the defenses with leave of court. (PPA Supplemental Pleadings
v. Gothong and Aboitiz, G.R. No. 158401, 2008) Set forth transactions, occurrences or events
which have happened since the date of the
Amendment by Leave of Court may NOT be pleading sought to be supplemented.
Allowed When
1. When cause of action, defense or theory of The cause of action stated in the supplemental
the case is changed; pleading is thus the SAME as that stated in the
2. Amendment is intended to confer original. The supplemental pleading is only a
jurisdiction to the court; CONTINUATION of the primary pleading as it
3. Amendment to cure a premature or non- only serves to bolster or add something to it.
existing cause of action; and
4. Amendment for purposes of delay. The adverse party MAY plead thereto within ten
(10) days from notice of the order admitting the
The defect of lack of cause of action at the supplemental pleading. Thus, it is NOT
commencement of the suit cannot be cured by mandatory for an answer to be filed to a
the accrual of a cause of action during the supplemental complaint.
pendency of the case. There must be some
cause of action at the commencement of the suit. Additional filing fees are due to a supplemental
(Swagman Hotels & Travel v. CA, G.R. No. complaint and it is not for the party or the trial
161135. April 8, 2005) court to waive such payment. Failure to pay filing
fees for supplemental complaint is fatal only for
Test to Determine Whether a Different Cause the supplemental complaint. The original
of Action is Introduced by Amendments complaint is not affected. (Do-All Metals
An amendment will not be considered as stating Industries Inc., v. Security Bank, G.R. No.
a new cause of action if the facts alleged in the 176339, 2011)
amended complaint (or counterclaim) show
substantially the same wrong with respect to the AMENDED SUPPLEMENTAL
same transaction, or if what are alleged refer to PLEADING PLEADING
the same matter but are more fully and differently
stated, or where averments which Were Implied Refers to facts existing Refers to facts
Are Made In Expressed Terms, And The Subject at the time of the arising AFTER the
Of The Controversy Or The Liability Sought To Be commencement of the filing of the original
Enforced Remains The Same. (Rubio V. Mariano, action. pleading.
G.R. No. L-30404, 1973) Takes the place of the Taken TOGETHER
original pleading. with the original
Formal Amendment pleading.
A defect in the designation of the parties and Can be made as a Always WITH leave
other clearly clerical or typographical errors may matter of right as when of court.
be summarily corrected by the court at any stage no responsive
of the action, at its initiative or on motion, pleading has yet been
provided so prejudice is caused thereby to the filed.
adverse party. (Rule 10, Sec. 4) When an amended A supplemental
pleading is filed, a new pleading does not
Amendments To Conform To Or Authorize copy of the entire require the filing of a
Presentation Of Evidence pleading must be filed. new copy of the
Section 5. No Amendment Necessary To entire pleading.
Conform To Or Authorize Presentation Of

ATENEO CENTRAL
An answer earlier filed The filing of an complaint may be served upon them without need
may serve as the answer is NOT of another summons EVEN IF new causes of
answer to the mandatory. action are alleged.
amended pleading.
6. WHEN TO FILE
Filing of Amended Pleadings RESPONSIVE PLEADINGS
When any pleading is amended, a new copy of (RULE 11)
the entire pleading, incorporating the
amendments, which shall be indicated by the Answer To Complaint
appropriate marks, shall be filed. The defendant shall file his answer to the
complaint within fifteen (30) days after service
Effect Of Amended Pleading of summons, unless a different period is fixed by
An amended pleading supersedes the pleading the court.
that it amends.
Where the Defendant is a Foreign Private
However, admissions in superseded pleadings Juridical Entity
may be received in evidence against the pleader; Where the defendant is a foreign private juridical
and claims or defenses alleged therein not entity and service of summons is made on the
incorporated in the amended pleading shall be government official designated by law to receive
deemed waived. the same, the answer shall be filed within sixty
(60) calendar days after receipts of summons by
Effect of Amendments in Relation to Statute such entity.
of Limitations
An amendment which merely supplements and Answer To Amended Complaint
amplifies the facts originally alleged relates back 1. Where the plaintiff files an amended
to the date of the commencement of the action complaint as a matter of right, the
and is NOT barred by the statute of limitations, defendant shall answer the same within
the period of which expires after service of the thirty (30) days after being served with a
original complaint but before service of copy thereof.
amendment. It is the actual filing in court that 2. Where filing is NOT a matter of right, the
controls and not the date of the formal admission defendant shall answer the amended
of the amended pleading. (Verzosa v. CA, G.R. complaint within fifteen (15) days from
No. 119511, 1998) notice of the Order admitting the same. An
answer earlier filed may serve as the
Admissions in Original Pleadings answer to the amended complaint, if no
Admissions made in the original pleadings are new answer is filed.
considered as EXTRAJUDICIAL admissions.
However, admissions in superseded pleadings This rule shall apply to the answer to an amended
may be received in evidence against the pleader counterclaim, amended cross-claim, amended
as long as they are formally offered in evidence. third (fourth, etc.)- party complaint, and amended
(Rule 10, Sec. 8) complaint-in-intervention.
Effect of Amendment of Complaint on the Counterclaim Or Cross-Claim

Requisite of Service of Summons A counterclaim or cross-claim must be answered
If new causes of action are alleged in the within twenty (20) calendar days from service.
amended complaint filed BEFORE the defendant
has appeared in court, another summons must Third-Party Complaint
be served on the defendant with the amended The time to answer a third (fourth, etc.)—party
complaint. complaint shall be governed by the same rule as
the answer to the complaint.
However, if the defendants have ALREADY
APPEARED before the court by virtue of REPLY may be filed within fifteen (15) calendar
summons in the original complaint (e.g., by filing days from service of the pleading responded to.
an entry of appearance or motion for extension of
time to file a responsive pleading), the amended

ATENEO CENTRAL
Answer To Supplemental Complaint Modes Of Service

A supplemental complaint may be answered
within twenty (20) calendar days from notice of a. PERSONAL SERVICE
the order admitting the same, unless a different
period is fixed by the court. The preferred mode of service. If another mode
of service is used (other than personal service),
The answer to the complaint shall serve as the the service must be accompanied by a written
answer to the supplemental complaint if no new explanation why the service of filing was not
or supplemental answer is filed. done personally.
Extension of Time to Plead How Personal Service is made

1. There must be a motion; 1. Delivering personally a copy to the party
2. With service of such motion to the other who is not represented by a counsel, or to
party; and his counsel; or
3. On such terms as may be just. 2. Leaving a copy in counsel’s office with his
clerk or with a person having charge
G. FILING AND SERVICE OF thereof; or
PLEADINGS (Rule 13) 3. If no person is found in his office, or if his
office is unknown, or if he has no office –
1. RULES ON PAYMENT OF by leaving the copy between 8 a.m. to 6
DOCKET FEES; EFFECT OF p.m. at the party’s or counsel’s residence,
NON-PAYMENT if known, with a person of sufficient age and
discretion then residing therein.
Both the filing of the complaint or appropriate
initiatory pleading AND the payment of the Failure to comply with the explanation
prescribed docket fee vests a trial court with requirement may be cause for the paper to be
jurisdiction over the subject matter or nature considered as NOT having been filed.
of the action.
b. SERVICE BY MAIL
HOWEVER, where the filing of the initiatory
pleading is not accompanied by payment of the The preferred service by mail is by REGISTERED
docket fee, the court may allow payment of the MAIL. Service by ordinary mail may be done only
fee within a reasonable time but in no case if no registry service is available in the locality of
beyond the applicable prescriptive or either the sender or the addressee.
reglementary period.
c. SUBSTITUTED SERVICE
The same rule applies to permissive
counterclaims, third party claims, If service of pleadings, motions, notices,
compulsory counterclaim or cross-claim. resolutions, orders and other papers cannot be
(Korea Technologies v. Lerma, G.R. No. 143581, made in either personal service or registered
2008). mail, the office and place of residence of the party
or his counsel being unknown, service may be
Effect of Non-Payment made by delivering the copy to the clerk of court,
Where the judgment awards a claim not with proof of failure of both personal service and
specified in the pleading, or if specified the service by mail.
same has been left for determination by the
court, the additional filing fee therefor shall d. SERVICE OF JUDGMENTS, FINAL
constitute a lien on the judgment. (Sun ORDERS, AND RESOLUTIONS
Insurance Office Ltd. v. Asuncion G.R. No.
79937-38, 1989) How Made
1. By personal service;
2. By registered mail;
3. By publication;
4. NO substituted service.

ATENEO CENTRAL
e. PRIORITIES IN MODES OF SERVICE depositing the mail in sender, or in lieu

AND FILING the post office thereof of the
2. In a sealed unclaimed letter
Whenever practicable, the service and filing of envelope addressed to together with the
pleadings and other papers shall be done the court certified or sworn
personally. 3. With postage fully copy of the notice
prepaid; and given by the
f. WHEN SERVICE IS DEEMED 4. With instructions to postmaster to the
COMPLETE the postmaster to addressee.
return the mail to the
1. Personal service - Upon actual delivery sender after ten (10)
2. Ordinary mail - Upon expiration of 10 days days if not delivered.
after mailing
3. Registered mail - Upon actual receipt by 2. EFFICIENT USE OF PAPER
the addressee OR five (5) days from the RULE; E-FILING (A.M. NO.
date he received first notice from 10-3-7-SC AND A.M. NO. 11-
postmaster 9-4-SC, AS REVISED,
4. Substituted service - At the time of such APPROVED ON FEBRUARY
delivery of the copy to the clerk of court 22, 2022)
g. PROOF OF FILING AND SERVICE Coverage
The Revised Guidelines shall govern the
PROOF OF FILING PROOF OF submission of electronic copies of all Supreme
SERVICE Court-bound papers and their annexes pursuant
Personal Service to A.M. No. 11-8-4-SC (Efficient Use of Paper
The filing of a pleading 1.Written admission Rule).
or paper shall be of the party served;
proved by its existence or Manner of Transmittal
in the record of the 2. Official return of Electronic copies of all Supreme Court-bound
case. the server; or papers and their annexes must be submitted
3. Affidavit of the within twenty-four (24) hours from the filing of the
If Not in the Record party serving, hard copies (filed personally, by registered mail,
Written or stamped containing full or by accredited courier) by transmitting them
acknowledgment of its information of the through electronic mail. (A.M. No. 10-3-7-SC).
filing by the clerk of date, place and
court on a copy of the manner of service. Date and Time of Filing
same. It must be understood that:
Ordinary Mail a. When the paper or hard copy is filed in
Affidavit of the person, by registered mail, or by
person mailing of the accredited courier, the same shall be
facts showing deemed to have been filed on the date
compliance with and time of filing of the hard copy, not the
Rule 13, Sec. 7 date and time of the transmission of the
electronic filing.
Registered Mail
b. When the manner of filing of the paper or
1. The registry receipt; 1. The registry
other court submission is made online
and receipt; and
(i.e. by transmitting them via electronic
2. By the affidavit of 2. By the affidavit of
mail or other means pursuant to Section
the person who did the the person who did
3(d), Rule 13 of the Rules of Civil
mailing. the mailing.
Procedure), the date of the electronic
transmission shall be considered as the
The affidavit must: The registry return
date of filing, provided that an EXPRESS
1. Contain a full card shall be filed
PERMISSION IS GRANTED BY COURT
statement of the date immediately upon its
for the online filing of the following:
and place of receipt by the

ATENEO CENTRAL
i. initiatory pleadings and initial initial responsive pleadings, etc.

responsive pleadings, such as in compliance with Section 14,
an Answer to a Complaint or a Rule 13 of the Rules of Civil
Comment to a Petition; Procedure (A.M. No. 10-7-3-
ii. Appendices and exhibits to SC).
motions, or other documents that
are not readily amenable to Electronic File Format
electronic scanning; and The electronic copy must be in PDF format and
iii. sealed and confidential individually saved, as well as individually
documents or records. attached to the e-mail.
In the absence of the express permission
from the Court to file the foregoing online, Verified Declaration
the date of filing shall be the date when The filer shall attach to the e-mail a Verified
the hard copy was filed in person, sent by Declaration that the pleading and annexes
registered mail, or delivered to the submitted electronically are complete and true
accredited courier (A.M No. 10-7-3-SC). copies of the printed document and annexes filed
with the Supreme Court.
Proof of Filing of Hard Copy
The electronic copy submitted should be the H. SUMMONS
EXACT COPY of the paper filed in Court
personally, by registered mail, by accredited 1. NATURE AND PURPOSE OF
courier, by e-mail or other means of electronic SUMMONS IN RELATION TO
transmission. ACTIONS IN PERSONAM, IN
REM, AND QUASI IN REM
The following are considered as proof of filing:
1. For paper filed in person, the electronic Summons
copy shall contain the official receiving A writ by which the defendant is notified of the
stamp of the docketing office, clearly action brought against him/her. Service of such
showing the date and time of filing of the writ is the means by which the court may acquire
hard/paper copy and must be duly signed jurisdiction over his/her person. (Cano-Gutierrez
by the receiving clerk or records officer; v. Gutierrez, G.R. No. 138584, 2000)
2. For paper sent by registered mail or by
accredited courier, the electronic copy Relevance
shall include the scanned copy of the Non-service or irregular service of summons may
following: be a ground for dismissal for lack of jurisdiction
a. proof of mailing over the person of the defending party.
b. proof of payment of fees
3. For paper filed online via electronic mail Service of such writ is the means by which the
or other electronic means pursuant to court acquires jurisdiction over his person. Any
Section3 (d), Rule 13 of the Rules of judgment without such service in the absence of
Procedure, the electronic copy shall a valid waiver is null and void. (Gomez v. Court
include the following documents: of Appeals, G.R. No. 127692, 2004)
a. PDF copy of the Affidavit of
Electronic Filing of the Supreme Nature
Court bound-paper and its The issuance of summons by the Clerk of Court
annexes (if any), with an is MANDATORY upon the filing of the complaint
undertaking that the filer will and payment of requisite legal fees. (Riano, Civil
submit the exact paper/hard Procedure: A Restatement for the Bar, 2nd
copy to the Court in person or by Edition, 2009)
registered mail or by accredited
courier, within 24 hours from the Amended Complaint
date of the electronic If the amended complaint does not change the
transmission; cause of action or introduce a new cause or
b. Express authority from the Court causes of action, there is no need to serve
to file the initiatory pleading and

ATENEO CENTRAL
summons on the amended complaint. (De Dios v. court CAN acquire jurisdiction by acquiring
Court of Appeals, 212 SCRA 519, 1992) jurisdiction over the RES (the thing).
If the cause of action remained the same, the In actions in rem or quasi in rem, jurisdiction over
amendment consisting of a mere correction, then the person of the defendant is not a prerequisite
there is no need to serve another summons. (Id.) to confer jurisdiction on the court provided that
the court acquires jurisdiction over the RES,
Additional Defendant, Impleaded although summons must be served upon the
If an additional defendant is impleaded in a later defendant in order to satisfy the due process
pleading, it is necessary to serve summons upon requirements. (Gomez v. CA, G.R. No. 127692,
him in order to obtain jurisdiction over his person. March 10, 2004)
(Fetilano v. Sanz, 44 Phil. 691)
Jurisdiction Over the Res is Acquired Either
The Clerk of Court Shall Issue the Summons 1. By the seizure of the property under legal
to the Defendant Upon process, whereby it is brought into actual
1. Filing of the complaint; and custody of the law; or
2. Payment of the requisite legal fees. 2. As a result of the institution of legal
proceedings, in which the power of the court is
Contents of Summons recognized and made effective.
1. Name of the court & names of the parties
to the action; 2. WHO MAY SERVE
2. Direction that defendant answer within SUMMONS
the time fixed by these Rules; and 1. Sheriff;
3. Notice that unless the defendant so 2. Sheriff’s deputy;
answers, plaintiff will take judgment by default 3. Other proper court officers; or
and may be granted the relief applied for. 4. Plaintiff, in proper cases (Rule 14, Sec.
3)
Note: A copy of the complaint and order for
appointment of guardian ad litem if any shall be Instances when service by the Plaintiff is
attached to the original and each copy of the allowed
summons. 1. In case of failure to serve summons by
the (1) sheriff, (2) his deputy, or (3) other
SUMMONS IN ACTIONS IN PERSONAM proper officer, upon authority from the
Purpose court;
1. Notify defendant of action against 2. Summons is to be served outside the
him/her; and judicial region of the court where the case
2. Acquire jurisdiction over defendant’s is pending; or
person in a civil case. 3. Summons is returned without being
served on any or all defendants, upon
Jurisdiction over the defendant, without service of order from the court for the plaintiff to
summons, cannot be acquired even if the cause the service of summons by other
defendant has knowledge of the case against means available under the Rules (Rule
him. (Habana v. Vamenta, G.R. No. L-27091, 14, Sec. 3)
1970)
3. VALIDITY OF SUMMONS
Even if jurisdiction was not originally acquired due AND ISSUANCE OF ALIAS
to defective service of summons, court acquires SUMMONS
jurisdiction over his person by his act of
subsequently filing a motion for reconsideration. Summons shall remain valid until duly served,
(Soriano v. Palacio, G.R. No. L-17469, 1964) unless it is recalled by the court. In case of loss
or destruction of summons, the court may, upon
SUMMONS IN ACTIONS IN REM AND QUASI motion, issue an alias summons.
IN REM
It is done NOT to acquire jurisdiction over the
defendant; in actions in rem and quasi in rem, the

ATENEO CENTRAL
There is failure of service of summons after therefore, the person of the defendant, not the
unsuccessful attempts to personally serve the locus of service. (Sps Manuel v Ong, G.R. No.
summons on the defendant in his or her address 205249, 2014)
indicated in the complaint. Substituted service
should be in the manner provided under Section Against a NONRESIDENT, jurisdiction over the
6 of this Rule. (Rule 13, Sec. 4). defendant is acquired by service upon his person
while said defendant is within the Philippines.
Alias Summons If the non-resident defendant is not in the
One issued by the clerk of court on demand of the Philippines, and the action is an action in
plaintiff when the original summons was returned personam, Philippine courts cannot acquire
without being served on any or all of the jurisdiction over the defendant, unless he
defendants, or when summons has been lost. voluntarily appears in court. (Macasaet v. Co,
When issued, it supersedes the first summons. G.R. No. 156759, 2013)
Return Service of Summons Upon Spouses

When the service has been completed, the server
shall, within five (5), serve a copy of the return, to Rule: When spouses are sued jointly, service of
the plaintiff's counsel, and shall return the summons should be made to each spouse
summons to the clerk, who issued it, individually. (Sec. 11, Rule 14)
accompanied by proof of service.
Note: In Villarama v. Guno (6 August 2018), it
4. PERSONAL SERVICE was held that service of summons on the wife is
binding on the husband where the obligation
Whenever practicable, the summons shall be subject of the suit was chargeable to the conjugal
served by handing a copy thereof to the partnership.
defendant in person and informing the defendant
that he or she is being served, or, if he or she Villarama is no longer good case law because of
refuses to receive and sign for it, by leaving the Section 11, Rule 14 of the 2020 Rules of Civil
summons within the view and in the presence of Procedure. (Riguera, Vol. I)
the defendant. (Sec. 5, Rule 14)
SERVICE IN PERSONAL
When Required PERSON (Rule 14, SERVICE (Rule 13,
Personal service within the forum is Sec. 6) Sec. 6)
MANDATORY in actions in personam to acquire Applies only to Applies to all
jurisdiction over the person of the defendant. summons pleadings (except
complaint),
In an action strictly in personam, personal service judgments, and other
on the defendant is the preferred mode of service, orders
that is, by handing a copy of the summons to the 1. By handing a copy 1. By delivering
defendant in person. (Imelda Manotoc v. Court of thereof to the personally a copy to
Appeals, G.R. No. 130974, 2006) defendant in person; the party or his
counsel, or by leaving
Where Effected 2. If he/she refuses to it in his office with his
Section 5, Rule 14 does not require that the receive and sign for it, clerk or with a person
service of summons on the defendant in person summons will be having charge
must be effected only at the latter's residence as tendered by server to thereof;
stated in the summons. In other words, personal defendant.
service of summons may be made in any place 2. If no person is
where the defendant may be found. (Sansio v. found in his office, or
Sps. Mogul, 14 July 2009). his office is not
known, or he has no
Personal service of summons has nothing to do office, then by leaving
with the location where summons is served. A the copy, between the
defendant's address is inconsequential.What is hours of eight in the
determinative of the validity of personal service is, morning and six in the

ATENEO CENTRAL
evening, at the party's place of business. Thus, where the defendant

or counsel's neither resides nor holds office in the address
residence, if known, stated in the summons, substituted service
with a person of cannot be resorted to. Not being a resident of the
sufficient age and address where the summons was served, the
discretion then substituted service of summons is ineffective.
residing therein. Accordingly, the RTC did not acquire jurisdiction
over the person of the defendant and its judgment
is thus void and should be set aside. (Express
5. SUBSTITUTED SERVICE Padala v. Ocampo, 6 September 2017).
Substituted Service On Persons First Mode: Leave copies of the summons

Substituted service may be effected if for (Sec. 6[a], Rule 14)
justifiable causes, the defendant cannot, within a 1. At the defendant’s residence
period of 30 days from issue and receipt of 2. To a person
summons, be served personally after at least a. at least 18 years of age
three attempts on two separate dates. (Sec. 6, b. of sufficient discretion
Rule 14) c. residing therein
“Exerted Efforts” These matters must be clearly and specifically

Without specifying the details of the attendant described in the Return of Summons. (Manotoc
circumstances or of the efforts exerted to serve v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 130974, 2006;
the summons, a general statement that such Constantino Pascual v. Lourdes Pascual, G.R.
efforts were made will not suffice for purposes of No. 171916, 2009)
complying with the rules of substituted service of
summons. (Guiguinto Credit Cooperative, Inc. v. Manotoc Doctrine: What Constitutes ‘Suitable
Torres, G.R. No. 170926, 2006) Age and Discretion’
A person of suitable age and discretion is one
How Effected who has attained the age of full legal capacity
1. By leaving copies of the summons at the (18 years old) and is considered to have enough
defendant's residence to a person at discernment to understand the importance of
least eighteen (18) years of age and of a summons.
sufficient discretion residing therein;
2. By leaving copies of the summons at the Discretion is defined as “the ability to make
defendant's office or regular place of decisions which represent a responsible choice
business with some competent person in and for which an understanding of what is lawful,
charge thereof. A competent person right or wise may be presupposed”.
includes, but is not limited to, one who
customarily receives correspondences Thus, to be of sufficient discretion, such person
for the defendant; must know how to read and understand English
3. By leaving copies of the summons, if to comprehend the import of the summons, and
refused entry upon making his or her fully realize the need to deliver the summons and
authority and purpose known, with any of complaint to the defendant at the earliest possible
the officers of the homeowners’ time for the person to take appropriate action.
association or condominium corporation,
or its chief security officer in charge of the Thus, the person must have the “relation of
community or the building where the confidence” to the defendant, ensuring that the
defendant may be found; and latter would receive or at least be notified of the
4. By sending an electronic mail to the receipt of the summons. (Manotoc v. Court of
defendant’s electronic mail address, if Appeals, 16 August 2006)
allowed by the court. (Sec. 6, Rule 14)
Second Mode: Defendant’s Office or Regular
Substituted service presupposes that the place Place of Business (Sec. 6[b], Rule 14)
where the summons is being served is the
defendant's current residence or office/regular Competent Person In Charge

ATENEO CENTRAL
A "competent person in charge" refers to one shall be made on the receiver or liquidator, as the
managing the office or the business, such as the case may be.
president, manager, or the officer-in-charge. The
rule presupposes the existence of a relation of Should there be a refusal on the part of the
confidence between such person and the persons above-mentioned to receive summons
defendant. (Ang v. Chinabank Commercial Bank despite at least three (3) attempts on two (2)
Corp., 18 Apr. 2016) different dates, service may be made
electronically, if allowed by the court, as provided
Under Section 6 (b) Rule 14, as amended in the under Section 6, Rule 14. (Sec. 12, Rule 14)
2020 Rules of Civil Procedure, a competent
person includes one who customarily receives Baltazar Doctrine: Wherever They May Be
correspondence for the defendant. (Riguera, Found
Volume I) While ordinarily the service of summons under
S12 R14 would be at the corporation's office or
Third Mode: When Refused Entry (Sec. 6[c], place of business, there is no requirement that it
Rule 14) be done so. It may be effected anywhere.
(Riguera, Vol. I, citing Baltazar v. Court of
Note: Section 6 (c), Rule 14 is a codification of Appeals, G.R. No. 78728, 8 December 1988)
the doctrine in Robinsons v. Miralles (G.R. No.
163584, 12 December 2006). Examples of Persons Who May Not Receive
Summons
An overly strict application of Section 6 Rule 14 1. Branch Manager is not among those
may be dispensed with if the sheriff was enumerated and a branch manager is not
prevented from effecting substituted service by one who customarily receives the
the defendant himself. correspondence of the defendant at its
principal office (E.B. Villarosa & Partner
Here, the Defendant herself gave strict Co., Ltd. v. Judge Benito, G.R. No.
instructions to the security guards not to allow 136426, 6 August 1999)
anyone to proceed to her house if she was not 2. Cost Accountant is not among the
around. In his return the sheriff declared that he designated persons in Section 12, Rule
was refused entry by the security guard. She 14 (Green Star Express, Inc. v. Nissin
should bear the consequences of such strict Universal Robina Corporation, 6 July
instructions. It can be considered that summons 2015)
were properly served upon the Defendant.
(Riguera citing Robinsons v. Miralles, 2006) Note: Although a liaison officer, in receiving the
summons, is not among the officers stated in
Service On Private Domestic Corporations Section 12, Rule 14, if he receives the summons
When the defendant is a corporation, partnership in representation of the corporate secretary, the
or association organized under the laws of the latter is considered to having constructively
Philippines with a juridical personality, service received the same, even if there is no direct,
may be made on the president, managing physical handing of the summons to the latter.
partner, general manager, corporate secretary, (Nation Petroleum Gas, Inc. v. RCBC, 17 August
treasurer, or in-house counsel of the corporation 2015)
wherever they may be found, or in their absence
or unavailability, on their secretaries. Foreign Private Juridical Entity
When the defendant is a foreign private juridical
If such service cannot be made upon any of the entity which has transacted or is doing business
foregoing persons, it shall be made upon the in the Philippines, as defined by law, service may
person who customarily receives the be made on its resident agent designated in
correspondence for the defendant at its principal accordance with law for that purpose, or, if there
office. be no such agent, on the government official
designated by law to that effect, or on any of its
In case the domestic juridical entity is under officers, agents, directors or trustees within the
receivership or liquidation, service of summons Philippines.

ATENEO CENTRAL
If the foreign private juridical entity is not Requirements

registered in the Philippines, or has no resident 1. It should only be made in the instances
agent but has transacted or is doing business in covered by Sec. 14, 16, 17, and 18 of
it, as defined by law, such service may, with leave Rule 14.
of court. be effected outside of the Philippines 2. There must be an application for leave to
through any of the following means: effect service of summons by publication
which shall be through a motion in
1. By personal service coursed through the writing, supported by the affidavit of the
appropriate court in the foreign country plaintiff or some person on his behalf,
with the assistance of the Department of setting forth the grounds for the
Foreign Affairs; application. (Sec. 19, Rule 14).
2. By publication once in a newspaper of 3. Leave of court must be granted by way of
general circulation in the country where the order for publication.
the defendant may be found and by 4. There should be a deposit of a copy of
serving a copy of the summons and the the summons and the order for
court order by registered mail at the last publication in the post office, postage
known address of the defendant; prepaid, directed to the defendant by
3. By facsimile; registered mail to his last known address.
4. By electronic means with the prescribed 5. Publication should be made in a
proof of service; or newspaper of general circulation in such
5. By such other means as the court. in its places and for such time as the court may
discretion, may direct. (Sec. 14, Rule 14) order.
6. There should be proof of service by
Note: If the foreign corporation is not doing publication, by way of affidavits stating
business in the Philippines and has no assets in the matters set forth in Sec. 22 Rule 14.
the Philippines, Avon v. CA (G.R. No. 97642, 29 (Riguera, Vol. I)
August 1997) provides that the Philippine Courts
cannot acquire jurisdiction over it as it is beyond Substantial Compliance
its jurisdiction. To subject such corporations to Requisites for the application of the doctrine of
the jurisdiction of the PH courts would violate substantial compliance:
principles of sovereignty. 1. There must be actual receipt of the
summons by the person served, i.e.,
Public Corporations transferring possession of the copy of the
When the defendant is the Republic of the summons from the Sheriff to the person
Philippines, service may be effected on the served;
Solicitor General. 2. The person served must sign a receipt or
the sheriffs return; and
In case of a province, city or municipality, or like 3. There must be actual receipt of the
public corporations, service may be effected on summons by the corporation through the
its Executive Head or on such Other Officers or person on whom the summons was actually
Officers as the law or the court may direct. (Sec. served. The third requisite is the most
15, Rule 14) important for it is through such receipt that the
purpose of the rule on service of summons is
Service Of Summons By Publication attained. (Porac Trucking, Inc. v. Court of
1. Service upon a foreign private juridical Appeals G.R. No. 81093, 1990)
entity. (Sec. 14[b], Rule 14)
2. Service upon a defendant whose identity For there to be substantial compliance, actual
or whereabouts are unknown. (Sec. 16, receipt of summons by the corporation through
Rule 14) the person served must be shown. Where a
3. Extraterritorial service upon a non- corporation only learns of the service of summons
resident defendant. (Sec. 17, Rule 14) and the filing of the complaint against it through
4. Service upon a resident temporarily out some person or means other than the person
of the Philippines. (Sec. 18, Rule 14) actually served, the service of summons
(Riguera, Vol. I) becomes meaningless. (Millenium Industrial

ATENEO CENTRAL
Commercial Corporation v. Tan, G.R. No.

131724, 2000) Summons by publication against a NON-
RESIDENT in an action IN PERSONAM is NOT
6. CONSTRUCTIVE SERVICE a proper mode of service.
Constructive notice by publication used to be 7. EXTRA-TERRITORIAL

available only in actions IN REM or QUASI IN SERVICE
REM.
Extra-Territorial Service
Now, constructive service is available in action IN Involves a NON-RESIDENT defendant who
PERSONAM (thus, in ANY ACTION) where the CANNOT be found in the Philippines and the
defendant is designated as an unknown owner or action against him is IN REM or QUASI IN REM.
whenever his whereabouts are unknown and
cannot be ascertained. Exception
When service may be effected OUT of the
a. Service Upon A Defendant Where His Philippines (as provided in extra-territorial
Identity Is Unknown Or Where His service) for ANY ACTION involving residents who
Whereabouts Are Unknown are TEMPORARILY out of the Philippines. (Rule
14, Sec. 18)
Constructive Service of Summons (through
publication) may be effected on RESIDENT Instances When Extra-territorial Service May
DEFENDANT be availed of
1. Who is designated as an unknown owner 1. Actions that affect the personal status of
(or the like), or the plaintiff;
2. Whose whereabouts are unknown and 2. Actions which relate to, or the subject
cannot be ascertained by diligent inquiry; matter of which is property within the
3. With leave of court. Philippines, in which defendant claims a
lien or interest, actual or contingent;
Service of summons shall be effected by 3. Actions in which the relief demanded
publication in a newspaper of general circulation consists, wholly or in part in excluding
and in such places and for such time as the court the defendant from an interest in the
may order. property located in the Philippines; and
4. When defendant’s property has been
b. Service Upon Residents Temporarily attached in the Philippines.
Outside The Philippines
Applicability of Extra-territorial Service
The defendant is a resident of the Philippines, Extra-territorial service of summons or summons
and remains to be one, except that he is by publication applies only when the action is in
temporarily outside of the country. The provision rem or quasi in rem. The first is an action against
does not provide for the length of time needed, as the thing itself instead of against the defendant’s
long as the defendant is certain to return, person; in the latter, an individual is named as
although it may not be known when. defendant, and the purpose is to subject that
individual’s interest in a piece of property to the
In ANY suit against a resident of the Philippines, obligation or loan burdening it. (Jose v. Boyon,
temporarily absent from the country, the G.R. No. 147369, 2003)
defendant may be served by SUBSTITUTED
service because he still leaves a definite place of Modes of Extra-Territorial Service
residence where he/she is bound to return.
As per the same rule, the following are the
In addition, EXTRA-TERRITORIAL service [by allowed Modes of Extra-Territorial Service
personal service effected out of the Philippines 1. Personal service under Section 6 of Rule
OR by publication in a newspaper of general 14.
circulation in such places and for such time as the 2. Publication in a newspaper of general
court may order] MAY be resorted to WITH circulation in such places and for such time
LEAVE OF COURT. as the court may order AND service by

ATENEO CENTRAL
registered mail to the last known address of proof of service; why efforts exerted towards
the defendant. personal service failed. The pertinent facts and
Publication and service must BOTH circumstances attendant to the service of
concur summons must be stated in the proof of service
3. In any other manner the court may deem or Officer’s Return; otherwise, the substituted
sufficient service cannot be upheld.”
Note: ALL require prior leave of court. Proof of Service by Publication may be
proved by:
The said extraterritorial service of summons is not 1. Affidavit of the –
for the purpose of vesting the court with a. Printer, his foreman or principal clerk OR
jurisdiction, but for complying with the b. Editor, business or advertising manager,
requirements of fair play or due process, so that to which affidavit a copy of the publication
the defendant will be informed of the pendency of shall be attached AND
the action against him and the possibility that 2. Affidavit showing the deposit of a copy of
property in the Philippines belonging to him or in the summons and order for publication in the
which he has an interest may be subjected to a post office, postage prepaid, directed to the
judgment in favor of the plaintiff, and he can defendant by registered mail to his last
thereby take steps to protect his interest if he is known address.
so minded. (Perkin Elmer Singapore Pte Ltd. v.
Dakila Trading Corporation, G.R. No. 172242, I. MOTIONS
2007)
1. MOTIONS IN GENERAL
8. PROOF OF SERVICE
Motion
The following are the requisites and contents An application for relief other than by a pleading.
of a valid proof of service It has facts based on relief and facts based on
1. Made in writing by the server; claims. It is NOT a pleading since it does not have
2. Shall set forth the manner, place, and claims or defenses.
date of service
3. Shall specify any papers which have Motion Versus Pleadings
been served with the process and the name See discussion under Pleadings
of the person who received the same; and
4. Shall be sworn to when made by a Note that under service of pleadings, papers, and
person other than a sheriff or his deputy. other court submissions, leaving copies thereof at
(Rule 14, Sec. 21) the office of the party, counsel, or authorized
representative or leaving it in his or her residence
The certificate of service of the process server of to a person of sufficient age or discretion is
the court a quo is prima facie evidence of the facts considered personal service. Meanwhile, under
as set out therein. This is fortified by the service of summons, the same manner of service
presumption of the regularity of performance of is considered as substituted service. (see Sec.
official duty. To overcome the presumption of 6, Rule 13 and Sec. 6, Rule 14).
regularity of official functions in favor of such
sheriff’s return, the evidence against it must be Contents And Form Of Motions
clear and convincing. Sans the requisite quantum General Rule: All motions must be in writing
of proof to the contrary, the presumption stands
deserving of faith and credit. (Guanzon v. Exceptions
Arradaza, G.R. No. 155392, 2006) 1. Motions made in open court;
2. Motions made in the course of a hearing or
In the 2002 decision in the case of Samartino v. trial.
Raon et. al., (G.R. No. 131482, 2002) the Court
said that: Rules that apply to pleadings shall also apply to
“We have long held that the impossibility of written motions as to caption, designation,
personal service justifying availment of signature and other matters of form.
substituted service should be explained in the

ATENEO CENTRAL
Contents of a Motion 11. Motion for summary judgment

1. Statement of relief sought to be obtained. 12. Demurrer to evidence
2. Grounds upon which the motion is based. 13. Motion to declare defendant in defaults;
3. Supporting affidavits and other papers and
when mandated by the Rules or when 14. Other similar motions. (Rule 15, Sec. 4)
necessary to prove facts stated in motion.
All motions shall be served by personal service,
Requisites of a Motion: accredited private courier, or registered mail, or
1. It must be in writing except those made in by electronic means.
open court or in the course of trial or hearing
The opposing party shall file his or her
A motion made in open court or in the course of oppositions to a litigious motion within five (5)
hearing or trial should immediately be resolved in calendar days from receipt thereof. No other
open court, after the adverse party is given the submission shall be considered by the court in the
opportunity to argue his or her opposition thereto. resolution of the motion.
When a motion is based on facts not appearing 4. PROHIBITED MOTIONS

on record, the court may hear the matter on 1. Motion to Dismiss, except on the
affidavits or depositions presented by the following grounds:
respective parties, but the court may direct that a. That the court has no jurisdiction
the matter be wholly or partly on oral testimony or over the subject matter of the
depositions. (Rule 15, Sec. 2) claim
b. That there is another action
2. NON-LITIGIOUS MOTIONS pending between the same
1. Motion for the issuance of alias summons parties for the same cause; and
2. Motion for the extension to file answer a) That the cause of action is barred by a
3. Motion for postponement prior judgment or by the statute of
4. Motion for the issuance of writ of limitations
execution 2. Motion to hear affirmative defenses
5. Motion for the issuance of an alias writ of 3. Motion for reconsideration of the court’s
execution action on affirmative defenses
6. Motion for the issuance of a writ of 4. Motion to suspend the proceedings without a
possession TRO or injunction issued by a higher court
7. Motion for the issuance of an order 5. Motion for extension of time to file pleadings,
directing the sheriff to execute the final affidavits or any other papers, except a motion
certificate of sale; and for extension to file an answer as provided by
8. Other similar motions. (Rule 15, Sec. 4) Section 11, Rule 11; and
6. Motion for postponement intended for delay,
These motions shall not be set for hearing and except if is based on acts of God, force
shall be resolved by the court within five (5) majeure or physical inability of the witness to
calendar days from receipts thereof. appear and testify. If the motion is granted
based on such exceptions, the moving party
3. LITIGIOUS MOTIONS shall be warned that the presentation of its
1. Motion for bill of particulars evidence must still be terminated on the dates
2. Motion to dismiss previously granted. (Rule 15, Sec. 12),
3. Motion for new trial including the receipt for the payment of the
4. Motion for reconsideration postponement fee,
5. Motion for execution pending appeal
6. Motion to amend after responsive Note: Court may in its discretion call a hearing on
pleading has been filed litigious motions (Rule 15, Sec. 6)
7. Motion to cancel statutory lien
8. Motion for an order to break in or for a Q: Corp A instituted an action for quieting of
writ of demolition title and recovery of ownership and
9. Motion for intervention possession of a parcel of land, and damages
10. Motion for judgment on the pleadings against Heirs X. Judgment by the RTC was

ATENEO CENTRAL
issued in Corp A’s favor. Heirs X filed a A bill of particulars is a definite statement of any
Motion for Reconsideration, contending that matter which is not averred with sufficient
Corp A had no legal personality to sue. This definiteness or particularity in a pleading so as to
was denied by the RTC, hence, Heirs X filed a enable the opposing party to properly prepare his
Notice of Appeal. Corp A filed a Motion to responsive pleading. (Sec. 1, Rule 12) A bill of
Dismiss the Notice of Appeal, averring that particulars becomes a part of the pleading for
the Motion of Reconsideration filed by Heirs X which it is intended. (Sec. 6, Rule 12)
did not toll the running of the reglementary
period to appeal for the reason that the Motion Note: If the pleading is not only indefinite or
was pro forma and raised no new issue. The ambiguous but fails to state a cause of action, the
RTC denied the Notice of Appeal for being remedy of the party is to file a motion to dismiss
filed out of time. Did the RTC err in denying on the ground that the pleading states no cause
the Notice of Appeal? of action. (Riguera, Vol. I)
A: Yes. It was held that in the cases where a The Motion Shall Point Out
motion for reconsideration was held to be pro 1. Defects complained of;
forma, the motion was so held because (1) it was 2. The paragraphs wherein they are
a second motion for reconsideration, or (2) it did contained;
not comply with the rule that the motion must 3. The details desired must be supplied by
specify the ﬁndings and conclusions alleged to be the movant.
contrary to law or not supported by the evidence,
or (3) it failed to substantiate the alleged errors, The motion must comply with the requirements
or (4) it merely alleged that the decision in for motions under Rule 15. Otherwise, it shall be
question was contrary to law, or (5) the adverse treated as a pro forma motion which shall not
party was not given notice thereof. In the case at stop the running of the period for filing the
hand, the Heirs X’s Motion for Reconsideration is requisite pleading.
not a pro forma motion. It is not alleged to be a
second motion for reconsideration. It is not Section 2, Rule 10 of the Revised Rules of
contended that the said Motion failed to specify Court—which allows amendment of pleadings
the ﬁndings and conclusions contained in the once as a matter of right before a responsive
RTC's Decision that Heirs X opined were contrary pleading is served—does not apply in situations
to law or not supported by the evidence. It is where it is the court itself that orders a party
likewise not alleged that the said Motion merely litigant to amend his or her pleading. Where, the
alleged that the Decision in question was contrary trial court orders the amendment after a motion
to law without making any explanation. A motion for a bill of particulars has been filed by the
for reconsideration is not pro forma just because adverse party and heard by the court, the
it reiterated the arguments earlier passed upon applicable provision is Section 1 of Rule 12 of the
and rejected by the appellate court. A movant Rules of Court: the amended pleading must be
may raise the same arguments precisely to filed within the time fixed by the court, or absent
convince the court that its ruling was erroneous. such a specification of time, within ten (10) days
A thorough examination of the Motion for from notice of the order. (Bantillo v. IAC, G.R. No.
Reconsideration reveals that Heirs X had 75311, 1988)
stressed the issue on Corp A's legal capacity to
sue them which was not discussed in the earlier Purpose
decision. This alone readily showed that Heirs X’s The purpose of the motion is to seek an order
Motion for Reconsideration was not pro forma. from the court directing the pleader to submit a
(Valencia (Bukidnon) Farmer’s Cooperative bill of particulars which avers matters with
Marketing Association, Inc. v. Heirs of Cabotaje, sufficient definiteness or particularity to enable
G.R. No. 219984, April 3, 2019) the movant to prepare his responsive pleading.
5. MOTION FOR BILL OF When applied for

PARTICULARS A motion for a bill of particulars must be filed
BEFORE responding to a pleading. Thus, the
Motion for a bill of particulars period to file the motion refers to the period for
filing the responsive pleading in Rule 11.

ATENEO CENTRAL
If the Bill of Particulars is Directed to a Movant may file his responsive pleading within
Complaint the period to which he is entitled (balance of
Motion should be filed fifteen (15) days after reglementary period) at the time the bill of
service of summons particulars is filed, which shall NOT be less than
FIVE (5) DAYS in any event AFTER:
If Directed to a Counterclaim 1. Service of the bill of particulars upon him; or
Motion should be filed ten (10) days from service 2. Notice of the denial of his motion
of counterclaim.
When filing for a Bill of Particulars is NOT
In Case of a Reply to Which No Responsive appropriate
Pleading is Provided for It would also be improper to call for the production
The motion must be filed within ten (10) days of of the particulars constituting malice, intent,
service of said reply. knowledge or condition of the mind, which under
the Rules may be averred generally.
Actions of the Court
Upon the filing of the motion, the clerk of court A motion for bill of particulars will not be granted
must immediately bring it to the attention of the if the complaint, while not very definite,
court. nonetheless already states a sufficient cause
of action. A motion for bill of particulars may not
The court may call for matters which should form part of the
1. deny the motion outright, proof of the complaint upon trial. Such information
2. grant the motion outright, or may be obtained by other means. (Salita v.
3. allow the parties the opportunity to be Magtolis, G.R. No. 106429, 1994)
heard.
Where private respondent has already alleged
Compliance With The Order And Effect Of that petitioner was unable to understand and
Non-Compliance accept the demands made by his profession upon
When the motion is granted (in whole or in part), his time and efforts, it is certain that she can
compliance must be effected WITHIN 10 DAYS respond to this. To demand for more details
from NOTICE of the order, UNLESS the court would indeed be asking for information on
fixes a different period. evidentiary facts—facts necessary to prove
essential or ultimate facts and to obtain
In complying with the order, the pleader may file evidentiary matters is not the function of a motion
the bill of particulars either in a separate pleading for bill of particulars. (Salita v. Magtolis, G.R. No.
or in the form of an amended pleading, a copy of 106429, 1994)
which must be served on the adverse party.
J. DISMISSAL OF ACTIONS
Effect of Noncompliance or Insufficient
Compliance. The court may: 1. WITH PREJUDICE V.
1. Order striking out of the pleading; WITHOUT PREJUDICE
2. Order striking out portions of pleading to
which the order was directed; Dismissal With Prejudice
3. Make such other order as it deems just; Grounds for dismissal that will bar the refiling of
4. Dismiss the complaint with prejudice the same action:
unless otherwise ordered by the court if it is 1. Res Judicata (Sec. 5, Rule 16)
the PLAINTIFF who fails to comply; 2. Prescription (Id.)
5. Strike off the answer and dismiss the 3. Payment, waiver, abandonment or
counterclaim plus a declaration of in default extinguishment of claim (Id.)
upon motion of the plaintiff if it is the 4. Claim is unenforceable under the Statute
DEFENDANT who fails to comply. of Frauds (Id.)
5. Dismissal upon notice by plaintiff which
Effect On The Period To File A Responsive operates as an adjudication upon the
Pleading merits (Sec. 1, Rule 17)
Filing of bill of particulars interrupts or STAYS the 6. Dismissal due to the fault of the plaintiff
period to file a responsive pleading. when the order of dismissal states that

ATENEO CENTRAL
the dismissal is with prejudice (Sec. 2, Exception: The dismissal is with prejudice
Rule 17) 1. If stated in the notice of dismissal
7. Dismissal due to the fault of the plaintiff 2. If it falls under the two-dismissal rule
unless the order states otherwise (Sec. 3,
Rule 17) Two-Dismissal Rule
8. Dismissal due to willful and deliberate Under the Two-Dismissal Rule, the notice of
forum shopping dismissal operates as an adjudication upon the
9. Dismissal due to failure of plaintiff to merits provided it is filed by a plaintiff who has
appear at pre-trial or file a pre-trial brief once dismissed in a competent court an action
when the order of dismissal states that based on or including the same claim.
dismissal is with prejudice.
Motion For Dismissal By Plaintiff
Dismissal Without Prejudice After the service upon the plaintiff of the answer
Grounds for dismissal that will NOT BAR the or of a motion for summary judgment. In such a
refilling of the same action: case, the complaint shall not be dismissed save
1. Lack of jurisdiction over the subject upon approval of the court and upon such terms
matter. and conditions as the court deems proper.
• File is in the proper place
2. Lack of jurisdiction over the person of the Dismissal due to the fault of the plaintiff
defendant Grounds: If no justifiable cause,
• Serve summons again 1. The plaintiff fails to appear on the date of
3. Improper venue the presentation of his or her evidence in
• File in proper venue chief on the complaint
4. Lack of legal capacity to sue 2. the plaintiff fails to prosecute his or her
• Prove legal capacity action for an unreasonable length of time
5. Litis pendencia 3. the plaintiff fails to comply with the rules
• The other case was probably or any order of the court.
dismissed In such cases, the complaint may be dismissed
6. Failure to state a cause of action upon the motion of the defendant or upon the
• Fix your complaint court’s own motion, without prejudice to the right
7. Failure to comply with a condition of the defendant to prosecute his or her
precedent. counterclaim in the same or in a separate action.
• Do the condition precedent first
This dismissal shall have the effect of an
• Brgy. Conciliation Proceeding
adjudication upon the merits, unless otherwise
declared by the court.
2. DISMISSALS WHICH HAVE
AN EFFECT ON
K. PRE-TRIAL
ADJUDICATION ON THE
MERITS
1. NATURE AND PURPOSE
Dismissal by the plaintiff
The pre-trial is mandatory BOTH in civil and in
1. Notice of dismissal (Sec. 1, Rule 17)
criminal cases.
2. Motion for dismissal (Sec. 2, Rule 17)
When Pre-Trial is Conducted
When May Plaintiff File Notice of Dismissal
Under the current rules, the pre-trial shall include
At any time before service of the answer or of a
the schedules of referral to mediation, and for
motion for summary judgment.
JDR, if necessary.
Upon such notice being filed, the court shall issue
Referral Of Some Cases For Court Annexed
an order confirming the dismissal.
Mediation (CAM) And Judicial Dispute
Resolution (JDR)
Effect of Notice of Dismissal
● CAM is a mediation presided over by an
General Rule: Without prejudice
accredited mediator.

ATENEO CENTRAL
● JDR is a mediation presided over by the (4) Judge renders a judgment based on
judge. compromise.
(5) Copy of the judgment is sent to the Phil.
Cases Subject to Mediation / JDR Mediation Center for statistical purposes.
1. All civil cases
2. Settlement of estates The Purpose of the Pre-trial is to Allow the
3. Cases covered by the Summary Court to Consider:
Procedure, except: 1. The possibility of an amicable settlement
a. Traffic violations or of a submission to alternative modes of
b. Violation of municipal or city dispute resolution;
ordinances 2. The simplification of the issues;
4. Cases cognizable by the Lupong 3. The necessity or desirability of
Tagapamayapa amendments to the pleadings;
5. Civil aspect of BP22 (bouncing checks) 4. The possibility of obtaining stipulations or
cases admissions of facts and of documents to
6. Civil aspect of quasi-offenses avoid unnecessary proof;
7. Civil aspect of estafa and libel 5. The advisability of a preliminary
8. Civil aspect of theft reference of issues to a commissioner;
6. The propriety of rendering judgment on
Salient Features of the JDR the pleadings, or summary judgment, or
The judges conducting the JDR and the pre-trial dismissing the action should a valid ground
proper are different. exist;
7. The advisability or necessity of
Notes taken during the JDR shall not form part of suspending the proceedings; and
the records of the case. 8. Such other matters as may aid in the
prompt disposition of the action.
Timeline for mediation
First level courts: 30 days 2. APPEARANCE OF PARTIES;
Second level courts: 60 days EFFECT OF FAILURE TO
APPEAR
The JDR judge may talk to the parties, jointly or
separately, w/o their lawyers. Parties and their counsel BOTH have the duty to
appear at pre-trial.
The JDR judge could facilitate the creation of
options that would provide solutions to the Non-appearance May Be Excused Only If:
dispute. 1. A valid cause is shown; or
2. A representative appears fully authorized
If there is NO settlement or PARTIAL in writing to enter into an amicable settlement,
settlement reached: to submit to alternative modes of dispute
A JDR judge shall turn over the case to the trial resolution and to enter into stipulations or
judge, determined by re-raffle in multiple sala admissions of facts and of documents.
courts or to the originating court in single sala The authorization in writing must be in the
courts, as the case may be, to conduct pre-trial form of a SPECIAL POWER OF
proper (XII, A.M. No. 11-1-6-SC-PHILJA) ATTORNEY.
Note: Judicial affidavit shall be submitted 5 days
prior to the pre-trial. The parties and their counsels are required to
attend the pre-trial the purpose of which is to
If Settlement is reached in JDR exhaust all possibilities of reaching a
(1) Drafting of compromise agreement w/ the compromise. Having failed to justify their
assistance of their lawyers absence, they have no valid ground to request for
(2) Prior to the signing, the JDR judge may a new trial. Further, an improvident termination
opt to explain the contents of the agreement. of legal services is not a valid excuse to be absent
(3) Signing of the compromise agreements at the pretrial. (Jonathan Landoil International Co
and the filing of a joint motion to approve the v Sps. Mangudadatu, G.R. No. 155010, 2004)
compromise.

ATENEO CENTRAL
Stipulations freely and voluntarily made are valid Failure to file the pre-trial brief shall have the
and binding and will not be set aside unless for same effect as failure to appear at the pre-trial.
good cause. The Rules of Court mandate parties
in a criminal case to stipulate facts. Once they Parties are bound by the representations and
have validly and voluntarily signed the statements in their respective pre-trial briefs as
stipulations, the accused and their counsel may such are in the nature of judicial admissions.
not set these aside on the mere pretext that they
may be placed at a disadvantage during the trial. Effect of Failure to File a Pre-Trial Brief
(Sixto Bayas vs Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. The same as failure to appear at the pre-trial:
143689-91, 2002) 1. If PLAINTIFF failed to appear, the case is
dismissed with prejudice unless otherwise
Effect of Failure to Appear of Parties ordered by the court.
1. If PLAINTIFF failed to appear, the case is 2. If DEFENDANT failed to appear, the
dismissed with prejudice unless otherwise plaintiff will be allowed to present evidence
ordered by the court. ex-parte, and the court shall render judgment
on the basis thereof.
The dismissal is to be considered as a final
judgment, thus, the remedy of the plaintiff is to Having no counsel in a civil case is not a
APPEAL. reasonable excuse to not file a pre-trial brief. It
does not also deprive one of due process. Failure
2. If DEFENDANT failed to appear, the to file a pre-trial brief will have the same effect as
plaintiff will be allowed to present not appearing during pre-trial. (Saguid v. CA,
evidence ex-parte, and the court shall G.R. 150611, 2003)
render judgment on the basis of the evidence
presented. Pre-Trial Order
The order of the court is issued upon the
The order allowing the plaintiff to present his/her termination of the pre-trial.
evidence ex-parte is interlocutory, hence, NOT
APPEALABLE. The Order Shall Contain:
1. An enumeration of the admitted facts
3. PRE-TRIAL BRIEF; EFFECT 2. The minutes of the pre-trial conference
OF FAILURE TO FILE 3. The legal and factual issue/s to be tried
4. The applicable law, rules, and
A pre-trial brief is required to be filed at least three jurisprudence
(3) days before the date of the pre-trial 5. The evidence marked
conference and it MUST be served on the 6. The specific trial dates for continuous
adverse party. trial, which shall be within the period
provided by the rules
The Pre-Trial Brief Shall Contain the 7. The case flowchart to be determined by
Following: the court, which shall contain the different
1. A concise statement of the case and the stages of the proceedings up to the
reliefs prayed for promulgation of the decision and the use
2. A summary of admitted facts and of time frames for each stage setting in
proposed stipulation of fact the trial dates
3. The main factual and legal issues to be 8. A statement that one-day examination of
tried or resolved witness rule and most important witness
4. The propriety of referral of factual issues rule under A.M. No. 03-1-09-SC shall be
to commissioners; strictly followed; and
5. The documents or other object evidence 9. A statement that the court shall render
to be marked, stating the purpose thereof judgment on the pleadings or summary
6. The names of the witnesses, and judgment, as the case may be.
the summary of their respective
testimonies; and The pre-trial order shall define and limit the issues
7. Brief statement of points of law and to be tried and shall control the subsequent
citation of authorities.

ATENEO CENTRAL
course of the action EXCEPT if it is modified up during the the pre-trial

before trial to prevent manifest injustice. conference, the conference,
action taken the facts
Distinction Between Pre-Trial In A Civil Case thereon, the stipulated,
And Pre-Trial In A Criminal Case amendments the
IN allowed to the admissions
IN CIVIL
CRIMINAL pleadings, and made,
CASES
CASES the evidence
Pre-trial is agreements or marked, the
ordered by admissions number of
the court after made by the witnesses to
arraignment parties as to be presented,
and within any of the and the
thirty (30) matters schedule of
days from the considered. trial.
Pre-trial is set
date the court If the counsel
when the
acquired for the
PLAINTIFF
jurisdiction accused or
moves EX-
over the the
PARTE to set
person of the prosecutor
Begins the case for
accused does not
pre-trial Non-
(either appear at the
conference appearance of
through pre-trial
after the last parties or
voluntary As to non- conference,
pleading has counsel does
surrender or appearance and does not
been filed. of parties not authorize
arrest). offer an
the courts to
acceptable
impose
NO MOTION excuse, the
“penalties”.
to set the court may
case for pre- impose
trial is proper
required. sanctions
Agreements and
or penalties.
admissions
Minutes of
made or L. INTERVENTION
each pre-trial
entered
conference
during the Intervention
shall contain
pre-trial A legal proceeding by which a person who is NOT
matters taken
conference a party to the action is permitted by the court to
up therein,
shall be become a party by intervening in a pending action
As to more
reduced in after meeting the conditions and requirements set
matters particularly
discussed writing and by the Rules of Court.
admissions of
signed by
facts and
BOTH the Who May Intervene
exhibits and
accused and 1. Has a legal interest in the matter in
shall be signed
counsel; litigation;
by the parties
otherwise, 2. Has legal interest in the success of either
and/or their
they cannot of the parties;
counsel.
be used 3. Has an interest against both parties; or
against the 4. A party that is so situated as to be
accused. adversely affected by a distribution or
Shall set forth Shall set forth other disposition of property in the
As to Pre-
Trial Order
in detail the the actions custody of the court or of an officer
matters taken taken during thereof.

ATENEO CENTRAL
Legal Interest 4. Intervention must not unduly delay or

One that is actual, material, direct and of an prejudice the adjudication of the rights of the
immediate character, not merely contingent or original parties.
expectant. 5. Intervenor’s rights may not be fully protected
in a separate proceeding.
Intervention is NOT an absolute right (nor is it
compulsory or mandatory), as it is within the Interest Required
court’s discretion to grant it. General Rule: Intervention is only collateral or
ancillary to the main action. Final dismissal of the
Intervention is an ancillary and supplemental principal action results in the dismissal of said
proceeding to an existing litigation. Thus, the ancillary action.
final dismissal of the principal action results in the
denial of the motion to intervene. Exception: Where a complaint in intervention
was filed before plaintiff's action had been
A law firm whose services were unjustly expressly dismissed, the intervenor's complaint
terminated was allowed to intervene in the case was not subject to dismissal on the ground that
despite the compromise agreement between the no action was pending, since dismissal of
parties. (Czarina Malvar v. Kraft Foods, G.R. plaintiff’s action did not affect the rights of the
183952, 2013) intervenor or affect the dismissal of intervenor's
complaint. An intervenor's petition showing it to
A complaint-in-intervention can’t be treated as an be entitled to affirmative relief will be preserved
independent action as it is merely ancillary to and and heard regardless of the disposition of the
a supplement upon the principal action. The principal action. (Metro Bank v. RTC Manila, G.R.
complaint-in-intervention essentially latches on No. 89909, 1990)
the complaint for its legal efficacy so much so that
the dismissal of the complaint leads to its Time to Intervene
concomitant dismissal. (Sta. Rita Co v. Angeline General Rule: May only be filed BEFORE
Gueco, G.R. 193087, 2013) judgment is rendered by the trial court.
The trial court must not only determine if the Exceptions:

requisite legal interest is present, but also take 1. With respect to indispensable parties,
into consideration the delay and the consequent intervention may be allowed even on appeal.
prejudice to the original parties that the 2. When the intervenor is the Republic.
intervention will cause. Both requirements must 3. Where intervention is necessary to
concur, as the first requirement on legal interest protect some interest which cannot otherwise
is not more important than the second be protected, and for the purpose of
requirement that no delay and prejudice should preserving the intervenor’s right to appeal.
result. To help ensure that delay does not result
from the granting of a motion to intervene, the As indispensable parties, Spouses Crisologo
Rules also explicitly say that intervention may be should have been joined as defendants in the
allowed only before rendition of judgment by the case pursuant to Section 7, Rule 3 of the Rules
trial court. (Lorenza C. Ongco vs Valeriana Ungco of Court.
Dalisay, G.R. No. 190810, 2012)
The reason behind this compulsory joinder of
Requisites For Intervention indispensable parties is the complete
1. There must be a motion for intervention filed determination of all possible issues, not only
BEFORE rendition of judgment. between the parties themselves but also as
2. Movant must show in his/her motion that regards other persons who may be affected by
he/she has legal interest in the matter in the judgment. (Spouses Crisologo v. JEWM
litigation, in the success of either of the parties Agro-Industrial Corporation, G.R. 196894, 3
in the action, or against both parties. March 2014).
3. The movant must show that he/she is situated
as to be adversely affected by a distribution
or other disposition of property in the custody
of the court.

ATENEO CENTRAL
Remedy Of Denial Of Motion To Intervene A process directed to a person, requiring him to

Denial of a motion to intervene DOES NOT attend and to testify at a hearing or trial of an
constitute res judicata. Remedy of the intervenor action, or at any investigation conducted by a
is to file a SEPARATE ACTION. competent authority, or for the taking of his
deposition.
The intervenor can also APPEAL or file for
MANDAMUS if there is grave abuse of discretion. A subpoena:
1. Shall state the name of the court and the
If there is improper grant of intervention, the title of the action or investigation;
remedy of the party is CERTIORARI. 2. It shall be directed to the person whose
Pleadings-in-intervention. — The intervenor shall attendance is required; and
file a complaint-in-intervention if he or 3. In a subpoena duces tecum, it shall
she asserts a claim against either or all of the contain a reasonable description of the
original parties, or an answer-in-intervention if books, documents or things demanded
he or she unites with the defending party in which must appear to the court prima
resisting a claim against the latter. (Rule 19, facie relevant.
Sec.3)
Answer to complaint-in-intervention. — The A subpoena may be issued by:
answer to the complaint-in-intervention shall be 1. The Court before whom the witness is
filed within fifteen (15) calendar days from notice required to attend
of the order admitting the same, unless a different 2. The Court of the place where the
period is fixed by the court. (Rule 19, Sec. 4) deposition is to be taken
3. The Officer or Body authorized by law to
Intervention versus Interpleader issue a subpoena in connection with
INTERVENTION INTERPLEADER investigations conducted by said officer
Ancillary action Original action of body
Presupposes that the 4. Any Justice of the Supreme Court or of
plaintiff has no interest the Court of Appeals in any case or
in the subject matter investigation pending within the
Proper in any of the Philippines (Rule 21, Sec. 2)
of the action or has an
four situations
interest therein, which
mentioned in this A Subpoena is Served:
in whole or in part, is
Rule 1. In the same manner as personal or
not disputed by the
other parties to the substituted service of summons
action. 2. The original must be exhibited, and a
The defendants are copy delivered to the person on whom it
The defendants are is served
already original
being sued precisely 3. The fees for one day attendance and
parties to the pending
to implead them. kilometrage allowed by the Rules shall be
suit.
tendered to such person
M. SUBPOENA 4. Service must be made as to allow the
witness a reasonable time for preparation
Subpoena Duces Tecum and travel to the place of attendance
A process directed to a person requiring him or 5. The reasonable cost of producing the
her to attend and to testify at the hearing or the documents and other materials subject of
trial of an action, or at any investigation the subpoena shall be tendered or
conducted by competent authority, or for the charged accordingly. (Rule 21, Sec. 6)
taking of his or her deposition. It may also require
him or her to bring with him or her any books, A Subpoena May be Served By:
documents, or other things under his or 1. Sheriff;
her control, in which case it is called a 2. Deputy sheriff;
subpoena duces tecum. (Rule 21, Sec. 1) 3. Other proper court officer; or
4. For any justifiable reason, by any suitable
Subpoena Ad Testificandum person authorized by the court issuing
the subpoena

ATENEO CENTRAL
2. When the witness fees and kilometrage

In Case of Failure of a Witness to Attend allowed by the Rules were not tendered
The court or judge issuing the subpoena, upon when the subpoena was served
proof of the service thereof and of the failure of
the witness, may issue a warrant to the sheriff of Grounds to Quash a Subpoena Duces Tecum
the province, or his or her deputy, to arrest the UPON MOTION Promptly Made
witness and bring him or her before the court or 1. It is unreasonable and oppressive
officer where his or her attendance is required, 2. Relevancy of the books, documents or
and the cost of such warrant and seizure of such things does not appear
witness shall be paid by the witness if the court
issuing it shall determine that his or her failure to Forms and Contents
answer the subpoena was willful and without just A subpoena shall:
excuse. (Rule 21, Sec. 8) 1. State the name of the court;
2. State the title of the action or
Contempt investigation;
1. If the subpoena was issued by a court – 3. Be directed to the person whose
failure by any person without adequate attendance is required; and
cause to obey a subpoena served on him 4. In the case of a subpoena duces tecum,
shall be deemed contempt of the court it shall also contain a reasonable
from which the subpoena is issued; description of the books, documents or
things demanded which must appear to
2. If a subpoena is NOT issued by a court the court prima facie relevant. (Rule 21,
– the disobedience shall be punished in Sec. 3)
accordance with applicable law or Rule.
Subpoena for Depositions
Exceptions Proof of service of a notice to take a deposition,
1. Witness resides more than 100 km away as provided in sections 15 and 25 of rule 23, shall
from the place where he is to testify by constitute sufficient authorization for the issuance
the ordinary course of travel. of subpoenas for the persons named in said
2. Witness is a detention prisoner and there notice by the clerk of the court of the place in
was no permission obtained from the which the deposition is to be taken.
court in which the case is pending.
The clerk shall not, however, issue a
Only a judicial officer and quasi-judicial officer subpoena duces tecum to any such person
specifically authorized by law can exercise the without an order of the court.
power of contempt in relation to subpoena.
(Nazareno v. Barnes, G.R. No. L-59072, 1984) Personal appearance in court
A person present in court before a judicial officer
The failure of a server to pursue substituted may be required to testify as if he/she were in
service after a frustrated attempt to personally attendance upon a subpoena issued by such
serve the complainant a copy of the subpoena court or officer.
constitutes simple neglect of duty. (Macaspec v.
Flores, A.M. No. P-05-2072, 2008) N. COMPUTATION OF TIME
3. No advance of reasonable cost of Section 1, Rule 22 provides that when the last
production of such books and documents day on which a pleading is due falls on a
was made. Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, time shall not
4. Witness fees and kilometrage allowed by run until the next working day. This rule speaks
the rules were not tendered when the only of "the last day of the period," so that when
subpoena was served. a party seeks an extension and the same is
granted, the due date ceases to be the last day
Grounds to Quash a Subpoena Ad and hence, the provision no longer applies. Any
Testificandum extension of time to file the required pleading
1. The witness is not bound by such should therefore be counted from the expiration
subpoena of the period regardless of the fact that said due

ATENEO CENTRAL
date is a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday. prosecution witness who would foreseeably be
(Reinier Pacific International Shipping, Inc. v. unavailable for trial, the testimonial examination
Guevarra, G.R. No. 157020, 2013) should be made before the court, or at least
before the judge, where the case is pending as
required by the clear mandate of Section 15, Rule
O. MODES OF DISCOVERY 119 of the Revised Rules of Criminal
Procedure (Go v. People, G.R. No. 185527,
1. DEPOSITIONS (RULES 23 2012)
and 24)
The testimony of any person, whether a party or When May Depositions Be Used
not, may be taken, at the instance of any party, 1. Depositions may be used in a pending
by deposition upon oral examination or written trial action (De Benne Esse). (Rule 23)
interrogatories. The attendance of witnesses may 2. Depositions may also be used in future
be compelled by the use of a subpoena as proceedings (In Perpetuam Rei
provided in Rule 21. Depositions shall be taken Memoriam) as in the case where it is
only in accordance with these Rules. The sought before the existence of an action
deposition of a person confined in prison may be or for cases on appeal. (Rule 24)
taken only by leave of court on such terms as the
court prescribes. Nature Of Depositions
Who May Petition (Deposition Before Action)
Discovery still applies even if motion for bill 1. Any person who wants to perpetuate
of particulars was denied his/her own testimony; or
That the matters on which discovery is desired 2. Any person who wants to perpetuate the
are the same matters subject of a prior motion for testimony of another person.
bill of particulars and denied for lack of merit is
beside the point. A bill of particulars may elicit A non-resident foreign corporation may request
only ultimate facts, not-so-called evidentiary for depositions, whether oral or written. (San Luis
facts. The latter are without doubt proper subject v. Rojas, G.R. No. 159127, 2008)
of discovery. (Republic v. Sandiganbayan, G.R.
No. 90478, 1991) In criminal cases, filing a Motion for Leave to
Take Deposition is a voluntary appearance and
Modes of Discovery under the Rules of Court he subjects himself to the jurisdiction of the court.
1. Depositions (Disini v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 175730,
2. Interrogatories to Parties 2010)
3. Admission by Adverse Party
4. Production or Inspection of Documents Before Whom Taken (Depositions Pending
or Things Action)
5. Physical and Mental Examination of 1. IF WITHIN the Philippines – deposition may
Persons be taken before
a) Judge;
Depositions in Civil vs. Criminal Proceedings b) Notary public; or
1. The procedure under Rule 23 to 28 of c) Before any person authorized to
the Rules of Court allows the taking of administer oaths if the parties so stipulate in
depositions in civil cases, either upon oral writing.
examination or written interrogatories, before any 2. IF OUTSIDE the Philippines – deposition
judge, notary public or person authorized to may be taken before
administer oaths at any time or place within the a) A secretary of an embassy or legation,
Philippines; or before any Philippine consular consul general, consul, vice-consul or
official, commissioned officer or person consular agent of the Republic of the
authorized to administer oaths in a foreign state Philippines;
or country, with no additional requirement except b) Such person or officer as may be
reasonable notice in writing to the other party. appointed by commission or letters rogatory;
c) A person authorized to administer oaths
2. For purposes of taking the deposition in by written stipulation of the parties.
criminal cases, more particularly of a

ATENEO CENTRAL
Disqualification by Interest. No depositions A party shall NOT be deemed to make a person

shall be taken before: his/her own witness for any purpose by taking
1. a person who is a relative within the sixth his/her deposition (Rule 23, Sec. 7) EXCEPT
degree of consanguinity or affinity; or when the deposition is introduced in evidence,
2. employee or counsel of any of the then he/she will be deemed to have made the
parties; or deponent his/her witness (Rule 23, Sec. 8).
3. a relative within the same degree or
employee of such counsel; or The exception will NOT apply if the deposition
4. one who is financially interested in the used is that of an opposing party or the deposition
action. is used to impeach or contradict the deponent –
Deponent still NOT a witness of the party taking
Difference Between Letters Rogatory and the deposition.
Commission
LETTERS COMMISSION A deposition is not to be used when the deponent
ROGATORY is at hand. (Sales v. Sabino, G.R. No. 133154,
Request to a An instrument issued 2005)
FOREIGN COURT by a court of justice or
to give its aid, other competent Any Part or All of the Deposition, So Far as
backed by its power, tribunal DIRECTED Admissible under the Rules of Evidence, May
to secure desired TO A MAGISTRATE be Used
information. by his official 1. Against any party who was present or
designation OR TO represented at the taking of the
AN INDIVIDUAL BY deposition; or
NAME, authorizing 2. Against one who had due notice of the
him to take the deposition.
depositions of the
witness. The Deposition May be Used for the Following
Methods of Taken in accordance Purposes
procedure are under with the rules laid 1. For the purpose of contradicting or
the control of the down by the court impeaching the testimony of the deponent as
foreign tribunal. issuing the witness by any party;
commission. 2. If the deponent is a party or anyone who
was at the time of the deposition was an
(Dulay v. Dulay, G.R. No. 158857, 2005) officer, director, or managing agent of a public
or private corporation, partnership or
When DEPOSITIONS PENDING ACTION Are association which is a party, his/her deposition
Taken can be used by an adverse party for any
1. After jurisdiction has been obtained over purpose.
the defendant or property subject of the 3. If the deponent is a witness, whether or
action and BEFORE answer has been not a party to the case, his/her deposition may
filed – WITH leave of court; be used by any party for any purpose if the
2. After jurisdiction has been obtained and court finds that:
AFTER an answer has been served – a) The witness is dead; or
WITHOUT leave of court; b) The witness resides at a distance more
3. DEPOSITION OF PRISONER – only with than one hundred (100) kilometers from
leave of court and upon such terms as the place of trial or hearing, or is out of
the court may prescribe. the Philippines (UNLESS it appears that
his/her absence was procured by the
There is no rule that limits deposition-taking only party offering the deposition); or
to the period of pre-trial or before it, neither c) The witness is unable to attend or testify
against the taking after pre-trial. (Jonathan because of age, sickness, infirmity or
Landoil International Co., Inc. v. Mangudadatu imprisonment; or
G.R. No. 155010, 2004) d) The party offering the deposition has
been unable to procure the attendance of
Uses; Scope of Examination the witness by subpoena; or

ATENEO CENTRAL
e) Upon application and notice, that such 2. Upon showing that the examination is
exceptional circumstances exist as to being conducted in bad faith or in such
make it desirable, in the interest of justice manner as unreasonably to annoy,
to allow the deposition to be used. embarrass or oppress the deponent or party.
If only part of a deposition is offered in evidence
by a party, the adverse party may require him or Suppletory Application In Criminal Cases
her to introduce all of it which is relevant to the The Rules are silent as to how to take a testimony
part introduced, and any party may introduce any of a witness who is unable to testify in open court
other parts. (Rule 23, Sec. 4(d)) because he is imprisoned in another country.
Scope of Examination Depositions, however, are recognized under Rule
23 of the Rules on Civil Procedure. Although the
May be any matter not privileged and which is rule on deposition by written interrogatories is
relevant to the subject of the pending action, inscribed under the said Rule, the Court holds
including: that it may be applied suppletorily in criminal
1. Claim or defense of any other party; proceedings so long as there is compelling
2. Existence, description, nature, custody, reason. (People v. Sergio, G.R. No. 240053,
condition and location of any books, October 9, 2019)
documents, or other tangible things; and
3. Identity and location of persons having 2. INTERROGATORIES TO
knowledge of relevant facts. PARTIES (RULE 25)
In civil cases, a person may not use the right Written Interrogatories
against self-incrimination as an objection to make Any party desiring to elicit material and relevant
a deposition. Only when an incriminating question facts from any adverse parties may do so by filing
is asked can a person invoke the right. (Rosete v. and serving upon the latter written interrogatories.
Lim G.R. No. 136051, June 8, 2006)
Unless thereafter allowed by the court for good
When May Objections To Admissibility Be cause shown and to prevent a failure of justice, a
Made party not served with written interrogatories may
Objections may be made at the trial or hearing not be compelled by the adverse party to give
to receive in evidence any deposition or part testimony in open court, or to give a deposition
thereof. pending appeal. (Sps. Afulugencia v. Metrobank,
G.R. No. 185145, February 5, 2014)
Any reason that would require the exclusion of
the evidence if the witness were then present and A Party Shall FILE AND SERVE Written
testifying may be used as a reason for objection. Interrogatories
1. After jurisdiction has been obtained over
All objections made at the time of the examination the defendant or property subject of the
to the qualifications of the officer taking the action and BEFORE answer has been
deposition, manner of taking it, to evidence filed – WITH leave of court; or
presented, conduct of any party and any other 2. After jurisdiction has been obtained and
objection to the proceedings shall be NOTED by AFTER an answer has been served –
the officer taking the deposition. He/she has NO WITHOUT leave of court
authority to rule on such objections. (Riano, Civil
Procedure: A Restatement for the Bar, 2nd ed. The interrogatories shall be ANSWERED FULLY
2009) in writing and shall be signed and sworn to by the
person making them. Such answer shall be filed
When The Taking Of Deposition May Be and served to the party submitting the
Terminated Or Its Scope Limited interrogatory within fifteen (15) days from service
The Taking of Deposition may be terminated of such interrogatories UNLESS the court on
or Its Scope Limited at ANY TIME DURING the motion and for good cause extends or shortens
Taking of the Deposition the time.
1. Upon motion or petition of any party or of
the deponent; and

ATENEO CENTRAL
OBJECTIONS to the interrogatory may be 3. Enter judgment by default against the

presented to the court within ten (10) days after defendant, if it was the DEFENDANT who
service thereof. refused to answer;
4. Order that party who refused to answer
NO party may serve MORE THAN ONE set of to pay reasonable expense incurred by the
interrogatories to be answered by the same party other party and attorney’s fees (Rule 29, Sec.
WITHOUT LEAVE OF COURT. (Riano, 2014, p. 5)
520)
If a party refuses to answer the WHOLE written
Difference between Interrogatories to Parties interrogatory, Section 5, Rule 29 shall apply.
and Bill of Particulars
INTERROGATORIES BILL OF However, where a party refuses only to answer a
TO PARTIES PARTICULARS PARTICULAR question, Section 3 [c], Rule 19
shall apply (the main difference being that in
Directed to an Directed to a Section 3[c], there is no provision on payment of
Adverse Party Pleading reasonable expenses/ penalty).
Seeks the disclosure Designed to seek for Effect Of Failure To Serve Written
of all material and a more definite Interrogatories
relevant facts from a statement or for General Rule: A party not served with written
party particulars of any interrogatories may NOT be compelled by the
matter not averred adverse party to give testimony in open court, or
with sufficient to give a deposition pending appeal.
definiteness in a
pleading Exception: When allowed by the court for good
cause and to prevent a failure of justice.
Difference between Interrogatories to Parties
and Written Interrogatories in a Deposition 3. ADMISSION BY ADVERSE
PARTY (RULE 26)
WRITTEN
INTERROGATORIES
INTERROGATORIES A Written Request for Admission Filed and
TO PARTIES
IN A DEPOSITION Served Upon Any Other Party May Include
1. Request for the admission of the
Directed to an Adverse Not served upon the genuineness of any material and relevant
Party adverse party directly; document described in and exhibited with the
delivered to the officer request;
designated in the 2. Request for the admission of the truth of any
notice material and relevant matter of fact set forth in
the request.
The service of written interrogatories is a mode of
deposition separate and distinct from Objections to any request for admission shall be
interrogatories to parties. (Riano, 2014, p.520) submitted to the court WITHIN the period for and
PRIOR to the filing of the sworn statement -
Consequences Of Refusal To Answer Written fifteen (15) days after service of request.
Interrogatories
Such objections will defer compliance until such
The Court, ON MOTION and NOTICE May have been resolved by the court.
1. Strike out all or any part of any pleading
of that party; or Implied Admission By Adverse Party
2. Dismiss the action or proceeding or any There is an IMPLIED ADMISSION if the party to
part thereof made if it was the PLAINTIFF whom the request is made does NOT file and
who refused to answer; serve a sworn statement EITHER a) denying
specifically the matters of which an admission is
requested OR b) setting forth the reasons why he
cannot either admit or deny those matters within

ATENEO CENTRAL
fifteen (15) days after service thereof or with that its Comment was not under oath. (DBP v CA,
such further time as the court may allow on G.R. No. 153034, 2005)
motion. (Duque v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No.
125383, 2002) A party should not be compelled to admit matters
of fact already admitted by his pleading and
Consequences Of Failure To Answer Request concerning which there is no issue, nor should he
For Admission be required to make a second denial of those
The matters of which admission is requested already denied in his answer to the complaint.
shall be deemed admitted provided BOTH [xxx] A request for admission is not intended to
adverse party and counsel are served copy. merely reproduce or reiterate the allegations of
the requesting party's pleading but should set
There is a distinction in Section 8 Rule 40 where forth relevant evidentiary matters of fact, or
the first paragraph a trial is needed when there is documents described in and exhibited with the
an affirmance and the ground of dismissal is lack request, whose purpose is to establish said
of jurisdiction over the subject matter. Whereas in party's cause of action or defense. (Po v. CA,
the second paragraph, a trial is not necessary. G.R. No. L-34341, 1988)
(Rule 40, Sec. 8)
4. PRODUCTION AND
Effect Of Admission INSPECTION OF
Any admission made pursuant to such request is DOCUMENTS OR THINGS
for the purpose of the pending action only. The (RULE 27)
admission may NOT be used against the party
who gave it in any other proceeding. UPON MOTION, a party may seek the production
of documents, papers, books, accounts, letters,
Effect Of Failure To File And Serve Request photographs, objects or tangible things OR to
For Admission order any party to permit entry upon designated
The party who fails to request for admission of land or other property in his possession or
material and relevant facts which are or ought to control.
be within the personal knowledge of such party
shall NOT be permitted to present evidence on Filing of a Motion; Order of the Court
such facts UNLESS allowed by the court for good 1. The motion must be filed by the party
cause shown and to prevent a failure of justice. seeking the production or inspection of
(Riano, p. 522, 2014) documents and things, and the motion must
show good cause supporting the same.
Withdrawal of Admission 2. The order shall specify the time, place
1. Admissions made in this mode of and manner of making the inspection and
discovery, whether express or implied, are taking copies and photographs, and may
NOT final and irrevocable. prescribe such terms and conditions as are
2. The court may allow the party making the just.
admission to withdraw or amend the
admission upon such terms as may be just. This is essentially a mode of discovery limited to
3. To effect the withdrawal, the admitting the parties to the action. This is to be
party should file a motion to be relieved of the differentiated from a subpoena duces tecum
effects of his admission. (Riano, p. 523) which is a means to compel the production of
evidence, which may be directed to a person who
That the Comment was not under oath is not a may or may not be a party to the action. (Riano,
substantive, but merely a formal, defect which 2014, p.525)
can be excused in the interest of justice
conformably to the well-entrenched doctrine that Documents to be Produced
all pleadings should be liberally construed as to 1. It should NOT be privileged;
do substantial justice. The filing of such Comment 2. It should constitute or contain evidence
substantially complied with Rule 26. material to any matter involved in the action;
Consequently, the DBP cannot be deemed to and
have impliedly admitted the matters set forth in 3. It must be within the party’s possession,
the Request for Admission for the mere reason custody or control.

ATENEO CENTRAL
Privileged Documents (Rule 130, Sec. 24) For Party or Deponent who Appears But
1. Communication between Husband and REFUSES TO ANSWER Any Question Upon
Wife Oral Examination Or Interrogatory:
2. Communication between Attorney and 1. The proponent may apply for a court
Client order to compel an answer:
3. Communication between Physician and a) If the motion is GRANTED– the court
Patient shall require the refusing party to answer.
4. Communication between Priest and If the refusal to answer was without
Penitent SUBSTANTIAL JUSTIFICATION, it may
5. Communication of Public Officers require the refusing party or deponent or
involving public interest the counsel advising the refusal, or both
of them, to pay the proponent the amount
Others privileged documents not mentioned of the reasonable expenses incurred in
by Rule 130 obtaining the order, including attorney's
1. Editors may not be compelled to disclose fees.
the source of published news b) If the motion is DENIED - and the court
2. Voters may not be compelled to disclose finds that it was filed WITHOUT
for whom they voted SUBSTANTIAL JUSTIFICATION, the
3. Trade secrets court may require the proponent or the
4. Information contained in tax census counsel advising the filing of the
returns application, or both of them, to pay to the
5. Bank Deposits (Riano, page 525-526, refusing party or deponent the amount of
2014) the reasonable expenses incurred in
opposing the application, including
5. PHYSICAL AND MENTAL attorney's fees
EXAMINATION OF
PERSONS (RULE 28) 2. If despite the court order, the party or
deponent still refuses to answer, the refusal
When the mental or physical condition of a party may be considered contempt of that court or
is in controversy, the court, UPON MOTION FOR the court may make such order as are just
GOOD CAUSE SHOWN, may order the party to under Rule 29, Sec. 3.
submit to a physical or mental examination by a
physician. If the Adverse Party Makes a Wrongful Denial
of the Genuineness of Documents or Truth of
The party examined MAY request the party Any Matter of Fact
causing the examination to be made to deliver to The other party who proves the genuineness may
him a copy of a detailed report of the examining apply to the court for an order requiring the other
physician. party to pay him reasonable expenses incurred in
making such proof, including attorney’s fees.
Waiver of Privilege
By requesting and obtaining a report of the If a Party Refuses an Order to Produce Any
examination OR by taking the deposition of the Document or Other Thing Under Rule 27 OR If
examiner, the party examined WAIVES any a Person Refuses to Submit to a Physical or
privilege he may have in that action or any other Mental Examination Under Rule 28 OR If a
involving the same controversy regarding the Person Refuses to Answer Particular
testimony of every other person who has Questions Under Rule 25:
examined or may thereafter examine him. The court may make such orders in regard to the
refusal as are just, and among others, also issue
6. REFUSAL TO COMPLY the following:
WITH MODES OF 1. An order that the matters regarding which
DISCOVERY (RULE 29) the questions were asked shall be TAKEN
TO BE ESTABLISHED for the purposes of
the action in accordance with the claim of the
party obtaining the order;
2. An order

ATENEO CENTRAL
a) Prohibiting the disobedient party to description of the thing or land, or the

support or oppose claims or defenses, or contents of the paper, or the physical or
b) Prohibiting such disobedient party from mental condition of the party, or any other
introducing in evidence designated designated facts shall be taken to be
documents or things or items of established for the purposes of the action in
testimony; accordance with the claim of the party
3. An order obtaining the order;
a) Striking out pleadings or parts thereof, or b. An order refusing to allow the disobedient
b) Staying further proceedings until the party to support or oppose designated
order is obeyed, or claims or defenses or prohibiting him from
c) Dismissing the action or proceeding or introducing in evidence designated
any part thereof, or documents or things or items of testimony, or
d) Rendering a judgment by default against from introducing evidence of physical or
the disobedient party; mental condition;
4. In addition to any of the above orders, an c. An order striking out pleadings or parts
order directing the arrest of any party or agent thereof, or staying further proceedings
of a party for disobeying any of such orders. until the order is obeyed, or dismissing the
action or proceeding or any part thereof, or
For Failure to Appear to Serve Answer to rendering a judgment by default against the
Written Interrogatories the Court, on Motion, disobedient party; and
May: d. In lieu of any of the foregoing orders or in
1. Strike out all or any part of any pleading addition thereto, an order directing the arrest
by that party; of any party or agent of a party for
2. Dismiss the action or proceeding or any disobeying any of such orders except an
part thereof; or enter a judgment by default order to submit to a physical or mental
against that party; examination.
3. At the court’s discretion, order the party to
pay reasonable expenses incurred by the For FAILURE TO APPEAR TO SERVE
other, including attorney’s fees. ANSWER to Written Interrogatories the Court,
on Motion, May:
Contempt of court 1. Strike out all or any part of any pleading
If a party or other witness refuses to be sworn or by that party;
refuses to answer any question after being 2. Dismiss the action or proceeding or any
directed to do so by the court of the place in which part thereof; or enter a judgment by default
the deposition is being taken, the refusal may be against that party; or
considered contempt of that court. 3. At the court’s discretion, order the party
to pay reasonable expenses incurred by the
Other consequences other, including attorney’s fees.
If party refuses to obey:
1. An order made under section 1 of this Rule P. TRIAL (RULE 30)
requiring him to answer designated
questions; or General Rule: Judgment should not be rendered
2. An order under Rule 27 to produce any without trial on the material facts in the pleadings
document or other thing for inspection, of the parties which are in good faith
copying, or photographing or to permit it to be controverted.
done, or to permit entry upon land or other
property or an order made under Rule 28 Exceptions: When Trial is Unnecessary
requiring him to submit to a physical or 1. Judgment on the Pleadings
mental examination. 2. Summary Judgment
3. Judgment on Compromise
The court may make such orders in regard to the 4. Dismissal of Complaint WITH Prejudice
refusal as are just, and among others the 5. Summary Procedure Cases
following: 6. Judgment on Facts Stipulated/Agreed
a. An order that the matters regarding which the Upon
questions were asked, or the character or

ATENEO CENTRAL
1. SCHEDULE OF TRIAL 2. ADJOURNMENTS AND

POSTPONEMENTS
Section 1. Schedule of trial. — The parties shall
strictly observe the scheduled hearings as agreed A court may adjourn a trial from day to day and to
upon and set forth in the pre-trial order. postpone it to any stated time.
(a)The schedule of the trial dates, for both plaintiff
and defendant, shall be continuous and within the General Rule: A court does not have power to
following periods: adjourn trial for a longer period than one (1)
i. The initial presentation of plaintiff’s month for each adjournment and not for more
evidence shall be set not later than thirty than three (3) months total for all adjournments.
(30) calendar days after the termination
of the pre-trial conference. Plaintiff shall Exception: When authorized in writing by the
be allowed to present its evidence within Court Administrator, Supreme Court.
a period of three (3) months or ninety (90)
calendar days which shall include the 3. REQUISITES OF MOTION TO
date of the judicial dispute resolution, if POSTPONE TRIAL ON THE
necessary; GROUND OF ILLNESS OF A
ii. The initial presentation of defendant’s PARTY OR COUNSEL
evidence shall be set not later than thirty
(30) calendar days after the court’s ruling A motion to postpone a trial on the ground of
on plaintiff’s formal offer of evidence. The illness of a party or counsel may be granted if it
defendant shall be allowed to present its appears upon affidavit or sworn certification that
evidence within a period of three (3) the presence of such party or counsel at the trial
months or ninety (90) calendar days; is indispensable and that the character of his or
iii. The period for the presentation of her illness is such as to render his or her non-
evidence on the third (fourth, etc.) -party attendance excusable. (Rule 30, Sec. 3)
claim, counterclaim or cross-claim shall Motion to postpone due for absence of
be determined by the court, the total of evidence no longer allowed. (provision was
which shall in no case exceed ninety (90) deleted in revised rules)
calendar days; and
iv. If deemed necessary, the court shall set The party who caused the postponement is
the presentation of the parties’ respective warned that the presentation of its evidence must
rebuttal evidence, which shall be still be terminated on the remaining dates
completed within a period of thirty (30) previously agreed upon.
calendar days.
v. The trial dates may be shortened Agreed Statement Of Facts [Stipulation Of
depending on the number of witnesses to Facts]
be presented, provided that the Parties to ANY action may agree upon the facts
presentation of evidence of all parties involved in the litigation.
shall be terminated within a period of ten
(10) months or three hundred (300) Such agreement must be in WRITING and upon
calendar days. facts involved in the litigation. The case will then
vi. If there are no third (fourth, etc.)-party be submitted for judgment on the facts agreed
claim, counterclaim or cross-claim, the upon WITHOUT need for introduction of
presentation of evidence shall be evidence.
terminated within a period of six (6)
months or one hundred eighty (180) If the parties agree only on some of the facts, trial
calendar days. shall be held as to the disputed facts.
vii. The court shall decide and serve copies
of its decision to the parties within a In CIVIL cases, such agreement MAY be made
period not exceeding ninety (90) orally, in open court. However, in CRIMINAL
calendar days from the submission of the CASES, such agreement must always be in
case for resolution, with or without writing.
memoranda. (n)

ATENEO CENTRAL
Order of Trial 2. Any case where the parties so agree in

writing.
The trial shall be LIMITED to the issues stated
in the PRE-TRIAL ORDER and shall proceed The CLERK OF COURT has the duty to submit
as follows: his report, objections, and transcripts of the
1. Plaintiff shall adduce evidence is proceedings within ten (10) days from the
support of his complaint; termination of hearing.
2. Defendant shall then adduce evidence
in support of his defense, counterclaim, The CLERK OF COURT shall have NO power to
cross-claim or third-party complaint; rule on objections to any question or to the
3. Third (3rd) party defendant shall admission of exhibits. Such power shall remain
adduce evidence in support of his defense, with the JUDGE who shall resolve such objection
counterclaim, cross-claim, fourth-party within ten (10) days from the termination of
complaint; hearing.
4. Fourth (4th) party and so on shall
adduce evidence of the material facts Judicial Affidavit Rule
pleaded by him; Section 2. Submission of Judicial Affidavits and
5. The parties against whom any Exhibits in lieu of direct testimonies. - (a) The
counterclaim or cross-claim has been parties shall file with the court and serve on the
pleaded, shall adduce evidence in support of adverse party, personally or by licensed courier
their defense, in the order prescribed by the service, not later than five days before pre-trial
court; or preliminary conference or the scheduled
6. Parties may then adduce rebutting hearing with respect to motions and
evidence only, unless the court permits them incidents, the following:
to adduce evidence upon their original case; 1. The judicial affidavits of their
7. Upon admission of the evidence, the case witnesses, which shall take the place
shall be deemed submitted for decision, of such witnesses' direct testimonies;
unless the court directs the parties to argue and
or to submit their respective memoranda or 2. The parties' documentary or object
any further pleadings. evidence, if any, which shall be attached
If several defendants or third-party to the judicial affidavits and marked as
defendants, and so forth, having separate Exhibits A, B, C, and so on in the case of
defenses appear by different counsel, the the complainant or the plaintiff, and as
court shall determine the relative order of Exhibits 1, 2, 3, and so on in the case of
presentation of their evidence. the respondent or the defendant
Reversal or Modification of Order Q. CONSOLIDATION OR

If the defendant relies upon an affirmative SEVERANCE (RULE 31)
defense in his answer, then the order of the trial
may be properly reversed. This is because the Consolidation is Proper When:
plaintiffs need not present evidence as judicial 1. There are actions involving a common
admissions do not require proof. question of law or fact; and
2. The actions are pending before the
Defendant in this case will present evidence same court.
ahead of plaintiff.
Court May Order Actions to be Consolidated
Delegation Of Reception Of Evidence By:
General Rule: The JUDGE of the court where the 1. A joint hearing or trial of any and all
case is pending shall personally receive the matters or issue in the action; or
evidence to be adduced by the parties. 2. Consolidation of all actions; or
3. Such order concerning proceedings
Exception: The court may delegate the reception therein as may tend to avoid
of evidence to its CLERK OF COURT (who is a unnecessary costs or delay.
member of the bar) in:
1. Default or Ex Parte hearings;

ATENEO CENTRAL
Civil cases MAY now be consolidated with the case, excluding technical aspects such as
criminal cases. (Rule 111, Section 2[a]) capacity to sue. (Celino v. Heirs of Alejo and
Teresa Santiago, G.R. No. 161817, 2004)
Consolidation is a matter of discretion with the
court. Consolidation becomes a matter of right Demurrer to evidence authorizes a judgment on
only when the cases sought to be consolidated the merits of the case without the defendant
involve similar questions of fact and law, provided having to submit evidence on his part as he would
certain requirements are met. An essential ordinarily have to do, if it is shown by plaintiff’s
requisite of consolidation is that the court must evidence that the latter is not entitled to the relief
have jurisdiction over all the cases consolidated sought.
before it. In this case, since the Sandiganbayan
does not have jurisdiction over the collection A demurrer to evidence is likewise sustainable
case, the same cannot be consolidated with the when, admitting every proven fact favorable to
criminal cases even if these cases involve the plaintiff and indulging in his favor all
similar questions of fact and law. (Republic v. conclusions fairly and reasonably inferable
Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 116463, 2013) therefrom, the plaintiff has failed to make out one
or more of the material elements of his case, or
In the appellate stage, the rigid policy is to make when there is no evidence to support an
the consolidation of all cases and proceedings allegation necessary to his claim. It should be
resting on the same set of facts or involving sustained where the plaintiff’s evidence is prima
identical claims or interests or parties facie insufficient for a recovery. [Heirs of
mandatory. Such consolidation should be made Santioque v. Heirs of Calma, G.R. No. 160832,
regardless of whether or not the parties or any 2006)
of them requests it. (In re: Fabiana, A.M. No.
CA-12-51-J, 2013) What should be resolved in a motion to dismiss
based on a demurrer to evidence is whether the
Proceedings for the issuance of a writ of plaintiff is entitled to the relief based on the facts
possession being ex parte and non-litigious in and the law. The “facts” referred to here include
nature, cannot be consolidated with proceedings judicial admissions, matters of judicial notice,
seeking to nullify the extra-judicial foreclosure or stipulations made during the pre-trial and trial,
the certificate of sale. (Espinoza v. UOB, G.R. No. admissions, and presumptions, the only
175380, 2010) exclusion being the defendant’s evidence. (GMA
Network v. Central CATV, G.R. No. 176694,
Severance, When Proper 2014)
The court, in furtherance of convenience or to
avoid prejudice, may order a separate trial of any 2. EFFECT OF ORDER
claim, cross-claim, counterclaim, or third-party DENYING DEMURRER TO
complaint, or of any separate issue or of any EVIDENCE
number of claims, cross-claims, counterclaims,
third-party complaints or issues. Defendant CAN present his evidence as a matter
of right EVEN IF he did NOT obtain leave of court
R. DEMURRER TO EVIDENCE (RULE or reserve his right to do so.
33)
EFFECT OF EFFECT OF DENIAL IN
1. GROUNDS DENIAL IN CRIMINAL CASE
CIVIL CASE
After the plaintiff has completed the presentation
of his evidence, the defendant may move for
dismissal on the ground that upon the facts and
the law, the plaintiff has shown NO RIGHT TO
RELIEF.
Note: The evidence contemplated by the rule on

demurrer is that which pertains to the merits of

ATENEO CENTRAL
The If demurrer was with Demurrer To Evidence In Civil Cases Versus

defendant will express leave of court, In A Criminal Case
present his accused may present CIVIL CASE CRIMINAL CASE
evidence evidence. Leave of court is
NO need for leave of
NECESSARY so that
court for defendant
If demurrer was without the accused could
to file demurrer to
express leave of court, present his evidence if
evidence
accused can NO longer his demurrer is denied
present evidence and the If court finds
If court finds
case is submitted for prosecution’s
plaintiff’s evidence
decision based on evidence insufficient,
insufficient,
prosecution’s evidence. demurrer will be
demurrer will be
granted and judgment
granted and
will be rendered
An order denying a demurrer to the evidence is complaint will be
acquitting the
INTERLOCUTORY and is therefore NOT dismissed. This
accused. The
appealable. It can be the subject of a Petition for dismissal is
judgment is not
Certiorari in case of grave abuse of discretion or appealable.
appealable.
an oppressive exercise of judicial authority.
(Katigbak v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 140183, If plaintiff appeals
2003) and the judgment is
reversed, the
Effect of Grant appellate court will Judgment is NOT
Court will render judgment on demurrer to decide the case on appealable by reason
evidence by DISMISSING the case. This order is the basis of plaintiff’s of the double jeopardy
APPEALABLE. evidence and the rule.
defendant loses his
right to present
EFFECT OF GRANT EFFECT OF GRANT evidence.
IN CIVIL CASE IN CRIMINAL CASE
If court denies
demurrer, either of the
The complaint will be The accused will be following will happen:
dismissed acquitted. Judgment of
acquittal is NOT 1. If demurrer was
appealable WITH express
leave of court,
accused may
If court denies
Waiver Of Right To Present Evidence present evidence;
demurrer, defendant
If on appeal, the order granting the motion for will present his
demurrer is REVERSED, the defendant LOSES 2. If demurrer was
evidence
his right to present evidence. WITHOUT leave of
court, accused can no
Judgment shall be rendered on the basis of the longer present
evidence submitted by the PLAINTIFF. evidence and the case
is submitted for
Note: The appellate court reversing the order decision based on
granting the demurrer MUST NOT REMAND the prosecution’s
case to the trial court for further proceedings. The evidence.
appellate court should render judgment on the The court cannot, on The court may make a
basis of the evidence submitted by the plaintiff. its own, make a demurrer on its own.
(Radiowealth Finance Corporation v. Del demurrer. (Rule 119, Sec. 23)
Rosario, 335 SCRA 228, 2000) Both are based on insufficiency of evidence
presented by the plaintiff or the prosecution to
warrant the grant of affirmative relief in favor of
the plaintiff nor conviction of accused;

ATENEO CENTRAL
3. Penalty imposed on the accused.

In both, the motion is filed after the plaintiff or 4. Civil liability or damages, if any, unless a
the prosecution has presented evidence and separate civil action has been reserved or
closed his or its case. waived.
Section 2. Action on demurrer to evidence. — A A Judgment of ACQUITTAL Must Contain:

demurrer to evidence shall be subject to the 1. Whether the evidence absolutely failed to
provisions of Rule 15. prove the guilt of the accused or merely failed
to prove it beyond reasonable doubt;
2. If the act or omission from which civil
The order denying the demurrer to evidence shall
liability may arise did not exist
not be subject of an appeal or petition for
certiorari, prohibition or mandamus before
Memorandum Decision
judgment.
Rendered by an appellate court and references
the finding of facts and conclusions of law
S. JUDGMENTS AND FINAL contained in the decision under review. This is
ORDERS done in order to avoid repetition and cumbersome
reproduction of the decision of the lower court in
Requisites: the decision of the higher court. In order to be
1. In writing in the official language; valid, however, it must provide direct access to
2. Personally and directly prepared by the the facts and law being adopted, which must be
judge; contained in a statement attached to the decision
3. State clearly and distinctly the facts and and made an indispensable part of the decision.
the law on which it is based; (Francisco v. Permskul, G.R. No. 81006, 1989).
4. Contains a dispositive portion;
5. Signed by the judge; and Memorandum Decisions are supported by BP
6. Filed with the clerk of court. 129 and Rule 51 of the Rules of Court.
Contents of a Judgment Even though memorandum decisions are
1. Opinion of the court (findings of fact and permitted by the court under certain
conclusions of law) – Ratio Decidendi; circumstances, it cannot merely refer to the
2. Disposition of the case (dispositive conclusions of law of the lower court, the
portion) - Fallo; appellate court must likewise make full findings of
3. Signature of the judge. fact and conclusions of law on its own (Ong Chia
Kwan v. CA, G.R. No. 113006, 2000).
When there is a conflict between the dispositive
portion and the body of the decision, the FALLO The constitutional requirement of a valid
controls. judgment will not be violated when for as long as
a memorandum decision states the nature of the
A decision that does not clearly and distinctly case, summarizes the facts with references to the
state the facts and the law on which it is based record and contains a statement of the applicable
leaves the parties in the dark and is especially laws and jurisprudence and the tribunal's
prejudicial to the losing party who is unable to assessment and conclusions on the case. (Oil
point the assigned error in seeking a review by a and Natural Gas Commission v. CA, G.R. No.
higher tribunal. (Shimizu Philippines Contractors, 114323, 1998)
Inc. v. Magsalin, G.R. No. 170026, 2012)
1. JUDGMENT ON THE
A Judgment of CONVICTION Must Contain: PLEADINGS (RULE 34)
1. The legal qualifications of the offense
constituted by the acts committed by the A judgment rendered by the court upon motion of
accused and the aggravating and mitigating the claimant OR plaintiff on the ground that an
circumstances which attended its ANSWER fails to tender an issue, OR otherwise
commission. admits the material allegations of the adverse
2. Participation of the accused either as party’s pleading.
principal, accomplice or accessory.

ATENEO CENTRAL
“Fails to tender an issue” and “otherwise shall be subject to the provisions of Rule 15 of
admits the material allegations of the adverse these Rules.
party’s pleading?”
Judgment on the pleadings is proper when an Any action of the court on a motion for judgment
answer fails to tender an issue, or otherwise on the pleadings shall not be subject of an appeal
admits the material allegations of the adverse or petition for certiorari, prohibition or mandamus
party’s pleading. An answer fails to tender an
issue if it does not comply with the requirements Doctrines: Judgment on the Pleadings
of a specific denial as set out in Sections 8 Judgment on the pleadings is proper when an
(actionable document denial under oath) and 10 answer fails to tender an issue, or otherwise
(specific denial). Failure to deny such would admits the material allegations of the adverse
result in the admission of the material allegations party’s pleadings. The defense of the defendant
of the adverse party’s pleadings. (Asian was that plaintiff was in bad faith. The courts ruled
Construction v. Sanneadle, G.R. No. 181676, that the answer in fact tendered an issue hence
June 11, 2014) judgment on the pleadings would be inapplicable.
Summary judgment also cannot apply because
Sham denials, consisting of an avowed lack of the requirement for such is that there must not be
knowledge of facts which could not but be clearly a genuine issue. The plaintiff, in this case, prayed
known by them, in effect tender no issue, or for an accounting which required a full blown trial
otherwise admit the allegations of the complaint (requires presentation of evidence on partial
material to a valid decision. (Manufacturer’s Bank payment) hence, there was a genuine issue in the
v. Diversified, G.R. No. 33695, 1989) case at bar. (Sps. Ong v. Roban Lending, G.R.
No. 172592, 2008)
a. GROUNDS
1. Answer fails to tender an issue because of: A Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings is one
a) General denial of the material allegations that is considered ex parte because upon
of the complaint; particular facts thus presented, the plaintiff is
b) Insufficient denial of the material entitled to judgment, or motu proprio under
allegations of the complaint; or Section 2 [g] of Rule 18 of the Rules of Court.
2. Answer admits the material allegations of (Dino v. Valencia, G.R. No. L-43886, 1989)
the adverse party’s pleading.
An answer fails to tender an issue if it does not
By moving for judgment on the pleading, plaintiff comply with the requirements of a specific denial
WAIVES his claim for unliquidated damages. as set out in Sections 8 and 10, Rule 8 of the
Claim for such damages must be alleged and Rules, resulting in the admission of the material
proved. allegations of the adverse party’s pleadings.
Note: The concept of a judgment on the No Judgment on the Pleadings in Actions for
pleadings will not apply when no answer is filed. 1. Declaration of Nullity of Marriage;
(Riano, Civil Procedure: The Bar Lecture Series, 2. Annulment of marriage; and
Vol. 1, Bantam Ed, 2014) 3. Legal Separation
b. ACTION ON MOTION FOR JUDGMENT In actions for declaration of nullity or annulment

ON THE PLEADINGS of marriage or for legal separation, the material
facts alleged in the complaint shall always be
Judgment on the pleading may be motu proprio proved (see Articles 48 and 60 of the Family
or upon motion Code). The purpose is to prevent collusion
between the parties.
Section 2. Action on motion for judgment on the
pleadings. — The court may motu proprio or on Difference between motion to dismiss and
motion render judgment on the pleadings if it is motion for judgment on the pleadings
apparent that the answer fails to tender an issue, MOTION TO MOTION FOR
or otherwise admits the material allegations of the DISMISS JUDGMENT ON
adverse party’s pleadings. Otherwise, the motion PLEADINGS

ATENEO CENTRAL
Filed by defendant to a Filed by the claimant The crucial question in a motion for summary
complaint, judgment is whether the issues raised in the
counterclaim, cross- pleadings are genuine or fictitious, as shown by
claim, or third-party affidavits, depositions or admissions
complaint. accompanying the motion. (Evangelista vs.
Mercator Finance Corp., G.R. No. 148864, 2003)
2. SUMMARY JUDGMENT The trial court cannot motu proprio decide that
(RULE 35) summary judgment on an action is in order. The
defending party or claimant, as the case may be,
Nature of summary judgment must invoke the rule on summary judgment by
1. A summary judgment, also called accelerated filing a motion. The adverse party must be notified
judgment, is proper where, upon a motion of the motion for summary judgment and
filed after the issues had been joined and on furnished with supporting, affidavits, depositions
the basis of the pleadings and papers filed, or admissions before hearing is conducted.
the court finds that there is no genuine issue (Pineda v. Heirs of Eliseo Guevara, G.R. No.
as to any material fact except as to the 143188, February 14, 2007)
amount of damages.
2. What triggers a summary judgment is the The party who moves for summary judgment has
absence of a genuine factual issue. It is not the burden of demonstrating clearly the absence
proper where there are factual issues to be of any genuine issue of fact, or that the issue
resolved by the presentation of evidence. posed in the complaint is patently unsubstantial
Even if there is a complicated question of law so as not to constitute a genuine issue for trial.
if there is no issue as to the facts, a summary When the facts as pleaded by the parties are
judgment is not barred. (Velasco v. CA, G.R. disputed or contested, proceedings for summary
No. 121517, 2000) judgment cannot take the place of trial. (Tan v. De
la Vega, G.R. No. 168809, 2006)
One granted by the court, UPON MOTION, for
the prompt disposition of civil actions wherein it Under Section 3, Rule 35 of the Rules of Court, a
clearly appears that there exists NO GENUINE summary judgment MAY NOT be rendered on the
ISSUE or controversy as to any material fact, amount of damages, although such judgment
EXCEPT as to the amount of damages. may be rendered on the issue relating to the
existence of the right to damages. In this case,
It is granted AFTER the issues have been joined the Court distinguished between the
and on the basis of pleadings, depositions, determination of the amount of damages and the
admissions and affidavits, there exists NO issue of the right to damages itself in case of a
genuine factual issue. It is available to BOTH summary judgment. (Ybiernas v. Tanco-
plaintiff and defendant. Gabaldon, G.R. No. 178925, 2011)
A genuine issue is an issue of fact which requires An action for annulment of marriage cannot be
the presentation of evidence as distinguished decided by summary judgment proceeding
from a sham, fictitious, contrived or false claim. (Roque v. Encarnacion, G.R. No. L-6505, 1954)
When the facts as pleaded appear uncontested
or undisputed, then there is no real or genuine Summary judgments are made specifically
issue or question as to the facts, and summary applicable to a special civil action for Declaratory
judgment is called for. Relief (Rule 63).
The party who moves for summary judgment has Service of Motion for Summary Judgment;
the burden of demonstrating clearly the absence Proceedings
of any genuine issue of fact, or that the issue The motion shall be served at least ten (10) days
posed in the complaint is patently unsubstantial before the time specified for the hearing.
so as not to constitute a genuine issue for trial.
(Philippine Bank of Communications v. Go, G.R. The adverse party may serve opposing affidavits,
No. 175514, 2011) depositions, or admissions at least three (3) days
before the hearing. (Rule 35, Sec. 3)

ATENEO CENTRAL
After the hearing, the judgment sought shall be Remedy for Court’s action on motion for
rendered forthwith if the pleadings, supporting summary judgment
affidavits, depositions, and admissions on file, Any action of the court on a motion for summary
show that, EXCEPT as to the amount of judgment shall not be subject of an appeal or
damages, there is no genuine issue as to any petition for certiorari, prohibition or mandamus.
material fact and that the moving party is entitled
to a judgment as a matter of law. (Rule 35, Sec. Proper remedy is to appeal the decision itself.
3)
Affidavits And Attachments
For The Claimant Requisites of affidavits:
A party seeking to recover upon a claim, 1. Based on personal knowledge;
counterclaim, or cross-claim or to obtain a 2. Set forth facts as would be admissible in
declaratory relief may, at any time AFTER the evidence;
pleading in answer thereto has been served, 3. Show affirmatively that the affiant is
move with supporting affidavits, depositions or competent to testify to the matters stated
admissions for summary judgment in his favor therein.
upon all or any part thereof. (Section 2, Rule 35)
Bases of Summary Judgment
For The Defendant 1. Affidavits made on personal knowledge,
A party against whom a claim, counterclaim, or set forth such facts as would be admissible
cross-claim is asserted or a declaratory relief is as evidence and show affirmatively that the
sought may, at ANY TIME, move with supporting affiant is competent to testify on matters
affidavits, depositions or admissions for summary stated therein (Rule 35, Sec. 5)
judgment in his favor upon all or any part thereof. 2. Depositions of the adverse party or a
(Section 3, Rule 35). third party under Rule 23;
3. Admissions of the adverse party under
When The Case Not Fully Adjudicated On Rule 26; or
Motion 4. Answers to interrogatories under Rule
This authorizes rendition of PARTIAL summary 25; all intended to show that:
judgment but such is interlocutory in nature and a) There is no genuine issue as to any
is NOT a final and appealable judgment. material fact, EXCEPT damages which
must always be proved; and
The court shall make an order specifying the facts b) The movant is entitled to a judgment as a
that appear without substantial controversy. The matter of law.
facts so specified shall be deemed established.
Even if the answer does tender an issue, and
The trial shall be conducted on the controverted therefore a judgment on the pleadings is not
facts only and judgment shall be rendered on the proper, a summary judgment may still be
facts that appear without substantial controversy. rendered if the issues tendered are not genuine,
are sham, fictitious, contrived, set up in bad faith,
The test is whether or not the pleadings, affidavits and patently unsubstantial. (Vergara v. Suelto,
and exhibits in support of the motion are sufficient G.R. No. L-74766, 1987)
to overcome the opposing papers and to justify
the finding that, as a matter of law, there is no Affidavits in Bad Faith
defense to the action or claim clearly meritorious. It should it appear that the affidavits are:
(Estrada v. Consolacion, G.R. No. L-40948, 1. Presented in bad faith; or
1976) 2. Solely for the purpose of delay.
A partial summary judgment is an interlocutory The court shall order the offending party or
order, because it does not completely and finally counsel to pay to the other party the amount of
dispose of a litigation. (GSIS v. PH Village Hotel, reasonable expenses, which the filing of the
G.R. No. 150922, 2004) affidavits caused him to incur, including attorney’s
fees. It may, after hearing, further adjudge the
offending party or counsel guilty of contempt.
(Section 6, Rule 35)

ATENEO CENTRAL
a. EFFECT OF ORDER DENYING A If filed by the

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT PLAINTIFF, it must
be filed at any time
An action by the court on a motion for summary after an answer is
judgment shall not be subject of an appeal or served;
petition for certiorari, prohibition or mandamus. There is already an
answer filed
If filed by
Judgment On The Pleadings Versus DEFENDANT, it may
Summary Judgments be filed at any time
JUDGMENT ON SUMMARY even before there is
THE PLEADINGS JUDGMENT an answer
Based on the
pleadings, 3. RENDITION AND ENTRY OF
Solely based on the
depositions, JUDGMENTS AND FINAL
pleadings
admissions, and ORDERS (RULE 36)
affidavits
General Rule: It is not the writing or signing of the judgment
Available only to a which constitutes rendition of the judgment.
claiming party like a (Castro v. Malazo, A.M. No. 1237-CAR, 1980)
plaintiff or a Available to BOTH
counterclaimant plaintiff and A case is deemed SUBMITTED FOR
defendant RESOLUTION upon the filing of the last pleading,
Exception: brief or memorandum required by the Rules of
Defendant presents a Court or by the court.
counterclaim
Even if the judgment has already been put in
There is an absence writing and signed, it is STILL subject to
of a factual issue in amendment if it has not yet been filed with the
There is an issue only Clerk of Court.
the case because the
as to the amount of
answer tenders no
damages but not as to A judgment is considered RENDERED upon the
issue at all. or there is
any material fact FILING of the signed decision with the Clerk of
an admission of
material allegations Court. This includes an amended decision
because an amended decision is a distinct and
Notice required separate judgment and must follow the
before hearing: 10 established procedural rule.
days.
For a Judgment to be Valid
Notice required The adverse party in 1. In writing, personally and directly
before hearing: 3 turn may serve prepared by the Judge
days opposing affidavits, 2. State clearly and distinctly the facts and
depositions or law on which it is based
admissions at least 3. Signed by judge and filed with clerk of
three days before the court (Rule 36, Sec. 1)
hearing.
Judgment Upon A Compromise
May be interlocutory
On the merits Judgment rendered by the court on the basis of a
or on the merits
compromise agreement entered into between the
parties to the action. It has the force of law and is
conclusive between parties. It is NOT appealable.
Judgment upon a compromise is immediately

executory upon the signing of the compromise
agreement in the absence of a motion to set aside

ATENEO CENTRAL
on the ground of fraud, mistake, etc. Hence, it has subsequent action based on the same claim
the effect of res judicata. (World Machine or cause of action.
Enterprises v. IAC, G.R. No. 72019, 1990) 2. Conclusiveness of Judgment – the
judgment or final order precludes the re-
Judgment On The Merits litigation of particular issues or facts on a
Judgment rendered after consideration of the different demand or cause of action.
evidence submitted by the parties during the trial
of the case. Judgment For or Against One or More of Several
Parties Judgment MAY be given for or against
Judgment Nunc Pro Tunc one or more of several plaintiffs, and for or
A judgment intended to enter into the records acts against one or more of several defendants.
which had already been done, but which do not
appear in the records. When justice so demands, the court may require
the parties on each side to file adversary
Judgment Sin Perjuicio pleadings as between themselves and determine
A dismissal of a case without prejudice to it being their ultimate rights and obligations. (Rule 36,
refilled. It is one which contains only the Sec. 3)
dispositive portion of the decision and reserves
the making of findings of fact and conclusions of Several Judgments
law in a subsequent judgment. Judgment rendered by a court, when proper,
against one or more defendants and NOT against
Entry Of Judgment And Final Order all of them leaving the action to proceed against
If no appeal or motion for new trial or the others. (Rule 36, Sec. 4)
reconsideration is filed within the reglementary
period, the judgment or final order shall be Several judgments is proper where:
entered by the Clerk in the Book of Entries of 1. The liability of each party is clearly
Judgment. Date of the finality of the judgment or separable and distinct from his co-parties
final order shall be deemed to be the DATE OF such that the claims against each of them
ITS ENTRY. (Rule 36, Sec. 2) could have been the subject of separate
suits, and
Judgment is deemed FINAL when it disposes of 2. The judgment for or against one of them
a case in a manner that leaves NOTHING more will not necessarily affect the other.
to be done by the court in respect thereto. (Rule (Fernandez v. Sta. Maria, G.R. No. 160730,
36, Sec. 1) 2004)
General Rule: After judgment has become final It is NOT proper in actions against solidary
and executory, the court cannot amend the same. debtors. (Fernandez v. Sta. Maria, G.R. No.
160730, 2004)
Exceptions:
Amendment May Be Possible in the Following Separate Judgment
Instances: Judgment rendered to dispose of one of the
1. To make corrections of clerical errors but several claims for relief presented in an action.
not substantial amendments; (Rule 36, Sec. 5)
2. To clarify an ambiguity which is borne out
by and justifiable in the context of the Separate Judgments are Made on One or
decision; and Several Claims
3. In judgments for support, which can 1. At any stage;
always be amended from time to time. 2. Upon a determination of the issues
material to a particular claim and all
The judgment or final order has the effect of RES counterclaims arising out of the transaction,
JUDICATA between the two parties. or occurrence which is the subject matter of
the claim;
Res Judicata Has Two Aspects 3. Such judgment terminates the claim,
1. Bar by Prior Judgment – the judgment leaving the action to proceed as to the
or final order is a bar to the prosecution of a remaining claims.

ATENEO CENTRAL
b. NDE - testimonial or
Remedies Against Judgments Or Final Orders documentary
Affidavit of
(Riano 2015 p. 630) evidence or to
merit setting
Before Finality provisions of law;
forth the
1. Motion for Reconsideration 5. Written notice to
particular
2. Motion for New trial adverse party
facts
3. Appeal (Rule 37, Sec. 2)
claimed to
constitute a
After Finality
meritorious
1. Relief from Judgment or Final Order
cause of
2. Annulment of Judgment
action
3. Petition for Certiorari
4. Written notice to
4. Collateral Attack of a Judgment
adverse party
(Rule 37, Sec.
Judgment against Entity without Juridical
2)
Personality
When judgment is rendered against two or more
Exception:
persons sued as an entity without juridical
The allegations
personality, the judgment shall set out their
contained in an
individual or proper names, if known. (Rule 36,
affidavit of merit
Sec. 6)
required to be
attached to a motion
T. POST JUDGMENT REMEDIES to lift an order of
default or for a new
1. MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL trial need not be
OR RECONSIDERATION embodied in a
separate document
Requirements but may be
MOTION FOR NEW MOTION FOR incorporated in the
TRIAL RECONSIDERATION petition itself. When a
motion to lift an order
1. Must be in 1. Must be in writing; of default contains the
writing; 2. Must point out reasons for the failure
2. Affidavit of the specifically the to answer as well as
existence of findings or the facts constituting
fraud, accident, conclusions of the the prospective
mistake, or judgment or final defense of the
excusable order; defendant and it is
negligence 3. Grounds: sworn to by said
(FAME) or newly a. Excessive defendant, neither a
discovered damages formal verification nor
evidence (NDE); b. Insufficient a separate affidavit of
3. Grounds: evidence merit is necessary.
a. FAME - (factual) (Capuz vs. CA, G.R.
Affidavit of c. Contrary to No. 112795, 1994)
merit setting law (legal)
forth the (Rule 37, Sec.
Affidavit of Merit (for MNT)
particular 1)
One which recites the nature and character of
facts 4. Specific
FAME on which the motion for new trial is based.
claimed to assignment of trial
It must state the movant’s good and substantial
constitute a court findings that
cause of action or defense and the evidence
meritorious are challenged
he/she intends to present if the motion is granted
cause of with express
which evidence should be as such as to warrant
action reference to

ATENEO CENTRAL
reasonable belief that the result of the case would A motion for reconsideration is deemed pro forma
probably be otherwise. if the same does not specify the findings or
conclusions in the judgment, which are not
Effect of Motion for New Trial or supported by the evidence or contrary to law,
Reconsideration and Notice Thereof making express reference to the pertinent
A motion suspends or tolls the running of the evidence or legal provisions. It is settled that
reglementary period to appeal EXCEPT when it although a motion for reconsideration may merely
is pro-forma. reiterate issues already passed upon by the court
that by itself does not make it pro forma and is
Pro-Forma Motion (Rule 37, Section 2) immaterial because what is essential is
A motion that does NOT comply with Rule 15 compliance with the requisites of the Rules.
(mandatory requirement of notice and hearing)
and Rule 37 (requirement that the motion must Grounds For Motion For New Trial
point out specifically the findings or conclusions 1. Extrinsic Fraud, Accident, Mistake, or
of the judgment as are contrary to law, fails to Excusable Negligence (FAME), which ordinary
make express reference to the testimonial or prudence could not have guarded against and
documentary evidence or to the provisions of law by reason of which such aggrieved party has
alleged to be contrary to such findings or probably been impaired in his rights
conclusions, and is merely intended to delay the 2. Newly discovered evidence (NDE),
proceedings or if there is no affidavit of merit). which could not, with reasonable diligence,
have been discovered and produced at the trial,
The clerk of court has no right to receive a pro and which, if presented, would probably alter
forma motion and which the court has no the result
authority to act upon.
Grounds For Motion For Reconsideration
A motion for reconsideration is NOT pro forma 1. The damages awarded are excessive;
just because it reiterated the arguments earlier 2. The evidence is insufficient to justify the
passed upon and rejected by the appellate court. decision or final order (factual question); or
A movant may raise the same arguments to 3. The decision or final order is contrary to
convince the court that its ruling was erroneous. law (legal question)
(Security Bank v. Cuenca, GR No. 151914, 2002)
Extrinsic Fraud
Moreover, the rule (that a motion is pro forma if it Extrinsic or collateral fraud, as distinguished from
only repeats the arguments in the previous intrinsic fraud, connotes any fraudulent scheme
pleadings) will NOT apply if said arguments were executed by a prevailing litigant outside the trial
not squarely passed upon and answered in the of a case against the defeated party, or his
decision sought to be reconsidered. (Ong Yong v. agents, attorneys or witnesses, whereby said
Tiu, GR No. 144476, 2003) Where the defeated party is prevented from presenting fully
circumstances of a case do not show an intent on and fairly his side of the case. (Libudan vs. Gil,
the part of the pleader to merely delay the G.R. No. L-21163, 1972)
proceedings, and his motion reveals a bona fide
effort to present additional matters or to reiterate (Example: preventing a witness from testifying).
his arguments in a different light, the courts
should be slow to declare the same outright as Note: Compare with intrinsic fraud – Intrinsic
pro forma. The doctrine relating to pro forma fraud takes the form of acts of a party in a
motions has a direct bearing upon the movant’s litigation during the trial which did not affect the
valuable right to appeal. It would be in the interest presentation of the case, but did prevent a fair
of justice to accord the appellate court the and just determination of the case. (Libudan vs.
opportunity to review the decision of the trial court Gil, G.R. No. L-21163, 1972)
on the merits than to abort the appeal by
declaring the motion pro forma, such that the (Example: use of forged instruments or perjured
period to appeal was not interrupted and had testimony).
consequently lapsed (Philippine National Bank v.
Paneda, 515 SCRA 639, 649. For the next three grounds: The ACCIDENT,
MISTAKE, and EXCUSABLE NEGLIGENCE

ATENEO CENTRAL
must be something which ordinary prudence Exception: Such negligence of counsel may be
could not have guarded against and by reason of a ground for new trial if it was so great that the
which the party applying has probably been party was prejudiced and prevented from fairly
impaired in this rights. (De Leon, Appellate presenting his/her case, viz:
Remedies, 2013, p.21) 1. Where the gross negligence of counsel
deprives the client of due process of law;
Accident 2. When the application of the rule will result
An event that takes place without one’s in the outright deprivation of the client’s
reasonable foresight or expectation. (McEntee v. liberty or property; and
Manotok, G.R. No. L-14968, 1961) 3. Where the interest of justice so requires.
(Redena vs. CA, G.R. No. 146611, 2007)
Mistake 4. Where gross negligence of counsel will
The general rule is that only mistakes of “fact” (as deprive or has deprived the party of his
opposed to mistake of “law”) may be grounds for substantial rights.
a new trial.
For a claim of counsel’s negligence to prosper,
Thus, the petitioner’s claim of having committed nothing short of clear abandonment of the client’s
an “honest mistake” in not filing an answer to cause must be shown. (Multi-trans Agency v.
respondent’s petition for prohibition and Oriental Assurance G.R. No. 180817, 2009)
declaratory relief because of its belief that the
RTC did not acquire jurisdiction over it was held Requisites for Newly Discovered Evidence
to be a “mistake of law” which cannot be a 1. The evidence was discovered after trial;
ground for new trial. (De Leon, Appellate 2. Such evidence could not have been
Remedies, 2013, p.21, citing Viking Industrial discovered and produced at trial despite the
Corporation v. CA GR No. 143794, 2004) exercise of reasonable diligence; and
3. It is material, not merely cumulative,
However, the Supreme Court has on occasion corroborative or impeaching; and
recognized a mistake in “law”, made in good faith, 4. It is of such weight that, if admitted, will
and where such mistake misled a party, as a probably change the judgment. (Tumang v.
ground for new trial. Regalado gives as CA, G.R. Nos. 82346-47, 1989)
examples of mistake of “law” a mistake as to the
scope and extent of the coverage of an ordinance Otherwise, it is barred and called Forgotten
(citing City of Iloilo vs. Pinzon, L-7552, May 31, Evidence.
1955) and a mistake of a defendant who failed to
file an answer to the complaint (and consequently Newly discovered evidence need not be newly
declared in default) because the defendant relied created evidence. It may and does commonly
on a compromise agreement with the plaintiff. refer to evidence already in existence prior or
The defendant failed to properly appreciate the during trial. (Tumang v. CA, G.R. Nos. 82346-47,
effect of the compromise agreement on the 1989)
pending case. (Salazar vs. Salazar G.R. No. L-
2995, 1907) The question of whether evidence is newly
discovered has two aspects: a temporal one
Excusable Negligence (when was the evidence discovered), and a
Depends upon the circumstances of the case. predictive one (when should or could it have been
discovered). (Dinglasan v. CA, G.R. No. 145420,
Note: The test of excusable negligence is 2006)
whether a party has acted with ordinary prudence
while transacting important business. (Philippine If the documents belatedly submitted are public
Phosphate Fertilizer Corporation v. records, they cannot be considered as “newly
Commissioner of Internal Revenue, G.R. No. discovered” since these could be secured during
141973, 2005) trial. (Heirs of Emilio Santioque v. Heirs of Emilio
Calma, GR No. 160832, 2006)
General Rule: Negligence of counsel is binding
upon the client. Rule 53 (CA) has its own rules for MNT:
1. File anytime as long as the case is active;

ATENEO CENTRAL
2. But the only ground is newly discovered When to File

evidence MOTION FOR NEW MOTION FOR
TRIAL RECONSIDERATION
General Rule: No MNT in the SC under Rule 56
WHEN TO FILE
Exception: SC may entertain if it is in the interest
of justice Within the period for Within the period for
taking an appeal. This taking an appeal. This
Motion for Reconsideration Must Specifically is within 15 days (or 30 is within 15 days (or 30
Point out the Findings or Conclusions of days if a record on days if a record on
Judgment appeal is required) appeal is required)
A motion for reconsideration must point out after receipt of notice after receipt of notice
specifically the findings or conclusions of the to the appellant of the to the appellant of the
judgment or final order which are not supported judgment or final order judgment or final order
by evidence or which are contrary to law, making appealed from. appealed from.
specific reference to the testimonial or
documentary evidence presented or to the WHERE TO FILE
provisions of law alleged to be violated. (Cansino
With the trial court With the trial court
v. CA, G.R. No. 125799, 2003)
which rendered the which rendered the
questioned judgment questioned judgment
A winning litigant may also move for
or final order sought to
reconsideration of a part or parts of a decision or
be reconsidered
final order. (Balanoba v. Madriaga, GR No.
160109, 2005)
Denial Of The Motion; Effect
As a rule, a motion for reconsideration MOTION FOR NEW MOTION FOR
seasonably filed in the Court of Appeals will NOT TRIAL RECONSIDERATION
necessarily preclude a motion for new trial as
long as it was also filed on time. Further, a denial If denied, not If denied, not
of a motion for reconsideration entitles the party appealable; will have appealable; remedy is
who filed said motion another 15 days to appeal to wait for the to appeal from the
by certiorari – the same period within which a judgment and appeal judgment or final
motion for new trial may be filed. (Tiongco v. therefrom. Remedy is order. (Rule 37, Sec.
Deguma, GR No. 133619, 1990) to appeal from the 9)
judgment or final order.
Note: MOTIONS FOR EXTENSION OF TIME to (Rule 37, Sec. 9) This means that if the
file a motion for reconsideration may be filed only motion is denied, the
in connection with cases pending before the If the motion is denied, movant has a “fresh
Supreme Court, which may in its sound the movant has a period” of 15 days
discretion either grant or deny the extension “fresh period” of 15 from receipt or notice
requested. (Habaluyas Enterprises v Japson, GR days from receipt or of the order denying or
No. 70895, 1986) notice of the order dismissing the motion
denying or dismissing for reconsideration
The Habaluyas ruling applies even if the motion the motion for new trial from which to file a
is filed before the expiration of the reglementary from which to file a notice of appeal.
period. (Fernandez v. CA, GR No. 131094, 2005) notice of appeal. (Neypes v. Court of
Appeals, G.R. No.
No motion for extension may be filed before any 141524, 2005).
lower courts, as stated in Sec. 2(2), Rule 40 and
Sec. 2, Rule 41.
Grant Of The Motion; Effect
MOTION FOR NEW MOTION FOR
TRIAL RECONSIDERATION

ATENEO CENTRAL
GRANT OF MOTION itself because an order denying a motion for

(Rule 37, Sec. 6) reconsideration is not appealable.
If a new trial is granted, If the court finds that 2. APPEALS

the trial court will set excessive damages
aside the judgment or have been awarded or A. NATURE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL;
final order. The case that the judgment or JUDGMENTS AND FINAL ORDERS
stands for trial de novo final order is contrary SUBJECT TO APPEAL
and will be tried anew. to the evidence or law,
it may amend such The right to appeal is not a natural or inherent
judgment or final order right; it is not a part of due process but a mere
accordingly. statutory privilege that has to be exercised only in
the manner and in accordance with law.
PARTIAL GRANT OF MOTION
(Rule 37, Sec. 7) An appeal may be taken only from judgments or
final orders that completely dispose of the case.
Partial new trial is Partial reconsideration
allowed where less is allowed. If the court An interlocutory order is NOT appealable until
than all of the issues finds that a motion after a judgment on the merits has been
are ordered retried. affects the issues of rendered. (Rule 41, Sec. 1)
The court may either the case as to only a
enter a judgment or part, or less than all of Appeals in Civil Cases
final order as to the the matters in An appeal as a matter of right, which refers to
rest or stay the controversy, or only the right to seek the review by a superior court of
enforcement of such one, or less than all, of the judgment rendered by the trial court, exists
judgment or final order the parties to it, the after the trial in the first instance. In contrast, a
until after a new trial. order may grant a discretionary appeal, which is taken from the
reconsideration as to decision or final order rendered by a court in the
such issues if exercise of its primary appellate jurisdiction, may
severable without be disallowed by the superior court in its
interfering with the discretion. (Heirs of Arturo Garcia v Municipality
final judgment or order of Iba, G R No. 162217, 2015)
upon the rest.
B. JUDGMENTS AND FINAL ORDERS
A. REMEDY AGAINST DENIAL, FRESH- SUBJECT TO APPEAL
PERIOD RULE
An appeal may be taken from a judgment or final
A party shall have a FRESH PERIOD of 15 days order that completely disposes of the case, or
to file a notice of appeal to the RTC from receipt of a particular matter therein when declared by
of the order denying a motion for new trial or the Rules to be appealable. (Rule 41, Sec. 1)
motion for reconsideration.
C. MATTERS NOT APPEALABLE;
This rule shall apply to Rules 40, 41, 42, 43 and AVAILABLE REMEDIES
45 (Neypes vs. CA, G.R. No. 141524, 2005) and
in criminal cases under Section 6 of Rule 122 of NO Appeal May be Taken From:
the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure. (Yu vs. 1. An order denying a petition for relief or
Tatad, G.R. No. 170979, 2011) any similar motion seeking relief from
judgment;
Note: The period is 30 days if record on appeal is 2. An interlocutory order;
required.
Note: An interlocutory order does NOT dispose of
The fresh period does NOT refer to the period the entire case; it does not put an end to a case
within which to appeal from the order denying the before the court.
motion for reconsideration BUT to the period
within which to appeal from the judgment

ATENEO CENTRAL
1. An order disallowing or dismissing an Note: A supervening event, to be sufficient to

appeal; stay or stop the execution, must alter or modify
2. An order denying a motion to set aside a the situation of the parties under the decision as
judgment by consent, confession or to render the execution inequitable, impossible,
compromise on the ground of fraud, or unfair. The supervening event cannot rest on
mistake or duress, or any other ground unproved or uncertain facts. (Abrigo vs. Flores,
vitiating consent; GR No. 160786, 2013)
3. An order of execution;
4. A judgment or final order for or against Doctrine of immutability of a final judgment may
one or more of several parties or in be relaxed only to serve the ends of substantial
separate claims, counterclaims, cross- justice in order to consider certain circumstances
claims, and third party complaints, while like:
the main case is ending, unless the court 1. Matters of life, liberty, honor, or property
allows an appeal therefrom; and 2. Existence of special or compelling
5. An order dismissing an action without circumstances;
prejudice. (Rule 41, Sec. 1) 3. Merits of the case;
4. Cause not being entirely attributable to
Remedy Against Judgments And Orders the fault or negligence of the party
Which Are Not Appealable favored by the suspension of the doctrine
In those instances where the judgment or final 5. Lack of any showing that the review
order is not appealable, the aggrieved party may sought is merely frivolous and dilatory;
file the appropriate special civil action under Rule 6. Other party will not be unjustly prejudiced
65. (Rule 41, Sec. 1) by the suspension. (Abrigo vs. Flores,
GR No. 160786, 2013)
D. DOCTRINE OF FINALITY/IMMUTABILITY
OF JUDGMENT E. MODES OF APPEAL
A judgment that has acquired finality becomes Issues to be Raised on Appeal

immutable and inalterable and may no longer be
modified in any respect even if the modification is Note: The issues that may be raised on appeal
meant to correct erroneous conclusions of fact or depend on the kind of appeal filed.
law and whether it will be made by the court that
rendered it or by the highest court of the land. 1. QUESTIONS OF FACT – exist when the
doubt or difference arises as to the truth
The doctrine of immutability and inalterability of a or the falsehood of alleged facts; or when
final judgment has a two-fold purpose: the query necessarily invites calibration
1. To avoid delay in the administration of of the whole evidence considering mainly
justice and thus, procedurally, to make the credibility of witnesses, existence and
orderly the discharge of judicial business; relevancy of specific surrounding
2. To put an end to judicial controversies, at circumstances, their relation to each
the risk of occasional errors, which is other and to the whole and the
precisely why courts exist probabilities of the situation (Sesbreno
vs. CA, G.R. No. 84096, 1995); (Cirtek
Exceptions: Employees Labor Union vs. Cirtek
1. Correction of clerical errors; Electronics, Inc., G.R. No. 190515, 2011)
2. Nunc pro tunc entries that cause no 2. QUESTIONS OF LAW – exist when the
prejudice to any party; doubt or difference arises as to what the
3. Void judgments; and law is on certain state of facts (Sesbreno
4. Whenever circumstances transpire after vs. CA, G.R. No. 84096, 1995); (Cirtek
the finality of the decision rendering its Employees Labor Union vs. Cirtek
execution unjust and inequitable. (Apo Electronics, Inc., G.R. No. 190515, 2011)
Fruits and Hijo Plantation vs. CA, GR No. It also pertains to the legal consequences
164195, 2009) or effects of the law on a given set of
facts.
3. MIXED Questions of Fact and Law

ATENEO CENTRAL
MODE OF APPEAL and ISSUES TO BE RAISED
QUESTIONS OF FACT, OR LAW, OR BOTH
1) Rule 40 - Appeal from MTC to RTC

• Notice of Appeal filed with the MTC and payment of fees
2) Rule 41 - Appeal from RTC (exercising original jurisdiction) to CA
• Notice of Appeal filed with the RTC and payment of fees
3) Rule 42 - Appeal from RTC (exercising appellate jurisdiction) to CA
• Petition for Review filed with RTC with payment of fees
4) Rule 43 - Appeal from QJA to CA
• Petition for Review filed with CA with payment of fees
GENERALLY, QUESTION OF LAW ONLY
Rule 45 - Appeal from CA, CTA en banc, Sandiganbayan, and RTC, on pure questions of law
Petition for Review on Certiorari filed with the SC with payment of fees
General Rule: Pure questions of law
Exceptions based on SC Circulars:

(a) Writ of Amparo
(b) Writ of Habeas Data
(c) Writ of Kalikasan
(d) Writ of Habeas Corpus
(e) Criminal cases by notice of appeal (Death, Life, Reclusion Perpetua)
Exceptions based on Jurisprudence:

(a) When the factual findings of the Court of Appeals and the trial court are contradictory; (2) when
the conclusion is a finding grounded entirely on speculation, surmises, or conjectures;
(b) When the conclusion is a finding grounded entirely on speculation, surmises, or conjectures;
(c) When the inference made by the Court of Appeals from its findings of fact is manifestly mistaken,
absurd, or impossible;
(d) When there is a grave abuse of discretion in the appreciation of facts;
(e) When the Appellate Court, in making its findings, went beyond the issues of the case and such
findings are contrary to the admissions of both appellant and appellee;
(f) When the judgment of the Court of Appeals is premised on a misapprehension of facts;
(g) When the Court of Appeals failed to notice certain relevant facts which, if properly considered,
would justify a different conclusion;
(h) When the findings of fact are themselves conflicting;
(i) When the findings of fact are conclusions without citation of the specific evidence on which they
are based; and
(j) When the findings of fact of the Court of Appeals are premised on the absence of evidence but
the evidence on record contradicts such findings. (Local Superior vs. Jody King, G.R. No. 141715,
2005)

ATENEO CENTRAL
Remedies and When to File Rule 43 - 15 days from notice of the

REMEDY PERIOD Appeals award, judgment, final order
Rule 37 - 15 days or 30 days (if record from QJA or resolution, or from the date
MR/MNT on appeal is required) from to CA of its last publication, if
notice of final judgment or publication is required by law
final order for its effectivity, or of the
- No extension allowed denial of petitioner's motion
- 2nd MR not allowed (Rule 37, for new trial or
Sec. 5) reconsideration duly filed in
accordance with the
Rule 38 - Within 60 days after governing law of the court or
Petition for knowledge but not more than
agency a quo
Relief from 6 months after entry of
Judgment judgment (date of finality) - Only one (1) motion for
reconsideration shall be
- Non-extendible;
allowed
uninterrupted
Rule 40
- Extendible for another 15
- 15 days or 30 days (if record days for the most compelling
Appeal on appeal is required) from
reasons with full payment of
from MTC notice of final judgment or
docket fees
to RTC final order
Rule 45 - 15 days from notice of the
- Full payment of appeal fees Appeal by judgment or final order or
within the period to appeal certiorari resolution appealed from, or
- Non-extendible, but from RTC, of the denial of the
MR/MNT will trigger fresh CA, CTA petitioner's motion for new
period from receipt of order En Banc, trial or reconsideration
of denial on pure - Extendible for 30 days on
Rule 41 - GR: 15 days or 30 days (if questions justifiable reasons upon
Appeal record on appeal is required) of law, to motion duly filed and served,
from RTC from notice of final judgment the SC with full payment of the
(original) to or final order docket and other lawful fees
CA - EXC: 48 hours for habeas and the deposit for costs
corpus cases before the expiration of the
- Full payment of appeal fees reglementary period
within the period to appeal Rule 47 - Extrinsic fraud: 4 years from
- Non-extendible, but Annulment discovery
MR/MNT will trigger fresh of - Lack of jurisdiction: before
period from receipt of order Judgments barred by laches or estoppel
of denial RULE 64 - 30 days from notice of the
Rule 42 - 15 days from notice of Review of judgment or final order or
Petition for decision Judgments resolution sought to be
Review - Extendible for 15 days upon and Final reviewed.
from RTC proper motion and payment Orders or - MR or MNT, if allowed under
(appellate) of the full amount of docket Resolution the procedural rules of the
to CA and other lawful fees and s of Commission concerned,
deposit for costs before the COMELEC shall interrupt the period
expiration of the and the herein fixed (no fresh
reglementary period COA period!)
- Extendible for another 15 - If the motion is denied, the
days for the most compelling aggrieved party may file the
reasons petition within the remaining
period, but which shall not
be less than 5 days in any
event, reckoned from notice
of denial.

ATENEO CENTRAL
Rule 65 - 60 days from notice of the of appeal is merely to notify the trial court that the
Certiorari, judgment, order or resolution appellant was availing of the right to appeal, and
Prohibition, - MR/MNT will trigger fresh not to seek the court’s permission that he be
Mandamus period from receipt of order allowed to pose an appeal. (Crisologo v. Daray
of denial A.M. No. RTJ-07-2036, 2006)
1. APPEAL FROM MUNICIPAL TRIAL How to Appeal

COURTS TO REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS 1. FILE a notice of appeal within 15/30 days
(RULE 40) from notice of judgment or final order with
the court that rendered it, and SERVE
Perfection of Appeal upon the adverse party.
RULES 40 AND 41 2. PAY the full amount of the appellate court
1. If by notice of appeal: docket and other legal fees to the clerk of
Appeal is deemed perfected as to the the court which rendered the judgment or
party appealing upon the filing of the final order. (BUT, failure to pay warrants
notice of appeal and full payment of only discretion to dismiss the appeal.)
appeal fees in due time. (Rule 40, Sec. 3)
2. If by record on appeal: Contents of Notice of Appeal

Appeal is deemed perfected as to the 1. Parties to the appeal.
party appealing upon the approval of 2. Date of judgment or final order or part
the record on appeal filed in due time. thereof appealed from.
(Rule 41, Sec. 9) 3. Court to which the appeal is being taken;
and
4. Material dates showing the timeliness of
NOTICE OF APPEAL RECORD ON the appeal (i.e., when the judgment or
APPEAL final order was received, when the
motion for reconsideration or new trial
An appeal by notice of The record on appeal was filed, and when denial of the motion
appeal is a mode that enables the trial court for reconsideration or motion for new trial
envisions the elevation to CONTINUE with was received) (Material Data Rule).
of the original records the rest of the case
to the appellate court because the original Record on Appeal
as to thereby records remain with 1. Certain kinds of special proceedings; or
OBSTRUCT the trial the trial court even as 2. Other cases of multiple or separate
court in its further it affords the appellate appeals,
proceedings regarding court the full
the other parts of the opportunity to review Shall:
case. and decide the 1. State the full names of the parties to the
appealed matter. proceedings in its caption
2. Include:
a. Judgment or final order from
(De Leon, Appellate Remedies, 2013, p. 53, citing
which the appeal is taken.
Lebin vs. Mirasol, G.R. No. 164255, 2011)
b. In chronological order, copies of
such pleadings, petitions,
motions, and all interlocutory
RULE 42
orders as are related to the
Appeal is perfected as to petitioner upon timely:
appealed judgment or final order
1. Filing of a petition for review; and
for the proper understanding of
2. Payment of the corresponding docket
the issue involved; and
and other lawful fees. (Rule 42, Sec. 8)
c. Such data as will show that the
appeal was perfected on time.
Notice of Appeal
3. Contain a subject index, if it exceeds 20
The notice of appeal does not require the
pages.
approval of the court. The function of the notice

ATENEO CENTRAL
Copies of the notice of appeal and the record on

appeal (when required) shall be served on the General Rule: The court will dismiss the appeal
adverse party. when there is no full payment of appellate docket
fees within the prescribed period to appeal.
Material Data Rule
The requirement for “material dates showing the Exceptions: which warrant a relaxation of the
timeliness of the appeal” is the same as the application of rules on payment of docket fees:
“material data rule” applicable to records on 1. Most persuasive and weighty reasons.
appeal with respect to the contents thereof. 2. To relieve a litigant from an injustice not
commensurate with his/her failure to
Appellate Court Docket and Other Lawful comply with the prescribed procedure.
Fees 3. Good faith of the defaulting party by
Within the period for taking an appeal, the immediately paying within a reasonable
appellant shall pay to the Clerk of the Court time from the time of default.
which rendered the judgment or final order 4. The existence of special or compelling
appealed from, the full amount of the appellate circumstances.
court docket and other lawful fees. (Rule 40, Sec. 5. The merits of the case.
5) 6. A cause not entirely attributable to the
fault or negligence of the party favored by
Proof of payment shall be transmitted to appellate the suspension of the rules.
court together with the original record or the 7. A lack of any showing that the review
record on appeal, as the case may be. sought is merely frivolous and dilatory.
8. The other party will not be unjustly
Note: It is the responsibility of the MTC clerk of prejudiced thereby.
court to attach appellant’s proof of payment to the 9. Fraud, accident, mistake or excusable
original record. Whatever omission or negligence negligence without appellant’s fault.
on the part of such clerk of court should not 10. Peculiar legal and equitable
adversely affect the appellant. (De Leon, circumstances attendant to each case.
Appellate Remedies, 2013, p. 42) 11. In the name of substantial justice and fair
play.
Payment of docket fees within the period to 12. Importance of the issues involved; and
appeal is MANDATORY for the perfection of an 13. Exercise of sound discretion by the judge
appeal. Without such payment, the appellate guided by all the attendant
court does not acquire jurisdiction over the circumstances. (Villena v. Rupisan, GR
subject matter of the action and the decision No. 167620, 2007)
sought to be appealed becomes final and
executory. (Alfonso vs. Andres, G.R. 139611, IMPORTANT when invoking liberality:
2002). The payment of the appellate docket fee is The party invoking liberality should adequately
not a mere technicality of law or procedure but an explain his failure to abide by the rules. (Navarro
essential requirement for the perfection of an vs. Metrobank, G.R. No. 138031, 2004) Anyone
appeal (Enriquez vs. Enriquez, G.R. No. 139303, seeking an exemption has the burden of proving
2005) and without which the decision or final that exceptionally meritorious instances exist
order appealed from would become final and which warrant departure from the Rule (RP vs.
executory as if no appeal was filed at all. (Sps. CA, G.R. No. 129846, 2000).
Manalili vs. Sps. De Leon, G.R. No. 140858,
2001) Duty of the Clerk of Court
Within fifteen (15) days from the perfection of the
Note: While, in appealed cases, the full payment appeal, the clerk of court or the branch clerk of
of the appellate docket fees within the prescribed court of the lower court shall transmit the original
period is mandatory, even jurisdictional, the record on appeal, together with the transcripts
failure to pay warrants only discretionary as and exhibits, which he/she shall certify as
opposed to automatic dismissal of the appeal. complete, to the proper RTC.
(De Leon, Appellate Remedies, 2013, p. 41) This
is true under Rule 40 (Badillo v. Tayag, G.R. No.
143976, 2003)

ATENEO CENTRAL
A copy of his/her letter of transmittal of the The requirement for the submission of appellant’s
records shall be furnished the parties. (Rule 40, memorandum is a mandatory and compulsory
Sec. 6) rule. Non-compliance therewith authorizes the
dismissal of the appeal.
Note: Still, it must be emphasized that the
reckoning point for the RTC to acquire jurisdiction Where the party has appealed by counsel in the
over the appeal is NOT the receipt of the letter of inferior court, the notice should be sent to his
transmittal and of the notice of appealed case, but attorney; BUT if the notice is sent to the party
the timely filing of the notice of appeal in himself/herself and he/she actually received the
accordance with Sec. 9, Rule 41. (De Leon, same, such notice is valid and binding.
Appellate Remedies, 2013, p. 44)
Notice Requirement
Residual Jurisdiction Of The Court The notice to be sent to the parties cannot be
Prior to the transmittal of the original record or downplayed as a mere formality, for it is such
record on appeal, the court may: (IAPOA) notice which sets in motion the appellate
1. Issue orders for the protection and procedure before the RTC and the running of the
preservation of the rights of the parties, which prescriptive period within which the appellant
do not involve any matter litigated by the must file his/her appeal memorandum.
appeal.
2. Approve compromises. Moreover, the notice must be categorical enough
3. Permit appeals of indigent litigants. in stating that the RTC has already received the
4. Order execution pending appeal in records of the case. If there is no such notice or
accordance with Sec. 2, Rule 39; and the notice is defective in that it does not contain a
5. Allow withdrawal of the appeal. statement that the RTC is already in possession
of the records of the case, the appellant stands to
Note: Reckoning point for the exercise of residual lose his/her right to seek a judicial review of
jurisdiction is the transmittal of records to the his/her case.
appellate court.
Thus, a notice to the effect that a case under
Procedure in the Regional Trial Court appeal “is entered in the Docket Book of the RTC”
1. Upon receipt of the complete record or was deemed insufficient to commence the appeal
the record on appeal, the clerk of court of the before the RTC and the running of the 15-day
RTC shall notify the parties of such fact. period within which the appellant must file his
2. Within fifteen (15) days from notice, it appeal memorandum. (De Leon, Appellate
shall be the duty of the appellant to submit a Remedies, 2013, p. 45)
MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL to briefly
discuss the errors imputed to the lower court, RTC can decide errors not assigned in the
and a copy shall be furnished by him/her to appeal memorandum
the adverse party. The RTC presently decides all appeals from the
3. Within fifteen (15) days from receipt of MTC based on the entire record of the
the appellant’s memorandum, the appellee proceedings at the court of origin and such
may file his/her MEMORANDUM OF memoranda or briefs as may be submitted by
APPEAL; and the parties or required by the RTC. As a
4. Upon filing of the memorandum of the consequence, the RTC, in exercising its appellate
appellee, OR the expiration of the period to jurisdiction, is not limited to errors assigned in the
do so, the case shall be considered appeal memorandum.
SUBMITTED FOR DECISION. (Rule 40,
Sec. 7) Thus, in Macaslang v. Zamora (G.R. No. 156375,
2011), it was held that the RTC, as an appellate
The RTC shall decide the case on the basis of the court, could rule on the failure of the complaint to
entire record of the proceedings in the court of state a cause of action and the lack of demand to
origin and such memoranda as are filed. vacate even if not assigned in the appeal. (De
Leon, Appellate Remedies, 2013, p. 49)
Failure of the APPELLANT to file a memorandum
shall be a ground for the dismissal of the appeal.

ATENEO CENTRAL
Appeal from Orders Dismissing Case Section 1 Rule 41 of the Rules of Court
Without Trial; Lack of Jurisdiction Provides That NO Appeal May be Taken From:
If an Appeal is Taken from an Order of the Lower 1. An order denying a petition for relief or any
Court (i.e., MTC) Dismissing the Case similar motion seeking relief from judgment.
2. An interlocutory order.
WITHOUT TRIAL on the Merits – The Regional 3. An order disallowing or dismissing an
Trial Court may: appeal.
1. If AFFIRMED - and the ground of the 4. An order denying a motion to set aside a
dismissal is lack of jurisdiction over the judgment by consent, confession or
subject matter, the Regional Trial Court, if it compromise on the ground of fraud, mistake
has jurisdiction, SHALL TRY the case on the or duress, or any other ground vitiating
merits AS IF the case was originally filed with consent.
it. 5. An order of execution.
2. If REVERSED - the case shall be 6. A judgment or final order for or against one
remanded to the MTC for further or more of several parties or in separate
proceedings. claims, counterclaims, cross-claims, and third
party complaints, while the main case is
If the Case WAS TRIED on the Merits by the ending, unless the court allows an appeal
Lower Court (i.e., MTC) Without Jurisdiction over therefrom; and
the Subject Matter: 7. An order dismissing an action without
prejudice.
The RTC on appeal shall NOT dismiss the case The remedy provided if a judgment is not
if it has original jurisdiction thereof, BUT shall appealable is the SCA of Certiorari, Rule 65.
decide the case WITHOUT prejudice to the
admission of amended pleadings and additional Rule 41 vs. Rule 42
evidence in the interest of justice. (Rule 40, Sec. ORDINARY APPEAL PETITION FOR
8) (Rule 41) REVIEW (Rule 42)
Applicability of Rule 41 Appeal is not a right Discretionary
The other provisions of Rule 41 shall apply to but a statutory
appeals provided in this Rule. Thus, the inferior privilege; thus, appeal
courts also exercise residual jurisdiction in the must be made strictly
same manner provided under paragraph 5, in accordance with the
Section 9 of Rule 41. (Rule 40, Sec. 9) provision set by law.
(Enriquez vs.
2. APPEAL FROM THE REGIONAL TRIAL Enriquez, G.R. No.
COURTS (Rule 41) 139303, 2005)
Subject of Appeal All the records are No records are

The right to appeal is not part of due process but elevated from the elevated unless the
a mere statutory privilege that has to be exercised court of origin. court decrees it.
only in the manner and in accordance with law.
Notice and record on Filed with the Court of
An appeal may be taken only from judgments or appeal if required are Appeals.
final orders that completely dispose of the filed with the court of
case. An interlocutory order is NOT appealable origin and payment of
until after judgment on the merits has been fees
rendered. The case was decided The case was decided
by the RTC pursuant by the RTC pursuant
In those instances where the judgment or final to its original to its appellate
order is not appealable because it is interlocutory, jurisdiction. jurisdiction (i.e., case
the aggrieved party may file the appropriate emanated from MTC).
special civil action under Rule 65.

ATENEO CENTRAL
Period to file is a Period to file is a original

matter of right but is matter of right and is jurisdiction
NON-EXTENDIBLE EXTENDIBLE
Rule on Filing Appeal Within Reglementary
Modes of Appeal from RTC Period; Exception
ORDINARY PETITION APPEAL BY General Rule: Perfection of appeal within the
APPEAL FOR REVIEW CERTIORARI reglementary period is jurisdictional.
(RULE 41) (RULE 42) (RULE 45)
Exception: When there has been extrinsic fraud,
Appeal to the Appeal to the Appeal to the accident, mistake or excusable negligence
Court of Court of Supreme (FAME), resort to Petition for Relief from
Appeals in Appeals in Court in all Judgment under Rule 38 may be had. (Habaluyas
cases decided cases decided cases decided v. Japson, G.R. No. 70895, 1986)
by the RTC in by the RTC in by the RTC
its original the exercise of where only Appellate Court Docket and Other Lawful
jurisdiction its appellate questions of Fees
jurisdiction law are raised Within the period for taking an appeal, the
or involved appellant shall pay to the Clerk of the Court,
which rendered the judgment or final order
appealed from, the full amount of the appellate
By NOTICE By PETITION By PETITION court docket and other lawful fees.
OF APPEAL FOR REVIEW FOR REVIEW
with the court filed with the ON Proof of payment shall be transmitted to appellate
which Court of CERTIORARI court together with the original record or the
rendered the Appeals in filed with the record on appeal, as the case may be. (Rule 41,
judgment or accordance Supreme Sec. 4)
final order with Rule 42 Court in
appealed from and serving a accordance Note: Please see notes on General Rule and
(i.e., RTC) copy thereof with Rule 45 Exceptions with regard to Payment of Fees under
and serving a upon the and serving a Rule 40 in the previous section of this reviewer.
copy thereof adverse party copy thereof
upon the upon the Notice of Appeal
adverse party adverse party The notice of appeal must:
1. Indicate the parties to the appeal.
RECORD OF 2. Specify judgment or final order or part
APPEAL shall thereof appealed from.
be required 3. Specify the court to which the appeal is
only in: being taken; and
1. Special 4. State the material dates showing the
proceedings; timeliness of the appeal. (Rule 41, Section 5)
2. Multiple or
separate Record on Appeal
appeals The Record on Appeal shall include:
where the law 1. Full names of all the parties to the
or the Rules proceedings shall be stated in the caption
so require 2. The judgment or final order from which
the appeal is taken.
Questions of Questions of Question of
3. In chronological order, copies of only
fact or mixed fact, of law, or law only from
such pleadings, petitions, motions and all
questions of mixed judgment or
interlocutory orders as are related to the
fact and law questions of final order
appealed judgment or final order for the
fact and law rendered by
proper understanding of the issues involved;
RTC in the
and
exercise of its

ATENEO CENTRAL
4. Together with such data as will show that may issue orders for the protection and
the appeal was perfected on time (Material preservation of the rights of the parties which do
Data Rule). (Rule 41, Sec. 6) not involve any matter litigated by the appeal,
approve compromises, permit appeals of indigent
Approval of Record on Appeal litigants, order execution pending appeal in
Upon filing of the record on appeal for approval accordance with Section 2 of Rule 39, and allow
AND if no objection is filed by the appellee within withdrawal of the appeal. (Rule 41, Sec. 9)
five (5) days from receipt of the copy thereof the
trial court (RTC) may: Effect of Perfected Appeal
1. Approve it as presented; OR General Rule: A perfected appeal stays the
2. Upon its own motion or at the instance of the challenged judgment or final order; such
appellee, may direct its amendment by the judgment or final order cannot yet be the subject
inclusion of any omitted matters which are of a motion for execution.
deemed essential to the determination of the
issue of law or fact involved in the appeal. Exception: If the Court of Appeals, the law, or the
(Rule 41, Sec. 7) Rules provide otherwise.
If the trial court orders the amendment thereof, This is NOT applicable to civil cases under the
the appellant shall redraft the record by including Rule on Summary Procedure which provides that
therein, in their proper chronological sequence, the decision of the RTC in civil cases governed
such additional matters as the court may have by said Rule, including forcible entry and unlawful
directed him/her to incorporate, and shall detainer cases; shall be immediately executory
thereupon submit the redrafted record for without prejudice to a further appeal that may be
approval, upon notice to the appellee, in like taken therefrom.
matter as the original draft.
Duty of the Clerk of Court of the Lower Court
A record on appeal does not have to be set for upon Perfection of Appeal
hearing in the trial court by the appellant, as it is Within thirty (30) days after perfection of all the
deemed submitted for approval upon its filing and appeals in accordance with the preceding
the rule merely requires the adverse party to file section, it shall be the duty of the clerk of court of
any objection thereto within five (5) days. the lower court:
a. To verify the correctness of the original
Joint Record on Appeal record or the record on appeal, as the case
Can be applied when both parties are appellants. may be, and to make a certification of its
(Rule 41, Sec. 8) correctness;
b. To verify the completeness of the records
Perfection of Appeal; Effect thereof that will be transmitted to the appellate court;
Upon the timely filing of a notice of appeal and the c. If found to be incomplete, to take such
payment of the corresponding docket and other measures as may be required to complete
lawful fees, the appeal is deemed perfected as to the records, availing of the authority that he
the appealing party (appellant). or the court may exercise for this purpose;
and
In appeals by notice of appeal, the court loses d. To transmit the records to the appellate
jurisdiction over the case upon the perfection of court.
the appeals filed in due time and the expiration of
the time to appeal of the other parties. If the efforts to complete the records fail, he shall
indicate in his letter of transmittal the exhibits or
In appeals by record on appeal, the court loses transcripts not included in the records being
jurisdiction only over the subject matter thereof transmitted to the appellate court, the reasons for
upon the approval of the records on appeal filed their non-transmittal, and the steps taken or that
in due time and the expiration of the time to could be taken to have them available.
appeal of the other parties. The clerk of court shall furnish the parties with
copies of his letter of transmittal of the records to
In either case, prior to the transmittal of the the appellate court. (Rule 41, Sec. 10)
original record or the record on appeal, the court

ATENEO CENTRAL
Transcript
Upon perfection of the appeal, the clerk shall However, in a few instances, the court has
immediately direct stenographers concerned to allowed due course to such appeals on strong
attach to the record of the case: and compelling reasons of justice. (Note: This
1. 5 copies of the transcripts of the is applicable to the Supreme Court only, NOT the
testimonial evidence referred to in the record trial courts.)
on appeal.
2. Transcription of such testimonial 3. PETITION FOR REVIEW FROM THE
evidence. REGIONAL TRIAL COURT TO THE COURT OF
3. An index containing the names of the APPEALS (Rule 42)
witnesses and the pages where their
testimonies could be found; and How Appeal Taken Time for Filing
4. List of exhibits and pages wherein they Requisites:
appear. (Rule 41, Sec. 11) 1. File a verified petition for review with the
Court of Appeals within 15 days from notice
Transmittal of the decision or of the denial of Motion for
The branch clerk of court of the RTC shall Reconsideration/Motion for New Trial
transmit to the appellate court the original record a. The Court of Appeals may grant
or the approved record on appeal: an additional period of 15 days within
1. Within 30 days from the perfection of the which to file the petition for review. No
appeal. further extension shall be granted except
2. With proof of payment of the appellate for the most compelling reason and in
court docket and other lawful fees. no case to exceed 15 days.
3. A certified true copy of the minutes of the 2. Pay docket and lawful fees and deposit
proceedings. P500.00 to the Clerk of Court of the Court of
4. An order of approval. Appeals.
5. A certificate of correctness. 3. Furnish the Regional Trial Court and
6. Original documentary evidence; and adverse party with a copy of the petition.
7. Original and three copies of the (Rule 42, Sec. 1)
transcript. (Rule 41, Sec. 12)
RULE 41 RULE 42
Dismissal of Appeal
PRIOR to the transmittal of the original record or
the record on the appeal to the appellate court, Refers to regular Governs appeals from
the trial court may, motu proprio or on motion, appeals from the the decision of the
dismiss the appeal for having been taken out of Regional Trial Court Regional Trial Court in
time OR for non-payment of the docket and other exercising original the exercise of its
lawful fees within the reglementary period. (Rule jurisdiction appellate jurisdiction
41, Sec. 13) (Case originally filed
with MTC)
Rule 41 does not allow a trial court to disallow an
appeal on grounds other than an appeal being
taken out of time/non-payment of docket and An appeal on pure Appeals to the Court of
other fees within reglementary period; only the questions of law Appeals from the
CA may dismiss the appeal. Rule 41 is an appeal cannot be taken to Regional Trial Court
as a matter of right, once it is perfected, only the the Court of Appeals under this rule MAY be
CA may disallow an appeal (Kho v. Camacho, and such improper made on questions of
G.R. No. 82789, 1991) appeal will be fact or of law or on
dismissed pursuant mixed questions of fact
The period to appeal is mandatory and to Section 2, Rule 50 and law
jurisdictional. of the Rules of Court.
Note: An appeal
Failure to appeal on time makes the decision final
taken to either the
and executory and deprives the appellate court of
Supreme Court or the
jurisdiction.

ATENEO CENTRAL
Court of Appeals by Effect of Failure to Comply With

the wrong or Requirements
inappropriate mode The failure of the petitioner to comply with any of
shall be dismissed. the following requirements shall be sufficient
No transfers of ground for the dismissal thereof:
appeals erroneously
taken to the Supreme 1. Payment of the docket and other lawful
Court or to the Court fees.
of Appeals to 2. Deposit for costs.
whichever of these
Tribunals has Note: Before the Court of Appeals may grant the
appropriate appellate 15-day extension to file a petition for review, Sec.
jurisdiction will be 1, Rule 42 of the Rules of Court requires the
allowed; continued payment of the full amount of the docket and
ignorance or willful other lawful fees and the deposit of the necessary
disregard of the law amount for costs before the expiration of the
on appeals will not be reglementary period. (Heirs of Esplana vs. CA,
tolerated. (SC G.R. No. 155758, 2008)
Circular 2-90, March
9, 1990) 3. Proof of service of the petition;
Note: The service of judgment serves as the

reckoning point to determine whether a
Form and Contents decision had been appealed within the
File in 3 legible copies, with the original copy reglementary period or has already become
intended for the court being indicated as such by final. (Mindanao Terminal and Brokerage vs.
the petitioner. (Efficient Use of Paper Rule, A.M. CA, G.R. No. 163286, 2012);
No. 11-9-4-SC)
Note: In Teh vs People, the Court of Appeals
The Petition shall contain: correctly dismissed the petition for being
1. Full names of the parties, without insufficient in form, not being accompanied by
impleading the lower courts/judges thereof as duplicate original or certified true copies of the
petitioners or respondents. documents and material parts of the record
2. Specific material dates to show it was that would support the allegations. Moreover,
filed on time. there was no written explanation why service
3. A statement of the matters involved, the of the petition was not done personally. (Teh
issues raised, the specification or errors of vs. People, G.R. No. 141180, 2005); and
fact or law, or both, allegedly committed by
the Regional Trial Court, and the reasons or 4. Contents of and the documents which
arguments relied upon for the allowance of should accompany the petition. (Rule 42, Sec.
the appeal. 3)
4. Clearly legible duplicate originals or true
copies of judgments of both lower courts, Note: It is the petitioner who knows best what
certified correct by the RTC Clerk of Court. pleadings or material portions of the record of
5. Certificate of non-forum shopping. (Rule the case would support the allegations in the
42, Sec. 2) petition. Petitioner’s discretion in choosing the
documents to be attached to the petition is
The lower courts or judges that rendered the however not unbridled. The CA has the duty to
judgment or final order complained of should not check the exercise of this discretion, to see to
be impleaded as parties. The same prohibition it that the submission of supporting documents
is now provided in petitions for review on is not merely perfunctory.
certiorari under Rule 45, since these are petitions
for purposes of appeal and NOT petitions in The practical aspect of this duty is to enable
original actions. the CA to determine at the earliest possible
time the existence of prima facie merit in the

ATENEO CENTRAL
petition. Moreover, (Rule 42, Sec. 3) provides 3. State whether or not he/she accepts the
that if petitioner fails to comply with the statement of matters involved in the
submission of "documents, which should petition.
accompany the petition," it "shall be sufficient 4. Point out insufficiencies/inaccuracies
ground for the dismissal thereof." (Canton vs. as he/she believes exist in petitioner’s
City of Cebu, G.R. No. 152898, 2007) statement of matters involved but without
repetition; and
Note: In Quintin Lee vs. CA, the Court of 5. State reasons why petition should not
Appeals correctly dismissed petitioner's be given due course.
appeal not only because he purportedly
employed the wrong mode of appeal. It A copy of the comment shall be served on the
likewise found that petitioner failed to comply petitioner. (Rule 42, Sec. 5)
with the requirements of (Rule 42, Sec. 2[d]).
In his petition before the appellate court, Due course
petitioner attached only plain machine copies If the Court of Appeals finds prima facie that the
of the certified photocopies of the assailed lower court (RTC) committed an error of fact or
decisions of the lower courts. Neither did he law that will warrant a reversal or modification
submit the pleadings and other material of the decision, it may give due course to the
portions of the record to support his petition. (Rule 42, Sec. 6)
allegations. (Quintin Lee vs. CA, G.R. No.
165918, 2008) Petition for review is not a matter of right but
discretionary on the Court of Appeals. It may
Purpose: To eliminate the causes of judicial only give due course to the petition if it shows on
backlog and delay in light of the experience of the its face that the lower court has committed an
appellate courts. error of fact and/or law that will warrant reversal
or modification of the decision or judgment sought
Extension of Period to File Petition for Review to be reviewed.
General Rule: CA may allow (only) 1 extension
of 15 days to file the petition for review after Elevation of Record
docket fees are paid and if the motion for Whenever the Court of Appeals deems it
extension of time is filed within the 15-day necessary, it may require the RTC to elevate
reglementary period the original records of the case within 15 days.
(Rule 42, Sec. 7)
Exception: for the most compelling reasons, the
CA may allow another extension not to exceed 15 Records remain with the trial court because it
days MAY still issue a writ of execution pending appeal
and also because in some cases (e.g., ejectment
Action on the Petition and those of Summary Procedure), the
The Court of Appeals may: judgments are immediately executory.
1. Require the respondent to comment, not
file a motion to dismiss, within 10 days from A REJOINDER (to the reply) is no longer
notice, or required under AM No. 99-2-04-SC (15 March
2. Dismiss the petition if it finds it to be: 1999).
a. Patently without merit;
b. Prosecuted manifestly for delay; or Upon the Filing of the Reply, the Court Shall
c. Questions raised are too insubstantial to Resolve Either to:
require consideration. (Rule 42, Sec. 4) 1. Give due course to the petition; and
a) Consider the case submitted for decision
Contents of Comment based on the pleadings; or
Requisites of the comment of the respondent: b) Require the parties to submit their
1. File in 3 legible copies (Efficient Use of respective memoranda; or
Paper Rule, A.M. No. 11-9-4-SC). 2. Deny or dismiss the petition.
2. Accompanied by certified true copies of
material portions of records referred to. Perfection of Appeal; Effect thereof

ATENEO CENTRAL
The appeal is deemed perfected as to the Being a summation of the parties’ previous
petitioner upon the timely: pleadings, the Memoranda alone may be
1. Filing of the petition for review; and considered by the CA in deciding or resolving the
2. Payment of docket and lawful fees. petition.
(Rule 42, Sec. 8)
The case shall be deemed submitted for decision
The RTC loses jurisdiction over the case upon: upon the filing of the last pleading or
1. The perfection of the appeals; and memorandum required by these Rules or by the
2. The expiration of the time to appeal of CA itself.
other parties.
4. APPEALS FROM THE COURT OF TAX
However, before the Court of Appeals gives APPEALS, CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION,
due course to the petition, the Regional Trial AND QUASI-JUDICIAL AGENCIES (RULE 43)
Court MAY still exercise residual powers
(IAPOA): An appeal under this Rule may be taken to the
1. Issue orders for the protection and Court of Appeals within the period and in the
preservation of the rights of the parties, manner herein provided, whether the appeal
which do not involve any matter litigated involves questions of fact, of law, or mixed
by the appeal. questions of fact and law. (Rule 43, Sec. 3).
2. Approve compromises.
3. Permit appeals of indigent litigants. Appeals under this Rule apply to offices or
4. Order execution pending appeal in agencies which exercise quasi-judicial functions.
accordance with Sec. 2 of Rule 39; and
5. Allow withdrawal of the appeal. Note: The CTA is not covered by this Rule
anymore. CTA Division decisions are appealable
Rule on Perfected Appeal to the CTA En Banc. CTA En Banc decisions are
General Rule: A perfected appeal stays the appealable to the SC via Rule 45.
challenged judgment or final order.
Period of appeal
Exception: If the Court of Appeals, the law, or the Within 15 days from:
Rules provide otherwise. 1. Notice of the award, judgment, final order
or resolution; or
This is NOT applicable to civil cases under the 2. Date of last publication, if publication is
Rule on Summary Procedure, which provides that required by law for its effectivity; or
the decision of the RTC in civil cases governed 3. Denial of petitioner’s Motion for New Trial
by said Rule, including forcible entry and unlawful or Motion for Reconsideration duly filed
detainer cases. It shall be immediately executory in accordance with the governing law of
without prejudice to a further appeal that may be the court or agency a quo. (Rule 43, Sec.
taken therefrom. 4)
Submission for Decision Only ONE (1) MR shall be allowed.

If the petition is given due course, the Court of
Appeals (CA) may: Note: Rule 43, Section 4 specifically allows only
1. Set the case for oral argument. and/or one motion for reconsideration to an appealing
2. Require the parties to submit memoranda party; as such, the reckoning of the fifteen (15)-
within a period of 15 days from notice. (Rule day period to perfect the appeal starts from the
42, Section 9) receipt of the resolution denying the motion for
reconsideration. (Yinlu Bicol Mining Corporation
No new issues may be raised by a party in the v. Trans-Asia Oil and Energy Development
Memorandum. Corporation, G.R. No. 207942, 2015)
Issues raised by a party in previous pleadings but

not included in the Memorandum shall be
deemed waived or abandoned.

ATENEO CENTRAL
REGIONAL TRIAL QUASI-JUDICIAL action or proceeding at any time during its

COURT AS AGENCIES pendency. (As amended by A.M. No. 07-7-12 SC,
APPELLATE COURT Dec. 12, 2007)
(RULE 42) (RULE 43) The appeal under this Rule contemplates that the
RTC rendered the judgment or final order or
Decision is stayed by Decision is resolution acting in its original jurisdiction.
an appeal immediately
executory, not stayed If the RTC rendered the same in the exercise of
by an appeal its appellate jurisdiction, the remedy is to file a
Petition for Review either under Rules 42 or 43.
The appeal shall be taken to the Court of Appeals
Factual findings not Factual findings are
even if only questions of law are raised by the
conclusive upon the conclusive upon the
petitioner.
Court of Appeals Court of appeals if
supported by
Although the term used in the second mode is
substantial evidence
“Petition for Review,” just like in appeals from the
quasi-judicial agencies under Rule 43, it should
not be confused with the “Petition for Review on
Effect of appeal Certiorari” under the third mode, which is a
General Rule: The appeal shall not stay the distinct procedure under Rule 45.
award, final order, or resolution sought to be
reviewed Nor should the use of the word “Certiorari” in the
Exception: When the Court of Appeals shall latter be mistaken for the special civil action for
direct otherwise upon such terms as it may deem Certiorari in Rule 65, which is not a mode of
just. (Rule 43, Sec. 12) appeal but is an original action.
5. APPEAL FROM JUDGMENTS AND FINAL Certiorari as a Mode of Appeal (Rule 45) v.
ORDERS OF THE COURT OF APPEALS (Rule Certiorari as an Original Special Civil Action
45) (Rule 65)
Judgments, final orders, or resolutions of the APPEAL BY CERTIORARI AS AN

Court of Appeals can be raised on appeal to the CERTIORARI ORIGINAL ACTION
Supreme Court via Appeal by Certiorari under (RULE 45) (RULE 65)
Rule 45 on pure questions of law.
Petition based on Petition raises the
questions of law only issue as to whether
Appeal by Certiorari under Rule 45
which the appellant the lower court acted
A party desiring to appeal by certiorari from a
desires the appellate without or in excess of
judgment, final order or resolution of the following
court to resolve (if jurisdiction or with
courts may file with the Supreme Court a verified
case originated from grave abuse of
petition for review on certiorari:
RTC – direct filing with discretion
1. Court of Appeals.
SC)
2. Sandiganbayan.
3. Regional Trial Court.
4. Court of Tax Appeals (en banc). Involves review of the May be directed
5. Other courts, whenever authorized by judgment, award or against an
law final order on the interlocutory order of
merits the court prior to
The petition may include an application for a writ appeal from the
of preliminary injunction or other provisional judgment or where
remedies and shall raise only questions of law there is no appeal or
which must be distinctly set forth. any other plain,
speedy or adequate
The petitioner may seek the same provisional remedy
remedies by verified motion filed in the same

ATENEO CENTRAL
Must be made within May be filed not later proceeding of lower

the reglementary than 60 days from courts
period for appeal notice of the judgment,
order or resolution
sought to be assailed,
or 60 days from receipt
of denial of a motion
for reconsideration. When Rule 65 Petition is Not Available
Note that, as a general A special civil action for certiorari under Rule 65
rule, before a party lies only when there is no appeal or any plain,
can file a petition for speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary
certiorari under Rule course of law. Thus, certiorari cannot be allowed
65, he/she must first when a party to a case fails to appeal a judgment
file a motion for despite the availability of that remedy. Certiorari
reconsideration with is not a substitute for a lost appeal. (Indoyon vs.
the lower court) CA, G.R. No. 193706, 2013) (N.B.: In this case,
the Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65 was filed
35 days after notice of resolution, by which time
Stays the judgment, Does not stay the petitioner had therefore lost his appeal under
award or order challenged Rule 45.)
appealed from proceeding unless a
writ of preliminary The remedies of appeal and certiorari are
injunction or a mutually exclusive and not alternative or
temporary restraining successive. Although it is true that the SC may
order shall have been treat a petition for certiorari (under Rule 65) as
issued by the higher having been filed under Rule 45 to serve the
court higher interest of justice, it cannot be availed of
when the petition is filed well beyond the
The petitioner and The parties are the reglementary period for filing a petition for review
respondent are the aggrieved party (under Rule 45) and without offering any reason
original parties to the (petitioner) against the therefor. (Banco Filipino v. CA, G.R. No. 132703,
action, and the lower lower court or quasi- 2000; Sandoval v. Calipan G.R. No. 200727,
court or quasi-judicial judicial agency (public 2013)
agency is not to be respondent) and the
impleaded prevailing party in the To be sure, the distinctions between Rules 45
lower court (private and 65 are far and wide. However, the most
respondent) apparent is that errors of jurisdiction are best
reviewed in a special civil action for certiorari
under Rule 65, while errors of judgment can only
The prior filing of a A motion for be corrected by appeal in a petition for review
motion for reconsideration is, as under Rule 45. This Court, however, in
reconsideration is not a general rule, a accordance with the liberal spirit, which pervades
required condition precedent. the Rules of Court, and in the interest of justice
The purpose is to give may treat a petition for certiorari as having been
the lower court an filed under Rule 45, more so if the same was filed
opportunity to correct within the reglementary period for filing a petition
itself for review. (Nuñez v. GSIS Family Bank, G.R. No.
163988, 2005)
The appellate court is The higher court Questions of Law in Rule 45 Petition;
in the exercise of its exercises original Exception
appellate jurisdiction jurisdiction under its
and power of review power of control and General Rule: Only QUESTIONS OF LAW may
supervision over the be raised in a petition for review under Rule 45 of
the Rules of Court.

ATENEO CENTRAL
Exceptions: QUESTIONS OF LAW AND FACT extension of time to file his/her petition for
may be determined, in the following instances: review on certiorari. The petitioner must submit
the requisite proof of service of such motion on
Exceptions under the SC Circulars: the respondents, pay the docket and other lawful
1. Appeals from Habeas Data cases fees in full, as well as deposit the costs of suit.
2. Appeals from Amparo cases
3. Appeals from Kalikasan cases The Supreme Court may, for justifiable reasons,
4. Appeals from Habeas Corpus cases grant an extension of 30 days within which to file
5. Criminal cases by notice of appeal the petition, provided the following requisites
concur:
Exceptions under Jurisprudence: 1. A motion duly filed and served (within the
(a) When the factual findings of the Court of original 15-day period); and
Appeals and the trial court are contradictory; 2. Full payment of the docket and other
(b) When the conclusion is a finding grounded lawful fees and the deposit for costs (within
entirely on speculation, surmises, or the original 15-day period). (Rule 45, Sec. 2)
conjectures;
(c) When the inference made by the Court of Docket and other lawful fees; proof of service
Appeals from its findings of fact is manifestly of the petition
mistaken, absurd, or impossible; Unless he/she has theretofore done so, the
(d) When there is a grave abuse of discretion in petitioner shall pay the corresponding docket and
the appreciation of facts; other lawful fees to the clerk of court of the
(e) When the Appellate Court, in making its Supreme Court and deposit the amount of
findings, went beyond the issues of the case P500.00 for costs at the time of the filing of the
and such findings are contrary to the petition. (Rule 45, Sec. 3)
admissions of both appellant and appellee;
(f) When the judgment of the Court of Appeals is The phrase “unless he has theretofore done so”
premised on a misapprehension of facts; refers to the situation in the next preceding
(g) When the Court of Appeals failed to notice section wherein a motion for extension of time to
certain relevant facts which, if properly file the petition for review was filed, in which case
considered, would justify a different the petitioner had already paid the docket and
conclusion; other lawful fees and made the deposit for costs
(h) When the findings of fact are themselves as requisites therefore.
conflicting;
(i) When the findings of fact are conclusions Although a copy of the petition is served upon the
without citation of the specific evidence on lower court concerned, it is only for the purpose
which they are based; and of giving notice that its judgment should not be
(j) When the findings of fact of the Court of entered since it is not yet executory because of
Appeals are premised on the absence of the pending petition for review thereof. The
evidence but such findings are contradicted by lower court does not become a party to the
the evidence on record. (Local Superior vs. case since Rule 45 provides a mode of appeal.
Jody King, G.R. No. 141715, 2005)
Proof of service of a copy thereof on the lower
Time for filing; exceptions; extension court concerned AND on the adverse party shall
General Rule: The petition shall be filed within 15 be submitted together with the petition.
days from the notice of the judgment appealed
from, or of the denial of the petitioner’s motion for Contents of petition
new trial or reconsideration filed in due time after File in 11 copies for the Supreme Court en banc
notice of the judgment. and 5 copies for the SC division (per Efficient Use
of Paper Rule, A.M. No. 11-9-4-SC), with the
Exceptions: original intended for the court being indicated as
1. Writ of Amparo – 5 working days such by the petitioner.
2. Writ of Habeas Data – 5 working days
The Verified Petition shall contain:
Within the fifteen (15) day period, the petitioner 1. Full names of the appealing party as the
may, for good cause, file a motion for petitioner and the adverse party as

ATENEO CENTRAL
respondent, without impleading the lower 4. Contents of and the documents which
courts/judges thereof either as petitioners or should accompany the petition.
respondents.
2. Material dates showing: The Supreme Court may, on its own initiative,
a. When notice of the judgment or final deny the petition on the following grounds:
order or resolution subject thereof was 1. The appeal is without merit.
received. 2. It is prosecuted manifestly for delay; or
b. When a motion for new trial or 3. The questions raised therein are too
reconsideration, if any, was filed; and insubstantial to require consideration. (Rule
c. When notice of the denial thereof was 45, Sec. 5)
received.
3. A statement of the matters involved and Review discretionary
the reasons or arguments relied on for the A review is not a matter of right, but of sound
allowance of the petition. judicial discretion and will be granted only when
4. Clearly legible duplicate original, or a there are special and important reasons thereof.
certified true copy of the judgment or final (Rule 45, Sec. 6)
order or resolution certified by the clerk of
court of the court a quo and the requisite The following, while neither controlling nor fully
number of plain copies thereof, and such measuring the court’s discretion, indicate the
material portions of the record as would character of the reasons which will be
support the petition. considered:
5. Certificate of non-forum shopping. (Rule 1. When the court a quo (the court “from
45, Sec. 4) which”) has decided a question of substance,
not theretofore determined by the Supreme
Rule 45, Section 4 of the Rules of Court indeed Court, or has decided it in a way probably not
requires the attachment to the petition for review in accord with law or with the applicable
on certiorari “such material portions of the record decision of the Supreme Court; or
as would support the petition.” However, such a 2. When the court a quo has so far departed
requirement was not meant to be an ironclad rule from the accepted and usual course of
such that the failure to follow the same would judicial proceedings, or so far sanctioned
merit the outright dismissal of the petition. such departure by a lower court, as to call for
an exercise of the power of supervision.
In accordance with Section 7 of Rule 45, “the
Supreme Court may require or allow the filing of Pleadings and documents that may be
such pleadings, briefs, memoranda or documents required; sanctions
as it may deem necessary within such periods For the purposes of determining whether the
and under such conditions as it may consider petition should be dismissed or denied pursuant
appropriate.” More importantly, Section 8 of Rule to Section 5 of this rule, or where the petition is
45 declares that “if the petition is given due given due course under Section 8 hereof, the
course, the Supreme Court may require the Supreme Court may:
elevation of the complete record of the case or 1. Require or allow the filing of pleadings,
specified parts thereof within fifteen (15) days briefs, memoranda or documents as it may
from notice.” (F.A.T. Kee Computer Systems, deem necessary within such periods and
Inc. v. Online Networks International, Inc., G.R. under such conditions as it may consider
No. 171238, 2011) appropriate.
2. Impose sanctions in the following cases:
Dismissal or denial of petition a. Non-filing of such pleadings or
The failure of the petitioner to comply with any of documents.
the following requirements shall be sufficient b. Unauthorized filing of such pleadings or
ground for the dismissal thereof: documents; or
1. Payment of the docket and other lawful c. Non-compliance with the conditions
fees; therefor. (Rule 45, Sec. 7)
2. Deposit for costs;
3. Proof of service of the petition; and

ATENEO CENTRAL
Due course; elevation of records A judgment, resolution or final order of the Civil
If the petition is given due course, the Supreme Service Commission may be brought by the
Court may require the elevation of the complete aggrieved party to the Supreme Court on
record of the case or parts thereof within 15 days certiorari under Rule 64.
from notice. (Rule 45, Sec. 8)
REVIEW OF FINAL JUDGMENTS OR FINAL
Rule applicable to both civil and criminal ORDERS OF THE OMBUDSMAN
cases
General Rule: The mode of appeal prescribed in The Court of Appeals, under Rule 43, has
this Rule shall be applicable to both civil and jurisdiction over orders, directives and decisions
criminal cases of the Office of the Ombudsman in administrative
cases only. It cannot therefore review orders,
Exception: Not applicable in criminal cases directives or decisions of the Office of the
where the penalty imposed is: Ombudsman in criminal and non-administrative
1. Death. cases. For criminal cases, the ruling of the
2. Reclusion perpetua; or Ombudsman should be elevated to the Supreme
3. Life imprisonment. (Rule 45, Sec. 9) Court by way of Rule 65. (Indoyon vs. CA, G.R.
No. 193706, 2013); (Tirol vs. Sandiganbayan, G.
Procedure in Criminal Cases Where the R. No. 135913, 1999); (Fabian vs. Desierto, G.R.
Penalty is Death, Reclusion Perpetua, or Life No. 129742, 1998)
Imprisonment
If only to ensure utmost circumspection before
the penalty of death, reclusion perpetua or life 7. DISMISSAL, REINSTATEMENT, AND
imprisonment is imposed, the Court now deems WITHDRAWAL OF APPEAL
it wise and compelling to provide in these cases Sec. 1, Rule 50 lists 9 grounds wherein the CA
a review by the Court of Appeals before the may, on its own motion or on that of the appellee,
case is elevated to the Supreme Court. dismiss an appeal. These are:
1. Failure of the record on appeal to show on its
If the Court of Appeals should affirm the penalty face that the appeal was taken within the
of death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, period fixed by these Rules;
it could then render judgment imposing the 2. Failure to file the notice of appeal or the record
corresponding penalty as the circumstances so on appeal within the period prescribed by
warrant, refrain from entering the judgment and these Rules;
elevate the entire records of the case to the SC 3. Failure of the appellant to pay the docket and
for its final disposition. (People v. Mateo, G.R. other lawful fees as provided in section 5, Rule
Nos. 147678-87, 2004) 40 and section 4 of Rule 41; (Bar Matter No.
803, 1998)
6. REVIEW OF FINAL JUDGMENTS OR FINAL 4. Unauthorized alterations, omissions or
ORDERS OF THE COA additions in the approved record on appeal as
A judgment, resolution or final order of the provided in section 4 of Rule 44;
Commission on Audit may be brought by the 5. Failure of the appellant to serve and file the
aggrieved party to the Supreme Court on required number of copies of his brief or
certiorari under Rule 64. memorandum within the time provided by
these Rules;
REVIEW OF FINAL JUDGMENTS OR FINAL 6. Absence of specific assignment of errors in
ORDERS OF THE COMELEC EN BANC the appellant's brief, or of page references to
the record as required in section 13,
A judgment, resolution or final order of the paragraphs (a), (c), (d) and (f) of Rule 44;
Commission on Elections may be brought by the 7. Failure of the appellant to take the necessary
aggrieved party to the Supreme Court on steps for the correction or completion of the
certiorari under Rule 64. record within the time limited by the court in its
order;
REVIEW OF FINAL JUDGMENTS OR FINAL 8. Failure of the appellant to appear at the
ORDERS OF THE CSC preliminary conference under Rule 48 or to

ATENEO CENTRAL
comply with orders, circulars, or directives of If a Motion for New Trial was available at the time
the court without justifiable cause; and that the Petition for Relief from Judgment was
9. The fact that the order or judgment appealed filed, the petition was premature (there was a
from is not appealable. more adequate remedy) (Gomez v. Montalban,
G.R. No. 174414, 2008)
In deciding to dismiss an appeal, the CA is bound
to exercise its sound discretion upon taking all the No Rule 38 can be filed in the CA (Redena v. CA,
pertinent circumstances into due consideration. G.R. No. 146611, 2007)
(People v. Diaz, G.R. No. 180677, 2013).
Note: “any other proceeding taken thereafter”
Also, a litigant’s failure to furnish his opponent may include order of execution. (Cayetano v.
with a copy of his appeal brief does not suffice to Ceguerra, G.R. No. L-18831, 1965)
warrant the dismissal of an appeal. All that is
needed is for the court to order the litigant to Where to File
furnish opponent with a copy of brief. (Tiangco v. It shall be filed in such court and in the same case
Land Bank of the Philippines, G.R. No. 153998, from which the petition arose. (Redena v. CA,
2010) G.R. No. 146611, 2007)
3. PETITION FOR RELIEF Relief Sought

FROM JUDGMENT (Rule 38) It shall pray that the judgment, order or
proceedings be set aside OR that the appeal be
Grounds For Availing Of The Remedy given due course.
A Petition for Relief may be filed based on the
following grounds: A petition for relief from judgment is applicable in
1. When a judgment or final order is special civil actions and all kinds of special
entered into, or any other proceeding proceedings, such as land registration, intestate
is thereafter taken against the petitioner settlement, and guardianship proceedings.
in any court through fraud, accident,
mistake or inexcusable negligence; or Relief from judgment is NOT authorized in
2. When the petitioner has been prevented summary proceedings. (Revised Rules on
from taking an appeal by fraud, Summary Procedure, Sec. 19)
accident, mistake or inexcusable
negligence. A petition for relief is not a remedy available for
judgments, final orders, and other proceedings in
Who May File the Supreme Court. The phrase “any court” that
Petition for Relief from judgment is a remedy is referred to in Rule 38 are Metropolitan or
available ONLY to those PARTIES in the case. Municipal or Regional Trial Courts. (Sps. Mesina
vs. Meer, G.R. No. 146845, 2002)
This relief is only allowed in exceptional cases
when there is NO OTHER AVAILABLE NEW TRIAL OR PETITION FOR
ADEQUATE REMEDY. Thus, when a party has RECONSIDERATION RELIEF
other available remedies and he/she was not (RULE 37) (RULE 38)
prevented by fraud, accident, mistake or
excusable negligence from filing such motion or Available before Available after
taking such appeal, such party CANNOT avail of judgment becomes judgment becomes
this remedy. final and executory. final and executory.
A party who has filed a motion for new trial but Applies to judgments Applies to judgments,
which was denied, CANNOT file a petition for or final orders only. final orders and other
relief. These two remedies are to be EXCLUSIVE proceedings.
of each other. The remedy is to appeal from the
Grounds: Grounds:
judgment. (Francisco v. Puno, G.R. No. L-55694,
- FAME; and - FAME
1981)

ATENEO CENTRAL
- Newly Under this section, the petition for relief should be

discovered directed against the order preventing the
evidence. perfection of the appeal, and NOT against the
judgment on the merits. (Rafanan v. Rafanan,
Filed within the time to Filed within 60 days G.R. No. L-7795, 1955)
appeal. from knowledge of the
judgment and within 6 Time to File Petition
months from entry of The petition shall be filed within sixty (60) days
judgment. after the petitioner learns of the judgment, final
order or proceeding, and NOT more than six (6)
If denied, the order of If denied, the order of months after such judgment or final order was
denial is not denial is not entered, or such proceeding was taken. (Rule
appealable. The appealable. The 38, Sec. 3)
remedy is to appeal remedy is a special
from the judgment. civil action under Rule Both periods are NOT extendible and never
65. interrupted. These two periods must CONCUR.
(Quelnan v. VHF Philippines, G.R. No. 138500,
Legal remedy Equitable remedy 2005)
Motion need not be Petition must be
verified. verified. Note: The alternative phrase “or such proceeding
was taken” in Sec. 3, Rule 38 could be taken to
mean other proceedings which are NOT to be
Remedies Other Than Appeal entered, such as a writ of EXECUTION and an
MODE GROUND order approving a COMPROMISE
AGREEMENT. In such cases, the period must
have to commence from the date of occurrence
Petition for When the judgment has been because entry is either unnecessary or
Relief under taken against the party inconsequential. (Feria and Noche, Civil
Rule 38 through FAME Procedure Annotated, Vol. 2, 2013 Ed., p. 120,
citing Dirige v. Biranya, G.R. No. L-22033 (1996))
Action for Extrinsic fraud, lack of
annulment of jurisdiction, denial of due Petition for relief from a judgment based on a
judgment process compromise must be filed not later than 6 months
under Rule 47 from the date it was rendered (not date of entry),
since such judgment becomes final and
executory immediately. (Republic v. Estenzo,
Direct action, Certiorari – when there is G.R. No. L-24656, 1968)
as certiorari, grave abuse of discretion
OR collateral amounting to lack or excess of Note: A motion to dismiss the petition for relief
attack under jurisdiction. A challenged may be filed on the ground of lack of jurisdiction,
Rule 65 judgment, void upon its face, when the latter is filed beyond the reglementary
can be the subject of a period. (Pacific Importing v. Tinio, G.R. No. L-
collateral attack. 2634, 1949)
(Feria and Noche, Civil Procedure Annotated, Contents of Petition

Vol. 2, 2013 Ed., p. 109) a. The petition must be verified;
b. It must be accompanied with affidavits
Petition for Relief from Denial of Appeal showing the ff.:
When a party, by FAME, has been prevented 1. Grounds relied upon; and
from taking an appeal, he/she may file a petition 2. Facts constituting the petitioner’s good
in the court which rendered the judgment or final and substantial cause of action or
order and in the same case praying that the defense. (Rule 38, Sec. 3)
appeal be given due course.
Note: A separate affidavit is NOT necessary if
such facts are alleged in the verified petition.

ATENEO CENTRAL
(Feria and Noche, Civil Procedure Annotated, reconsideration had been granted by it. (Rule
Vol. 2, 2013 Ed., p. 117, citing Fabar Incorporated 38, Sec. 6)
v. Rodelas, G.R. No. L-46394 (1977), and
Samonte v. S.F. Naguiat, G.R. No. 165544, Instances when trial on the merits is NOT
2009)) necessary when the relief sought may be:
1. The allowance of an appeal after the
Order to File Answer expiration of the reglementary period.
If the petition is sufficient in form and substance, 2. The staying of immediate execution
to justify relief, the court in which it is filed, shall despite failure to pay or deposit the rents due
issue an order requiring the adverse parties to to FAME.
answer the same within fifteen (15) days thereof.
The court should NOT issue summons. (Rule 38, IMPORTANT: An order GRANTING the petition
Sec. 4) for relief is interlocutory hence not immediately
appealable. However, certiorari lies if there is
Note: If the petition is insufficient, as for example, grave abuse of discretion or lack/excess of
no affidavit of merit is attached, the court may jurisdiction.
dismiss the petition outright. (Omandam v.
Director of Lands, G.R. No. L-4301, 1954) An order DENYING the petition for relief is now
subject only to certiorari under Rule 65, as
Failure to file an answer does not warrant provided in Section 1(b) of Rule 41.
declaration of default.
Procedure Where the Denial of an Appeal is
Preliminary Injunction Pending Proceedings Set Aside
Because a final and executory judgment is the The lower court shall be required to give due
subject of a petition for relief, the judgment may course to the appeal and to elevate the record of
be subject to execution. A person who files a the appealed case as if a timely and proper
petition under Rule 38 may file a preliminary appeal had been made. (Rule 38, Sec. 7)
injunction to preserve the rights of the parties
upon filing of a bond. 4. ANNULMENT OF
JUDGMENTS AND FINAL
The bond is conditioned upon the payment to the ORDERS AND
adverse party of all damages and costs that may RESOLUTIONS (Rule 47)
be awarded to such adverse party by reason of
the issuance of the preliminary injunction. Annulment of Judgment
A remedy in law independent of the case where
Such injunction shall not discharge any lien which the judgment sought to be annulled was
the adverse party may have acquired upon the rendered. Consequently, an action for annulment
property of the petitioner. (Rule 38, Sec. 5) of judgment may be availed of even if the
judgment to be annulled had already been fully
Proceedings after the Answer is Filed executed or implemented. (Bulawan v. Aquende,
After the filing of the answer or the expiration of G.R. No. 182819, 2011; Diona v. Balangue, G.R.
the period to file the answer, the court shall hear No. 173559, 2013)
the petition.
Coverage
Thereafter, the court may either: This Rule shall govern the annulment by the
(1) Dismiss the petition if it finds that the Court of Appeals of judgments or final orders
allegations thereof are not true; or and resolutions in civil actions of Regional Trial
(2) Set aside the judgment or final order or Courts for which the ordinary remedies of new
other proceeding if it finds the allegations to trial, appeal, petition for relief or other appropriate
be true. The case shall then stand as if such remedies are no longer available through no
judgment, final order or other proceeding had fault of the petitioner. (Rule 47, Sec. 1)
never been rendered, issued, or taken. The
court shall hear and determine the case as if The purpose is to set aside a final and executory
a timely motion for a new trial or judgment, so that there would be a renewal of
litigation.

ATENEO CENTRAL
Absolute lack of jurisdiction over the person of the

This remedy is NOT available to decisions of defending party OR over the subject matter of the
quasi-judicial bodies. It is only applicable to the claim.
annulment of judgments or final orders of a
Municipal Trial Court by the Regional Trial Court Note: In a petition for annulment of judgment
or the annulment of the decisions of Regional based on lack of jurisdiction, petitioner must show
Trial Court by the Court of Appeal. not merely an abuse of jurisdictional discretion,
but an ABSOLUTE lack of jurisdiction. (RP vs.
Summary of coverage for Rule 47: Technological Advocates, G.R. No. 165333,
a. Sec. 1 – Annulment by the CA of 2010)
judgments/orders of the RTC
b. Sec. 2 – Annulment by the RTC of 3. Denial of due process, as recognized by
judgments/orders of the MTC jurisprudence. Where there is an unconstitutional
deprivation of property without due process, or a
Rule 47 only applies to civil actions (not criminal) party has not had his day in court (Intestate
Estate of the Late Nimfa Sian v. Philippine
Grounds for Annulment National Bank, G.R. No. 168882, 2007; Sps.
Benatiro vs. Heirs of Cuyos, G.R. No. 161220,
1. Extrinsic fraud (Rule 47, Section 2). One that 2008)
prevents a party from having a trial or from
presenting his/her entire case to the court, or Where filed
where it operates upon matters pertaining not to CA – over decisions of the RTC; or
the judgment itself but to the manner in which it is RTC – over decisions of the MTC
procured. Note: Never SC over decisions of the CA
● Extrinsic Fraud exists when there is a
fraudulent act committed by a prevailing Period To File Action
party outside of the trial of the case, ● If based on EXTRINSIC FRAUD – the
where the defeated party was prevented action must be filed within four (4) years
from presenting fully his/her side of the from its discovery.
case by deception practiced on him/her ● If based on LACK OF JURISDICTION –
by the prevailing party. action does not prescribe since the
● Extrinsic fraud shall not be a valid ground judgment is void, but note that laches or
if it was availed of, or could have been estoppel can set in as an equitable bar to
availed of, in a motion for new trial or the action.
petition for relief. ● If based on DENIAL OF DUE PROCESS
● Extrinsic fraud will not be a valid – the action does not prescribe. Lack of
ground if it was availed of, or could have due process renders the judgment void.
been availed of in an MNT or a petition An action to declare the nullity of a void
for relief from judgment judgment does not prescribe. (Sps.
Benatiro vs. Heirs of Cuyos, G.R. No.
If person filing is not a party, Rule 38 (petition for 161220, 2008)
relief from judgment) would not be available to
him (must be a party), hence the proper remedy Filing and Contents of Petition
is a Rule 47 (Petition for Annulment of The action shall be commenced by filing a
Judgment) verified petition alleging therein with
particularity:
Note: The petition need not categorically state 1. The facts and the law relied upon for
the exact words extrinsic fraud; rather, the annulment;
allegations in the petition should be so crafted to 2. Those supporting the petitioner’s good
easily point out the ground on which it was based. and substantial cause of action or
(Castigador vs. Nicolas, G.R. No. 184023, 2013) defense, as the case may be.
2. Lack of jurisdiction (Rule 47, Sec. 2) The petition shall be filed in 3 clearly legible
copies (per Efficient Use of Paper Rule, A.M. No.
11-9-4-SC), together with:

ATENEO CENTRAL
1. Sufficient copies corresponding to the However, where the judgment or final order or
number of respondents. resolution is set aside on the ground of extrinsic
2. Affidavits of witnesses or documents fraud, the court may, on motion, order the trial
supporting the cause of action; and court to try the case as if a timely motion for
3. Certificate of non-forum shopping. new trial had been granted therein. (Rule 47,
Sec. 7)
A certified true copy of the judgment or final order
or resolution shall be attached to the original copy Suspension of Prescriptive Period
of the petition intended for the court and indicated The prescriptive period for the re-filing of the
as such by the petitioner. (Rule 47, Sec. 4) aforesaid original action shall be deemed
suspended from the filing of such original action
We have consistently held that a person need not until the finality of the judgment of annulment.
be party to the judgment sought to be annulled.
What is essential is that he can prove his However, the prescriptive period shall not be
allegation that the judgment was obtained by the suspended where the extrinsic fraud is
use of fraud and collusion and that he would be attributable to the plaintiff in the original action.
adversely affected thereby. (Bulawan v. (Rule 47, Section 8); hence:
Aquende, G.R. No. 182819, 2011)
General Rule: Prescriptive period for refiling the
Material dates need to be stated to prove that the original action shall be deemed suspended from
petition was filed within 4 years from the filing a Rule 47 until finality of the judgment of
discovery of the fraud; fraud must be extrinsic annulment
(Ramos v. Combong, Jr., G.R. No. 144273, 2005)
Exception: If the extrinsic fraud is attributable to
Submitted wrongly to the jurisdiction of the RTC the plaintiff in the original action – prescriptive
(should have been LBAA); once a party invokes period shall not be suspended
the jurisdiction of a court, that party cannot then
deny it and use it as bases for a Rule 47 (Sps. Relief available
Teaño v. Navotas, G.R. No. 205814, 2016) The judgment of annulment may include:
1. Award of damages;
Action by the Court 2. Attorney’s fees; and
The court may: 3. Other relief.
1. Dismiss the petition outright, if it finds no
substantial merit in the petition, with If the questioned judgment or final order or
specific reasons for such dismissal; resolution had already been executed, the court
2. Give due course if the court finds prima may issue:
facie merit in the petition, in which case 1. Orders of restitution or
summons shall be served on the 2. Other relief as justice and equity may
respondent. (Rule 47, Sec. 5) warrant under the circumstances. (Rule
47, Sec. 9)
Procedure
A petition for annulment of judgment filed in the Annulment of Judgments or Final Orders of
Court of Appeals shall observe the procedure in MTC
ordinary civil actions. Should a trial be An action to annul a judgment or final order of a
necessary, the reception of the evidence may be Municipal Trial Court shall be filed in the Regional
referred to a member of the Court or a Regional Trial Court having jurisdiction over the former. It
Trial Court judge. (Rule 47, Sec. 6) shall be treated as an ordinary civil action and
sections 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, and 9 of this Rule shall be
Effects Of Judgment Of Annulment applicable thereto. (Rule 47, Sec. 10)
A judgment of annulment shall set aside the
questioned judgment or final order or resolution Remedies from a Rule 47
and render the same null and void, without If petition is denied – Rule 45 to SC (if question of
prejudice to the original action being re-filed in the law)
proper court.
If question of fact – no remedy left

ATENEO CENTRAL
Direct attack distinguished from collateral

If given due course (interlocutory) – Rule 65 to SC attack
5. COLLATERAL ATTACK OF A DIRECT ATTACK against a judgment is made

JUDGMENTS through an action or proceeding the main object
of which is to annul set aside, or enjoin the
Collateral attack of judgments enforcement of such judgment, if not yet carried
A collateral attack upon a judgment has been into effect; or, if the property has been disposed
defined to mean any proceeding in which the of, the aggrieved party may sue for recovery.
integrity of a judgment is challenged, except
those made in the action wherein the judgment is A COLLATERAL ATTACK is made when, in
rendered or by appeal, and except suits brought another action to obtain a different relief, an
to obtain decrees declaring judgments to be attack on the judgment is made as an incident in
void ab initio. (15 R.C.L., 838); (Alviar vs. said action. This is proper only when the
Carlos, G.R. No. L-45291, 1937) judgment, on its face, is null and void, as where it
is patent that the court which rendered said
In case of collateral attack, the principles that judgment has no jurisdiction. (Co vs. CA, G.R.
apply have been stated as follows: “The No. 93687, 1991)
legitimate province of collateral impeachment is
void judgments. There and there alone can it U. EXECUTION, SATISFACTION AND
meet with any measure of success. EFFECT OF JUDGMENTS
Decision after decision bears this import: In every Difference Between Final Judgment For
case the field of collateral inquiry is narrowed Purposes Of Appeal; For Purposes Of
down to the single issue concerning the void Execution
character of the judgment and the assailant is
called upon to satisfy the court that such is the For Purposes Of Appeal
fact. To compass his purpose of overthrowing the General Rule: Final judgments dispose of,
judgment, it is not enough that he shows a adjudicate, or determine the rights of the parties
mistaken or erroneous decision or a record and leave nothing to be adjudicated upon. Only
disclosing non-jurisdictional irregularities in the final judgments can be the subject of an appeal.
proceedings leading up to the judgment.
Final judgment or order distinguished from
He must go beyond this and show to the court, interlocutory order
generally from the fact of the record itself, that the
judgment complained of is utterly void. If he can Final judgment or order
do that his attack will succeed for the cases leave A final judgment or order is one that finally
no doubt respecting the right of a litigant to disposes of a case, leaving nothing more to be
collaterally impeach a judgment that he can prove done by the Court in respect thereto, e.g., an
to be void.” (I Freeman on Judgments, sec. 322, adjudication on the merits which, on the basis of
p. 642.); (Barretto vs. Barretto-Datu, G.R. No. L- the evidence presented at the trial, declares
5549, 1954) categorically what the rights and obligations of
the parties are and which party is in the right; or
Note: In the case of Sps. Benatiro, the CFI a judgment or order that dismisses an action on
(RTC)'s order being null and void, it may be the ground, for instance, of res judicata or
assailed anytime, collaterally or in a direct action prescription. Once rendered, the task of the Court
or by resisting such judgment or final order in any is ended, as far as deciding the controversy or
action or proceeding whenever it is invoked, determining the rights and liabilities of the litigants
unless barred by laches. Consequently, the is concerned.
compromise agreement and the Order approving Nothing more remains to be done by the Court
it must be declared null and void and set aside. except to await the parties' next move and
(Sps. Benatiro vs. Heirs of Cuyos, G.R. No. ultimately, of course, to cause the execution of
161220, 2008) the judgment once it becomes "final" or, to use
the established and more distinctive term, "final

ATENEO CENTRAL
and executory." (Philippine Business Bank vs. Requisites of a Writ of Execution

Chua, G.R. No. 178899, 2010) The writ must conform strictly to the decision or
judgment; it cannot vary the terms of the
Interlocutory order judgment it seeks to enforce.
An interlocutory order does not finally dispose of
the case and does not end the Court's task of Execution As A Matter Of Right
adjudicating the parties' contentions and When execution is a matter of right
determining their rights and liabilities as regards On motion:
each other, but obviously indicates that other Upon judgment or order that disposes of the
things remain to be done by the Court, is action or proceeding;
"interlocutory", e.g., an order denying a motion to Upon expiration of the period to appeal
dismiss under Rule 16 of the Rules. Unlike a final therefrom and no appeal has been duly
judgment or order, which is appealable, an perfected;
interlocutory order may not be questioned on When appeal has been duly perfected and
appeal except only as part of an appeal that may resolved with finality. (Rule 39, Sec. 1)
eventually be taken from the final judgment
rendered in the case. (Philippine Business Bank Judgments and final orders which may be
vs. Chua, G.R. No. 178899, 2010) executed as a matter of right even BEFORE
expiration of time to appeal:
For Purposes Of Execution: (Note: Without need of advance notice or service
Execution of a final and executory judgment is a of a motion for execution on defeated party)
matter of right. A judgment is final and executory 1. Judgment of lower court against
when the law/rules do not provide for an appeal defendant in forcible entry and unlawful
or the period to appeal has lapsed without an detainer (where the defendant fails to
appeal being taken. post a supersedeas bond or deposit the
rentals with the court, or where the
Final judgments distinguished from final and appeal is from a decision of the regional
executory judgments trial court against the defendant).
Judgments are “FINAL” in a sense that they 2. Judgment in action for injunction,
finally dispose of, adjudicate, or determine the receivership, accounting and support,
rights of the parties. But such judgments are not unless otherwise ordered by the court.
yet final and executory pending the period of 3. Award, judgment, final order, or
appeal. During that period, execution of the resolution of quasi-judicial bodies
judgment cannot be yet demanded by the winning appealable to the Court of Appeals.
party as a matter of right. (Feria and Noche, Civil Procedure
Annotated, 2013 ed., vol. 2, p. 127)
Judgments become “FINAL AND
EXECUTORY” by operation of law. Finality of Section 1 of Rule 39 of the Revised Rules of
judgment becomes a fact upon the lapse of the Court does not prescribe that a copy of the motion
reglementary period to appeal if no appeal is for the execution of a final and executory
perfected. In such a situation, the prevailing party judgment be served on the defeated party, like
is entitled to a writ of execution, and issuance litigated motions such as a motion to dismiss
thereof is a ministerial duty of the court. (Abrigo (section 3, Rule 16), or motion for new trial
vs. Flores, G.R. No. 160786, 2013); (Feria and (section 2, Rule 37), or a motion for execution of
Noche, Civil Procedure Annotated, 2013 ed., vol. judgment pending appeal (section 2, Rule 39), in
2, p.127) all of which instances a written notice thereof is
required to be served by the movant on the
Doctrine of Immutability of Judgments adverse party in order to afford the latter an
See discussion under Post-Judgment Remedies opportunity to resist the application.
When Execution Shall Issue Once the judgment has become final and
NO appeal may be taken from an order of executory, the prevailing party (judgment obligee)
execution. A party desiring to assail an order of may, by motion, ask for the issuance of a writ
execution may instead file an appropriate special execution of the judgment in the court of origin.
civil action under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court.

ATENEO CENTRAL
(Far Eastern Surety vs. Vda. de Hernandez, G.R. Grounds for Quashing a Writ of Execution
No. L-30359, 1975) 1. When the writ of execution varies the
judgment;
The prevailing party can have it executed as a 2. When there has been a change in the
matter of right, and the judgment debtor need not situation of the parties making the
be given advance notice of the application for execution inequitable or unjust;
execution nor be afforded prior hearings thereon. 3. When execution is sought to be enforced
(De Mesa vs. CA, G.R. No. 109387) against property exempt from execution;
4. When it appears that the controversy has
Elementary is the rule that every motion must never been submitted to the judgment of
contain the mandatory requirements of notice and the court;
hearing and that there must be proof of service 5. When the terms of the judgment are not
thereof. The rule, however, is NOT ABSOLUTE. clear enough and there remains room for
There are motions that can be acted upon by the interpretation thereof;
court ex parte if these would not cause prejudice 6. When it appears that the writ of execution
to the other party. They are not strictly covered by has been improvidently issued;
the rigid requirement of the rules on notice and 7. When it appears that the writ of execution
hearing of motions. A motion for execution is such is defective in substance, or is issued
kind of motion. (Anama vs. CA, G.R. No. 187021, against the wrong party or that the
2012) judgment debt has been paid or
otherwise satisfied, or the writ was issued
The issuance of the writ of execution is the without authority.
ministerial duty of the court. Thus, it is
compellable by MANDAMUS. You can also file a petition for certiorari under
Rule 65 with prayer for TRO to restrain execution.
Exceptions (When the Court May Refuse (Albano, Remedial Law Reviewer)
Execution):
1. Where the judgment turns out to be When execution of final and executory
incomplete or conditional; judgments may be ENJOINED:
2. Judgment is novated by the parties (e.g. 1. Upon filing of a petition for relief from
compromise); judgment, the court in which the petition
3. Change in the situation of the parties is field may grant preliminary injunction
which would render execution of judgment for the preservation of the rights of the
unjust; parties pending the proceedings;
4. Execution is enjoined (e.g., there is a 2. In an attack against a judgment which is
preliminary injunction); void for lack of jurisdiction or was
5. Judgment has become dormant; obtained through fraud, the court in which
6. Execution is unjust or impossible. the action for certiorari, injunction, or
annulment is filed may grant preliminary
A compromise agreement, once approved by injunction; and
final order of the court, has the force of res 3. On equitable grounds. (Feria and Noche,
judicata between the parties and should not be Civil Procedure Annotated, 2013 ed., vol.
disturbed except for vices of consent or forgery. 2, p. 130)
Hence, a decision on a compromise agreement is
final and executory and it has the force of law and General Rule: The dispositive portion of the
is conclusive between the parties. It transcends decision is that part that becomes the subject of
its identity as a mere contract binding only upon execution.
the parties thereto as it becomes a judgment that
is subject to execution in accordance with the Exceptions:
Rules of Court. (Sonley v. Anchor Savings Where there is ambiguity, the body of the opinion
Bank/Equicom Savings Bank, G.R. 205623, may be referred to for purposes of construing
2016) the judgment. (Mutual Security Insurance
Corporation v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-
47018, 1987)

ATENEO CENTRAL
Where extensive and explicit discussion and Good reasons consist of compelling
settlement of the issue is found in the body of the circumstances justifying immediate execution lest
decision. (Wilson Ong Ching Kian Chung, et al v. judgment becomes illusory, or the prevailing
Chinese National Cereals Oil and Foodstuffs party, after the lapse of time, be unable to enjoy
Import and Export Corp, et al. G.R. No. 131502, it, considering the tactics of the adverse party
June 8, 2000) who may have apparently no cause but to delay.
(Archinet International, Inc. v. Beco Philippines,
Discretionary Execution Inc. G.R. No. 183753, 2009)
Execution of a judgment or a final order Examples of GOOD REASONS:

pending appeal That the appeal was being taken for the purpose
Requisites: of delay. (Presbitero v. Roxas 73 Phil. 300, 1941)
1. Motion for execution filed by the
prevailing party; Where the education of the person to be
2. Notice of the motion to adverse party; supported would be unduly delayed. (Javier v.
and Lucero, et al. G.R. No. L-6706, 1953)
3. Good reasons stated in a special order
after due hearing. (Rule 39, Sec. 2) The insolvency of the judgment debtor. (Archinet
International, Inc. v. Becco Philippines, Inc. G.R.
On motion, WITH NOTICE to the adverse party, No. 183753, 2009)
the prevailing party may apply for a writ of
execution of judgment or final order pending However, when there are several defendants and
appeal. the co-defendant is not insolvent, insolvency of a
defendant is not a good reason for execution.
This must be done while trial court has (Philippine National Bank v. Puno G.R. No.
jurisdiction over the case and is in possession 76018, 1989)
of either the original record or record on
appeal. The court may, in its discretion, order Execution of several, separate or partial
execution even before the expiration of the period judgments.
for appeal. Several separate or partial judgments MAY be
executed under the SAME terms and conditions
After the trial court has lost jurisdiction, the as execution of judgment or final order pending
motion for execution pending appeal may be filed appeal.
with the appellate court.
Note: An award for actual/compensatory
Note: Awards for MORAL and EXEMPLARY damages may be ordered executed pending
damages CANNOT be the subject of execution appeal, but not an award for moral or
pending appeal. (International School, Inc. exemplary damages.
(Manila) v. CA, G.R. No. 131109, 1999) Unlike
the actual damages for which the petitioners may Stay of Discretionary Execution
clearly be held liable if they breach a specific Stayed upon approval by the proper court of a
contract and the amounts of which are fixed and sufficient supersedeas bond filed by the party
certain, liabilities with respect to moral and against whom it is directed, conditioned upon the
exemplary damages as well as the exact performance of the judgment or order allowed to
amounts remain uncertain and indefinite pending be executed in case it shall be finally sustained in
resolution by the Intermediate Appellate Court whole or in part.
(now CA) and eventually the Supreme
Court. (Radio Communications v. Lantin, G.R. The supersedeas bond is filed by the petitioner
No. L-59311, 1985) and approved by the court BEFORE the judgment
becomes final and executory. It guarantees the
Note: Execution pending appeal is NOT satisfaction of the judgment in case of affirmation
applicable in land registration proceedings. on appeal. (Rule 38, Section 3)
What is a Good Reason Note: Section 3 (Stay of Discretionary Execution)

finds application in ordinary civil actions where

ATENEO CENTRAL
the interest of the prevailing party is capable of The Revived Judgment may be enforced:
pecuniary estimation, and consequently, of 1. By motion, within 5 years from date of its
protection, through the filing of a supersedeas entry; or
bond. Thus, the penultimate sentence of Section 2. By action, after the lapse of 5 years,
3 states: “[T]he bond thus given may be before it is barred by the statute of
proceeded against on motion with notice to the limitations. (Rule 38, Section 6)
surety.” Consequently, it finds no application in
election protest cases where judgments Suspension of the 5 Year Period for Execution
invariably include orders which are not capable of by Motion
pecuniary estimation such as the right to hold While the general rule is that a judgment can no
office and perform its functions. (Navarosa vs. longer be affected by mere motion after 5 years
Comelec, G.R. No. 157957, 2003) from the date of entry, delays in the execution of
the judgment that are ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE
Judgments NOT Stayed By Appeal DEBTOR has the effect of SUSPENDING the
General Rule: Judgment is stayed by appeal. If running of the prescriptive period for the
so stayed, it is not yet executory. enforcement of the judgment.
Exceptions: Instances when judgments are
immediately executory: Execution by Independent Action – REVIVAL
1. Injunction; OF JUDGMENT
2. Receivership; A revived judgment is deemed a new judgment,
3. Accounting; separate and distinct from the original judgment.
4. Support; Hence, the 5 year period to enforce the judgment
5. Other judgments declared to be immediately by motion and the 10 year period to enforce the
executory as ordered by the trial court. (Rule judgment by action will run from the date of finality
39, Sec. 4) of the revived judgment and not of the original
judgment.
These exceptions shall be enforceable after
their rendition and shall NOT be stayed by an The action for revival of judgment need not
appeal taken therefrom UNLESS otherwise necessarily be filed with the same court that
ordered by the trial court. decided the case; it shall be filed in the RTC as
one incapable of pecuniary estimation.
On appeal therefrom, the appellate court in its
discretion MAY make an order suspending, SECTION 6 SECTION 34
modifying, restoring or granting the injunction,
receivership, accounting, or award of support. An independent action Not an independent
The stay of execution shall be upon such terms assigned a new docket action; merely by
as may be considered proper for the security or number with payment motion filed in court
protection of the rights of the adverse party. of filing fees, assigned
to a new court
Effect of Reversal of Executed Judgment
The trial court may, on motion, issue such orders Assumes that there is Assumes that a
of restitution or reparation of damages as equity no execution within the judgment is executed
and justice may warrant under the circumstances. first five years within the first five
(Rule 39, Section 5) years
How Judgment Is Executed The party who files the The party who files the
action is the judgment motion is not the
Execution By Motion Or By Independent creditor himself, or his original judgment
Action assignee, or creditor but the highest
A Final and Executory Judgment or Order may successor-in-interest bidder in the public
be executed: auction sale
1. On motion, within 5 years from entry; or
2. By filing an independent action for Filed due to lapse of Filed because movant
revival of judgment after 5 years but the five-year period is deprived of the
before 10 years from entry. property purchased

ATENEO CENTRAL
Execution in case of death or party An appeal is the remedy for an order denying the
In case of death of the judgment obligee, issuance of a writ of execution.
execution will issue upon the application of the
executor or administrator or successor-in- Issuance of the corresponding writ of execution
interest. upon a final and executory judgment is a
ministerial duty of the court to execute which is
In case of death of judgment obligor: compellable by mandamus (Ebero v. Cañizares,
BEFORE levy: G.R. No. L-1397, 1947)
1. Execution will issue if the action is for the
recovery of real or personal property or any Execution Of Judgments For Money
lien thereon.
2. Execution will not issue if the action is for the A Judgment for Money is enforced by:
recovery of a sum of money. The judgment 1. Immediate payment on demand;
obligee must file a claim against the estate of 2. Satisfaction by levy;
the judgment obligor under Rule 86. 3. Garnishment of debts and credits. (Rule
39, Sec. 9)
AFTER levy: Execution will continue even in
money judgment. The property may be sold Immediate payment on demand
for the satisfaction of the judgment obligation, Judgment obligor shall pay in cash, certified bank
and the officer making the sale shall account check payable to the judgment obligee, or any
to the corresponding executor or other form of payment acceptable to the latter of
administrator for any surplus in his hands. the full amount stated in the writ of execution.
(Rule 39, Section 7)
Satisfaction by levy
Issuance And Contents Of A Writ Of Levy is a prerequisite to the auction sale. In order
Execution that an execution sale may be valid, there must
be a previous valid levy. A sale not preceded by
Writ Of Execution a valid levy is void and the purchaser acquires no
A judicial writ issued to an officer authorizing title. (Valenzuela v. De Aguila, G.R. No. L-18083-
him/her to execute the judgment of the court. 83, 1963)
Requisites: The officer shall levy upon properties of the

1. Must strictly conform to the decision or judgment obligor not otherwise exempt from
judgment which gives it life; execution.
2. Cannot vary the terms of judgment it
seeks to enforce. The judgment obligor exercises discretion to
choose which property to levy and if not
The Writ must: exercised; the officer shall levy first on personal
1. Be issued in the name of the Republic of property, then on real property.
the Philippines from the court, which
granted the motion; The sheriff shall sell only property sufficient to
2. State the name of the court, the case satisfy the judgment and other lawful fees.
number and title, the dispositive part of
the subject judgment or order; and The levy on execution creates a lien in favor of
3. Require the sheriff or other proper officer the judgment obligee over the right, title, and
to enforce the writ according to its terms. interest of the judgment obligor in such property
at the time of the levy, subject to liens and
The motion for execution and the writ of execution encumbrances then existing.
must state specifically the amount of interest,
costs, damages, rents, or profits due as of the Mistaken Levy
date of issuance of the writ, aside from the Upon due application of the third person and after
principal obligation. summary hearing, the court may command that
the property be released from the mistaken levy
Special sheriffs for the service of a writ of and restored to the rightful owner or possessor.
execution are not authorized by law. What said court can do in these instances,

ATENEO CENTRAL
however, is limited to a determination of whether Sale of real or personal property

the sheriff has acted rightly or wrongly in the The officer must sell such property, describing it,
performance of his duties in the execution of and apply the proceeds in conformity with the
judgment, more specifically, if he has indeed judgment.
taken hold of property not belonging to the
judgment debtor. The court does not and cannot Delivery or restitution of real property
pass upon the question of title to the property, The officer shall demand the losing party to
with any character of finality (Magdalena T. Villasi peaceably vacate the property within 3 working
v. Filomena Garcia, substituted by his heirs, days, and restore possession to judgment
namely, Ermelinda H. Garcia, et al., G.R. No. obligee; otherwise, the officer shall oust such
190106, 2014) disobedient party.
Garnishment of debts and credits Removal of improvements on property

subject of execution
GARNISHMENT is an act of appropriation by the Officer shall not destroy, demolish, or remove
court when the property of a debtor is in the hands improvements except upon special order of the
of a third person. It is a species of attachment for court.
reaching any property or credits pertaining or
payable to a judgment debtor. Delivery Of Personal Property
The officer shall take possession of the same and
Note: Garnishment is proper only when the forthwith deliver it to the party entitled to satisfy
judgment to be enforced is one for payment of a any judgment for money as therein provided.
SUM OF MONEY. It cannot be employed to (Rule 39, Section 10)
implement a special judgment such as that
rendered in a special civil action for mandamus. If the party refuses to vacate the property, the
(National Home Mortgage vs. Alpajaro, G.R. No. Sheriff must oust the party. But if demolition is
166508, 2009) involved, there must be a special order.
The sheriff may levy on debts due to the debtor, A writ of execution directing the sheriff to cause
or other credits, including bank deposits, financial the defendant to vacate is in the nature of a
interests, royalties, commissions and other habere facias possessionem and authorizes the
personal property, not capable of manual delivery sheriff to break open the premises where there is
in the possession or control of 3rd parties. Notice no occupant therein. (Arcadio v. Ylagan, A.C. No.
must be served to the 3rd party. 2734, July 30, 1986)
Note: The unused balance of an overdraft When the party refuses to comply, the court can
account is not a credit subject to garnishment. appoint some other person at the expense of the
(Feria and Noche, Civil Procedure Annotated, disobedient party and the act done shall have the
2013 ed., vol. 2, p.181) same effect as if the disobedient party performed
it.
The garnishee or the 3rd person who is in
possession of the property of the judgment debtor Execution Of Special Judgments
is deemed a forced intervenor. One which can only be complied with by the
judgment obligor because of his/her personal
Execution Of Judgments For Specific Acts qualifications or circumstances.
Conveyance, delivery of deeds, or other For example, a judgment granting a petition for
specific acts; vesting title. mandamus is a special judgment, since a writ of
If a party fails to comply within the time specified, mandamus is a command directed to an inferior
the court may direct the act to be done at the cost court, tribunal, or board, or to some corporation
of the disobedient party. or person, requiring the performance of a
particular duty, and which duty results from the
official station of the party to whom the writ is
directed, or from operation of law. (National

ATENEO CENTRAL
Housing Mortgage Finance Corporation v. 9. Salaries, wages, or earnings as are

Abayari, G.R. No. 166508, 2009) necessary for support of family within 4
months preceding levy.
Requisites: 10. Lettered gravestones.
1. The judgment requires performance of 11. Monies, benefits, privileges, or annuities
any act other than payment of money, or accruing out of any life insurance; and
the sale or delivery of real or personal 12. Properties specially exempt from
property. execution.
2. A certified copy of the judgment shall be:
a. Attached to the writ of execution; Other EXEMPTIONS:
and 1. Property mortgaged to DBP. (Section 26,
b. Served by the office upon: C.A. 458)
3. Party against whom the judgment is 2. Property taken over by Alien Property
rendered; Administration. (Section 9[f], US Trading
4. Any other person required by the With The Enemy Act)
judgment or by law to obey the writ. (Rule 3. Savings of national prisoners deposited
39, Sec. 11) with the Postal Savings Bank. (Act 2489)
4. Backpay of pre-war civilian employees.
Failure to comply with special judgment under (R.A. 304)
Rule 39, Section 11 is punishable by contempt 5. Philippine Government backpay to
by imprisonment. This is an exception to the rule guerillas. (R.A. 897)
that contempt is not a remedy to enforce a 6. Produce, work animals, and farm
judgment. implements of agricultural lessees,
subject to limitations. (Section 21, R.A.
Effect Of Levy On Third Persons 6389)
A levy creates a lien in favor of the judgment 7. Benefits from private retirement systems
obligee over the right, title and interest of the of companies and establishments, with
judgment obligor in such property at the time of limitations. (R.A. 4917)
the levy, subject to liens and encumbrances then 8. Labor wages, except for debts incurred
existing. for food, shelter, clothing, and medical
attendance. (Civil Code, Art. 1708)
Properties Exempt From Execution 9. Benefit payments from the SSS. (Section
Except as otherwise expressly provided by law, 16 R.A. 1161 as amended by P.D.s 24,
the following property, and no other, shall be 65, and 177)
EXEMPT from execution: 10. Copyrights and other rights in intellectual
1. Family home, or homestead, land property under the former copyright law.
necessarily used in connection therewith. (P.D. 49 cf. Section 239.3, R.A. 8293)
2. Ordinary tools and implements used in 11. Bonds issued under R.A. 1000.
trade, employment, or livelihood. (NASSCO v. CIR G.R. No. L-17874, 31
3. Three (3) horses, cows, carabaos, or August 1963; Regalado, F. Remedial
other beast of burden necessarily used in Law Compendium Vol. 1, 9th ed., pp.
his/her ordinary occupation. 481-482)
4. Necessary clothing and articles for
ordinary personal use, except jewelry. But no article or species of property mentioned in
5. Household furniture and utensils this section shall be exempt from execution
issued upon a judgment recovered for its price or
necessary for housekeeping that is ≤ upon a judgment of foreclosure of a mortgage
P100K. hereon.
6. Provisions for individual or family use Based on Section 8(g) of R.A. 9262 (Anti-
sufficient for 4 months. Violence Against Women and Their Children Act),
7. Professional libraries and equipment.
the court has the power to direct the employer to
8. One fishing boat and accessories ≤ withhold the appropriate amount from the
P100K used in livelihood. Respondent’s salary and to automatically remit
the same to the woman, despite what other laws

ATENEO CENTRAL
provide. The Supreme Court ruled that Section days before the sale, except as provided in
8(g) of R.A. 9262, which is a later law, should be paragraph (a) where notice shall be given at any
understood to be an exception to the general rule time before the sale. It shall specify the place,
prohibiting garnishment of the benefits. In date and exact time of sale (between 9AM and
addition, the Supreme Court declared that the 2PM). (Rule 39, Sec. 15)
law’s use of the term “employer” applies to all
employers, whether private or government. Place Of Sale
(Republic of the Philippines vs. Daisy R. Yahon, 1. May be agreed upon by the parties; or
G.R. No. 201043, June 16,2014) 2. In the absence of such agreement, the sale
will be held in:
Return of Writ of Execution 1. Sale or Real or Personal Property NOT
The writ of execution shall be returnable to the Capable of Manual Delivery:
court immediately after the judgment has been Office of the Clerk of Court of MTC or
satisfied in part or in full. RTC which issued the writ or was
designated by the appellate court
If the judgment cannot be satisfied in full within 2. Sale of Personal Property Capable of
thirty (30) days after receipt of the writ, the officer Manual Delivery:
shall report to the court and state the reason Place where property is located. (Rule
therefor. (Rule 39, Sec. 4) 39, Sec. 15)
Lifetime of the Writ of Execution Proceedings Where Property Is Claimed By

The writ shall continue in effect during the period Third Persons
within which the judgment may be enforced by
motion. (Rule 39, Sec. 4) Thus, the writ is Who May File Third Party-Claims
enforceable within the five (5) year period from Any other person other than the judgment obligor
entry of judgment. or his agent. (Third-party claimant)
NOTICE OF SALE of Property on Execution Time to File a Third-Party Claim

The third (3rd) party claim (terceria) may be filed
If PERISHABLE property: By posting written at any time, so as long as the sheriff has the
notice of the time and place of the sale in three possession of the property levied upon, or before
(3) public places, preferably in conspicuous areas the property is sold under execution.
of the municipal or city hall, post office and public
market where the sale is to take place, for such Purpose of Third-Party Claim:
time as may be reasonable, considering the 1. To recover the property levied on by the
character and condition of the property. sheriff, although the claimant may
vindicate his claim by any proper action
OTHER PERSONAL property: By posting even if he has not filed a third-party claim.
similar notice in three (3) public places above- 2. To hold the sheriff liable for damages for
mentioned for not less than five (5) days. the taking or keeping of such property,
which action for damages, however,
If REAL property: By posting for 20 days in three must be brought within 120 days from the
(3) public places particularly describing the date of the filing of the bond. (Feria and
property and stating where the property is to be Noche, Civil Procedure Annotated, 2013
sold, and if the assessed value of the property ed., vol. 2, p. 211)
exceeds P50,000, by publishing a copy of the
notice once a week for two (2) consecutive weeks Procedure in Making a Third-Party Claim
in one (1) newspaper selected by raffle (whether Third (3rd) Party Claimant should:
in English, Filipino, or any major regional 1. Make an affidavit of his/her title
language published, edited and circulated or, in thereto, or right of possession thereof,
the absence thereof, having general circulation in stating the grounds of such right or title;
the province or city). and
2. Serve such affidavit upon the sheriff and
In all cases, written notice of the sale shall be a copy thereof upon the judgment
given to the judgment obligor, at least three (3) obligee.

ATENEO CENTRAL
Proceedings where property is claimed by a third

Effect: The Officer shall not be bound to keep person are the same as to a judgment obligee
the property, UNLESS the Judgment Obligee, (final and executory judgments), an attaching
on demand the officer files an INDEMNITY party (attachment), and an applicant praying
BOND approved by the court to indemnify the for recovery of possession of personal
third party claimant in a sum not less than the property (replevin), EXCEPT that the amount of
value of the property levied on. the INDEMNITY BOND they file differs.
In case of disagreement as to the value of the Attachment

property, the Court issuing the writ shall To keep the property in the possession of the
determine the same. sheriff, the ATTACHING PARTY or his AGENT,
on demand of the sheriff, shall file a BOND
The Officer shall not be liable for damages to any approved by the court to indemnify the third-party
third-party claimant if such bond is filed by the claimant in a sum not less than the value of the
judgment obligee for the taking or keeping of the property levied upon. (Rule 57, Sec. 14)
property.
Remedy: Nothing shall prevent a claimant or any
Nothing herein contained shall prevent such third person from vindicating his claim to the
claimant or any third person from vindicating his property, or prevent the attaching party from
claim to the property in a SEPARATE action. claiming damages against a third-party claimant
(Rule 39, Section 16) who filed a frivolous or plainly spurious claim, in
the SAME or a SEPARATE action. (Rule 57, Sec.
However, the judgment obligee can claim 14)
damages against a third-party claimant who filed
a frivolous or plainly spurious claim, and such Under Rule 39, Sec. 16, the third party claimant
judgment obligee can institute proceedings does not have a remedy in the same action
therefor in the SAME or SEPARATE action. because intervention is only allowed before
judgment. His remedy is a separate action.
When the writ of attachment is issued in favor of However, in Villasi v. Garcia, (G.R. No. 190106,
the Republic of the Philippines, or any officer 2014), the third party claimant can file a motion
duly representing it, the filing of such bond shall for SUMMARY HEARING.
NOT be required, and in case the sheriff is sued
for damages as a result of the attachment, he Replevin
shall be represented by the Solicitor General, To keep the property in the possession of the
and if held liable therefor, the actual damages sheriff or to have the latter deliver the property to
adjudged by the court shall be paid by the the applicant, the APPLICANT or his AGENT, on
National Treasurer out of the funds to be demand of said sheriff, shall file a bond approved
appropriated for the purpose. (Rule 39, Sec. 14) by the court to indemnify the third-party claimant
in a sum not less than double the value of the
The third-party claimant may execute an affidavit property as stated in the applicant’s affidavit.
of his title or right to the possession of the (Rule 60, Sec. 7)
property levied, and serve the same to the officer
making the levy and a copy thereof to the Remedy: Nothing shall prevent claimant or any
judgment creditor. This remedy is known as 3rd person from vindicating his claim to the
terceria. The officer shall not be bound to keep property, or prevent the applicant from claiming
the property, unless the judgment creditor files a damages against a 3rd-party claimant who filed a
bond approved by the court to indemnify the third- frivolous or plainly spurious claim, in the SAME or
party claimant in a sum not less than the value of a SEPARATE action. (Rule 60, Sec. 7)
the property levied on. (PSALM v. Maunlad
Homes, GR No. 215933, 8 February 2017). Execution Sale
Penalty for selling without notice, or removing
In Relation To Third-Party Claim In or defacing notice
Attachment And Replevin
The following are liable for actual and punitive
damages:

ATENEO CENTRAL
1. An officer selling without the notice Title acquired after the Title acquired upon
required under Section 15; and expiration of the period entry of the
2. A person willfully removing or defacing of redemption when confirmation and
the notice posted, if done before the sale, the final deed of registration of the
or before satisfaction of judgment if conveyance is foreclosure sale
satisfied before the sale. executed
Actual and punitive damages may be recovered
by motion in the same action. (Rule 39, Sec. 17) Refusal of Purchaser to Pay
The officer may again sell the property to the
No Sale if Judgment and Costs Paid highest bidder and shall not be responsible for
At any time before the sale of property on any loss occasioned thereby. But the court may
execution, the judgment obligor may prevent the order the refusing purchaser to pay to the court
sale by paying the amount required by the the amount of such loss with costs. The court
execution and the costs that have been incurred may punish him/her for contempt if he/she
therein. (Rule 39, Sec. 18) disobeys the order. The officer may then reject
any subsequent bid of such purchaser who
How property sold on execution; who may refuses to pay. (Rule 39, Sec. 20)
direct manner and order of sale
Sales of property under execution must be made: If Judgment Obligee is Purchaser
1. At public auction. When the purchaser is the judgment obligee, and
2. To the highest bidder. no third party claim has been filed, he/she need
3. To start at the exact time fixed in the not pay the amount of the bid if it does not exceed
notice. the amount of his/her judgment. If it does, he/she
shall pay only the excess. (Rule 39, Sec. 21)
After sufficient property has been sold to satisfy
the execution, no more shall be sold and any Adjournment of Sale
excess shall be promptly delivered to the With written consent of the judgment obligor and
judgment obligor or his/her authorized obligee or their duly authorized representatives:
representative, unless otherwise directed by the The officer may adjourn the sale to any date and
judgment or order of the court. (Rule 39, Sec. 19) time agreed upon by them.
Without such written consent: The officer may

ORDINARY SALE SALE IN JUDICIAL adjourn the sale from day to day if it becomes
ON EXECUTION FORECLOSURE OF necessary to do so for lack of time. (Rule 39, Sec.
MORTGAGE 22)
No need for Must be confirmed by
confirmation of the the court Conveyance to Purchaser of Personal
court Property Capable of Manual Delivery
When the purchaser pays the purchase price, the
Right of redemption No right of redemption officer making the sale must deliver the property
exists when property is except by the to the purchaser and, if desired, execute and
real mortgagor where the deliver to him/her a certificate of sale. (Rule 39,
mortgagee is a bank or Sec. 23)
a banking institution.
(See Section 47 of Conveyance to Purchaser of Personal
General Banking Law Property NOT Capable of Manual Delivery
of 2000) When the purchaser pays the purchase price, the
officer must execute and deliver a certificate of
If the mortgagee is a sale. The certificate conveys to the purchaser all
non-banking the rights which the judgment obligor had in the
institution, there is no property as of the date of the levy on execution
right to redeem. or preliminary attachment. (Rule 39, Sec. 24)

ATENEO CENTRAL
Note: The execution and delivery of a certificate Redemptioner:

of sale is mandatory for personal property not Within 1 year from the date of registration of
capable of manual delivery (unlike in conveyance the certificate of sale if he/she is the first
of personal property capable of manual delivery). redemptioner; and
This constitutes symbolic delivery. Within 60 days from the last redemption, if
he/she is a subsequent redemptioner.
Conveyance of Real Property; Certificate (Rule 39, Sec. 28)
thereof Given to Purchaser and Filed with the
Registry of Deeds Note: The periods for redemption are not
The officer must give to the purchaser a extendible or interrupted. The parties may,
certificate of sale. however, agree on a longer period. In such case,
it would be a conventional redemption. (Lazo v.
Contents of CERTIFICATE OF SALE: Republic Surety & Insurance Co., G.R. No.
1. A particular description of the real 27365, 1970)
property sold.
2. The price paid for each distinct lot or The judgment debtor has always one year from
parcel. the registration of the certificate of sale within
3. The whole price paid by him/her. which to redeem, regardless of whether there
4. A statement that the right of redemption have been any prior redemptions and the date of
expires 1 year from the date of the such redemptions; and the moment said
registration of the certificate of sale. judgment debtor redeems, there shall be no
(Rule 39, Sec. 25) further redemption.
Note: The certificate of sale in this case is merely The redemptioner, on the other hand, must
provisional. No court confirmation is required. redeem within the one-year period, if he is the first
redemptioner, and within 60 days from the last
Certificate of Sale Where Property is Claimed redemption, if he is a subsequent redemptioner,
by Third Person provided that the judgment debtor has not
The certificate of sale must make express exercised his right of redemption. (Regalado,
mention of the existence of such third-party claim. Remedial Law Compendium, Vol. I, Sixth
(Rule 39, Sec. 26) Revised Edition, p. 457)
Right of Redemption Redemption Price

1. Personal Property - no right because the
sale is absolute. By The Judgment Obligor Or First
2. Real Property - right is given. Redemptioner:
1. Purchase price.
Who may redeem REAL property 2. 1% interest per month thereon, up to the time
1. The JUDGMENT OBLIGOR; or his of redemption.
SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST in the whole or 3. Any amount of assessments or taxes which
any part of the property; the purchaser may have paid thereon after
2. A creditor having a lien by virtue of an purchase and interest on such last named
attachment, judgment or mortgage on the amount at the same rate. and
property sold, or on some part thereof, 4. If the purchaser be also a creditor having a
subsequent to the lien under which the prior lien to that of the redemptioner, other
property was sold. Such redeeming creditor than the judgment under which such
is termed a REDEMPTIONER. (Rule 39, Sec. purchase was made, the amount of such
27) other lien, with interest.
Period to Redeem By Subsequent Redemptioners:

Judgment Debtor: Within 1 year from the 1. Amount paid on the last redemption.
date of registration of the certificate of sale. 2. 2% interest per month thereon.
3. Any amount of assessments or taxes which
the last redemptioner may have paid thereon

ATENEO CENTRAL
after redemption by him/her with interest on 1. To continue to use it in the same manner
such last named amount; and in which it was previously used; or
4. Amount of any liens held by said last 2. To use it in the ordinary course of
redemptioner prior to his/her own, with husbandry; or
interest. 3. To make the necessary repairs to buildings
thereon while he/she occupies the property.
The offer to redeem must be accompanied by a (Rule 39, Sec. 31)
bona fide tender of redemption price. But a
formal offer to redeem with a tender is not Rents, Earnings And Income Of Property
necessary when the right to redeem is exercised Pending Redemption
through the filing of a complaint to redeem in the All rents, earnings and income derived from the
courts, within the period to redeem. property pending redemption shall belong to the
judgment obligor until the expiration of his/her
Certificate of Redemption period of redemption. (Rule 39, Sec. 31)
The person to whom redemption is made must
execute and deliver a certificate of redemption Deed And Possession To Be Given At
acknowledged before a notary public or other Expiration Of Redemption Period; By Whom
officer authorized to take acknowledgments of Executed Or Given
conveyances of real property. (Rule 39, Sec. 29) 1. If NO redemption is made within 1 year
from the date of the registration of the
Proof Of Redemption Required By certificate of sale - the purchaser is
Redemptioner entitled to a conveyance and possession
A redemptioner must produce to the officer, or of the property.
person from whom he/she seeks to redeem, and 2. If redeemed whenever 60 days have
serve with his/her notice to the officer: elapsed and no other redemption has
1. A copy of the judgment or final order been made, and notice thereof given,
certified by the clerk of the court wherein and the time for redemption has expired
the judgment or final order is entered; or, – the last redemptioner is entitled to the
2. If he/she redeems upon a mortgage or conveyance and possession.
other lien, a memorandum of the
record thereof, certified by the registrar In all cases the judgment obligor shall have the
of deeds, or an original or certified entire period of 1 year from the date of the
copy of any assignment necessary to registration of the sale to redeem the property.
establish his/her claim; and
3. An affidavit executed by him/her or The deed shall be executed by:
his/her agent, showing the amount then 1. The officer making the sale; or
actually due on the lien. (Rule 39, Sec. 2. His/her successor in office.
30)
Recovery Of Price If Sale Not Effective;
Manner of Using Premises Pending Revival Of Judgment
Redemption; Waste Restrained The purchaser may recover the purchase price
Until the expiration of the time allowed for if:
redemption, the court may, as in other proper 1. The purchaser or his/her successor-in-
cases, restrain the commission of waste on the interest, fails to recover the possession
property by injunction, on the application of the thereof; or
purchaser or the judgment obligee, with or 2. Is evicted therefrom:
without notice. (Rule 39, Sec. 31) a. In consequence of irregularities
in the proceedings concerning
What is NOT Considered Waste that can be the sale; or
Restrained b. Because the judgment has been
It is NOT waste for a person in possession of the reversed or set aside; or
property at the time of the sale, or entitled to c. Because the property sold was
possession afterwards, during the period allowed exempt from execution; or
for redemption:

ATENEO CENTRAL
d. Because a third person has commissioner to testify as provided in Sections

vindicated his/her claim to the 36 and 37. (Rule 39, Sec. 38)
property.
Effects of Judgments IN REM
The purchaser may: In case of a judgment or final order:
a. File a motion in the same action or in a 1. Against a specific thing; or
separate action to recover from the 2. In respect to the probate of a will; or
judgment obligee the price paid, with 3. The administration of the estate of a
interest, or so much thereof as has not deceased person; or
been delivered to the judgment obligor, 4. In respect to the personal, political,
or or legal condition or status of a
b. File a motion to have the original particular person or his relationship
judgment revived in his/her name for the to another (Example: naturalization,
whole price with interest, or so much adoption, and annulment of
thereof as has been delivered to the marriage)
judgment obligor. (Rule 39, Sec. 34)
The judgment or final order is CONCLUSIVE
Note: The judgment so revived shall have the upon the title to the thing, the will or
same force and effect as an original judgment administration or the condition, status or
would have as of the date of the revival and no relationship of the person.
more. Exception: The probate of a will or granting of
letters of administration shall only be PRIMA
Right To Contribution Or Reimbursement FACIE evidence of the death of the testator or
Contribution and reimbursement may be intestate. (Rule 39, Sec. 47)
obtained in a separate action, unless cross claims
have been filed and adjudicated in the same Effects of Judgments IN PERSONAM
action, in which case, execution may issue to In OTHER CASES, the judgment or final order is,
compel contribution or reimbursement. (Feria and with respect to the matter directly adjudged or as
Noche, Civil Procedure Annotated, 2013 ed., vol to any other matter that could have been missed
2) in relation thereto, CONCLUSIVE between the
parties and their successors in interest, by title
Examination Of Judgment Obligor When subsequent to the commencement of the action
Judgment Is Satisfied or special proceeding, litigating for the same thing
Upon return of writ of execution, and judgment is and under the same title and in the same
still unsatisfied, the creditor may ask the court to capacity. (RES JUDICATA or BAR BY PRIOR
require the debtor to appear and his/her property JUDGMENT)
or income be examined. (Rule 39, Sec. 6)
In ANY OTHER LITIGATION BETWEEN THE
Limitation SAME PARTIES OR THEIR SUCCESSORS IN
No judgment obligor shall be required to appear INTEREST, that only is deemed to have been
before a court or commissioner outside the adjudged in a former judgment or final order
province or city in which such obligor resides or is which appears upon its face to have been so
found. adjudged, or which was actually and necessarily
included therein or necessary thereto.
Examination Of Debtors Of The Judgment (ESTOPPEL BY JUDGMENT OR
Obligor CONCLUSIVENESS OF JUDGMENT)
The court may order to be examined any person
or corporation who has property of the debtor, or Judgment is deemed CONCLUSIVE when the
is indebted to the debtor in order to bind the issues actually and directly resolved in a former
credits due to debtor. (Rule 39, Sec. 37) suit cannot again be raised in any future case
between the same parties involving a different
Enforcement of Attendance and Conduct of cause of action.
Examination
A party or other person may be compelled, by an
order or subpoena, to attend before the court or

ATENEO CENTRAL
Res Judicata or Bar By Prior Judgment In case of a judgment or final order AGAINST
A judgment or decree of a court of competent A PERSON:
jurisdiction concludes the litigation between the The judgment or final order is presumptive
parties and their successors or privies and bars a evidence of a right as between the parties
new action or suit involving the same cause of and their successors in interest by a
action. subsequent title.
Res Judicata v Conclusiveness of Judgment In EITHER case, the judgment or final order may
Res judicata (meaning, a “matter adjudged”) is a be REPELLED by evidence of a:
fundamental principle of law which precludes 1. Want of jurisdiction;
parties from re-litigating issues actually litigated 2. Want of notice to the party;
and determined by a prior and final judgment. 3. Collusion;
There is a bar by prior judgment where there is 4. Fraud; or
identity of parties, subject matter, and causes of 5. Clear mistake of law or fact.
action between the first case where the judgment
was rendered and the second case that is sought Enforcement
to be barred. There is conclusiveness of In order to enforce a foreign judgment in the
judgment, on the other hand, where there is Philippines, it is necessary to file an action
identity of parties in the first and second cases, based on said judgment. A foreign judgment is
but no identity of causes of action. (De Leon v presumed valid and binding in the country from
Dela Llana, G.R. No. 212277, 2015) which it comes, until the contrary is shown. (Feria
and Noche, Civil Procedure Annotated, 2013 ed.,
Estoppel by Judgment or Conclusiveness of vol. 2, p. 287)
Judgment
Any right, fact or matter in issue which has been
directly adjudicated upon or is necessarily Recognition
involved in the determination of the action by a A defendant in a Philippine court may invoke a
competent court is conclusively settled by the foreign judgment as res judicata in his defense. It
judgment or final order and CANNOT be litigated is not necessary to institute a separate action
again by the parties and their privies. or proceeding for recognition of the foreign
judgment, as long as the parties opposed to the
Generally, decisions in administrative cases are judgment on the grounds of want of jurisdiction,
not binding on criminal proceedings. Thus, an want of notice to the party, collusion, fraud, or
absolution from a criminal charge is not a bar to clear mistake of law or fact, have the opportunity
an administrative prosecution or vice versa. to challenge the foreign judgment. (Feria and
However, this case does not involve an Noche, Civil Procedure Annotated, 2013 ed., vol.
administrative charge stemming from the same 2, p. 288)
set of facts involved in the criminal proceeding.
The DARAB case involves a determination of ———— end of topic ————
whether there exists a tenancy relationship
between X and Y, while the criminal case involves
determination of whether X committed theft.
However, the tenancy relationship is a factor in
determining all the elements of theft. Hence,
findings of fact of administrative agencies in the
exercise of quasi-judicial powers are entitled to
respect if supported by substantial evidence.
(People v Ligtas G.R. 200751, August 17, 2015)
Enforcement And Effect Of Foreign

Judgments Or Final Orders
In case of a judgment or final order UPON A
SPECIFIC THING:
The judgment or final order is conclusive
upon the title to the thing.

ATENEO CENTRAL

ATENEO CENTRAL
IV. PROVISIONAL REMEDIES in the law and in the Rules of Court. If left alone,
the hiatus will result in unjust enrichment to the
petitioner at the expense of respondent. The
TOPIC OUTLINE UNDER THE 2023 hiatus may also imperil restitution. (Reyes v. Lim,
SYLLABUS G.R. No. 134241, 2003)
A. Nature and Purpose, and Jurisdiction Other Laws Providing For Provisional
Over Provisional Remedies Remedies
B. Preliminary Attachment (Rule 57) 1. VAWC (R.A. 9282);
C. Preliminary Injunction (Rule 58) 2. Marital cases (nullity, annulment, legal
D. Receivership (Rule 59) separation) (A.M. 02-11-12-SC);
E. Replevin (Rule 60) 3. Human Security Act of 2007 (R.A. 9372);
4. Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2001 (R.A.
A. NATURE AND PURPOSE, AND 9160);
JURISDICTION OVER 5. Financial Rehabilitation an Insolvency Act of
PROVISIONAL REMEDIES 2010 (R.A. 10142);
6. Special rules under Alternative Dispute
Nature of Provisional Remedies Resolution Act (R.A. 9285);
Provisional remedies are temporary and ancillary 7. Custody of minors (A.M. 03-04-04-SC);
remedies to which party-litigants may resort for 8. Provisional remedies relative to the rule on
the preservation or protection of their rights or Writ of Amparo and Writ of Habeas Data;
interests, and for no other purpose, during the 9. Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases
pendency of the principal action. (FERIA & (A.M. No. 09-6-8-SC);
NOCHE, 2013) 10. Precautionary Hold Departure Orders (A.M.
No. 18-07-05-SC).
Purpose of Provisional Remedies
1. To protect the rights of a party during the B. PRELIMINARY ATTACHMENT
litigation;
2. To secure the judgment; Definition of Preliminary Attachment
3. To preserve the subject matter of the
litigation; Attachment is defined as a provisional remedy by
4. To preserve the status quo / status quo which the property of an adverse party is taken
ante; into legal custody, either at the commencement
5. To prevent very serious damage; or of an action or at any time thereafter, as a security
6. To meet a very urgent need. for the satisfaction of any judgment that may be
(RIANO, 2022). recovered by the plaintiff or any proper party.
(Northern Islands Co., Inc. v. Sps. Garcia, G.R.
Provisional Remedies Under The Rules Of No. 203420, March 18, 2015)
Court
1. Preliminary Attachment (Rule 57); Nature of Preliminary Attachment
1. Preliminary Injunction (Rule 58); Being merely ancillary to a principal proceeding,
2. Receivership (Rule 59); the attachment must fail if the principal suit itself
3. Replevin (Rule 60); and cannot be maintained, as the purpose of the writ
4. Support Pendente Lite (Rule 61). can no longer be justified. (RIANO, 2022)
Note: This enumeration is not exclusive. The attachment of the property of the defendant
(Lorenzo Shipping Corp. v. Villarin, G.R. Nos. converts an ordinary action in personam into an
175727 & 178713, 2019) action quasi in rem. In such case, jurisdiction over
the person of the defendant is not required as
In one case, the Court upheld the validity of an long as the court acquires jurisdiction over the
order of the trial court to the petitioner to make a res. (Biaco v. Countryside Rural Bank, G.R. No.
deposit of the down payment paid by the 161417, 2007)
respondent to the former pursuant to an
annulment of a contract of sale. In upholding the Attachment is purely a statutory remedy, and it
order, the Court mentioned that there is a hiatus cannot exist without a statute. Its legal bases for

ATENEO CENTRAL
application include Rule 57 of the Rules of Court property of the debtor being entirely separate and
and Article 1177 of the Civil Code, which distinct. As a rule, the judgment in the main action
authorizes a creditor to pursue the property of the neither changes the nature nor determines the
debtor. (RIANO, 2022) validity of the attachment. (Peroxide Philippines
Corp. v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 92813, 1991)
Purposes of Preliminary Attachment
1. To seize the property of the debtor before final Effectivity of Preliminary Attachment
judgment and put the same in custodia legis The lien continues until the debt is paid, or the
even while the action is pending for the sale is made under execution issued on the
satisfaction of a later judgment. (Insular Bank judgment, or until the judgment is satisfied, or the
of Asia and America v. Court of Appeals, G.R. attachment discharged or vacated in the same
No. L-61011, 1990) manner provided by law. (Lim, Jr. v. Sps. Lazaro,
2. To enable the court to acquire jurisdiction over G.R. No. 185734, 2013)
the res or the property subject of the action in
cases where service in person or any other Who May Apply For a Writ of Preliminary
service to acquire jurisdiction over the Attachment
defendant cannot be effected. (Philippine A plaintiff or any proper party may have the
Commercial International Bank v. Alejandro, property of the adverse party attached. (Sec. 1,
G.R. No. 175587, 2008) Rule 57)
Kinds of Attachments Thus, a writ of preliminary attachment may be

1. PRELIMINARY ATTACHMENT - issued at issued in favor of a defendant who sets up a
the commencement of the action or at any counterclaim. (De Borja v. Platon, G.R. No.
time before entry of judgment as security for 48080, 1942)
the satisfaction of any judgment that may be
recovered. The court takes custody of the Grounds For Issuance Of Preliminary
property. (Sec. 1, Rule 57); Attachment
2. GARNISHMENT - plaintiff reaches a credit/s The following are the grounds for the issuance of
belonging to the defendant and owing to him a preliminary attachment:
from a third person who is a stranger to the 1. Recovery of a specified amount of money
litigation. It does not involve actual seizure of or damages – In an action for the recovery
the property; it simply impounds the property of a specified amount of money or damages,
in the garnishee’s possession and maintains other than moral and exemplary, on a cause
the status quo until the main action is finally of action arising from law, contract, quasi-
decided. (Sec. 7(d), Rule 57; Sec. 9(c), Rule contract, delict, or quasi-delict against a party
39); who is about to depart from the Philippines
3. LEVY ON EXECUTION - the writ issued by with the intent to defraud his creditors;
the court after judgment by which the Note: That the amount be specified is a clear
property of the judgment obligor is taken into requirement of the rule. (RIANO, 2022)
custody of the court before the sale of the
property on execution. (Sec. 9[b], Rule 39) 2. Action for money or property embezzled –
In an action for money or property embezzled
When Writ May be Availed of or fraudulently misapplied or converted to his
An application for the issuance of a writ of own use by a public officer, or an officer of a
attachment may be filed: corporation, or an attorney, factor, broker,
1. At the commencement of the action; or agent, or clerk, in the course of his
2. At any time before entry of judgment. (Sec. 1, employment as such, or by any other person
Rule 57). in a fiduciary capacity, or for a willful violation
of duty;
Before the determination of the liability of the
adverse parties, the writ of preliminary Note: For the writ to be issued, there is no
attachment may properly issue. The attachment need for a showing that the defendant is
does not affect the decision of the case on the concealing, removing, or disposing of his
merits, the right to recover judgment on the property. Under this provision, it is the
alleged indebtedness and the right to attach the character of the office or the duty of the

ATENEO CENTRAL
defendant that is to be considered when the 1. There is a removal or disposal of the

acts, giving rise to the cause of action, are property; and
performed. (RIANO, 2022) 2. The removal or disposal must be with
intent to defraud the creditor. (RIANO,
3. Recovery of property unjustly or 2022)
fraudulently taken – In an action to recover the
possession of property unjustly or fraudulently The execution of a mortgage in favor of
taken, detained or converted, when the property, another creditor is not conceived by the Rules
or any part thereof, has been concealed, as one of the means of fraudulently disposing
removed or disposed of to prevent its being found of one’s property. By mortgaging a piece of
or taken by the applicant or an authorized person; property, a debtor merely subjects it to a lien
but ownership is not parted with. (Adlawan v
Note: This ground does not refer to a Torres, G.R. Nos. 65957-58, July 5, 1994)
defendant acting in a fiduciary capacity or to
one acting in the course of his employment. It 6. Action against non-residents or on whom
does not also refer to one who has willfully summons may be served by publication – In
violated his duty. The circumstances of the an action against a party who does not reside in
defendant do not matter under this provision the Philippines, or on whom summons may be
as long as the acts mentioned have been served by publication. (Sec. 1, Rule 57)
performed. (RIANO, 2022)
The rule does not solely refer to parties who are
4. Fraud in contracting or performing an nonresidents but also to other parties who may
obligation – In an action against a party who has be residents but on whom summons by
been guilty of a fraud in contracting the debt or publication may be served. Preliminary
incurring the obligation upon which the action attachment may be availed of against their
is brought, or in the performance thereof; properties. These persons are:
1. resident defendants whose identity or
NOTE: Mere general averments render the whereabouts are unknown.
writ defective and the court that ordered its 2. resident defendants who are temporarily
issuance acted with grave abuse of discretion out of the country. (RIANO, 2022)
amounting to excess of jurisdiction (RIANO
citing Watercraft Venture Corporation v. See discussion under Service of Summons by
Wolfe, G.R. No. 181721, September 9, 2015). Publication.
A writ of preliminary attachment is too harsh a Note: In grounds 1 to 5, fraud (e.g., in fraud of
provisional remedy to be issued based on creditors, fraudulent detention or removal,
mere abstractions of fraud. Rather, the rules embezzlement, etc.) is an essential requirement.
require that for the writ to issue, there must be
a recitation of clear and concrete factual Further, the enumeration in Rule 57, Sec. 1 is
circumstances manifesting that the debtor exclusive.
practiced fraud upon the creditor at the time
of the execution of their agreement in that said Insolvency is not a ground for issuance of a writ.
debtor had a preconceived plan or intention The fact that the defendant company’s bank
not to pay the creditor. (Equitable Bank v. account has been reduced to nil is not a ground
Special Steel, G.R. No. 175350, 2012) for the issuance of attachment. (Aboitiz v.
Cotabato Bus Co., G.R. No. L-35990, June 17,
5. Removal or disposal of property with the 1981).
intent to defraud – In an action against a
party who has removed or disposed of his But the mere fact of failure to pay after the
property, or is about to do so, with intent to obligation to do so has become due and despite
defraud his creditors; and several demands is not enough to warrant the
issuance of a writ of preliminary attachment. (Mt.
Under Sec. 1(e) of Rule 57, two requisites Banahaw Wood Industries, Inc. v. Naga Dynasty
must be satisfied to justify a preliminary Allied Marketing Corp., G.R. No. 211179, 2019)
attachment:

ATENEO CENTRAL
Requisites 2. The writ of attachment is issued pursuant to

an order of the court granting the writ; and
1. Application - An application may be filed at the 3. The writ is enforced/implemented. (Torres v.
commencement of the action, or at any time Satsatin, G.R. No. 166759, 2009).
before entry of judgment. (Rule 57, Sec. 1)
Note: For Stages 1 and 2, it is NOT necessary
If applied for at the commencement of the action, that jurisdiction over the person of the defendant
it must be incorporated in a verified complaint be first obtained. But in Stage 3, the court must
alleging all the grounds relied upon and have acquired jurisdiction over the defendant,
complying with all the requisites for the grant of because without such jurisdiction, the court has
the application. Here, the writ may be granted ex no power or authority to act in any manner
parte or even before summons is served. If not against the defendant. (Cuartero v. CA, G.R. No.
applied for at the commencement of the action, it 102448, 1992).
must only be applied for after service of summons
upon the defendant. (Davao Light & Power Co., Hence, when the sheriff or other proper officer
Inc. v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 93262, 1991). commences implementation of the writ of
attachment, it is essential that he serve on the
See discussion on Prior or Contemporaneous defendant not only a copy of the applicant's
Service of Summons for Rules on affidavit and attachment bond, and of the order of
Implementation/Execution of Writ of Attachment. attachment, as explicitly required by Section 5 of
Rule 57, but also the summons addressed to said
2. Affidavit – To ensure that the applicant states defendant. (Davao Light & Power Co., Inc. v.
the truth by requiring him to allege the presence Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 93262, 1991).
of all the legal requirements under oath. The
affidavit is the foundation of the writ and if none is But prior or contemporaneous service of
filed or one is filed but wholly fails to set out some summons may be dispensed with under certain
facts required by law to be stated therein, there is exceptions. (Sec. 5, Rule 57; see further
no jurisdiction and the proceedings are null and discussions on Rule on Prior or
void. (Jardine-Manila Finance, Inc. v. Court of Contemporaneous Service of Summons).
Appeals, G.R. No. 55272, 1989)
Issuance of the Order
3. Attachment Bond – Executed in favor of the An order of attachment may be issued either ex
adverse party in an amount fixed by the court, the parte or upon motion with notice and hearing by:
bond is conditioned to pay all the costs which will 1. The court in which the action is pending;
be adjudged the adverse party and all damages 2. The Court of Appeals; or
he may sustain if the court should later rule that 3. The Supreme Court. (Sec. 2, Rule 57).
the applicant is not entitled to the attachment.
(Sec. 4, Rule 57). The order must require the sheriff of the court to
attach so much of the property in the Philippines
The surety is liable for all damages and not only of the party against whom it is issued (must not
for damages sustained during the appeal as this be exempt from execution) as may be sufficient
is its commitment. (Phil. Charter Insurance v CA, to satisfy the applicant’s demand, UNLESS such
G.R. No. 88379, 1989) party makes a deposit or gives a bond, which may
be the amount sufficient to satisfy the applicant’s
The writ will not be issued if a real estate demand or the value of the property attached,
mortgage exists to secure the obligation. EXCLUSIVE of costs. (Secs. 2 and 3, Rule 57).
(Salgado v. CA, G.R. No. 55381, 1994)
Several writs may be issued at the same time to
Issuance And Contents Of Order Of the sheriffs of the courts of different judicial
Attachment; Affidavit And Bond regions. (Rule 57, Sec. 2)
Three Stages in the Grant of Preliminary Ex parte grant of the writ is allowed because it is
Attachment possible that during the course of the hearing, the
1. The court issues the order granting the part against whom the writ is sought may dispose
application; of his property or abscond before the writ is

ATENEO CENTRAL
issued. (Filinvest v. Relova, G.R. No. L-50378, General Rule: No levy on attachment pursuant
1982) to the writ issued under Section 2, Rule 57 shall
be enforced unless preceded, or
Affidavit contemporaneously accompanied by service
An order of attachment shall be granted only upon the defendant within the Philippines of the
when it appears that it is supported by an affidavit following:
which contains: 1. Summons;
1. A sufficient cause of action exists; 2. A copy of the complaint;
2. The case is one of those mentioned in Sec. 3. The application for attachment;
1, Rule 57; 4. The applicant’s affidavit and bond; and
3. There is no other sufficient security for the 5. The order and writ of attachment. (Sec. 5, Rule
claim sought to be enforced by the action; 57; Davao Light and Power Co., Inc. v. CA, G.R.
and No. 147058, 2006)
4. The amount due to the applicant is as much
as the sum for which the order is granted Exceptions: Prior or contemporaneous service
above all legal counterclaims. (Sec. 3, Rule of summons shall not apply when:
57). 1. Summons could not be served personally or
by substituted service despite diligent efforts;
The affidavit may be made by: 2. Defendant is a resident of the Philippines
1. The applicant of the writ of preliminary temporarily absent therefrom;
attachment; or 3. Defendant is a non-resident of the
2. Some other person who personally knows Philippines; or
the facts. (Id.). 4. The action is one in rem or quasi in rem. (Sec.
5, Rule 57).
It is not enough to state that a sufficient cause of
action exists. The applicant must state the facts Note: In exceptions 1 to 3, the principal action
constituting the cause of action, as well as facts, may be an action in personam. If the court issues
i.e. place, time, date, to illustrate the grounds for a writ of preliminary attachment, it converts the
attachment relied upon. action in personam into an action quasi in rem.
A bare allegation that an encumbrance of Manner Of Attaching Real And Personal

property is in fraud of creditors does not suffice. Property; When Property Attached Is Claimed
Factual bases for such conclusion must be clearly By Third Person
averred. (Adlawan v Torres, G.R. No. 65957-58,
1994) Manner of Attaching Property
The sheriff enforcing the writ shall without delay
Bond and with all reasonable diligence attach, to await
The party applying for the order of attachment judgment and execution in the action, such
must thereafter give a bond which is: property:
1. Executed to the adverse party; 1. Only so much of the property sufficient to
2. In the amount fixed by the court in its order satisfy the applicant’s demand;
granting the issuance of the writ; 2. That which is found in the Philippines;
3. Conditioned that the applicant will pay all the 3. That which belongs to the party against
costs which may be adjudged to the adverse whom the writ is issued; and
party and all damages which he may sustain 4. That which is not exempt from execution.
by reason of the attachment, if the court shall (Sec. 5, Rule 57).
finally adjudge that the applicant was not
entitled thereto. (Sec. 4, Rule 57) Kinds of Real Property Covered
Real property, or growing crops thereon, or any
The affidavit and the bond must be duly filed with interest therein which is:
the court before the writ of attachment issues. 1. Standing upon the record of the registry of
(Sec. 3, Rule 57) deeds of the province in the name of the party
against whom attachment is issued; or
Rule On Prior Or Contemporaneous Service 2. Not appearing at all upon such records; or
Of Summons

ATENEO CENTRAL
3. Belonging to the party against whom 2. A notice stating that the stock or interest
attachment is issued and held by any other of the party against whom the attachment
person; or is issued, is attached pursuant to the writ.
4. Standing on the records of the registry of (Sec. 7[c], Rule 57).
deeds in the name of any other person. (Sec.
7(a), Ryle 57). Attachment of Debts and Credits, Bank
Deposits, Financial Interest, Royalties,
Procedure for Attachment of Real Property Commissions, and Other Personal Property
Real property is attached by: Not Capable of Manual Delivery
1. Filing with the registry of deeds: Attachment shall be made by leaving with the
a. A copy of the order; person owing such debts, or having in his
b. A description of the property attached; possession or under his control, such credits or
and other personal property, or with his agent, a copy
c. A notice that it is attached, or that such of the writ, and notice that the debts owing by him
real property and any interest therein to the party against whom attachment is issued,
held by or standing in the name of such and the credits and other personal property in his
other person are attached; and possession, or under his control, belonging to
2. Leaving a copy of such order, description, said party, are attached in pursuance of such writ.
and notice with the occupant of the property, (Sec. 7(d), Rule 57).
if any, or with such other person or his agent
if found within the province. (Id.) Attachment of Interest of the Party Against
Whom Attachment is Issued in Property
Where the property has been brought under the Belonging to the Estate of the Decedent,
operation of either the Land Registration Act or Whether as Heir, Legatee, or Devisee
the Property Registration Decree, the notice shall Attachment is made by serving the executor or
contain a reference to: administrator or other personal representative of
1. The number of the certificate of title; the decedent with a copy of the writ and notice
2. The volume and page in the registration book that said interest is attached. (Sec. 7(e), Rule 57).
where the certificate is registered; and
3. The registered owner or owners thereof. (Id.) A copy of said writ of attachment and of said
notice shall also be filed in the office of the clerk
Note: The registrar of deeds must index of the court in which said estate is being settled
attachments filed under this section in the and served upon the heir, legatee, or devisee
names of the applicant, the adverse party, or concerned. (Id.).
the person by whom the property is held or in
whose name it stands in the records. (Id.) Attachment of Property in Custodia Legis
If the property sought to be attached is in custodia
If the attachment is not claimed on the entire legis, a copy of the writ of attachment shall be
area covered by the certificate of title, a filed with the proper court or quasi-judicial
description sufficiently accurate for the agency, and notice of the attachment served
identification of the land or interest to be affected upon the custodian of such property. (Sec. 7,
shall be included in the registration of such Rule 57).
attachment. (Id.)
Property legally attached is property in custodia
Attachment of Personal Property Capable of legis and cannot be interfered without the
Manual Delivery permission of the proper court, but this is confined
Attachment shall be made by taking and safely to cases where the defendant has proprietary
keeping it in his custody, after issuing the interest. Otherwise, the attachment will be void.
corresponding receipt therefor. (Sec. 7(b), Rule (Traders Royal Bank v. IAC, G.R. No. L-66321,
57). 1984)
Attachment of Stocks or Shares Effect of Attachment of Debts, Credits, Similar

Attachment shall be made by leaving with the Personal Property
president or managing agent thereof: Those who have in their possession or control
1. A copy of the writ; AND any credits or other similar personal property

ATENEO CENTRAL
which belongs to the party against whom the The court may, after such examination, order
attachment is issued, or owing any debts to him, personal property capable of manual delivery
shall be liable to the applicant for the amount of belonging to him, in the possession of the person
such credits, debts or other similar property. (Sec. so required to attend before the court, to be
8, Rule 57). delivered to the clerk of the court or sheriff on
such terms as may be just, having reference to
Such liability shall accrue from the time of service any lien thereon or claim against the same, to
upon him of the copy of the writ of attachment and await the judgment in the action. (Id.).
until the attachment is discharged, or any
judgment recovered by him is satisfied, UNLESS When Attached Property May be Sold
such property is delivered or transferred, or such The attached property may be sold by order of the
debts are paid, to the clerk, sheriff, or other court whenever it shall be made to appear that:
proper officer of the court issuing the attachment. 1. The property is perishable, or
(Id.). 2. The interests of all the parties to the
action will be subserved by the sale
Effect of Attachment of Interests in Property thereof. (Sec. 11, Rule 57).
Belonging to the Estate of a Decedent
The attachment of the interest of an heir, legatee, The court may order such property to be sold at
or devisee in the property belonging to the estate a public auction in such manner as it may direct,
of a decedent shall NOT impair the powers of the and the proceeds of such sale to be deposited in
executor, administrator, or other personal court to abide by the judgment in the action. (Id.).
representative of the decedent over such
property for the purpose of administration. (Sec. Such order to sell shall be made:
9, Rule 57). 1. By the court where the action is pending; and
2. Upon notice and hearing to both parties. (Id.).
Such personal representative, however, shall
report the attachment to the court when any Remedies of the Third Person Claiming a
petition for distribution is filed, and in the order Property Subject of a Writ of Attachment
made upon such petition, distribution may be 1. File a terceria by executing an affidavit of his
awarded to such heir, legatee or devisee, but the title or right of possession over the property
property attached shall be ordered delivered to levied on attachment and serving the same to
the sheriff making the levy, subject to the claim of the office making the levy and the adverse
such heir, legatee, or devisee, or any person party or third party claim (Sec. 16, Rule 39;
claiming under him. (Id.). Sec. 14, Rule 57);
2. A writ of replevin (Sec. 7, Rule 60);
It is not necessary to serve summons upon the 3. Motion for summary hearing on his claim for
garnishee to acquire jurisdiction upon him. All that the purpose of determining whether the
is required is service upon him of the writ of sheriff has acted rightly or wrongly in the
garnishment. (Perla Compania de Seguros v. performance of his duties in the execution of
Ramolete, G.R. No. L-60887, 1991) the writ of attachment, more specifically if he
has indeed levied on attachment and taken
Examination of Party Whose Property is hold of property not belonging to the plaintiff;
Attached and Persons Indebted to Him or 4. File a separate action to nullify the levy with
Controlling His Property damages resulting from the unlawful levy and
Any person owing debts to the party whose seizure.
property is attached or having in his possession
or under his control any credit or other personal The remedies are CUMULATIVE and any one of
property belonging to such party, may: them may be resorted to without availing of the
1. Be required to attend before the court in other remedies. (Ching v. CA, G.R. No. 124642,
which the action is pending, or before a 2004).
commissioner appointed by the court, and be
examined on oath; or Note: In item no. 3 above, it does not refer to
2. Be required to attend for the purpose of giving intervention under the Rules of Court. It is rather
information respecting his property, and may simply an invocation of the Court's power of
be examined on oath. (Sec. 10, Rule 57). supervision and control over the actuations of its

ATENEO CENTRAL
officers and employees to the end that it be unless the action therefor is filed within 120 days
assured that these conform to the law. (Ong v. from the date of the filing of the bond. (Id.)
Tating, G.R. No. L-61042, 1987).
Nevertheless, nothing herein contained shall
In resolving the motion of the third party, the court prevent such claimant or any third person from
does not and cannot pass upon the question of vindicating his claim to the property, or prevent
the title to the property with any character of the attaching party from claiming damages
finality. It can treat the matter only insofar as may against a third-party claimant who filed a frivolous
be necessary to decide if the sheriff has acted or plainly spurious claim, in the same or a
correctly or not. If the claimant’s proof does not separate action. (Id.)
persuade the court of the validity of the title, or
right of possession thereto, the claim will be Exemption from Bond Requirement in
denied by the court. (Ching v. CA, G.R. No. Terceria
124642, 2004) When the writ of attachment is issued in favor of
the Republic of the Philippines, or any officer duly
Terceria representing it, the filing of the aforementioned
A stranger to the action, i.e., a person not a party bond shall not be required. (Id.)
to the action, whose property is seized pursuant
to the writ of delivery (attachment), is accorded In case the sheriff is sued for damages as a result
the remedy known as a terceria, a third party of the attachment, he shall be represented by the
claim. (La Tondeña Distillers, Inc. v. Court of Solicitor General, and if held liable therefor, the
Appeals, G.R. No. 88938, 1992) actual damages adjudged by the court shall be
paid by the National Treasurer out of the funds to
Under the remedy of terceria, the sheriff shall not be appropriated for the purpose. (Sec. 14, Rule
be bound to keep the property under attachment 57)
if the property attached is being claimed by any
person, other than whom the attachment, or his Grounds to Discharge Preliminary
was issued against and such person: Attachment
1. Makes an affidavit of his title thereto or right Preliminary attachment shall be discharged when
of possession thereof; it is established that any of the following grounds
2. The affidavit states the grounds of the right or exist:
title; 1. The debtor has posted a counterbond or has
3. Such affidavit is served upon the sheriff while made the requisite cash deposit (Sec. 12, Rule
he is still in possession of the attached 57)
property; and 2. The attachment was improperly or irregularly
4. A copy of the affidavit is served upon the issued as where there is no ground for
attaching party. (Sec. 14, Rule 57) attachment under Section 1 of this Rule (Sec. 13,
Rule 57);
However, the sheriff shall be bound to keep the 3. The bond filed is defective or insufficient (Sec.
property if the attaching party or his agent shall 13, Rule 57);
file a bond, on demand of the sheriff and 4. The attachment is excessive, but the discharge
approved by the court, to indemnify the third-party shall be limited to the excess (Sec. 13, Rule 57);
claimant. The value of the bond shall not be less 5. The property attached is exempt from
than the value of the property levied upon. In case execution, hence exempt from preliminary
of disagreement as to such value, the same shall attachment (Secs. 2 & 5, Rule 57); or
be decided by the court issuing the writ of 6. The judgment is rendered against the attaching
attachment. (Id.) creditor. (Sec. 19, Rule 57)
The sheriff shall not be liable for damages for the Note: Attachment is IRREGULAR when any of
taking or keeping of such property, to any such the six (6) grounds for attachment are present but
third-party claimant, if the aforementioned bond attachment was not made according to the rules.
shall be filed. (Id.)
When the preliminary attachment is issued upon
No claim for damages for the taking or keeping of a ground which is at the same time the central
the property may be enforced against the bond issue of applicant's cause of action, the

ATENEO CENTRAL
defendant is not allowed to file a motion to and after satisfying the judgment the balance
dissolve the attachment under Section 13 of Rule shall be refunded to the depositor or his assignee.
57 by offering to show the falsity of the factual (Sec. 18, Rule 57).
averments in the plaintiffs application and
affidavits on which the writ was based - and If the judgment is in favor of the party against
consequently that the writ based thereon had whom attachment was issued, the whole sum
been improperly or irregularly issued - the reason deposited must be refunded to him or his
being that the hearing on such a motion for assignee. (Id.).
dissolution of the writ would be tantamount to a
trial of the merits of the action. (Watercraft Counterbond is Discharged Either:
Venture v. Wolfe, G.R. No. 181721, 2015) 1. Wholly when there is full satisfaction of the
judgment or court finally absolved surety; or
When Counterbond is Filed 2. In part with the security given. (Sec. 12, Rule
1. Before enforcement of the writ (Sec. 2, 57)
Rule 57);
2. During enforcement of the writ (Sec. 5, Distinction between Counterbond and
Rule 57); Attachment Bond
3. After enforcement of the writ. (Sec. 12, ATTACHMENT/
Rule 57) COUNTERBOND
APPLICANT’S BOND
Note: In case of item 3 above, the moving party
may either file a counterbond or make a cash Purpose
deposit. (Id.)
To pay all the costs To secure the payment
which may be of any judgment that
Purpose of Counterbond
adjudged to the the attaching party may
The purpose of a counterbond is to secure the
adverse party and all recover in the action.
payment of any judgment that the attaching party
damages which he (Secs. 12 and 17, Rule
may recover in the action. (Secs. 12 and 17, Rule
may sustain by reason 57)
57)
of the attachment, if the
court shall finally
Notice and Hearing
adjudge that the
Discharge is not automatic. There must be due
applicant was not
notice served on the attaching party and hearing
entitled thereto. (Secs.
and an order issued by the court. Should it involve
4 and 12, Rule 57)
a cash deposit, a notice of the deposit shall
likewise be served on the attaching party. (Sec. When Discharged
12, Rule 57).
Not discharged even if Not discharged until full
Amount of the Counterbond or Cash Deposit attachment satisfaction or Court
It shall be in an amount, exclusive of cost, equal discharged, since finally absolved surety
to: damage may be even if case dismissed
1. That fixed by the court in the order of adjudged by the court and reinstated or
attachment, exclusive of costs; or to the adverse attachment is
2. The value of the particular property, if the party/defendant. (Uy wrongfully issued. (Id.)
attachment sought to be discharged is with Kimpang v. Javier,
respect to a particular property, as G.R. No. L-43461,
determined by the court. (Secs. 2 and 12, Dec. 16, 1937)
Rule 57) When Claimed
Cash Deposit Claim only after due Notice to surety and

Where the party against whom attachment had notice to the surety and summary hearing; after
been issued has deposited money instead of proper hearing and which, the surety
giving counter-bond, it shall be applied under the ruling shall be included becomes charged and
direction of the court to the satisfaction of any in the judgment on the liable to the judgment
judgment rendered in favor of the attaching party, main case. obligee.

ATENEO CENTRAL
Who Files claims. The liability of the surety on the bond

subsists because the final reckoning is when the
Applicant files the Adverse party files the Court shall finally adjudge that the attaching
bond. (Sec. 3, Rule counterbond. (Sec. 12, creditor was not entitled to the issuance of the
57). Rule 57). attachment writ. (Mindanao Savings and Loan
Assoc. vs. CA, G.R. No. 84481, 1989)
Procedure for Discharge of Writ of
Attachment Upon Giving Counterbond Discharge of An Attachment Improperly or
1. The party whose property has been Irregularly Issued or Enforced or Attachment
attached, or the person appearing on this Bond is Insufficient
behalf may file a motion to discharge the How to obtain discharge: Motion and hearing is
attachment necessary (Secs. 12 & 13, Rule 57)
2. Such party may either:
a. Give cash deposit with the court When filed: before or after levy or after release of
from which the writ was issued; attached property. (Sec.13, Rule 57)
or
b. Give a counter-bound executed Burden of proof: the attaching creditor must show
to the attaching party. that the writ was properly issued. (Filinvest Credit
3. Notice of deposit shall be served on the Corp. v. Relova, G.R. No. L-50378, 1982).
attaching party
4. After notice and hearing, the court shall When Discharge Due to Improper Issuance is
order discharge of the attachment. (Sec. Not Available
12, Rule 57) When the ground for the issuance of the writ
forms the core of the complaint, the writ cannot
Filing of a Counterbond Not a Waiver to Claim be discharged until after trial on the merits. This
Damages Under the Attachment Bond is because the court cannot allow the litigation of
The filing of a counter-bond does not relieve the main issue of the case prior to trial. (Liberty
applicant’s attachment bond’s liability for Insurance Corp. v CA, G.R. No. 104405, 1993)
damages. Liability attaches if the plaintiff is not
entitled to the attachment because the Once the writ of attachment is lifted due to the
requirements entitling him to the writ are wanting, posting of a counterbond, the adverse party may
or if the plaintiff has no right to the attachment no longer file a motion to lift the attachment on the
because the facts stated in his affidavit, or some ground that it was improperly or irregularly
of them are untrue. (Calderon v IAC, G.R. No. issued, since there is no longer anything to lift.
74696, 1987) (Mindanao Savings & Loan Association v.
Mercado, G.R. No. 84481, 1989)
The attachment debtor cannot be deemed to
have waived any defect in the issuance of the HOWEVER, this does not mean that the adverse
attachment writ by simply availing himself of one party has waived all irregularity or impropriety in
way of discharging the attachment writ, instead of the issuance of the writ FOR PURPOSES OF
the other. (Id.). CLAIMING DAMAGES. (Calderon v IAC, G.R.
No. 74696, 1987).
Counterbond Cannot be Cancelled on the
Ground That Writ is Improperly Issued Damages Recoverable by the Attachment
Obligors in the bond are absolutely liable for the Defendant
amount of any judgment that the plaintiff may Where there is wrongful attachment, the
recover in the action without reference to the attachment defendant may recover actual
question of whether the attachment was rightfully damages even without proof that the attachment
or wrongfully issued. The same rule applies to the plaintiff acted in bad faith in obtaining the
plaintiff’s attachment bond. (Uy Kimpang v. attachment. However, if it is alleged and
Javier, G.R. No. L-43461, 1937) established that the attachment was not merely
wrongful but also malicious, the attachment
The liability of the surety on the counterbond defendant may recover moral damages and
subsists until the Court shall have finally exemplary damages as well. (Spouses Yu v. Ngo
absolved the defendant from the plaintiff’s Yet Te, G.R. No. 155868, 2007).

ATENEO CENTRAL
2. If any balance remains due, by selling so

Either way, the wrongfulness of the attachment much of the property, real or personal, as
does not warrant the automatic award of may be necessary to satisfy the balance;
damages to the attachment defendant; the latter 3. By collecting from all persons having in their
must first discharge the burden of proving the possession credits belonging to the judgment
nature and extent of the loss or injury incurred by obligor, or owing debts to the latter at the time
reason of the wrongful attachment. (Id.). of the attachment of such credits or debts, the
amount of such credits and debts as
The Liability of The Attaching Party Not determined by the court in the action, and
Limited to The Amount of Attachment Bond stated in the judgment, and paying the
Should the bond or deposit given by the attaching proceeds of such collection over to the
party be insufficient or fails to fully satisfy the judgment obligee. (Sec. 15, Rule 57)
award, the party against whom attachment was
issued is not prevented from recovering in the Sheriff’s Return
same action the damages awarded to him from The sheriff, after paying the obligee, shall make a
any property of the attaching party not exempt return in writing to the court of his proceedings
from execution. (Sec. 20, Rule 57). and furnish the parties with copies thereof. (Id.).
However, the judgment award should be first Balance and Excess

executed on the attachment bond. Only if the If after realizing upon all the property attached,
attachment bond is insufficient to cover the including the proceeds of any debts or credits
judgment award can the attaching party be held collected, and applying the proceeds to the
liable. (Phil-Air Conditioning Center v. RCJ Lines, satisfaction of the judgment less the expenses of
G.R. No. 193821, 2015). proceedings upon the judgment any balance shall
remain due, the sheriff must proceed to collect
However, the surety’s liability is limited to the such balance as upon ordinary execution.
amount of the bond. (Philippine Charter (Sec. 16, Rule 57).
Insurance Corp. v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No.
88379, 1989). The sheriff, upon reasonable demand, must
return to the judgment obligor the attached
Discharge Due to Excessive Attachment property remaining in his hands, and any
The attachment may also be discharged if the proceeds of the sale of the property attached not
same is excessive, but the discharge shall be applied to the judgment. (Id.).
limited to the excess. (Sec. 13, Rule 57).
Recovery Upon the Counterbond
However, the whole attachment may be In order that the judgment creditor may recover
discharged if the same is excessive and such from the Surety on the counterbond, it is
defect is not cured despite the court’s order. (Id.). necessary:
1. That judgment has become executory (Sec.
The party seeking the discharge must also file a 17, Rule 57) or that execution be first issued
motion in the court where the action is pending, against the principal debtor and that such
and due notice and hearing shall also be execution was returned unsatisfied in
observed. (Id). whole or in part; (Towers Assurance v.
Ororama Supermart, G.R. No. L-45848,
Satisfaction of Judgment by Sheriff 1977)
If judgment be recovered by the attaching party 2. That the creditor made a demand upon the
and execution issue thereon, the sheriff may surety for the satisfaction of the judgment;
cause the judgment to be satisfied out of the and
property attached, if it be sufficient for that 3. The surety be given notice and a summary
purpose in the following manner: hearing in the same action as to his liability
1. By paying to the judgment obligee the for the judgment under his counterbond.
proceeds of all sales of perishable or other (Sec. 17, Rule 57).
property sold in pursuance of the order of the
court, necessary to satisfy the judgment; Note: The first requisite is not applicable
where a solidary liability for the satisfaction of a

ATENEO CENTRAL
judgment is involved. The surety is not entitled to

the exhaustion of properties of the principal
debtor. (Towers Assurance v. Ororama
Supermart, G.R. No. L-45848, 1977).

ATENEO CENTRAL
2. COMPARED WITH GARNISHMENT AND LEVY ON EXECUTION
Table of Comparison: Preliminary Attachment, Levy, and Garnishment

PRELIMINARY
LEVY ON EXECUTION GARNISHMENT
ATTACHMENT
Rule 57, Section 7 (c) and
BASIS Rule 57 Rule 39, Section 9 (b)
(d); Rule 39, Section 9 (c)
Provisional and Means of execution of
NATURE A species of attachment.
ancillary remedy. money judgment.
A specie of attachment in
which the attaching party
seeks to subject to his
claim either the property of
the adverse party, in the
Applied for and may be hands of a third person
issued at the called the garnishee, or
commencement of the Available after the judgment the money which said third
action or at any time has become executory by person owes the adverse
before entry of which the property of the party.
judgment, to have the judgment debtor is taken
DEFINITION property of the adverse into custody of the court A forced novation by the
party taken into the before the sale of the substitution of creditors.
custody of the court as property on execution for The judgment
security for the the satisfaction of a final debtor/defendant, who is
satisfaction of any judgment. the original creditor of the
judgment that may be garnishee is, through
recovered. service of a writ of
garnishment, substituted
by the judgment
creditor/plaintiff who
thereby becomes the
creditor of the garnishee.
A means of executing a
1. To seize the
money judgment where if
property of the
the judgment obligor cannot
debtor in advance
pay all or part of the
of final judgment
obligation in cash, certified
and to hold it for
bank check, or other mode
purposes of
of payment acceptable to
satisfying said
the judgment obligee, the To reach credits belonging
judgment; and
officer shall levy upon the to the judgment debtor
2. To acquire
properties of the judgment until the plaintiff can obtain
PURPOSE jurisdiction over the
obligor of every kind and a judgment and have such
action by actual or
nature whatsoever which property applied to its
constructive
may be disposed of for satisfaction.
seizure of the
value and not otherwise
property in those
exempt from execution
instances where
giving the latter the option to
personal or
immediately choose which
submitted service
property or part thereof may
on the defendant
be levied upon, sufficient to
cannot be effected.
satisfy the judgment.

ATENEO CENTRAL
Money, stocks or shares,

an interest in stocks or
shares of any corporation
or company, debts and
Real or personal credits, bank deposits,
SUBJECT Any available property of
property of the adverse financial interest, royalties,
MATTER the adverse party.
party. commissions and other
personal property not
capable of manual delivery
in possession or control of
third parties.
1. The judgment obligor's family home as provided by law, or the homestead in
which he resides, and land necessarily used in connection therewith;
2. Ordinary tools and implements personally used by him in his trade,
employment, or livelihood;
3. Three horses, or three cows, or three carabaos, or other beasts of burden, such
as the judgment obligor may select necessarily used by him in his ordinary
occupation;
4. His necessary clothing and articles for ordinary personal use, excluding jewelry;
5. Household furniture and utensils necessary for housekeeping, and used for that
purpose by the judgment obligor and his family, such as the judgment obligor
may select, of a value not exceeding one hundred thousand pesos;
6. Provisions for individual or family use sufficient for four months;
7. The professional libraries and equipment of judges, lawyers, physicians,
PROPERTIES
pharmacists, dentists, engineers, surveyors, clergymen, teachers, and other
EXEMPTED
professionals, not exceeding three thousand pesos in value;
8. One fishing boat and accessories not exceeding the total value of one hundred
thousand pesos owned by a fisherman and by the lawful use of which he earns
his livelihood;
9. So much of the salaries, wages, or earnings of the judgment obligor for his
personal services within the four months preceding the levy as are necessary
for the support of his family;
10. Lettered gravestones;
11. Monies, benefits, privileges, or annuities accruing or in any manner growing out
of any life insurance;
12. The right to receive legal support, or money or property obtained as such
support, or any pension or gratuity from the Government;
13. Properties specially exempted by law. (Sec. 13, Rule 39)
1. The case must be 1. The sheriff shall demand 1. The sheriff will serve the
any of those where payment of money writ and a notice upon
preliminary judgment either in cash, the person owing such
attachment is certified bank check, or debts (garnishee) or
proper; any other mode of having in his
2. The applicant must payment that is possession or control
file a motion; acceptable to the such credits;
3. The applicant must judgment obligee; 2. The garnishee shall
REQUISITES/
show by affidavit 2. If the judgment obligor make a written report to
PROCEDURE
that there is no cannot pay by these the court within 5 days
sufficient security methods, he can exercise from service of the
for the claim sought his option to choose notice, stating whether
to be enforced; that which among personal or not the judgment
the amount claimed properties can be levied obligor has sufficient
in the action is as upon; funds or credits; and
much as the sum of 3. If he does not exercise 3. The garnished amount
which the order is this option, he waives shall be delivered

ATENEO CENTRAL
granted above all such right and the sheriff directly to the judgment
counterclaims; can now first levy his oblige within 10 days
4. The applicant must personal properties, if from service of notice.
post a bond any, and then the real
executed to the properties if the personal
adverse party properties are insufficient
(attachment bond). to satisfy the judgment;
4. The sheriff is mandated
to file with the Register of
Deeds a copy of the
order, description of the
attached property, and
notice of attachment; and
5. Leave with the occupant
of the property copy of
the same order,
description, and notice
1. Court of origin, when
case is finally resolved
therein or in case of 1. If used as mode of
discretionary execution, preliminary
1. Court where action while it has jurisdiction attachment, either the
is pending; over the case and is in court where action is
2. The CA, on appeal, possession of the pending, the CA or the
even if action is original record or record SC on appeal even if
WHICH COURT pending in the on appeal; action is pending in
MAY GRANT lower court; or 2. Appellate court, when the lower court; or
3. The SC, on appeal, appeal is duly perfected 2. If used as a mode of
even if action is and finally resolved, or executing a judgment,
pending in the in case of discretionary either the court of
lower court. execution, after the trial origin or the appellate
court has lost jurisdiction court, as the case may
and possession of the be.
original record or record
on appeal.
Bond executed to the
adverse party in the
amount fixed by the
court to cover the costs
1. If used as mode of
which may be
preliminary
adjudged to the
attachment, then
adverse party and all
BOND applicant bond is
damages which he No bond required.
REQUIREMENT required;
may sustain by reason
2. If used as a mode of
of the granting of
executing a judgment,
provisional remedy
no bond is required.
prayed for, if the court
shall finally adjudge
that the applicant was
not entitled thereto.
The grant is a matter of
right, unless discretionary
The grant is addressed preliminary attachment,
GRANT execution is sought, which
to judicial discretion. then grant is addressed
is subject to judicial
to judicial discretion;
discretion.

ATENEO CENTRAL
executing a judgment,
grant is a matter of right,
unless discretionary
execution is sought,
which is subject to
judicial discretion.

ATENEO CENTRAL
C. PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION A preliminary injunction should not establish new

relations between the parties but merely maintain
Preliminary Injunction or re-establish the pre-existing relationship
It is an order granted at any stage of an action or between them. (Bustamante v. CA, G.R. No.
proceeding before the judgment or final order, 126371, 2002)
requiring a party or a court, agency or person to:
1. Refrain from a particular act or acts (prohibitory Temporary Restraining Order (TRO)
injunction); or It is a temporary or provisional order to maintain
2. Perform a particular act or acts (mandatory the subject of controversy in status quo until the
injunction). (Sec. 1, Rule 58; Dungog v. CA, G.R. hearing of an application for a preliminary
Nos. 77850-51, 1988) injunction. (Incorporators of the Mindanao Institute
v. United Church, G.R. No. 171765, 2012)
A preliminary injunction is a preventive remedy
whose only mission is to prevent threatened The court to which the application for preliminary
wrong, further injury, and irreparable harm or injunction was made may issue a TRO, effective
injustice until the rights of the parties can be for 20 days from notice to the party or person
settled. (Nerwin Industries Corp v. PNOC-Energy sought to be enjoined, if it shall appear from facts
Dev’t Corp., G.R. No. 167057, 2012) shown by affidavits or by the verified application
that great or irreparable injury would result to the
A preliminary mandatory injunction is more applicant before the matter can be heard on
cautiously regarded than a mere prohibitive notice. (Sec. 5, Rule 58).
injunction since, more than its function of
preserving the status quo between the parties, it A TRO has a definite life span of 20 days. It is
also commands the performance of an act. Thus, automatically dissolved upon the lapse of 20 days.
the issuance of a writ of preliminary mandatory (REGALADO, 2008 ed.)
injunction is justified only in a clear case, free from
doubt or dispute. (Ngo v Allied Banking Corp, G.R. A Writ of Preliminary Injunction has an indefinite
No. 177420, 2010) life – it is valid until final judgment or while the
action is pending. (Spouses Carpo v. Chua, G.R.
Preservation of Status Quo – Purpose of Nos. 150773 & 153599, 2005)
Injunctive Writ
The status quo is the last, actual, peaceful, and TRO v. Injunction
uncontested situation (which precedes a TRO INJUNCTION
controversy, and its preservation is the office of an
injunctive writ. (Pineda v. CA, G.R. No. 181643, May be granted ex Cannot be granted
Nov. 17, 2010) It usually refers to the status of the parte if great and without notice and
parties immediately before the filing of the irreparable injury hearing.
complaint. would result
otherwise.
Injunction is resorted to only when there is a
pressing necessity to avoid injurious 72 hours or maximum In force while the
consequences which cannot be remedied under 20 days (RTC), 60 action is pending.
any standard compensation. The sole objective of days (CA) or until
a writ of preliminary injunction is to preserve the further orders (SC).
status quo until the merits of the case can be heard
fully. (Unilever v CA, G.R. No. 119280, 2006)
Status Quo Ante Order
Persons Bound by Writ; Relations Created Status quo ante is a Latin term for "the way things
A preliminary injunction is merely a provisional were before." When an order of this nature is
remedy, an adjunct to a main suit; hence, a person imposed, it is to maintain the state of things
who is not a party in the main suit cannot be bound existing before the controversy. (ABS-CBN Corp.
by the writ. (Mabayo Farms v. CA, G.R. No. v. National Telecommunications Commission,
140058, 2002) G.R. No. 252119, 2020)

ATENEO CENTRAL
It is an interlocutory order. (Dimayuga v. prohibitory or mandatory, may issue. (Urbanes v.

COMELEC, G.R. No. 174763, April 24, 2007) CA, G.R. No. 117964, 2001)
The Rules of Court do not sanction the issuance The main action for injunction seeks a judgment
of a status quo ante order (SQAO). But in cases embodying a final injunction, which is distinct from,
where the SQAO is issued by a court or agency and should not be confused with, the provisional
other than the Supreme Court, the SQAO is remedy of preliminary injunction, the sole object of
deemed to have the “nature of a temporary which is to preserve the status quo until the merits
restraining order,” and thus must comply with the are heard. (Id.).
requisites for a TRO in applicable cases. Thus, it
cannot exceed the 20-day term and cannot be Who May Grant Preliminary Injunction
“indefinite.” Procedural requirements of hearing A preliminary injunction may be granted by the
and notice must also be complied with. (See Repol court where the action or proceeding is pending. If
v. Comelec, G.R. 161418, Apr. 28, 2004; Llamzon the action or proceeding is pending in the Court of
v. PEZA Board of Inquiry, G.R. 167445, Jun. 26, Appeals or in the Supreme Court, it may be issued
2007) by said court or any member thereof. (Sec. 2, Rule
58).
The Supreme Court, in jurisprudence, may issue
SQAOs without restriction. The Supreme Court Municipal Trial Courts (MTC/MeTC/MCTC)
has issued a status quo order which, as the very 1. A possessor deprived of his possession
term connotes, is merely intended to maintain the through forcible entry may within ten days from
last, actual, peaceable and uncontested state of the filing of the complaint present a motion to
things which preceded the controversy. This was secure from the competent court, in the action
resorted to when the projected proceedings in the for forcible entry, a writ of preliminary
case made the conservation of the status quo mandatory injunction to restore him in his
desirable or essential, but the affected party possession. The court shall decide the motion
neither sought such relief nor did the allegations in within thirty (30) days from the filing thereof.
his pleading sufficiently make out a case for a (Art. 539, Civil Code);
temporary restraining order. 2. In ejectment cases where an appeal is taken,
the remedy granted in Article 539, second
The status quo order was thus issued motu proprio paragraph, shall also apply, if the higher court
or on equitable considerations. Unlike a temporary is satisfied that the lessee’s appeal is frivolous
restraining order or a preliminary injunction, a or dilatory, or that the lessor’s appeal is prima
status quo order is more in the nature of a cease facie meritorious. The period of ten days
and desist order, since it does not direct the doing referred to in said article shall be counted from
or undoing of acts as in the case of a prohibitory or the time the appeal is perfected. (Art. 1674,
mandatory injunctive relief. The further distinction Civil Code);
is provided by the present amendment in the 3. A possessor deprived of his possession
sense that, unlike the amended rule on restraining through forcible entry or unlawful detainer
orders, a status quo order does not require the from the filing of the complaint, present a
posting of a bond. (Regalado, Remedial Law motion in the action for forcible entry or
Compendium Vol. I, 734-35) unlawful detainer for the issuance of a writ of
preliminary mandatory injunction to restore
COMELEC may issue a status quo ante order. him in his possession. The court shall decide
(Dimayuga v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 174763, 2007) the motion within thirty (30) days from the filing
thereof. (Sec. 15, Rule 70);
Action for Injunction v. Writ of Preliminary 4. Provided the main action is within its
Injunction jurisdiction, an inferior court can appoint a
The main action for injunction is distinct from the receiver and it has jurisdiction to issue a writ
provisional or ancillary remedy of preliminary of preliminary injunction in either forcible entry
injunction which cannot exist except only as part or unlawful detainer cases. (Day vs. RTC of
or an incident of an independent action or Zamboanga City, G.R. No. 79119, 1990, citing
proceeding. In an action for injunction, the auxiliary Regalado, Remedial Law Compendium,
remedy of preliminary injunction, whether Second Revised Edition, p. 33)

ATENEO CENTRAL
Judicial Interference in Preliminary Injunction Laguna v. Municipality of Siniloan, Laguna,

General Rule: Under the doctrine of judicial G.R. No. 203806, 2020)
stability or non-interference, no court has the
power to interfere by injunction with the judgments The Rules require that the applicant's right must
or decrees of a court of concurrent or coordinate be a right in esse, that which is, clear or
jurisdiction. (Dy Chiao v. Bolivar, G.R. No. 192491, unmistakable, actual, and positive, especially
2016). calling for judicial protection. (Id.).
Exception: A judge in charge of a branch of a trial
court has jurisdiction to issue a preliminary “Clear and Unmistakable Right”
injunction in a case pending in that branch One clearly founded in or granted by law or is
notwithstanding the fact that a similar injunction enforceable as a matter of law. (Australian
had been denied by another judge in another Professional Realty v. Municipality of Padre
branch of the court, and in the absence of gross Garcia, G.R. No. 183367, 2012)
abuse of discretion, the injunction granted will not
be interfered with by certiorari. (Sabado v. Cristina “Irreparable Injury”
Gonzalez, Inc., G.R. No. 28890, 1928) Injury is considered irreparable if it is of such
constant and frequent recurrence that no fair or
The denial of a petition for a preliminary injunction reasonable redress can be had therefore in court
is not a final determination of the matter and is no or law or where there is no standard by which their
obstacle to the subsequent granting of a renewed amount can be measured with reasonable
petition for the issuance of such injunction upon accuracy. (Social Security Commission v. Bayona,
further information and consideration. (Id.). G.R. No. L-13555, 1962)
Regional Trial Courts (RTC) Procedure For Issuance of Writ of Preliminary

For Regional Trial Courts, the issuance of a writ of Injunction and TRO
injunction is only enforceable within their 1. A verified application showing facts entitling the
respective regions. (Sec. 21, B.P. 129). applicant to the relief demanded shall be filed with
the court where the action is pending. (Sec. 4(a),
Requisites for the Issuance of the Writ of Rule 58)
Preliminary Injunction
A writ of preliminary injunction is issued upon the Application must be verified; absence of
applicant’s showing of two important requisite verification makes the application or petition
conditions: patently insufficient both in form and in substance.
1. The right to be protected exists prima facie; (Rivera v. Mirasol., A.M. No. RTJ-04-1885, 2004)
and
2. The acts sought to be enjoined are violative of The Sandiganbayan cannot validly issue a TRO on
that right. (Bicol Medical Center v. Botor, G.R. the basis of a communication (letter) which is not
No. 214073, 2017) verified. (Republic v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No.
89553, 1993)
What Must be Proven for a Writ of Preliminary
Injunction to Issue 2. If the application is included in a complaint or
The following requisites must be proved before a initiatory pleading filed before a single-sala court,
writ of preliminary injunction, be it mandatory or notice of the application must be served to the
prohibitory, will issue: adverse party. If the application is included in a
1. The applicant must have a clear and complaint or initiatory pleading filed before
unmistakable right to be protected, that is a multiple-sala court, the application shall be raffled
right in esse; only after notice and in the presence of the
2. There is a material and substantial invasion of adverse party. (Sec. 4 (c), Rule 58)
such right;
3. There is an urgent need for the writ to prevent No preliminary injunction shall be granted without
irreparable injury to the applicant; and hearing and prior notice to the party or person
4. No other ordinary, speedy, and adequate sought to be enjoined. (Sec. 5, Rule 58)
remedy exists to prevent the infliction of
irreparable injury. (Municipality of Famy, Notice shall be preceded or contemporaneously
accompanied by service of summons, together

ATENEO CENTRAL
with a copy of the complaint or initiatory pleading to the party enjoined in an amount to be fixed by
and the applicant’s affidavits upon the adverse the court, to the effect that the applicant will pay to
party in the Philippines. But the contemporaneous such party or person all damages which he may
service of summons shall not apply when: sustain by reason of the injunction or temporary
1. The summons could not be served restraining order if the court should finally decide
personally or by substituted service that the applicant was not entitled thereto. Upon
despite diligent efforts; approval of the requisite bond, a writ of preliminary
2. Adverse party is a resident of the injunction shall be issued. (Sec. 4(b), Rule 58).
Philippines temporarily absent therefrom;
or In the event that the application for preliminary
3. Adverse party is a non-resident. (Sec. injunction is denied or not resolved within the said
4(c), Rule 58) period, the temporary restraining order is deemed
automatically vacated. The effectivity of a
However, the court may issue a temporary temporary restraining order is not extendible
restraining order (TRO) to be effective only for a without need of any judicial declaration to that
period of 20 days from service on the party or effect and no court shall have authority to extend
person sought to be enjoined if great or or renew the same on the same ground for which
irreparable injury would result to the applicant as it was issued. (Sec. 5, Rule 58).
shown by affidavits or by the verified petition
before the matter can be heard on notice. (Sec. 5,
Rule 58.).
A summary hearing must be conducted in an

application for a TRO which must be held within 24
hours after the sheriff's return of service and/or the
records are received by the branch selected by
raffle and to which the records shall be transmitted
immediately. (Sec. 4(d), Rule 58)
Within the said 20-day period, the court must order

said party or person to show cause, at a specified
time and place, why the injunction should not be
granted, determine within the same period
whether or not the preliminary injunction shall be
granted, and accordingly issue the corresponding
order. (Sec. 5, Rule 58)
Nonetheless, the executive judge of a multiple-

sala court or the presiding judge of a single-sala
court may issue an ex parte TRO effective for 72
hours from issuance if:
1. The matter is of extreme urgency; and
2. The applicant will suffer grave injustice or
irreparable injury.
Thereafter, the application for TRO shall be acted

upon also after a summary hearing to determine
whether the TRO shall be extended, which must
not exceed 20 days, including the 72 hours initially
provided. (Secs. 4 (d) and 5, Rule 58).
After prior notice, a hearing shall be conducted on

whether the applicant is entitled to the writ of
preliminary injunction. Unless otherwise
exempted, the applicant shall file a bond executed

ATENEO CENTRAL
Comparison of Procedure for Issuance of Preliminary Injunction, TRO, SQAO

PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION TEMPORARY RESTRAINING STATUS QUO ANTE ORDER
ORDER
Purpose
To prevent future injury and To preserve the status quo To maintain the status quo ante or
maintain the status quo for the ante until the hearing of the the condition prevailing before the
duration of the proceedings. application for preliminary controversy until further orders by
injunction. the Supreme Court.
Requirements
1. There must be a verified Same with preliminary 1. If issued by the Supreme Court
application; injunction. –the conservation of the status
2. The application must show quo is desirable or essential
facts entitling the applicant to TRO shall be acted upon only (Regalado, Remedial Law
the relief demanded; after the sheriff’s return of Compendium vol. I, 734-35)
3. A bond must be filed, unless service and/or the records are 2. If issued by a lower court –
exempted in the court where received by the branch must comply with requisites for
the action is pending; and selected by raffle. a TRO under the Rules.
4. Prior notice and hearing for
the party/persons sought to
be enjoined.
When to File
At any stage of an action or 1. When great or irreparable At any stage of an action or

proceeding prior to the judgment injury would result to the proceeding prior to the judgment or
or final order. applicant before the final order.
matter can be heard on
notice;
2. When the matter is of
extreme urgency and the
applicant will suffer grave
injustice and irreparable
injury, the judge may issue
ex parte a TRO effective
for 72 hours from
issuance.
Where to File
RTC having territorial jurisdiction over the act sought to be The Rules of Court do not state
enjoined or the principal office of the corporation whose acts are where to file an application for status
sought to be enjoined; Court of Appeals; Supreme Court. quo ante order. However, from the
definition of status quo as the last
peaceable uncontested status in the
case, when a court issues a TRO to
maintain the status quo, it refers to
the status quo ante.
Period of Effectivity
Until the final disposition of the 1. RTC – 20 days, non- Until the final disposition of the
principal action extendible (including the principal action or as may be
original 72 hours); directed by the Supreme Court.

ATENEO CENTRAL
2. CA – may be effective for

60 days from service on
the party or person sought
to be enjoined;
3. SC – may be effective until
further orders.
Ex Parte
Cannot be granted ex parte 1. 20 day TRO – cannot be 1. If issued by the Supreme Court
granted ex parte – may be issued motu propio;
2. 3 day TRO – can be 2. If issued by a lower court –
granted ex parte partakes the nature of a TRO.

ATENEO CENTRAL
Preliminary Prohibitory Injunction Examples of When Preliminary Injunction May

The purpose of a preliminary prohibitory be Issued
injunction is to preserve the status quo of the 1. In petitions for relief from judgment entered
things subject of the action or the relation through fraud, accident, mistake, or
between the parties, in order to protect the rights excusable negligence (Sec. 5, Rule 38);
of the plaintiff respecting the subject of the action 2. In actions for certiorari, prohibition, and
during the pendency of the suit. If no such mandamus (Sec. 7, Rule 65);
preliminary prohibitory injunction were issued, the 3. In actions for annulment of judgments
defendant may, before final judgment, do or obtained through fraud (Anuran vs. Aquino
continue the doing of the act which the plaintiff and Ortiz, G.R. No. L-12397, 1918);
asks the court to restrain, and thus make 4. In actions for annulment of judgments which
ineffectual the final judgment rendered are not patent nullities, i.e. want of
afterwards granting the relief sought by the jurisdiction, lack of due process of law (Banco
plaintiff. (Calo v. Roldan, G.R. No. L-252, 1946) Español-Filipino vs. Palanca, G.R. No. L-
11390, 1918);
Preliminary Mandatory Injunction 5. To restrain husband from alienating or
The purpose of a preliminary mandatory encumbering conjugal property during
injunction, unlike a preliminary prohibitory pendency of divorce proceedings. (De La
injunction, is to require the performance of a Viña vs. Villareal and Geopano, G.R. No. L-
particular act or acts; thus, it tends to do more 13982, 1920)
than maintain the status quo. Hence the plaintiff’s 6. To restrain continued breach of valid
right must be clear and unmistakable. (Prosperity negative obligation;
Credit Resources v. CA, G.R. No. 114170, 1999) 7. To enjoin repeated trespass of land. (Rodulfa
vs. Alfonso, G.R. No. L-144, 1946);
PRELIMINARY PRELIMINARY 8. To restrain the city from proceeding with
PROHIBITORY MANDATORY abatement of nuisance per accidens before it
INJUNCTION INJUNCTION has been judicially declared as such (Iloilo
Ice and Cold Storage Co. vs. Municipal
To prevent a person To require a person to Council of Iloilo, G.R. No. 7012, 1913);
from the performance perform a particular 9. To restrain voting of disputed shares of
of a particular act. act. stocks (Madrigal vs. Rodas, G.R. No. L-1636,
1948);
The act had not yet The act has already 10. To restrain the sheriff from selling property on
been performed. been performed and execution not belonging to judgment debtor
has violated the rights (Codesal & Ocampo vs. Ascue, G.R. No.
of another. 11403, 1918);
11. To restrain criminal prosecutions (Brocka v.
Status Quo is Status Quo is Enrile, G.R. Nos. 69863-65, 1990);
preserved. restored. 12. In cases of forcible entry and unlawful
detainer. (Sec. 15, Rule 70).
Final injunction Generally, a criminal prosecution may not be
Granted if, after the trial of the action, it appears restrained or stayed by injunction, preliminary or
that the applicant is entitled to have the act or acts final, except:
complained of permanently enjoined. 1. To afford adequate protection to the
constitutional rights of the accused;
It may perpetually restrain the party or person 2. When necessary for the orderly
enjoined from the commission or continuance of administration of justice or to avoid
the act or acts or confirming the preliminary oppression or multiplicity of action;
mandatory injunction. (Sec. 9, Rule 58) 3. Where there is a prejudicial question which is
sub judice;
When Writ May Be Issued, When Writ May Not 4. When the acts of the officers are without or in
Be Issued excess of authority;
Preliminary injunction is granted at any stage of 5. When double jeopardy is clearly apparent;
the proceedings prior to the judgment or final 6. When the prosecution is under an invalid law,
order. (Sec. 1, Rule 58) ordinance, or regulation;

ATENEO CENTRAL
7. Where the court has no jurisdiction over the interpretation of the Comprehensive Agrarian
offense; Reform Law and other pertinent laws on
8. Where it is a case of persecution rather than Agrarian reform (R.A. No. 6657, Sec. 55) nor
prosecution; against the Dept of Agrarian Reform, the
9. Where charges are manifestly false and Dept of Agriculture, the Dept of Environment
motivated by lust or vengeance; and Natural Resources, and the Dept. of
10. When there is clearly no prima facie case Justice in their implementation of the
against the accused and a motion to quash comprehensive agrarian reform program.
on that ground has been denied; and (R.A. No. 6657, Sec. 68)
11. Preliminary Injunction has been issued by the 10. Against the extrajudicial foreclosure of real
SC to prevent threatened unlawful arrest of estate mortgage on the allegation that:
petitioners. (Brocka v. Enrile, G.R. Nos. a. The loan secured by the mortgage has
69863-65, 1990) been paid or is not delinquent unless the
application is verified and supported by
Examples of When Preliminary Injunction evidence of payment
Does Not Lie b. The interest on the loan is
1. To take property out of the possession of one unconscionable, unless the debtor pays
party and place it in another whose title is not the mortgagee at least 12% per annum
clearly established by law (Devesa vs. Arbes, interest on the principal obligation as
G.R. No. 4891, 1909); stated in the application for foreclosure
2. When action for damages would adequately sale, which shall be updated monthly
compensate the injuries caused (Golding vs. while the case is pending. (A.M. No. 99-
Balatbat, G.R. No. 11130, 1917); 10-05-O, 2007)
3. To prevent directors from discharging their
office and restoring former directors (Silen vs. Grounds For Issuance Of Preliminary
Vera, G.R. No. 45574, 1937); Injunction
4. To restrain criminal prosecution where the 1. That the applicant is entitled to the relief
Ombudsman had authorized the special demanded, and the whole or part of such
prosecutor to conduct a preliminary injunction relief consists in restraining the commission
or to file an injunction (Santiago vs. Vasquez, or continuance of the act or acts complained
G.R. Nos. 99289-90, 1992); of, or in requiring the performance of an act
5. To enjoin the collection of national internal or acts, either for a limited period or
revenue taxes (NIRC, Sec. 218) but not local perpetually;
taxes (Angeles City v. Angeles City Electric 2. That the commission, continuance, or non-
Corporation, G.R. No. 166134, 2010) performance of the act or acts complained of
6. To block the discharge of functions and during the litigation would probably work
implementation of decisions of the injustice to the applicant; or
Privatization and Management Office under 3. That a party, court, agency or a person is
the Dept. of Finance, in connection with the doing, threatening, or is attempting to do, or
acquisition, sale, or disposition of assets is procuring or suffering to be done, some act
transferred to it. (Proclamation No. 50 & 50-A or acts probably in violation of the rights of the
of 1986, Sec. 31; EO No. 323, Art. III, 2000) applicant respecting the subject of the action
7. To restrain the implementation of national or proceeding, and tending to render the
infrastructure projects (R.A. No. 8975, Sec. judgment ineffectual. (Sec. 3, Rule 58)
3)
8. To restrain any freeze order issued by the Note: The rule on preliminary injunction merely
Anti-Money Laundering Council except the requires that unless restrained, the act
Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court. (R.A. complained of will probably violate his rights and
No. 9160, Sec. 10) tend to render the judgment ineffectual.
9. Against the Presidential Agrarian Reform
Council (PARC) or any of its duly authorized Entitlement to Relief Demanded
or designated agencies in any case, dispute When there is a clear finding that the applicant is
or controversy arising from, necessary to, or indeed the owner of the land in dispute, the
in connection with the application, applicant is entitled to the benefit of injunctive
implementation, enforcement, or

ATENEO CENTRAL
relief to remove intruders. (Sps. Dela Rosa v - The former files a bond in an
Heirs of Juan Valdez, G.R. No. 159101, 2011) amount fixed by the court
conditioned that he will pay all
The writ will not issue if documents show that the damages which the applicant may
right of the applicant is disputed, i.e. existence of suffer by the denial or dissolution of
lien on properties sought to be released from the the restraining order. (Sec. 6, Rule
mortgage. (Ngo v Allied Banking Corp, G.R. No. 58).
177420, 2010)
The injunction may also be modified if it appears
A writ of preliminary injunction cannot be issued that the extent of the preliminary injunction or
without a prior notice and hearing. It cannot be restraining order granted is too great. (Id.)
issued ex parte. (Sec. 5, Rule 58) Only a 72-hour
TRO can. Filing of Counterbond to Dissolve Injunction
is Not a Matter of Right
Where the defendant is heard on the application Unlike the counter-bond to discharge attachment,
for injunction, the trial court must consider, too, which the court shall order after due notice and
the weight of his opposition. (G.G. Sportswear v. hearing if the party whose property has been
BDO, G.R. No. 184434, 2010) attached files a bond sufficient to secure the
payment of any judgment that the attaching party
Injunction Against Acts Already may recover in the action, the counterbond to
Consummated dissolve injunction may be approved by the court
General Rule: Injunction contemplates acts after hearing if:
being committed or about to be committed; thus, 1. The court in the exercise of its discretion, finds
it does not lie against acts already consummated. that the continuance of the injunction would
(Regalado, 2008 ed.; Municipal Council of Sta. cause great damage to the defendant, while the
Rosa v. La Laguna, G.R. No. 1697, 1904) plaintiff can be fully compensated for such
damages as he may suffer; AND
Exception: In cases of issuance of mandatory 2. The defendant files a counter-bond. (Yap vs.
injunction, i.e., if the acts complained of are Int’l. Exchange Bank, G.R. No. 175145, 2008)
continuing in nature and were in derogation of
plaintiff’s rights at the outset. (Manila Electric Co. Service of Copies of Bonds
v. Del Rosario, G.R. No. 7688, 1912) The party filing a bond shall serve a copy of such
bond on the other party, who may except to the
Neither does it protect contingent or future rights sufficiency of the bond, or of the surety or sureties
nor lies to enforce an abstract right. (Cerenio v. thereon. (Sec. 7, Rule 58)
Dictado G.R. No. 81550, 1988)
The injunction shall be dissolved:
Grounds For Objection To, Or For The 1. If the applicant's bond is found to be
Dissolution Of Injunction Or Restraining insufficient in amount, or if the surety or
Order sureties thereon fail to justify the
The application for injunction or restraining order insufficiency; AND
may be denied or dissolved, if granted, upon a 2. A bond sufficient in amount with sufficient
showing of: sureties approved after justification is not
1. Its insufficiency; filed forthwith. (Sec. 7, Rule 58).
2. Other grounds upon affidavits of the party or
person enjoined, which may be opposed by If the bond of the adverse party is found to be
the applicant also by affidavits; insufficient in amount, or the surety or sureties
3. If it appears after hearing that: thereon fail to justify a bond sufficient in amount
● Although the applicant is entitled to the with sufficient sureties approved after justification
injunction or restraining order, the is not filed forthwith, the injunction shall be
issuance or continuance thereof, as the granted or restored, as the case may be. (Sec. 7,
case may be, would cause irreparable Rule 58)
damage to the party or person enjoined
while the applicant can be fully Duration Of Temporary Restraining Orders
compensated for such damages as he
may suffer; provided that:

ATENEO CENTRAL
General Rule: A TRO is effective only for a Water District v. Labayen, G.R. No. 157494,
period of 20 days from service on the party or 2004)
person sought to be enjoined.
72-hour TRO
Exception: If the matter is of extreme urgency It shall be granted if:
and the applicant will suffer grave injustice and 1. The matter is of extreme urgency; and
irreparable injury, it can be issued with an 1. The applicant will suffer grave injustice and
effectivity of 72-hours from issuance and irreparable injury. (Sec. 5, Rule 58).
extendible up to 20 days after a summary
hearing. (Sec. 5, Rule 58) It shall be granted by the executive judge of a
multiple-sala court or the presiding judge of a
Comparison: Effectivity Depending on the single-sala court, who shall immediately comply
Court Which Issues TRO (Sec. 5, Rule 58) with Sections 4 and 5, Rule 58 as to service of
ISSUED BY EFFECTIVITY summons and the documents to be served
RTC 20 days, non-extendible therewith.
(including the original 72
hours). Reckoning Point of the Effectivity of a TRO
CA May be effective for 60 days A 20-day TRO has an effectivity of only 20 days
from service on the party or to be counted from service to the party sought to
person sought to be enjoined. be enjoined. Likewise, within those 20 days, the
SC May be effective until further court shall order the enjoined party to show why
orders. the injunction should not be granted and shall
then determine whether or not the injunction
20-day TRO should be granted. (First Sarmiento Property
It shall be granted if it shall appear from facts Holdings, Inc. v. Philippine Bank of
shown by affidavits or by the verified application Communications, G.R. No. 202836, 2018).
that great or irreparable injury would result to the
applicant before the matter can be heard on On the other hand, when there is extreme
notice and hearing on the application for urgency and the applicant will suffer grave
preliminary injunction. injustice and irreparable injury, the court shall
issue a temporary restraining order effective for
It shall be granted by the court to which the only 72 hours upon issuance. Within those 72
application for preliminary injunction was made hours, the court shall conduct a summary hearing
and is effective for the said period, to be counted to determine if the temporary restraining order
from notice to the person or party sought to be shall be extended until the application for writ of
enjoined. preliminary injunction can be heard. However, in
no case shall the extension exceed 20 days. (Id.).
Within the 20-day period, the court must:
1. Order said party or person to show cause, at Effect If Application for Preliminary Injunction
a specified time and place, why the injunction is Not Resolved Within the 20-Day Period
should not be granted; In the event that the application for preliminary
2. Determine within the same period whether injunction is denied or not resolved within the said
the preliminary injunction should be granted; period, the TRO is deemed automatically
and vacated. (Sec. 5, Rule 58)
3. Accordingly issue the corresponding order.
(Sec. 5, Rule 58) Effect if No Action is Taken Within the 20-day
Period
The rule against the non-extendibility of the 20- The temporary restraining order would
day effectivity of a temporary restraining order is automatically expire on the 20th day by sheer
absolute if issued by a Regional Trial Court. The force of law, no judicial declaration to that effect
failure of the trial court to fix a period in the being necessary. (Sec. 5, Rule 58)
temporary restraining order does not convert it to
a preliminary injunction. Where there is an Ban on Issuance of TRO or Writ of Injunction
omission to fix the period, the 20-day period is in Cases Involving Government Infrastructure
deemed incorporated in the order. (Bacolod City Projects

ATENEO CENTRAL
No court, except the Supreme Court, shall issue A temporary restraining order may not be issued
any TRO, preliminary injunction, or preliminary to compel the performance of an act. (Villanueva
mandatory injunction against the government, or vs. CA, G.R. No. 117661, 1996).
any of its subdivisions, officials, or any person or
entity, whether public or private, acting under the Courts should avoid issuing a writ of preliminary
government’s discretion, to restrain, prohibit, or mandatory injunction which would in effect
compel the following acts: dispose of the main case without trial. There
1. Acquisition, clearance, and development of would be in effect a prejudgment of the main case
the right-of-way and/or site or location of any and a reversal of the rule on the burden of proof
national government project; since it would assume the proposition which the
2. Bidding or awarding of contract/project of the plaintiffs were inceptively bound to prove. (Searth
national government; Commodities Corp vs. CA, G.R. No. 64220,
3. Commencement, prosecution, execution, 1992)
implementation, or operation of any such
contract or project; Rule On Prior Contemporaneous Service Of
4. Termination or rescission of any such Summons In Relation To Attachment
contract/project; and General Rule: The application for a writ of
5. The undertaking or authorization of any other preliminary injunction may or may not be included
lawful activity necessary for such in a complaint or any initiatory pleading. The
contract/project. notice of hearing on the said application shall be
preceded or contemporaneously accompanied
This prohibition shall apply in all cases, disputes, by service of summons, together with a copy of
or controversies instituted by a private party, the complaint or initiatory pleading and the
including but not limited to cases filed by bidders applicant’s affidavits and bond, upon the adverse
or those claiming to have rights through such party in the Philippines. (Sec. 4, Rule 58).
bidders involving such contract/project. (R.A. No.
8975, Sec. 3) Exceptions: The requirement of prior or
contemporaneous service of summons shall not
Any TRO, preliminary injunction, or preliminary apply, in the following cases:
mandatory injunction issued in violation of Sec. 3 1. The summons could not be served personally
is void and of no force and effect. (R.A. No. 8975, or by substituted service despite diligent
Sec. 4) efforts; or
2. The adverse party is a resident of the
Consequence of Issuance of TRO Against Philippines temporarily absent therefrom; or
Government Infrastructure Projects 3. The adverse party is a non-resident thereof.
Any judge who shall issue the same in violation (Id).
of Sec. 3 shall suffer the penalty of suspension of
at least 60 days without pay, in addition to any Duty of the Court That Issued the Writ
civil or criminal liabilities he or she may incur The trial court, the Court of Appeals, the
under existing laws. (R.A. No. 8975, Sec. 6). Sandiganbayan or the Court of Tax Appeals that
issued the writ of preliminary injunction against a
When Prohibition is Not Applicable lower court, board, officer, or quasi-judicial
1. When the matter is of extreme urgency agency shall decide the main case or petition six
involving a constitutional issue, such that (6) months from the issuance of the writ. (A.M.
unless a TRO is issued, grave injustice and No. 07-7-12-SC, Effective December 27, 2007)
irreparable injury will arise; and
2. Upon the filing of a bond by the applicant, the Procedure for Issuance of a TRO
amount which is to be fixed by the court and (Administrative Circular 20-95; Rule 58, Sec. 4
shall accrue in favor of the government if the and 5)
court should finally decide that the applicant
was not entitled to the relief sought. (R.A. No. Under ordinary circumstances:
8975, Sec. 3). 1. The complaint is filed with a prayer for TRO
or WPI;
Other Instances When TRO May Not be 2. The case shall be raffled and records
Issued transmitted to selected branch.

ATENEO CENTRAL
Note: If filed in a multiple-sala court, the raffle commission or continuance of the act or acts of
must be done after notice to and in the presence confirming the preliminary mandatory injunction.
of the adverse party or the person to be enjoined. (Sec. 9, Rule 58)
3. The preliminary injunction may only be heard Claim for Damages From the Bond Filed
after the trial court has ordered the issuance The posting of bond in connection with a
of the usual 20-day TRO. Within that period preliminary injunction (or attachment,
of 20 days, the court shall order the party receivership, or replevin) does not operate to
sought to be enjoined to show cause at a relieve the party obtaining the injunction from any
specified time and place why the injunction and all responsibility for the damages that the writ
should not be granted. During that same may cause. It merely gives additional protection
period, the court shall also determine the to the party against whom injunction is granted.
propriety of granting the preliminary (Sec. 20, Rule 57; Sec. 8, Rule 58)
injunction and then issue the corresponding
order to that effect. (FERIA, 2013, citing Lago At the trial, the amount of damages to be awarded
vs. Abul Jr, A.M. No. RTJ-10-2255, 2011). to either party, upon the bond of the adverse
party, shall be claimed, ascertained, and awarded
When there is grave and irreparable injury or under the same procedure prescribed in Section
extreme urgency: 20 of Rule 57, to wit:
1. File a complaint with prayer for TRO or WPI; 1. An application for damages must be filed:
2. Executive judge decides whether to issue an a. Before the trial;
ex parte 72-hour TRO; b. Before the appeal is perfected; or
● Applies when the matter is of extreme c. Before the judgment becomes executory;
urgency and the applicant will suffer 2. The application must be with due notice to the
grave injustice and irreparable injury. adverse party and his sureties;
3. Issuance or denial of the 72-hour TRO; 3. The damages shall be awarded after hearing
4. The case is raffled; and included in the judgment of the main
● Notice of raffle must be sent to a party. case;
This happens even before summons; 4. If the judgment on the appellate court be
● Raffled to a branch/sala. favorable against the party enjoined, he must
5. Judge must call a summary hearing within claim damages sustained during the
the 72 hours, before the TRO expires, to pendency of the appeal and before the
determine whether the TRO shall be judgment becomes executory, in accordance
extended until the application for preliminary with nos. 2 and 3 above. The appellate court
injunction can be heard; may allow the application to be heard and
● Notice of hearing and notice of summons decided by the trial court;
must already be given. 5. Should the bond be insufficient to satisfy the
6. If the TRO is extended to 20 days, during the award, the claiming party shall not be
20 days, the judge shall conduct hearings to prevented from recovering the damages, in
resolve whether or not to issue a writ of the same action, from any property of the
preliminary injunction. adverse party which is not exempt from
● Almost akin to a trial, but not a full-blown execution. (Sec. 20, Rule 57; Sec. 8, Rule
trial. 58).
● If not resolved or no action taken within
20 days, TRO is deemed automatically If surety is given due notice of the application for
vacated; it will automatically expire by damages, he is bound by the judgment that may
sheer force of law, no declaration to that be entered against the principal. If no notice is
effect necessary. given, the court must order the surety to show
cause why the bond should not respond for the
When Final Injunction Granted judgment for damages. If surety should contest,
If after the trial of the action it appears that the the court will set it for summary hearing. (Visayan
applicant is entitled to have the act or acts Surety & Insurance Corp vs. Pascual, G.R. No. L-
complained of permanently enjoined the court 2981, 1950).
shall grant a final injunction perpetually
restraining the party or person enjoined from the

ATENEO CENTRAL
The claim for damages must be presented in the 2. When it appears in an action by the
principal action and judgment therefor should be mortgagee for the foreclosure of a
included in the final judgment of the case. It must mortgage that the property is in danger of
be claimed in the same action, otherwise barred. being wasted or dissipated or materially
(Feria 2013 citing Mendoza vs. Cruz, G.R. No. L- injured, and that its value is probably
26829, 1979) insufficient to discharge the mortgage debt,
or that the parties have so stipulated in the
The remedy is exclusive and by failing to file a contract of mortgage;
motion for the determination of the damages in 3. After judgment, to preserve the property
time and while the judgment is still under the during the pendency of an appeal, or to
control of the court, the claimant loses his right to dispose of it according to the judgment, or to
such damages. (Feria 2013, citing Japco vs. City aid execution when the execution has been
of Manila, G.R. No. 24584, 1926) returned unsatisfied or the judgment obligor
refuses to apply his property in satisfaction of
D. RECEIVERSHIP (RULE 59) the judgment, or otherwise to carry the
judgment into effect;
Receiver 4. Whenever in other cases it appears that the
A receiver is a person appointed by the court on appointment of a receiver is the most
behalf of all the parties to the action for the convenient and feasible means of
purpose of preserving and conserving the preserving, administering, or disposing of
property in litigation and preventing its possible the property in litigation. (Sec. 1, Rule 59).
destruction or dissipation, if it were left in the
possession of any of the parties. The During the pendency of an appeal, the appellate
appointment of a receiver is not a matter of court may allow an application for the
absolute right. It depends upon the sound appointment of a receiver to be filed in and
discretion of the court and is based upon the facts decided by the court of origin and the receiver
and circumstances of each case. (Commodities appointed to be subject to the control of said
Storages & Ice Plant v. CA, G.R. No. 125008, court. (Id.).
1997)
Requisites
Purpose of Receivership 1. That the application for receivership is based
The purpose of receivership is to protect and on the grounds under Sec. 1 of Rule 59;
preserve the rights of the parties during the 2. That the properties being placed under
pendency of the main action, during the receivership are those involved in the
pendency of an appeal, or as an aid in the litigation. (Central Sawmills v. Alto Surety &
execution of a judgment when the writ of Insurance, G.R. No. L-24508, 1969);
execution has been returned unsatisfied. (Sec. 1, 3. That the plaintiff must not be in the actual
Rule 59). possession of the property being placed
under receivership. (Calo v. Roldan, G.R. No.
Cases When Receiver May Be Appointed L-252, 1946);
Upon a verified application, one or more receivers Note: This is because there would be no
of the property subject of the action or proceeding reason for such appointment, for the owner
may be appointed by the court where the action and possessor of a property is more
is pending or by the Court of Appeals or by the interested than other persons in preserving
Supreme Court, or a member thereof, in the and administering it. (Id.);
following cases: 4. The rights of the parties must not depend on
1. When it appears from the verified the pending determination of adverse claims
application, and such other proof as the of legal title to real property and one party is
court may require, that the party applying for in possession. (Descallar v. Court of Appeals,
the appointment of a receiver has an interest G.R. No. 106473, 1993)
in the property or fund which is the subject of
the action or proceeding, and that such Exception: Only when the property is in
property or fund is in danger of being lost, danger of being materially injured or lost, as
removed, or materially injured unless a by the prospective foreclosure of a mortgage
receiver be appointed to administer and thereon for non-payment of the mortgage
preserve it; loans despite the considerable income

ATENEO CENTRAL
derived from the property, or if portions The appointment of a receiver pendente lite, like
thereof are being occupied by third persons the granting of an interlocutory injunction, rests in
claiming adverse title thereto, may the the discretion of the court where the application is
appointment of a receiver be justified. (Id.) made which shall consider the entire
circumstances of the case. As such, the action of
Requirements Before Issuance Of An Order the lower court in appointing or denying the
Appointing A Receiver appointment of a receiver pendente lite will not be
1. Verified application for the appointment of a disturbed in appeal unless there has been a clear
receiver based on any of the grounds abuse. (Ylarde v. Enriquez, G.R. No. L-1401,
enumerated in Section 1, Rule 59; and 1947).
2. Bond filed by the applicant and executed to
the party against whom the application is Instances When Receivership May Be Denied
presented, in an amount to be fixed by the or Lifted
court, to the effect that the applicant will pay 1. If the appointment sought or granted is
such party all damages the latter may sustain without sufficient cause (Rule 59, Sec. 3);
by reason of the appointment of such 2. Adverse party files a counterbond to answer
receiver in case the applicant should have for damages (Id.);
procured the same without sufficient cause. 3. Applicant’s bond is insufficient (Rule 59, Sec.
(Sec. 2, Rule 59). 5); or
4. Receiver’s bond is insufficient (Id.).
The court may, in its discretion, at any time after
the appointment, require an additional bond as A clerk of court should not be appointed as a
further security for such damages. (Id.) receiver as he is already burdened with his official
duties. (Alcantara v. Abbas, G.R. No. L-14890,
Procedure for Appointment of a Receiver 1963).
1. A verified application must be filed by the
party applying for the appointment of a Neither party to the litigation should be appointed
receiver; as a receiver without the consent of the other
2. The applicant must have an interest in the because a receiver is supposed to be an impartial
property or funds subject of the action; and disinterested person. (Abrigo v. Kayanan,
3. The applicant must show that the property or G.R. No. L-28601, 1983).
funds is in danger of being lost, removed,
materially altered, wasted or dissipated or General Powers Of A Receiver
there is a need to preserve or administer the Subject to the control of the court in which the
property, or that all the grounds justifying the action is pending, a receiver shall have the power
appointment of a receiver exist; to:
4. The application must be with notice and set 1. Bring and defend actions in his own name in
for hearing; his capacity as receiver;
5. The applicant must post a bond in favor of the 2. Take and keep possession of the property
party against whom the application is subject of the controversy;
presented before the court issues the 3. Receive rents;
appointment of a receiver; and 4. Collect debts due to himself as receiver or to
6. Before entering upon his duties, the receiver the fund, property, estate, person, or
must be sworn to perform his duties faithfully corporation of which he is the receiver;
and shall file a bond. (Secs. 2-4, Rule 59; 5. Compound for and compromise the same;
REGALADO, 2012 ed.). 6. Make transfers;
7. Pay outstanding debts;
The Rules do not authorize an ex parte 8. Divide the money and other property that
appointment of a receiver. A hearing is necessary shall remain among the persons legally
and a bond is required from the applicant. Also, entitled to receive the same; and
all the necessary parties to be affected by the 9. Generally to do such acts respecting the
receivership must be included in the suit. (Claudio property as the court may authorize.
v. Zandueta, G.R. No. 45664, 1937). 10. Invest funds in his hands, only by order of the
court upon the written consent of all the
Appointment of Receiver – Discretionary parties (Sec.6, Rule 59)

ATENEO CENTRAL
● Bond executed to such person and in such

No action may be filed by or against a receiver sum as the court may direct, to the effect
without leave of the court which appointed him. that he will faithfully discharge his duties in
(Id.) the action or proceeding and obey the
orders of the court
The rule talks of the current receiver of the ● Given by the receiver before entering upon
company and not the previous receiver. The his duties
reason behind Rule 59, Sec. 6, which requires
leave of court for all suits by or against the Liability for Damages
present receiver, is to forestall any undue In order to determine which bond is liable for
interference with the receiver’s performance of damages, it is important to identify the cause.
duties through improvident suits. Hence, an
action filed by a successor-receiver against his If the damage is caused by reason of the
predecessor-receiver is allowed under Rule 59, appointment of the receiver, applicant is liable
Sec. 6, without leave of court. (Orendain v. BF through its bond (applicant’s bond). This must
Homes, G.R. No. 146313, 2006). be claimed in the court where appointment of
receivership is made; cannot file a separate
Kinds Of Bonds In Receivership action.
The following are the kinds of bonds in
receivership: If the damage is caused by the negligence or
1. Applicant’s bond (Sec. 2, Rule 59) acts of the receiver, receiver is liable through
● Bond on appointment of the receiver the receiver’s bond. This includes acts of
● A bond executed to the party against whom mismanagement or fraud, i.e., fictitious, pays
the application is presented, in an amount himself instead of creditor. (Dela Riva v. Molina
to be fixed by the court, to the effect that Salvado, G.R. No. L-10106, 1915)
the applicant will pay such party all
damages he may sustain by reason of the Bonds Must be Served to the Interested
appointment of such receiver in case the Parties
applicant shall have procured such The person filing a bond in accordance with the
appointment without sufficient cause provisions of this Rule shall forthwith serve a copy
● Given before the issuance of the order of thereof on each interested party, who may except
appointment to its sufficiency or of the surety or sureties
2. Additional bond (Sec. 2, Rule 59) thereon. (Sec. 5, Rule 59)
● Bond on appointment of the receiver
● Given at any time after the appointment Recovery on the Bonds
● May be required by the court in its The amount, if any, to be awarded to any party
discretion upon any bond filed in accordance with the
3. Counterbond (Sec. 3, Rule 59) provisions of this Rule, shall be claimed,
● The application may be denied, or the ascertained, and granted under the same
receiver discharged, when the adverse procedure prescribed in Section 20 of Rule 57.
party files a bond executed to the applicant, (Sec. 9, Rule 59)
in an amount to be fixed by the court, to the
effect that such party will pay the applicant See prior discussion on Claim for Damages From
all damages he may suffer by reason of the the Bond Filed under Preliminary Injunction.
acts, omissions, or other matters specified
in the application as ground for such Liability for Refusal or Neglect to Deliver
appointment. Property to Receiver
● If the bond of the adverse party is found to A person who refuses or neglects, upon
be insufficient in amount or the surety or reasonable demand, to deliver property subject or
sureties thereon fail to justify, and a bond involved in the action or proceeding, or in case of
sufficient in amount with sufficient sureties disagreement, as determined and ordered by the
approved after justification is not filed court, may be punished for contempt and shall be
forthwith, the receiver shall be appointed or liable to the receiver for the money or the value of
re- appointed, as the case may be. (Sec. 5, the property and other things so refused or
Rule 59) neglected to be surrendered, together with all the
4. Receiver’s bond (Sec. 4, Rule 59) damages that may have been sustained by the

ATENEO CENTRAL
party or parties entitled thereto as a consequence

of such refusal or neglect. (Sec. 7, Rule 59) Replevin v. Preliminary Attachment;
Distinctions
Termination Of Receivership PRELIMINARY
Whenever the court, motu proprio or on motion of REPLEVIN
ATTACHMENT
either party, shall determine that the necessity Available only where Available even if the
for a receiver no longer exists, it shall, after due the principal relief recovery of personal
notice to all interested parties and hearing: sought in the action is property is only an
1. Settle the accounts of the receiver; recovery of personal incidental relief
2. Direct the delivery of the funds, and other property, the other sought in the action.
property in his possession to the person reliefs (e.g.
adjudged to be entitled to receive them; and damages) being
3. Order the discharge of the receiver from merely incidental
further duty as such. thereto.
4. The court shall allow the receiver such Can be sought only May be resorted to
reasonable compensation as the where the defendant even if the personality
circumstances of the case warrant, to be is in actual or is in the custody of a
taxed as costs against the defeated party, or constructive third person.
apportioned, as judgment requires. (Rule 59, possession of the
Sec. 8) property involved.
Extend only to May be resorted to
E. REPLEVIN (RULE 60) personal property even if the property is
capable of manual intangible or
Replevin delivery. incorporeal.
Replevin, broadly understood, is both a form of Available to recover Seize any property
principal remedy and of a provisional relief. It may personal property owned by defendant
refer either to the action itself, i.e., to regain the even if the same is or adverse party.
possession of personal chattels being wrongfully not concealed,
detained from the plaintiff by another, or to the removed, or disposed
provisional remedy that would allow the plaintiff of.
to retain the thing during the pendency of the Cannot be availed of Can still be resorted
action and hold it in pendente lite. (Rivera v. if the property is in to even if the property
Vargas, G.R. No. 165895, 2009) custody legis, except: is in custodia legis.
1. When the seizure
Nature of an Action for Replevin is illegal;
The action is primarily possessory in nature and 2. Where there is
determines nothing more than the right of reason to believe
possession. Replevin is so usually described as that the seizure
a mixed action, being partly in rem and partly in will not anymore
personam – in rem insofar as the recovery of be followed by
specific property is concerned, and in personam the filing of the
as regards to damages involved. As an “action in criminal action in
rem,” the gist of the replevin action is the right of court or there are
the plaintiff to obtain possession of specific conflicting claims.
personal property by reason of his being the (Chua v. CA, G.R.
owner or of his having a special interest therein. No.119255, 2003)
(BA Finance Corporation v. CA, G.R. No. 102998,
1996) When Application May be Filed
A party may apply a writ of replevin to recover the
Enforceability of a Writ of Replevin possession of a personal property:
A writ of replevin issued by a Regional Trial Court 1. At the commencement of the action; or
or a Municipal Trial Court may be enforced 2. At any time before defendant files an answer.
anywhere in the Philippines. (Fernandez v. (Rule 60, Sec. 1)
International Corporate Bank, G.R. No. 131283,
1999)

ATENEO CENTRAL
Note: There can be no replevin before the 6. Applicant must give a replevin bond,
appellate courts. executed to the adverse party and double the
value of the property. (Rule 60, Sec. 2);
Applicant Need Not be the Owner
The applicant need not be the owner of the Note: A replevin bond is simply intended to
property. It is enough that he has a right to its indemnify the defendant against any loss that he
possession. (Yang v. Valdez, G.R. No. 73317, may suffer by being compelled to surrender the
1989) possession of the disputed property pending the
trial of the action. (Alim v. CA, G.R. No. 93213,
Note: A chattel mortgagee may maintain an 1991)
action for replevin. Where the mortgage
authorizes the mortgagee to take possession of 7. Upon the filing of such affidavit and approval
the property on default, he may maintain an of the bond, the court shall issue an order and
action to recover possession of the mortgaged corresponding writ of replevin describing the
chattels from the mortgagor or from any person in personal property alleged to be wrongfully
whose hands he may find them. This is detained and requiring the sheriff forthwith to
irrespective of whether the mortgage take such property into his custody. (Sec. 3,
contemplates a summary sale of the property or Rule 60)
foreclosure by court action. (Agner v. BPI Family
Savings Bank, G.R. No. 182963, 2013) Note: If the detention is actually allowed by law,
then no replevin is allowed (Twin Ace Holding v.
Requisites Rufina, G.R. No. 160191, 2006)
For a writ of replevin to be issued, the following
are required: Remedies of Owner or Person Entitled to
1. An application must be timely filed (Sec. 1, Possession to Secure Return of Property
Rule 60); 1. Object to the sufficiency of the bond or of the
2. The application must be supported by an surety or sureties thereon (Sec 5, Rule 60);
affidavit (Sec 2, Rule 60); ● In this case, return cannot be
3. The applicant must give a bond executed to immediately required;
the adverse party. (Id.) ● The result of this remedy is to require a
bond in a higher amount i.e., a new bond.
Procedure for the Application for Replevin Only when this order is not complied with
1. Application for replevin must be filed at any that the replevin is discharged.
time before defendant files an answer; 2. Filing of counterbond or redelivery bond (Id.)
2. Application must contain an affidavit ● In this case, return can be immediately
executed by the applicant or some other demanded;
person who personally knows of the facts the ● The bond must be double the value of the
matters required under the Rules, which property as stated in the applicant’s
shows that: affidavit;
a. Applicant is the owner of the property ● The redelivery bond answers for delivery
claimed, particularly describing it, or is of the subject property and payment of all
entitled to the possession thereof; sums as may be adjudged.
b. Property is wrongfully detained by the ● Requisites:
adverse party, alleging the cause of a. Must be filed before the delivery of
detention thereof according to the best of property to the plaintiff and within 5
his knowledge, information, and belief; days after the taking of the property
c. Property has not been distrained or taken by the sheriff;
for a tax assessment or a fine pursuant to b. Copy must be served to the plaintiff
law, or seized under a writ of execution (also within 5 days after the taking of
or preliminary attachment, or otherwise the property by the sheriff). (Sec. 6,
placed under custodia legis, or if so Rule 60)
seized, that it is exempt or should be
released from such seizure or custody; Duties of the Sheriff
and 1. The sheriff must serve a copy of the order on
d. Actual market value of the property; the adverse party, together with a copy of the
application, affidavit, and bond;

ATENEO CENTRAL
2. If the property is in the possession of the be served upon the person who not only has the
adverse party or his agent, the sheriff must possession or custody of the property involved
forthwith take it and retain it in his custody; but who is also a party or agent of a party to the
3. If the property or any part thereof be action. Consequently, a trial court is deemed to
concealed in a building or enclosure, the have acted without or in excess of its jurisdiction
sheriff must demand its delivery, and if it not with respect to the ancillary action of replevin if it
be delivered, he must cause the building or seizes and detains a personalty on the basis of a
enclosure to be broken open and take the writ that was improperly served.
property into his possession;
4. After the sheriff has taken possession of the The proper remedy of the person being served
property, he must keep it in a secure place with the writ should be to file a motion to quash
and shall be responsible for its delivery to the writ of replevin or a motion to vacate the order
the party entitled thereto upon receiving his of seizure. It now becomes imperative for the trial
fees and necessary expenses for taking and court to restore the parties to their former
keeping the same. (Rule 60, Sec. 4) positions by returning the seized property to
petitioner and by discharging the replevin bond
Disposition of Property by Sheriff filed by respondent. (Rivera v. Vargas, G.R. No.
The sheriff shall deliver the property to the 165895, 2009).
applicant if within 5 days after the taking of the
property by the sheriff, the adverse party: Remedies of Third Parties
1. Does not object to the sufficiency of the bond, 1. Terceria (third-party claim);
or of the surety or sureties contained thereon; 2. Separate action to assail recovery of
or possession;
2. So objects, and the court affirms its approval 3. File a motion for intervention.
of the applicant’s bond or approves a new
bond; or Terceria
3. If the adverse party requires the return of the When the property taken is claimed against
property but his bond is objected to and found whom replevin had been issued or his agent, the
insufficient and he does not forthwith file an sheriff shall not be bound to keep the property
approved bond. (Sec. 6, Rule 60) under replevin if such third person shall:
1. Make an affidavit of his title to or right of
If for any reason, the property is not delivered to possession over the property;
the applicant, the sheriff MUST return the 2. Such affidavit states the grounds of such
property to the adverse party. (Id.) title or right;
3. The affidavit is served to the sheriff while
The Rules provide that property seized under a the latter has possession of the attached
writ of replevin is not to be delivered immediately property; and
to the plaintiff. Under Section 6, Rule 60, the 4. A copy of the affidavit is served upon the
Sheriff should have waited no less than 5 days in applicant. (Sec. 7, Rule 60)
order to give the complainant an opportunity to
object to the sufficiency of the bond. (Hao v. However, the sheriff shall still be bound to keep
Andres, A.M. No. P-07-2384, 2008) the property if:
1. The applicant or his agent, on demand of the
Effect of Writ of Replevin That Has Been sheriff, shall file a bond approved by the court
Improperly Served to indemnify the third-party claimant; and
Service of the writ upon the adverse party is 2. The bond shall be in an amount not less than
mandatory in line with the constitutional guaranty the value of the property under replevin as
on procedural due process and as safeguard declared in the affidavit of the applicant;
against unreasonable searches and seizures.
The writ or order of replevin should comply with Note: In case of disagreement as to such value,
all the requirements as to matters of form or the court shall determine the same. (Id.)
contents prescribed by the Rules of Court. The
writ must also satisfy proper service in order to be No claim for damages for the taking or keeping of
valid and effective, i.e., it should be directed to the the property may be enforced against the bond,
officer who is authorized to serve it; and it should

ATENEO CENTRAL
unless the action therefor is filed within 120 days

from the date of the filing of the bond. (Id.)
The sheriff shall not be liable for damages, for the

taking or keeping of such property, to any such
third-party claimant, if such bond shall be filed.
(Id.)
Nothing herein contained shall prevent such

claimant or any third person from vindicating his
claim to the property, or prevent the attaching
property claiming damages against a third-party
claimant who filed a frivolous or plainly spurious
claim, in the SAME or SEPARATE action. (Id.)
When the writ of replevin is issued in favor of the

Republic of the Philippines, or any officer duly
representing it, the filing of such bond shall not be
required, and in case the sheriff is sued for
damages as a result of the replevin, he shall be
represented by the Solicitor General, and if held
liable therefor, the actual damages adjudged by
the court shall be paid by the National Treasurer
out of the funds to be appropriated for the
purpose. (Sec. 7, Rule 60)
Note: This is similar as in third-party claims in

execution and in attachment.
In Rule 57, Sec. 14, the affidavit is served upon

the sheriff while he has possession of the
attached property.
In Rule 60, Sec. 7, the affidavit is served within 5

days in which the sheriff has possession, in
connection with Rule 60, Sec. 6.

ATENEO CENTRAL

ATENEO CENTRAL
V. SPECIAL CIVIL ACTIONS As a general rule, however, the rules governing

ordinary civil actions shall apply in special civil
actions insofar as they supplement or are not
TOPIC OUTLINE UNDER THE 2023 inconsistent with the provisions governing the
SYLLABUS latter actions. (Id.).
A. Jurisdiction and Venue Distinguish: Ordinary Civil Actions And
B. Interpleader (Rule 62) Special Civil Actions
C. Declaratory Relief and Similar Remedies
ORDINARY CIVIL SPECIAL CIVIL
(Rule 63)
ACTIONS ACTIONS
D. Prohibition, Certiorari and Mandamus
(Rule 65) Governed by rules Generally governed
1. Definition and Distinctions for ordinary civil by rules for ordinary
2. Requisites, When, and Where to actions. civil actions but
File subject to special
3. Exceptions to Filing of Motion rules.
for Reconsideration Before Must be based on a Not necessarily
Filing Petition cause of action based on a cause of
E. Quo Warranto meaning an act or action, as in certain
F. Expropriation omission has special civil actions:
1. Two Stages in Every Action for violated the rights of 1. Declaratory relief
Expropriation another. – no actual violation
2. Order of Expropriation of rights;
3. Ascertainment of Just 2. Interpleader – no
Compensation interest in the
4. Rights of Plaintiff Upon subject matter.
Judgment and Payment May be filed initially There are some
G. Foreclosure of Real Estate Mortgage in either the MTC or special civil actions
(Rule 68) RTC depending which cannot be
1. Judicial Foreclosure upon the commenced in the
2. Extrajudicial Foreclosure (Act jurisdictional amount MTC, i.e. petitions
No. 3135, as amended) or the nature of the for certiorari,
3. The General Banking Law of action. prohibition and
2000 (Sec. 47, RA 8791) mandamus.
H. Partition (Rule 69) Ordinary civil Some special civil
I. Forcible entry and Unlawful detainer actions are filed as actions are filed as
(Rule 70) complaints. complaints, but
1. Differentiated from Accion others are filed as
Publiciana and Accion petitions.
Reivindicatoria
J. Contempt (Rule 71) Special Civil Actions Initiated by a Complaint
1. Interpleader (Rule 62);
A. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 2. Expropriation (Rule 67);
3. Foreclosure of REM (Rule 68);
Nature Of Special Civil Actions 4. Partition (Rule 69); and
Being a civil action, a special civil action is one 5. Forcible Entry and Unlawful Detainer (Rule
by which a party sues another for the 71).
enforcement or protection of a right, or the
prevention or redress of a wrong. (Rule 1, Sec. Special Civil Actions Initiated by a Petition
3[a]) 1. Declaratory Relief (Rule 63);
2. Review of Adjudication of COMELEC/COA
Both are governed by the rules for ordinary civil (Rule 64);
actions. However, the fact that an action is 3. Certiorari (Rule 65);
subject to special rules other than those 4. Prohibition (Rule 65);
applicable to ordinary civil actions is what gives 5. Mandamus (Rule 65);
a civil action its special character. (Id,). 6. Quo Warranto (Rule 66);
7. Contempt (Rule 71).

ATENEO CENTRAL
General Rule: Within a reasonable time after a

Special Civil Actions With Two Stages dispute has arisen without waiting to be sued
1. Expropriation; and by either of the contending claimants.
2. Partition.
The stakeholder should use reasonable
B. INTERPLEADER diligence to bring the contending claimants to
court—that is, by filing the interpleader suit
Nature of Interpleader within a reasonable time after a dispute has
An interpleader is a remedy whereby a person arisen without waiting to be sued by either of the
who has property whether personal or real, in his contending parties. Otherwise, he may be
possession, or an obligation to render wholly or barred by laches or undue delay. (Wack Wack
partially, without claiming any right in both, or Golf and Country Club v. Won, G.R. No. L-
claims an interest which in whole or in part is not 23851, 1976).
disputed by the conflicting claimants, comes to
court and asks that the persons who claim said A stakeholder’s action of interpleader is too late
property or who consider themselves entitled to when filed after judgment has been rendered
demand compliance with the obligation, be against him in favor of one of the contending
required to litigate among themselves, in order claimants, especially where he had notice of the
to determine finally who is entitled to one or the conflicting claims prior to the rendition of the
other thing. (Ocampo v. Tirona, G.R. No. judgment and neglected the opportunity to
147812, 2005) implead the adverse claimants in the suit where
judgment was entered. (Id.)
Purpose of Remedy
An interpleader complaint may be filed by a Exception: Where the stakeholder acts with
lessee against those who have conflicting reasonable diligence in view of environmental
claims over the rent due for the property leased. circumstances, the remedy is not barred. (Id.)
This remedy is for the lessee to protect himself
or herself from “double vexation in respect of Alternatively: If an action has been filed, in lieu
one liability. He or she may file the interpleader of an interpleader, one can file an answer with
case to extinguish his or her obligation to pay allegations of conflicting claims and a third-party
rent, remove him or her from the adverse complaint impleading the other party.
claimants’ dispute, and compel the parties with
conflicting claims to litigate among themselves. Order to Interplead
(Lui Enterprises v. Zuellig Pharma, G.R. No. Upon the filing of the complaint, an order
193494, 2014) requiring the conflicting claimants to interplead
with one another shall be issued. (Sec. 2, Rule
Requisites For Interpleader 62)
1. There must be two or more claimants with
adverse or conflicting interests to a If the interests of justice so require, the court
property in the custody or possession of the may direct in the said order that the subject
plaintiff; matter be paid or delivered to the court. (Id.)
2. The plaintiff in an action for interpleader
has no claim upon the subject matter of the Service of Summons
adverse claims or if he has an interest at all, Summons shall be served upon the conflicting
such interest is not disputed by the claimants; claimants together with:
3. The subject matter of the adverse claims 4. A copy of the complaint, and
must be one and the same. (Rule 62, Sec. 1). 5. The order. (Sec. 3, Rule 62)
Who May File the Complaint for Interpleader Answer and Other Pleadings
The person against whom the conflicting claims Each claimant shall file his answer setting forth
are made. (Id.). his claim within fifteen (15) days from service of
the summons upon him, serving a copy thereof
When To File The Complaint upon each of the other conflicting claimants who
may file their reply thereto as provided by these
Rules.

ATENEO CENTRAL
contract, etc., for their guidance in its

If any claimant fails to plead within the time enforcement or compliance and not to settle
herein fixed, the court may, on motion, declare issues arising from its alleged breach.
him in default and thereafter render judgment (Tambunting, Jr., v. Sps. Sumabat, G.R. No.
barring him from any claim in respect to the 144101, 2005)
subject matter. (Sec. 5, Rule 62; Lui Enterprises,
Inc. v. Zuellig Pharma Corp., G.R. No. 193494, Persons Interested in the Following Subject
2014) Matters May File a Petition
1. If the subject matter is a deed, will,
Motion to Dismiss contract or other written instrument, any
Within the time for filing an answer (30 days), person interested in the same may file
each claimant may file a motion to dismiss. (Sec. the petition; or
4, Rule 62) 2. If the subject matter is a statute,
executive order or regulation,
Grounds to Dismiss ordinance, or any other governmental
1. Impropriety of the interpleader action; or regulation, any person whose rights are
2. Other appropriate grounds specified in affected by the same may file the
Rule 16. (Rule 62, Sec. 4) petition. (Sec. 1, Rule 63)
Other Pleadings That May be Filed in an The enumeration of the subject matter is
Interpleader exclusive. (Mangahas v. Paredes, G.R. No.
1. Counterclaims (PDIC v. CA, G.R. No. 157866, 2007)
126911, 2003);
2. Cross-claims; Who Shall Be Impleaded As Parties
3. Third-party complaints; and All persons who have or claim any interest,
4. Responsive pleadings thereto as provided which would be affected by the declaration shall
in the Rules (Arreza v. Diaz, Jr., G.R. No. be made parties. (Sec. 2, Rule 63)
133113, 2001).
No declaration shall, except as otherwise
When Court Shall Determine and Adjudicate provided in these Rules, prejudice the rights of
Claims persons not parties to the action. (Id.)
The court shall proceed to determine their
respective rights and adjudicate their claims Rule 63, Section 2 contemplates a situation
after the pleadings of the conflicting claimants where there are other persons who would be
have been filed and pre-trial has been affected by the declaration, but were not
conducted. (Sec. 6, Rule 62) impleaded as necessary parties, in which case
the declaration shall not prejudice them. The
Lien Upon the Subject Matter non-joinder of necessary parties is not a
General Rule: The following shall constitute a jurisdictional defect. It may be a ground for
lien or charge upon the subject matter: dismissal under Rule 63, Sec. 5. (Baguio
1. Docket and other lawful fees paid by the Citizens Action Inc. v. The City Council of
party who filed the complaint for interpleader; Baguio, G.R. No. L-27247, 1983).
and
2. Costs and litigation expenses (Sec. 7, Rule The following shall also be notified and entitled
62) to be heard:
1. Solicitor General
Exception: Unless otherwise ordered by the a. Where the action involves the
court. (Id.) validity of a statute, executive
order or regulation, or any other
C. DECLARATORY RELIEF AND governmental regulation (Sec.
SIMILAR REMEDIES 3, Rule 63); or
b. Where the unconstitutionality of
Declaratory Relief a local government ordinance is
The purpose of the action is to secure an alleged (Sec. 4, Rule 63)
authoritative statement of the rights and 2. Local government unit prosecutor or
obligations of the parties under a statute, deed, attorney, where the action involves the

ATENEO CENTRAL
validity of a local government

ordinance. (Sec. 4, Rule 63). It must be a real and substantial controversy
admitting of a specific relief through a decree of
A notary public who is not a party to the contract conclusive character. (Province of North
is not entitled to file declaratory relief. None of Cotabato v. GRP Peace Panel on Ancestral
his rights or duties thereunder need be declared. Domain, G.R. No. 183591, 2008).
(Tadeo v. Prov. Fiscal of Pangasinan, G.R. No.
L-16474, 1962). Ripeness of Issue
1. When litigation is inevitable; or
Requisites Of An Action For Declaratory 2. When administrative remedies have been
Relief exhausted. (Bayan Telecommunications v.
1. The subject matter of the controversy must Republic, G.R. No. 161140, 2007)
be a deed, will, contract or other written
instrument, statute, executive order or Under the facts of the case, there is a threatened
regulation, or ordinance; litigation in the immediate future, which litigation
2. The terms of said documents and the validity is imminent and inevitable unless prevented by
thereof are doubtful and require judicial the declaratory relief sought. (Tolentino v. Board
construction; of Accountancy, G.R. No. L-3062, 1951)
3. There must have been no breach of the
documents in question; When Court May Refuse To Make Judicial
4. There must be an actual justiciable Declaration
controversy or the ripening seeds of one General Rule: The Court has the discretion,
between persons whose interests are motu proprio or upon motion, to refuse to grant
adverse; a declaratory relief when:
5. The issue must be ripe for judicial 1. The decision would not terminate the
determination; and uncertainty or controversy which gave rise to
6. Adequate relief is not available through other the action; or
means or other forms of action or proceeding. 2. The declaration or construction is not
(Almeda v. Bathala Marketing, G.R. No. necessary and proper under the
150806, 2008) circumstances. (Sec. 5, Rule 63)
No Actual Breach of Instrument Exception: If the action is for reformation of

An action for declaratory relief presupposes that instruments, consolidation of ownership, and
there has been no actual breach of the quieting of title – the court must decide the case.
instruments involved or of the rights arising (Sec. 1, Rule 63)
thereunder. It may be entertained before the
breach or violation of the statute, deed or Other Instances When the Action for
contract to which it refers. It is a form of action Declaratory Relief Will Not Lie:
that will set controversies at rest before they 1. Action to obtain a judicial declaration of
lead to a repudiation of obligations, an invasion citizenship (no real controversy; other
of rights, and a commission of wrongs. (Aquino remedies available) (Lim v. Republic, G.R.
vs. Municipality of Malay, Aklan,, G.R. No. No. L-30424, 1971);
211356, 2014) 2. Action to establish illegitimate filiation and
actions to determine hereditary rights (lack of
Actual Justiciable Controversy actual existing legal right – hereditary rights
A justiciable controversy refers to an existing are inchoate since the parent in question is
case or controversy that is appropriate or ripe for still alive) (Edades v. Edades, G.R. No. L-
judicial determination, not one that is conjectural 8964, 1956);
or merely anticipatory. (Velarde v. SJS, G.R. No. 3. Court decisions (not among subject
159357, 2004) matters listed; violates res judicata; see
Tanda v. Alday, G.R. Nos. L-9322-23, 1956);
It is one which is definite and concrete, touching 4. Decisions of quasi-judicial agencies (for
on all the legal relations of parties having the same reason as court decisions)
adverse legal interests. (Imbong v. Ochoa, G.R. (Monetary Board v. Philippine Veterans
No. 204819, 2014) Bank, G.R. No. 189571, 2015);

ATENEO CENTRAL
5. Action to resolve a political question; declaration of such rights and duties, as these
6. Those determinative of the issues rather are understood in ordinary civil actions, are not
than the construction of definite status, right sought by the proponent. However, the court
or relation; can grant such other affirmative relief as may be
7. Where the terms of the assailed ordinance warranted by the evidence if the complaint is
are not ambiguous or of doubtful meaning; sufficient to make out a case for specific
8. Where the contract or statute subject of performance or recovery of property with claims
the case had already been breached; (SJS v. for damages and the defendants did not raise
Lina, G.R. No. 160031, 2008); such issue in the trial court to challenge the
9. When the purpose of the action is merely remedy availed of. (Adlawan v. IAC, G.R. No.
to seek an advisory opinion from the court on 73022, 1989)
a moot question. (RIANO, 2016 ed.).
Reformation of an Instrument
Conversion To Ordinary Action An action for reformation is not an action brought
If before the final termination of the case, a to reform a contract, but to reform the instrument
breach or violation of an instrument or a statute, evidencing the contract. (New Civil Code, Art.
executive order or regulation, ordinance, or any 1359)
other governmental regulation should take
place, the action may thereupon be converted Consolidation of Ownership
into an ordinary action, and the parties shall be The action brought to consolidate ownership is
allowed to file such pleadings as may be not for the purpose of consolidating the
necessary or proper. (Sec. 6, Rule 63) ownership of the property in the person of the
vendee or buyer but for the registration of the
An action for declaratory relief presupposes that property. (Cruz v. Leis, G.R. No. 125233, 2000;
there has been no actual breach of the New Civil Code, Art. 1607)
instruments involved or of the rights arising
thereunder. It may be entertained before the Quieting of Title to Real Property
breach or violation of the statute, deed or An action to quiet title to real property is for the
contract to which it refers. It is a form of action removal or prevention of a cloud of title to real
that will set controversies at rest before they property or any interest by reason of any
lead to a repudiation of obligations, an invasion instrument, record, claim, encumbrance or
of rights, and a commission of wrongs. (Aquino proceeding which is apparently valid or effective
v. Municipality of Malay, Aklan, G.R. No. but is in truth and in fact invalid, ineffective,
211356, 2014) voidable or unenforceable and may be
prejudicial to said title. (New Civil Code, Art.
The law does not require that there shall be an 476)
actual pending case. It is sufficient that there is
a breach of the law, an actionable violation to Jurisdiction over actions to quiet title to real
bar a complaint for declaratory relief. (Borja v. property depends on the amount or value of the
Villadolid, G.R. No. L-1897, 1949) property.
Third Party Complaint Not Allowed Note: In Actions Similar to Declaratory Relief,
In a third party-complaint, the third-party plaintiff the court is bound to render judgment. In
is supposed to seek contribution, indemnity, petitions for declaratory relief, the court may
subrogation, or any other relief from the third- refuse to exercise the power to declare rights
party defendant in respect of the claim of the and to construe instruments. (Sec. 5, Rule 63)
plaintiff against him. This relief cannot be
granted because in a declaratory relief D. CERTIORARI, PROHIBITION , AND
proceeding, the court is confined merely to the MANDAMUS
interpretation of the terms of a contract.
(Commissioner of Customs v. Cloribel, G.R. No. 1. DEFINITIONS AND
L-21036, 1977) DISTINCTIONS
Writ of Execution Not Allowed Certiorari, Prohibition and Mandamus -
The judgment does not entail an executory Defined and Distinguished:
process since generally, other than a

ATENEO CENTRAL
CERTIORARI PROHIBITION MANDAMUS Covers Covers Covers

discretionary discretionary ministerial
To Whom It is Directed Against acts. and ministerial acts.
acts.
Directed Directed Directed
against an against an against an Nature of Remedy
entity or entity or entity or
person person person Corrective Negative and Affirmative or
exercising exercising exercising remedy: To preventive Positive: If
judicial or judicial, quasi- ministerial correct a lack remedy: To the
quasi-judicial judicial, or functions. of or restrain or performance
functions. ministerial usurpation of prevent of a duty is
functions. jurisdiction. usurpation of ordered.
jurisdiction.
Grounds Negative: If
desistance
Entity or Entity or Entity or from excluding
person is person is person is another from a
alleged to alleged to be alleged to right or office
have acted: acting or have: is ordered.
1. Without threatening to 1. Neglected
jurisdictio act: a
n; 1. Without ministerial 2. REQUISITES, WHEN, AND
2. In excess jurisdictio duty; or WHERE TO FILE
of n; 2. Excluded
jurisdictio 2. In excess another Certiorari and Appeal by Certiorari -
n; or of from a Distinguished:
3. With jurisdictio right or CERTIORARI AS A CERTIORARI AS A
grave n; or office. MODE OF APPEAL SPECIAL CIVIL
abuse of 3. With (RULE 45) ACTION (RULE 65)
discretion grave
amountin abuse of A continuation of the An original action and
g to lack discretion appellate process over not a mode of appeal.
or excess amountin the original case.
of g to lack
jurisdictio or excess Seeks to review final May be directed
n. of judgments or final against an
jurisdictio orders. interlocutory order of
n. the court or where no
appeal or plain,
Purpose speedy and adequate
remedy is available in
To annul or To have the To have the the ordinary course of
nullify a respondent respondent do law.
proceeding. desist from the act
further required as a Raises only questions Raises questions of
proceeding; duty; and pay of law (if directly from jurisdiction — that is,
from damages. RTC), or law, fact or whether a tribunal,
exercising both (if from other board or officer
jurisdiction/ courts). exercising judicial or
power. quasi-judicial functions
has acted without
Coverage jurisdiction or in
excess of jurisdiction
or with grave abuse of

ATENEO CENTRAL
CERTIORARI AS A CERTIORARI AS A CERTIORARI AS A CERTIORARI AS A

MODE OF APPEAL SPECIAL CIVIL MODE OF APPEAL SPECIAL CIVIL
(RULE 45) ACTION (RULE 65) (RULE 45) ACTION (RULE 65)
discretion amounting raised therein are too therein are too

to lack of jurisdiction. unsubstantial to unsubstantial to
require consideration. require consideration.
Filed within 15 days Filed within 60 days In such event, the
from notice of from notice of court may award in
judgment or final order judgment, order or favor of the
appealed from, or of resolution sought to be respondent treble
the denial of assailed and in case a costs solidarily against
petitioner’s motion for motion for the petitioner and
reconsideration or new reconsideration or new counsel, in addition to
trial. trial is timely filed, the subjecting counsel to
60-day period is to be administrative
counted from notice of sanctions under Rules
denial of said motion. 139 and 139-B of the
Rules of Court.
Extension of 30 days Extension is allowed
may be granted for only in exceptional and
The Court may impose
justifiable reasons. meritorious cases.
motu proprio, based
Does not require a Motion for on res ipsa loquitur,
prior motion for reconsideration is a other disciplinary
reconsideration. condition precedent, sanctions or measures
subject to exceptions. on erring lawyers for
patently dilatory and
Stays the judgment Does not stay the unmeritorious
appealed from. judgment or order Petitions for Certiorari.
subject of the petition,
unless enjoined or Liberal Construction: When a Rule 45 Petition
restrained. is Considered a Rule 65 Petition, and Vice-
Parties are the original The tribunal, board, Versa
parties with the officer exercising The Court has treated a petition for certiorari
appealing party as the judicial or quasi- under Rule 65 as petition for review on certiorari
petitioner and the judicial functions is under Rule 45 particularly
adverse party as the impleaded as primary 1. If the petition for certiorari was filed within the
respondent without respondent; with reglementary period within which to file a
impleading the lower adverse party in the petition for review on certiorari;
court or its judge. lower court (if any) as 2. When errors of judgment are averred;
the private 3. When there is sufficient reason to justify the
respondent. relaxation of the rules as when there is a
significant issue of jurisdiction; and
Filed only with SC. May be filed with SC, 4. When all requisites are present (RIANO
CA, Sandiganbayan, (2016), pp. 230-231; City of Manila v. Grecia-
or RTC (observe Cuerdo, G.R. No. 175723, 2014)
hierarchy of courts).
Requisites for Certiorari
SC may deny the The court may dismiss 1. Tribunal, board, or officer exercises judicial or
decision motu propio the petition if it finds quasi-judicial functions;
on the ground that the the same patently 2. Tribunal, board, or officer has acted without
appeal is without without merit or or in excess of jurisdiction or with grave
merit, or is prosecuted prosecuted manifestly abuse of discretion; and
manifestly for delay, or for delay, or if the 3. There is no appeal or any plain, speedy, and
that the questions questions raised adequate remedy in the ordinary course of

ATENEO CENTRAL
law. (Rosales v. ERC, G.R. No. 201852,

2016) Judicial or Quasi-Judicial Functions
General Rule: Respondent tribunal, board, or
Requisites for Prohibition officer is performing judicial or quasi-judicial
1. Respondent inferior court, tribunal, functions
corporation, board, officer, or other person is
exercising judicial, quasi-judicial, or The exercise of judicial function consists of the
ministerial functions; power to determine what the law is and what the
2. Respondent acted without or in excess of legal rights of the parties are, and then to
jurisdiction, or acted with grave abuse of adjudicate upon the rights of the parties.
discretion; and
3. There must be no appeal or other plain, The term quasi-judicial function applies to the
speedy, and adequate remedy. (Carlito action and discretion of public administrative
Montes v. CA, G.R. No. 143797, 2006) officers or bodies that are required to investigate
facts or ascertain the existence of facts, hold
Requisites for Mandamus hearings, and draw conclusions from them as a
1. There must be a clear legal right or duty; basis for their official action and to exercise
2. Respondent must be exercising a ministerial discretion of a judicial nature. (Ongsuco v. Hon.
duty — a duty which is absolute and Malones, G.R. No. 182065, 2009)
imperative, and involves merely its execution;
3. Respondent unlawfully neglects the Issuance by BSP-Monetary Board of CB
performance of its duty or unlawfully Circulars is done in the exercise of an executive
excludes another from the use and function and thus may not be the subject of
enjoyment of a right or office to which such certiorari petition. (Advocates for Truth in Lending
other is entitled; and v. BSP Monetary Board, G.R. No. 192986, 2013)
4. No appeal or other plain, speedy, and
adequate remedy in the ordinary course of The Secretary of Finance in issuing Revenue
law. (De Castro v. JBC, G.R. No. 191002, Regulations based on SEC. 244 of the NRIC is in
2010) the exercise of quasi-legislative functions, hence
outside the scope of certiorari. (Clark Investors
Note: All petitions must be accompanied with a Association v. Secretary of Finance, G.R. No.
certified true copy of the judgment or order 200670, 2015)
subject thereof. It must be an authenticated
original thereof and not a mere photocopy that Exception: However, with respect to the SC,
must be attached to the petition filed. certiorari and prohibition may be issued to correct
(REGALADO, 2008 ed.) errors of jurisdiction by a person or body even if
not exercising judicial, quasi-judicial, or
Common Requisites For Certiorari, ministerial functions where the matter is of
Prohibition, And Mandamus “transcendental importance to the nation.”
(Villanueva v. JBC, G.R. No. 211833, 2015)
Aggrieved Party
The term "person aggrieved" is not to be Ministerial Acts / Functions vs. Discretionary
construed to mean that any person who feels Acts / Functions
injured by the lower court's order or decision can MINISTERIAL ACTS DISCRETIONARY
question the said court's disposition via certiorari. / FUNCTIONS ACTS / FUNCTIONS
In a situation wherein the order or decision being One which an officer The law imposes a
questioned underwent adversarial proceedings or tribunal performs in duty upon a public
before a trial court, the "person aggrieved" a given state of facts, officer and gives him
referred to under Section 1 of Rule 65 who can in a prescribed the right to decide
avail of the special civil action manner, in obedience how or when the duty
of certiorari pertains to one who was a party in the to the mandate of a shall be performed.
proceedings before the lower court. (Siguion legal authority, (Mallari v. Banco
Reyna Montecillo and Ongsiako Law Offices v. without regard to or Filipino Savings &
No. Chionlo-Sia, G.R. No. 181186, 2016). the exercise of his

ATENEO CENTRAL
own judgment upon Mortgage Bank, G.R.

the propriety or No. 157600, 2008). Preliminary Considerations
impropriety done.
The hierarchy of courts should serve as a
general determinant of the appropriate forum for
Rule 65 petitions. The concurrence of jurisdiction
Jurisdictional Errors among the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals and
1. Without jurisdiction – Respondent does not the Regional Trial Courts to issue writs of
have the legal power to determine the case certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo warranto,
(Sps. Dacudao v. SOJ, G.R. No. 186056, habeas corpus and injunction does not give the
2013). petitioners the unrestricted freedom of choice of
2. Excess of jurisdiction – Respondent, being forum. (Kalipunan ng Damayang Mahihirap, Inc.
clothed with the power to determine the case, v. Robredo, G.R. No. 200903, 2014)
oversteps his authority as determined by law.
3. Grave abuse of discretion – generally In order to properly proceed against the
refers to a "capricious or whimsical exercise respondent, an aggrieved party [under Rule 65]
of judgment as is equivalent to lack of must choose the proper remedy. The choice
jurisdiction." The abuse of discretion must be depends on which function – quasi-judicial, quasi-
patent and gross so as to amount to an legislative, and administrative – the respondent
evasion of a positive duty or a virtual refusal has discharged in doing the assailed action.
to perform a duty enjoined by law, or to act at (Capalla v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 201112, 2012,
all in contemplation of law. (Atty. Allan Bersamin, J., concurring)
Hilbero v. Florencia Morales, Jr., G.R. No.
198760, 2017). Certiorari, Prohibition, or Mandamus as an
Independent Action
No Appeal, Plain, Speedy and Adequate An application for certiorari is an independent
Remedy action which is not part or a continuation of the
It is the inadequacy, and not the mere absence of trial which resulted in the rendition of the
all other legal remedies and the failure of justice judgment complained of. Impliedly, a petition
without the writ, that must usually determine the for certiorari pending before a higher court does
propriety of certiorari or prohibition. A remedy is not necessarily become moot and academic by a
plain, speedy, and adequate if it will promptly continuation of the proceedings in the court of
relieve the petitioner from the injurious effects of origin. (Sps. Juan Diaz v. Jose Diaz, G.R. No.
the judgment, order, or resolution of the lower 135885, 2000).
court of agency. (Morales v. CA, G.R. Nos.
217126-27, 2015). CERTIORARI
Certiorari is a remedy of last resort. It is not A petition for certiorari is proper when all the
available if the party still has another speedy and requisites are complied with.
adequate remedy (such as appeal) available.
(Tolentino v. COMELEC, G.R. Nos. 218536, Certiorari Not Available When Appeal is
2016). Available
General Rule: Where appeal is available to the
An adequate remedy has been defined as a aggrieved party, certiorari will not prosper, even if
remedy which is equally beneficial, speedy and the ground is grave abuse of discretion.
sufficient, not merely a remedy which at some (Freedom from Debt Coalition v. MWSS, G.R. No.
time in the future will bring about a revival of the 173004, 2007)
judgment of the lower court complained of in the
certiorari proceeding, but a remedy which will When the remedy by appeal had already been
promptly relieve the petitioner from the injurious lost due to the petitioner’s own neglect or error in
effects of that judgment and the acts of the the choice of remedies, certiorari cannot lie. The
inferior court or tribunal. (PSALM v. Maunlad two remedies are mutually exclusive. (MERALCO
Homes, Gr No. 215933, 8 February 2017). v. CA, G.R. No. 88396, 1990).
When Petition For Certiorari, Prohibition Or Exceptions:

Mandamus Is Proper

ATENEO CENTRAL
Even when appeal is available and is the proper jurisdiction. Petitioner filed another special civil
remedy, SC has allowed a writ of certiorari: action of certiorari assailing the CA’s resolution.
1. Where the appeal does not constitute a Petitioner should have filed a petition for review
speedy and adequate remedy; on certiorari under Rule 45, which is a
2. Where the orders were also issued either in continuation of the appellate process over the
excess of or without jurisdiction; original case. However, in accordance with the
4. For certain special considerations, as public liberal spirit pervading the Rules of Court and in
welfare or public policy; the interest of substantial justice, this Court has,
5. Where, in criminal actions, the court rejects before, treated a petition for certiorari as a
rebuttal evidence for the prosecution as, in petition for review on certiorari, particularly:
case of acquittal, there could be no remedy; 1. If the petition for certiorari was filed within the
6. Where the order is a patent nullity; and reglementary period within which to file a
7. Where the decision in the certiorari case will petition for review on certiorari;
avoid future litigations. (REGALADO, 2008 2. When errors of judgment are averred; and
ed.) 3. When there is sufficient reason to justify the
relaxation of the rules. (The City of Manila v.
Even when the period for appeal has lapsed, SC Hon. Grecia-Cuerdo, G.R. No. 175723, 2014)
has allowed a writ of certiorari:
1. When appeal is lost without the appellants’ Small Claims – Certiorari Is Proper
negligence; Considering the final nature of a small claims
2. When public welfare and the advancement of case decision under Sec. 23 of the Rules of
public policy dictates; Procedure for Small Claims Cases, the remedy
3. When the broader interest of justice so of appeal is not allowed, and the prevailing
requires; party may, thus, immediately move for its
execution. Nevertheless, the proscription on
4. When the writs issued are null and void; and
appeals in small claims cases, similar to other
5. When the questioned order amounts to an proceedings where appeal is not an available
oppressive exercise of judicial authority. remedy, does not preclude the aggrieved party
(Sunbeam Convenience Foods v. CA, G.R. from filing a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 of
No. 50464, 1990) the Rules of Court. (A.L. Ang Network v.
Mondejar, G.R. No. 200804, 2014)
Certiorari is Not a Proper Remedy to Appeal a
Motion to Quash Certiorari and Not Mandamus May be Issued
General Rule: The proper action is to continue Against the JBC
with the trial and reiterate the special defenses Although the JBC does not fall within the scope
invoked in the motion to quash. of a tribunal, board, or officer exercising judicial
or quasi-judicial functions, in the process of
Exception: Certiorari is proper when there is selecting and screening applicants, the JBC
grave abuse of discretion. (Lazarte v. neither acted in any judicial or quasi-judicial
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 180122, 2009) capacity nor assumed unto itself any
performance of judicial or quasi-judicial
Certiorari is the Proper Remedy to Appeal a prerogative. However, since the formulation of
Declaration of Presumptive Death guidelines and criteria, including the policy that
The Family Code was explicit that the court’s the petitioner now assails, is necessary and
judgment in summary proceedings, such as the incidental to the exercise of the JBC’s
declaration of presumptive death of an absent constitutional mandate, a determination must be
spouse, shall be immediately final and executory. made on whether the JBC has acted with grave
An aggrieved party may, nevertheless, file a abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess
petition for certiorari under Rule 65 to question of jurisdiction in issuing and enforcing the said
any abuse of discretion amounting to lack or policy. (Villanueva v. Judicial & Bar Council, G.R.
excess of jurisdiction that transpired. (Republic v. No. 211833, 2015)
Cantor, G.R. No. 184621, 2013)
The writ of mandamus does not issue to control
RTC ruled in favor of private respondents. Upon or review the exercise of discretion or to compel
the special civil action of certiorari, the CA a course of conduct, which, it quickly seems to us,
dismissed the petition on the ground of lack of

ATENEO CENTRAL
was what the petitioner would have the JBC do in

his favor. The function of the JBC to select and MANDAMUS
recommend nominees for vacant judicial
positions is discretionary, not ministerial. (Id.). Respondent in Mandamus
An inferior court, tribunal, corporation, board,
PROHIBITION officer, or other person neglecting the
performance of an act which the law specifically
Respondent in Prohibition enjoins as a duty or unlawfully excluding another
An inferior court, tribunal, corporation, board, from the use and enjoyment of a right or office to
officer, or other person, exercising which the petitioner is entitled. (Sec. 3, Rule 65).
1. Judicial;
2. Quasi-judicial; or
3. Ministerial functions. (Sec. 2, Rule 65) Nature and Purpose of Mandamus
The writ of mandamus lies to enforce the
When what is at contest is the power and execution of an act, when, otherwise, justice
authority of a private organization, composed of would be obstructed; and, regularly, issues only
several members-organizations, which power in cases relating to the public and to the
and authority were vested to it by its own government; hence, it is called a prerogative
members, prohibition will not lie. The definition writ. To preserve its prerogative character,
and purpose of a writ of prohibition excludes the mandamus is not used for the redress of private
use of the writ against any person or group of wrongs, but only in matters relating to the public.
persons acting in a purely private capacity, and (Uy Kiao Eng. v. Nixon Lee, G.R. No. 176831,
the writ will not be issued against private 2010).
individuals or corporations so acting. (Destileria
Limtuaco & Co. v. Advertising Board of the Mandamus Proper When There is the
Philippines, G.R. No. 164242, 2008) Existence of a Clear Legal Right
A clear legal right is a right which is indubitably
Accomplished Facts / Fait Accompli granted by law or inferable as a matter of law. If
General rule: A petition for prohibition is intended the right is clear and the case is meritorious,
to prohibit or prevent FUTURE acts done without objections raising merely technical questions will
authority or jurisdiction, and is not proper for acts be disregarded. But where the right sought to be
already accomplished. enforced is in substantial doubt or dispute,
mandamus cannot issue. (Angeles v. Secretary
Exceptions: of Justice, G.R. No. 142549, 2010)
Even when an act is already fait accompli, SC has
allowed a writ of prohibition: A Petition For Mandamus Was Considered
1. Where it would prevent the creation of a new Proper In The Following Instances:
province by those in the corridors of power 1. To compel the Ombudsman to dismiss a case
who could avoid judicial intervention and which was pending before him for 6 years,
review by merely speedily and stealthily which was considered a violation of the
completing the commission of such illegality. constitutional duty to “promptly act on
(Tan v. Comelec, G.R. No. 73155, 1986); complaints filed. (Angchangco v.
2. Where it would provide a complete relief by Ombudsman, G.R. No. 122728, 1997);
not only preventing what remains to be done 2. To compel a judge to issue a writ of execution
but by undoing what has been done, such as pending appeal of a decision in an ejectment
terminating a preliminary investigation case, where the defendant appellant failed to
instead of filing a motion to quash. (Aurillo v. make the necessary deposits of rentals
Rabi, G.R. No. 120014, 2002); pending appeal. (Vda. De Carbungco v.
3. Where the acts sought to be enjoined were Amparo, G.R. No. L-2245, 1949)
performed after the injunction suit is brought.
(Versoza v. Martinez, G.R. No. 119511, 1998) Mandamus Not Proper in the Following
Cases:
When Prohibition Proper 1. To enforce purely contractual obligations;
Prohibition is the remedy where a motion to 2. When there is another speedy and adequate
dismiss is improperly denied. (Enriquez v. remedy;
Macadaeg, G.R. No. L-2422, 1949)

ATENEO CENTRAL
3. To compel a school to readmit students, lack or excess of

and/or to confer academic honors, in violation jurisdiction. (Sec. 2,
of the school’s academic freedom. Rule 65)
(University of San Agustin v. CA, G.R. No. Ordinary civil
100588; University of San Carlos v. CA, G.R. Special civil action;
action; may deal
No. 79237 1988); refers to issues of
with factual or legal
4. To compel the performance of an act already jurisdiction only.
issues.
done, such as to include one’s name in the Directed against a
list of graduates and allow him to take part in Directed against a
tribunal, corporation,
the graduation exercises, as the same was litigant.
board, or officer.
moot since the graduation ceremony had Mandatory Injunction and Prohibition
already pushed through. (Cudia v. The Distinguished
Superintendent of the PMA, G.R. No.
211362, 2015) MANDATORY
PROHIBITION
INJUNCTION
Mandamus May Not be Used to Compel A judgment
Discretionary Duties; Exception commanding a
General Rule: Mandamus is applicable to a tribunal, corporation,
ministerial duty. board, officer, or
person, unlawfully
Exception: As for discretionary duties, it can be neglecting the
used to the extent of requiring performance of a performance of an act
An order requiring a
discretionary duty to act but not to require which the law
party litigant to
performance of such duty in a particular manner. specifically enjoins as
perform a particular
(BF Homes v. NWRC, G.R. No. 78529, 1987) a duty resulting from
act in order to restore
an office, trust, or
the last actual
Exceptions to the Exception: The respondent station, or unlawfully
peaceable
can be ordered to act in a particular manner to excluding another
uncontested status
control discretion when there is: from the use and
which preceded the
1. Grave abuse of discretion; enjoyment of a right
pending controversy.
2. Manifest injustice; or or office to which such
3. Palpable excess of authority. (M.A. Jimenez order is entitled to do
Enterprises v. Ombudsman, G.R. No. the act required to be
155307, 2011) done to protect the
rights of the
Injunction Distinguished from Prohibition petitioner. (Sec. 3,
and Mandamus Rule 65)
PREVENTIVE/ Ordinary civil action; Special civil action;
PROHIBITORY PROHIBITION may deal with factual refers to issues of
INJUNCTION or legal issues. jurisdiction only.
A judgment Directed against a
Directed against a
commanding a tribunal, tribunal, corporation,
litigant.
corporation, board, board, or officer.
officer, or person,
whether exercising Mandamus and Injunction Distinguished
judicial, quasi-judicial or
An order requiring a MANDAMUS INJUNCTION
ministerial functions, to
party litigant to
desist from further
refrain from a
proceeding in the action Special civil action. Ordinary civil action.
particular act.
or matter specified
therein because it acts
without or in excess of Directed against a
Directed against a
its or his jurisdiction or tribunal, corporation,
litigant.
with grave abuse of board, or officer.
discretion amounting to

ATENEO CENTRAL
Purpose is to either exercise of the Supreme Court’s primary

Purpose is for the compel the defendant jurisdiction. (Santiago v. Vasquez, G.R. Nos.
tribunal, corporation, to refrain from 99289-90, 1993)
board, or officer to performing an act or to
perform a ministerial perform any act - not 3. EXCEPTIONS TO FILING OF
and legal duty. necessarily a legal and MOTION FOR
ministerial duty. RECONSIDERATION
BEFORE FILING PETITION
General Rule: A motion for reconsideration is a

sine qua non requirement before filing a petition
under Rule 65. (Romy’s Freight Service v. Castro,
When to file petition
G.R. No. 141637; Nuque v. Aquino, G.R. No.
Within 60 days from notice of the assailed
193058, 2015)
judgment, order or resolution.
Exceptions:
In case a motion for reconsideration or a motion
1. Where the order questioned is a patent
for a new trial is timely filed: within 60 days from
nullity;
notice of the denial of said motion. (Sec. 4, Rule
2. Where the questions raised in the certiorari
65)
proceeding have already been duly raised
and passed upon by the lower court or are
Where to File Petition
the same as those raised and passed upon in
1. If the petition relates to the acts or omissions the lower court;
of a lower court, corporation, board, or officer
3. Where there is an urgent necessity for the
or person: RTC exercising jurisdiction over
resolution of the question;
the territorial area as defined by the SC.
4. Where an MR would be useless or is
2. If the petition relates to the acts or omissions prohibited;
of a quasi-judicial agency: Cognizable only 5. Where petitioner is deprived of due process;
by the CA; 6. Where, in a criminal case, relief from an order
3. To the Sandiganbayan or the Court of of arrest is urgent and the granting of such
Appeals, whether or not in aid of the court’s relief by the trial court is improbable;
appellate jurisdiction. (Id.) 7. Where the issue raised is one purely of law
or where public interest is involved;
Note: R.A. 10660 provides that the 8. Where the proceedings in the lower court are
Sandiganbayan shall have exclusive original a nullity for lack of due process;
jurisdiction over petitions for the issuance of the 9. Where the proceeding was ex parte or in
writs of mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, habeas which the petitioner had no opportunity to
corpus, injunctions, and other ancillary writs and object; and
processes in aid of its appellate jurisdiction 10. Where the subject matter of the action is
and over petitions of similar nature, including quo perishable.
warranto, arising or that may arise in cases filed
or which may be filed under Executive Order Nos. E. QUO WARRANTO
1, 2, 14 and 14-A, issued in 1986: Provided, that
the jurisdiction over these petitions shall not be Quo Warranto
exclusive of the Supreme Court. A petition for quo warranto is a proceeding to
determine the right of a person to the use or
Hierarchy of Courts exercise of a franchise or office and to oust the
General Rule: The filing of a petition under Rule holder from its enjoyment, if his claim is not well-
65 must follow the hierarchy of courts. Thus, founded, or if he has forfeited his right to enjoy
direct resort to the Supreme Court will not be the privilege. Where the action is filed by a private
entertained. person, he must prove that he is entitled to the
controverted position; otherwise, respondent has
Exception: Unless the redress desired cannot be a right to the undisturbed possession of the office.
obtained in the appropriate courts or where (Velasco v. Belmonte, G.R. No. 211140, 2016)
exceptional and compelling circumstances justify
availment of a remedy within and calling for the Object of Quo Warranto

ATENEO CENTRAL
1. Determine the right of a person to use or 3. An association which acts as a corporation

exercise of a franchise or office; and within the Philippines without being legally
2. Oust the holder from its enjoyment, if his incorporated or without lawful authority so to
claim is not well-founded, or if he has forfeited act. (Sec. 1, Rule 66)
his right to enjoy the office. (Tecson v.
COMELEC, G.R. No. 161434, 2004) Note: Rule 66 of the Rules of Court does not
apply to quo warranto cases against persons who
Nature of a Quo Warranto usurp an office in a private corporation. (Calleja
1. It is a direct, not a collateral attack, on the matter v. Panday, G.R. No. 168696, 2006)
assailed.
2. It is a proceeding against a public officer, not in Distinguish: Quo Warranto Under The Rules
his official capacity, because no official power Of Court And Quo Warranto Under The
or right or duty is sought, but because the Omnibus Election Code
officer’s title to the office is being questioned.
QUO WARRANTO QUO WARRANTO
3. It is a proceeding of a public nature filed by a
(RULE 66) (ELECTION CODE)
prosecuting attorney ex officio such as by the
Solicitor General or fiscal. (But it is personal in Subject of the petition is
nature as to the person claiming office) Subject of the petition in relation to an elective
is in relation to an office. (Nuval v. Guray,
Who May Commence an Action for Quo appointive office. G.R. No. L-30241,
Warranto December 29, 1928)
1. The Solicitor General or a public prosecutor
[MANDATORY quo warranto]; Grounds relied upon
a. Upon direction of the President; The issue is the are: (a) ineligibility to
b. Upon complaint; or legality of the the position; or (b)
c. When he has good reason to believe occupancy of the disloyalty to the
he can establish a case on the grounds office by virtue of a Republic. (Omnibus
in Sec. 1 legal appointment. Election Code, Sec.
2. The Solicitor General or a public prosecutor at 253)
the request and upon relation of another
May be instituted with
person [ex relatione]
the COMELEC by any
a. The petitioner must first obtain a leave voter contesting the
of court
election of any member
b. The petitioner may also require an Petition is brought of Congress, regional,
indemnity bond to the relator either to SC, CA, or provincial or city officer;
3. A private person claiming to be entitled to the RTC. or to the MeTC, MTC or
usurped or unlawfully held office. MCTC if against any
a. The petitioner will not need to secure barangay official.
intervention of the Solicitor General or (Omnibus Election
a fiscal; Code, Sec. 253)
b. The action will be brought in his name.
c. Petitioner must be able to show or Filed within one year
establish that he has a clear right to the from the time the
position, AND that the person holding cause of ouster, or Filed within 10 days
the office is a mere usurper. (Sec. 5, the right of the after the proclamation
Rule 66) petitioner to hold the of the results of the
office or position election.
The action is brought against: arose. (Sec 11, Rule
1. A person who usurps, intrudes into, or 66)
unlawfully holds or exercises a public office,
position or franchise; Petitioner is the Petitioner may be any
2. A public officer who does or suffers an act person entitled to the voter even if he is not
which, by the provision of law, constitutes a office. entitled to the office.
ground for the forfeiture of his office; or

ATENEO CENTRAL
When the tribunal charter. When the advertisements released by

declares the candidate- the company seem to celebrate bigamy, illegal
elect as ineligible, he marriages, or divorce, the same must be enjoined
will be unseated but the immediately by the court. (Ulep v. The Legal
person occupying the Clinic, Bar Matter no. 553, 1993; Secs. 2 & 3,
The court has to Rule 66 in relation to Revised Corporation Code,
second place will not be
declare who the Sec. 19 & P.D. No. 902-A, Sec. 6[1]).
declared as the one
person entitled to the
duly elected because
office is if he is the Where the Action is Brought if Solicitor
the law shall consider
petitioner. General Commences Action
only the person who,
having duly filed his When the action is commenced by the Solicitor
certificate of candidacy, General, the petition may be brought in the:
received a plurality of 1. Regional Trial Court of the City of Manila;
votes. 2. Court of Appeals; or
3. Supreme Court. (Sec. 7, Rule 66)
Quo Warranto vs. Mandamus Quo Warranto Against Corporations

Quo warranto tests the title to one’s office May be brought against an association acting as
claimed by another and has as its object the a corporation within the Philippines without being
ouster of the holder from its enjoyment, while legally incorporated or without lawful authority to
mandamus seeks to enforce clear legal duties act. (Sec. 19, Revised Corporation Code).
and not to try disputed titles. (Garces v. CA, G.R.
No. 114795, 1996) This refers to de facto corporations: those
issued a certificate of incorporation although it
When Government Commences An Action had not fully complied with the laws. (Id.)
Against Individuals Or Associations
De facto Corporation: one which in good faith
The Solicitor General or the public prosecutor claims to be a corporation, was organized in
must commence an action for quo warranto accordance and pursuant to a valid law, and
when: assumes corporate powers because it was
1. Directed by the President of the Philippines; issued a certificate of incorporation. (RIANO 2016
or ed., p. 279)
2. Upon complaint or otherwise, he has good
reason to believe that a case where a quo Its corporate existence can be directly attacked
warranto may be filed can be established by by a quo warranto proceeding (Corporation Code,
proof. (Sec. 2, Rule 66) Sec. 19)
A case for quo warranto may be filed by the Intra-Corporate Dispute

government against the following individuals: Quo Warranto proceedings against persons who
1. A person who usurps, intrudes into, or usurp the office, powers or functions of duly
unlawfully holds or exercises a public office, elected board members within a corporation are
position or franchise; not within the Scope of Rule 66. (Calleja v.
2. A public officer who does or suffers an act Panday, G.R. No. 168696, 2006).
which, by the provision of law, constitutes a
ground for the forfeiture of his office; or When Individual May Commence An Action
3. An association which acts as a corporation General Rule: Government, through Solicitor
within the Philippines without being legally General; or Public Prosecutor. (Sec. 2, Rule 66).
incorporated or without lawful authority so to
act. (Sec 1, Rule 66) Exception: Individual claiming to be entitled to a
public office or position usurped or unlawfully held
A petition to prohibit the release of illegal or exercised by another. (Sec. 5, Rule 66)
advertisements by a “Legal Clinic” run mainly by
paralegals (unauthorized practice of law), must In bringing a petition for quo warranto, a private
properly be brought to the Solicitor General to individual must show that he has a clear right to
commence an action of quo warranto against the the office allegedly being held by another. It is not
company in light of their misuse of the corporate enough that he merely asserts the right to be

ATENEO CENTRAL
appointed to the office. (Cuevas v. Bacal, G.R. 3. Bring an action for damages against
No. 139382, 2000) respondent sustained by him by reason of
the usurpation (Sec. 10, Rule 66)
The petitioner must also FIRST prove his
entitlement or right to the office, and cannot When a quo warranto case is rendered moot and
simply rely on the defects in the qualifications of academic, but the injunction order issued in such
the respondent. Failing this, the petition can be a pending case was disobeyed, the petitioner is
dismissed at any stage and the court will not pass still entitled to receive compensation in damages
on the qualifications or eligibility of the holder of from such disobedience by the party previously
the office/respondent. (Acosta v. Flor, G.R. No. proceeded against. (Villanueva v. Rosqueta,
2122, 1905) G.R. No. 180764, 2010)
An action of quo warranto is filed prematurely Limitation as to Period to File

when the nature of the position is yet to be General Rule: The action must be commenced
adjudged under a review on certiorari action in within 1 year from date after the cause of such
the CA as to whether it is of a de facto or de jure ouster or the right of the petitioner to hold such
capacity. This also constitutes forum shopping. office or position arose. (Sec. 11, Rule 66)
(Feliciano v. Villasin, G.R. No. 174929, 2008)
A petition for quo warranto and mandamus
Where the Action is Brought if the Action is affecting titles to public office must be filed within
Commenced by Other Persons one (1) year from the date the petitioner is ousted
1. Supreme Court; from his position. He who claims the right to hold
2. Court of Appeals; or a public office allegedly usurped by another and
3. Regional Trial Court exercising jurisdiction who desires to seek redress in the courts, should
over the territorial area where the respondent file the proper judicial action within the
or any of the respondents reside. (Sec. 7, reglementary period. (Galano v. Roxas, G.R. No.
Rule 66) L-31241, 1975)
Judgment In Quo Warranto Action Exception: Laches does not attach and failure to
When the respondent is found guilty of usurping, file quo warranto proceeding does not operate
intruding into, or unlawfully holding or exercising adversely against a dismissed government
a public office, position, or franchise, judgment employee where it was the act of responsible
shall be rendered that such respondent to be government officials which contributed in the
ousted and altogether excluded therefrom. delay of the filing of complaint for reinstatement.
(Cristobal v. Melchor, G.R. No. L-43203, 1977)
Petitioner or relator may recover his costs.
Interruption of Period
Such further judgment may be rendered An action for quo warranto must be filed within
determining the respective rights of all the parties one year after the cause of action accrues. The
to the action as justice requires. (Sec. 9, Rule 66) pendency of administrative remedies does not
operate to suspend the running of the one-year
Rights Of A Person Adjudged Entitled To period. (Palma-Fernandez v. De La Paz, G.R.
Public Office No. 78946, 1988)
If judgment be rendered in favor of the person
averred in the complaint to be entitled to the Under the first provision, the action for quo
public office, he may, after taking the oath of warranto must be commenced within one year
office and executing any official bond required by from the time the cause of such ouster, or the
law: right of the plaintiff to hold office arose. On the
1. Take upon himself the execution of the office other hand, Article 1155 of the New Civil Code
2. Demand of the respondent all the books and provides that "the prescription of actions is
the papers in the respondent’s custody or interrupted when they are filed before the court."
control appertaining to the office. If he (Mendiola v. Tancinco, G.R. No. L-14107, 1960)
refuses or neglects to do so, he may be
punished for contempt. One Year Limit Does Not Lie When Petitioner
is the Government

ATENEO CENTRAL
When it is the government which commenced the An expropriation proceeding is commenced by

petition for quo warranto and puts in issue the the filing of a VERIFIED COMPLAINT which
qualification of the person holding the highest shall:
position in the Judiciary, there can be no 1. State with certainty the right of the plaintiff to
acquiescence or inaction, in this case, on the part expropriation and the purpose thereof;
of the Republic as would amount to an 2. Describe the real or personal property sought
abandonment of its right to seek redress against to be expropriated; and
a public wrong and vindicate public interest. 3. Join as defendants all persons owning or
Neither can delay be attributed to the Republic in claiming to own, or occupying, any part of the
commencing the action since respondent property or interest therein showing as far as
deliberately concealed the fact of her practicable the interest of each defendant.
disqualification to the position. Prescription, 4. If the title to any property sought to be
therefore, cannot be pleaded against the expropriated appears to be in the Philippines
Republic. (Republic v. Sereno, G.R. No. 237428, (although occupied by private individuals) or
May 11, 2018) if the the title is so obscure such that the
plaintiff cannot with accuracy identify the real
F. EXPROPRIATION owners, averment to that effect must be
made in the complaint. (Sec 1, Rule 67)
Expropriation
It is a process by which the power of eminent Note: When the right of the plaintiff to expropriate
domain is carried out; taking of privately owned is conferred by law, the complaint does not have
property by the government under eminent to state with certainty the right of expropriation.
domain.
1. TWO STAGES IN EVERY
Eminent domain ACTION FOR
It is the right of the State to acquire private EXPROPRIATION
property for public use upon the payment of just
compensation (Brgy. Sinadalan v. CA, G.R. No. STAGE 1: Determination of the plaintiff’s
150640, 2007) authority to exercise the POWER OF
EMINENT DOMAIN and the propriety of its
Public Use exercise in the context of the facts involved in
It is synonymous with public interest, public the suit.
benefit, public welfare, and public convenience.
Whatever may be beneficially employed for the It ends with an ORDER either: DISMISSING the
general welfare satisfies the requirement of public action or “of CONDEMNATION” declaring that
use. (Reyes v. NHA, G.R. No. 147511, 2003) the plaintiff has a lawful right to take the property
sought to be condemned, for the public use or
Note: Expropriation is only proper when the purpose described in the complaint, upon the
owner refuses to sell or agrees to sell but an payment of just compensation to be determined
agreement as to price cannot be reached. as of the date of the filing of the complaint.
(Republic v. Legaspi, Sr., G.R. No. 177611)
Incapable of Pecuniary Estimation
An expropriation suit is incapable of pecuniary An ORDER OF DISMISSAL, if this be ordained,
estimation. An expropriation suit does not involve would be a final one, of course, since it finally
the recovery of a sum of money. Rather, it deals disposes of the action and leaves nothing more
with the exercise by the government of its to be done by the court on the merits. (Republic
authority and right to take private property for v. Legaspi, Sr., G.R. No. 177611)
public use. Hence, jurisdiction over expropriation
proceedings is lodged with the RTC. (Barangay Remedy: Appeal by notice of appeal
San Roque v. Heirs of Pastor, G.R. No. 138896, within FIFTEEN (15) DAYS or record on
2000) appeal within THIRTY (30) DAYS from
receipt of court order.
Matters To Allege In Complaint For
Expropriation STAGE 2: Determination by the court of the
just compensation for the property sought to
be taken. This is done by the court with the

ATENEO CENTRAL
assistance of not more than three (3) 2. ORDER OF

commissioners. The order fixing the just EXPROPRIATION
compensation on the basis of the evidence
before, and findings of, the commissioners would The order of expropriation forecloses any further
be final, too. It would finally dispose of the second objections to the right to expropriate, including the
stage of the suit, and leave nothing more to be public purpose of the same.
done by the court regarding the issue. (Barangay
San Roque v. Heirs of Pastor, G.R. No. 138896, The court will then proceed to resolve the matter
2000) of just compensation.
Remedy: Appeal by notice of appeal Such final order sustaining the right to expropriate
within FIFTEEN (15) DAYS from receipt the property may be appealed by any party
of court order. aggrieved thereby. Such appeal, however, shall
not prevent the court from determining the just
The order of the court in each stage is a compensation to be paid.
final order and is separately appealable.
Note: Expropriation is one of the actions wherein
multiple appeals are permitted. An appeal may be
taken from the order of expropriation which
What Constitutes “Taking” authorizes the expropriation. Another appeal may
1. The expropriator must enter a private lie against the judgment on the just compensation
property; to be paid.
2. The entrance into private property must be
for more than a momentary period; Since multiple appeals are permitted, the
3. The entry into the property should be under reglementary period to appeal shall be 30 days
warrant or color of legal authority; and a record on appeal shall be required for each
4. The property must be devoted to a public use of the permissible appeals.
or otherwise informally appropriated or
injuriously affected; and After the rendition of such an order, the plaintiff
5. The utilization of the property for public use shall not be permitted to dismiss or discontinue
must be in such a way as to oust the owner the proceeding except on such terms as the court
and deprive him of all beneficial enjoyment of deems just and equitable. (Sec. 4, Rule 67)
the property. (Republic v. Vda. De Castellvi,
G.R. No. L-20620, 1974) Judicial Review of the Exercise of Eminent
Domain; Limitations
Requisites for the Local Government to Judicial review of the exercise of eminent domain
Validly Exercise Eminent Domain is limited to the following areas of concern:
1. An ordinance is enacted by the local legislative 1. The adequacy of the compensation;
council authorizing the local chief executive, in 2. The necessity of the taking; and
behalf of the LGU, to exercise the power of 3. The public use character of the purpose of
eminent domain or pursue expropriation the taking. (Masikip v. City of Pasig, G.R. No.
proceedings over a particular private property; 136349, 2006)
2. The power of eminent domain is exercised for
public use, purpose or welfare, or for the Dismissal of Expropriation Proceeding –
benefit of the poor and the landless; When Proper
3. There is payment of just compensation, as Dismissal of an expropriation proceeding is
required under Section 9, Article III of the proper when the city asserting eminent domain
Constitution, and other pertinent laws; and failed to prove in evidence that there is a genuine
4. A valid and definite offer has been previously necessity for taking public property. Providing a
made to the owner of the property sought to playground for a non-profit, private organization,
be expropriated, but said offer was not not directly for the benefit of the locality, is not a
accepted. (Municipality of Parañaque v. V.M. public purpose. Hence, it is an inappropriate
Realty Corporation, G.R. No. 127820, 1998) reason for instituting expropriation proceedings
and no confiscation of property may be executed.
(Masikip v. City of Pasig, G.R. No. 136349, 2006)

ATENEO CENTRAL
The order of expropriation merely declares that JC = Fair Market Value of the Property
the plaintiff has the lawful power to expropriate
the property but contains no ascertainment of the (Republic v. BPI, G.R. No. 203039, 2013)
compensation to be paid to the owner of the
property. (RIANO, 2016, p. 300) Inverse Condemnation
Inverse condemnation has the objective to
3. ASCERTAINMENT OF JUST recover the value of property taken in fact by the
COMPENSATION governmental defendant, even though no formal
exercise of the power of eminent domain has
Just Compensation been attempted by the taking agency. (NPC v.
It is the full and fair equivalent of the property Heirs of Macabangkit, G.R. No. 165828, 2011)
taken from its owner by the expropriator. The Upon filing of complaint and after due notice to
measure is not just the taker’s gain, but the defendant, the plaintiff shall have the right to
owner’s loss. enter or take possession of property if he makes
a preliminary deposit. (Sec. 2, Rule 67)
Just compensation means not only the correct
determination of the amount to be paid to the Requisites for Authorizing Immediate Entry
owner of the land but also the payment of the land 1. The filing of a complaint for expropriation
within a reasonable time from its taking. sufficient in form and substance; and
2. The deposit of the amount equivalent to the
Without prompt payment, compensation cannot assessed value of the property to be
be considered "just" for the property owner is expropriated based on its current tax
made to suffer the consequence of being declaration (Bardillon v. Barangay Masili,
immediately deprived of his land while being G.R. No. 146886, 2003)
made to wait for a decade or more before actually
receiving the amount necessary to cope with his Purpose of Preliminary Deposit
loss. (Coscoluela v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 1. Provide damages if court finds that the
77765, 1988) plaintiff has no right to expropriate; and
2. Advance payment for just compensation, if
Just compensation is not only the correct property is finally expropriated. (Zaballero v.
determination of the amount to be paid to the NHA, G.R. No. 49291-92, 1987).
owner, but also the payment of the property within
a reasonable time, i.e. payment within 5 years Value of Preliminary Deposit
from finality of judgment (Republic v. Lim, G.R. 1. Personal property: provisionally ascertained
No. 161656, 2005) and fixed by the court;
2. Real property: assessed value in the tax
Value of the Property as Basis for Just return (Sec. 2, Rule 67);
Compensation 3. If it is a LGU which is expropriating the
1. As of the date of filing of the complaint; or property, only 15% of the fair market value
2. Upon taking of the property, whichever based on the tax declaration is required to be
comes first. (Sec. 4, Rule 67) deposited. (Sec. 19, Local Government
Code).
Formula for Determining Just Compensation
VL – Value of the property (see above); Form of Deposit
JC – Just Compensation; General rule: Compensation must be in money.
CB – Consequential Benefits; Exception: A court authorized certificate
CD – Consequential Damages. of deposit of a government bank; and
bonds to be paid by the government
Where consequential benefits are less than under the Comprehensive Agrarian
consequential damages: Reform Program.
JC = VL + CD - CB Where to Deposit
The deposit shall be made with the authorized
Where consequential benefits are larger than the government depository, i.e., depository bank
consequential damages: (PNB). (Sec. 2, Rule 67).

ATENEO CENTRAL
For the acquisition of right-of-way, site or location

Note: This system of payment does not apply in for any national government infrastructure project
the acquisition of right-of-way, site or location for through expropriation, upon the filing of the filing
any national government infrastructure project of the complaint, and after due notice to the
through expropriation. defendant, the implementing agency shall
immediately pay the owner of the property the
System of Deposit; When Governed by R.A. amount equivalent to the sum of:
8974 1. 100% of the value of the property based on
RA 8794 provides for a more favorable to the the current relevant zonal valuation of the BIR;
property owner than the procedure provided in and
Rule 67. RA 8974 applies in instances when the 2. The value of the improvements and/or
national government expropriates property for structures as determined under Sec. 7, R.A.
‘national government infrastructure projects’ only. 8974. (R.A. 8974, Sec. 4)
Thus, for other purposes, the assessed value A negotiated sale may be entered into instead of
standard and the deposit prescribed in Rule 67 expropriation proceedings. (Sections 3, 5 & 6 of
continues to apply. (Republic v. Gingoyon, G.R. R.A 8974, and Sections 6 & 13 of E.O. 1035) For
No. 166429, 2005) negotiated sale, payment must be effected within
90 days from submission of all documents and
authorization of sale, while for expropriation, it is
Difference between Rule 67 and R.A. No. 8974 90 days from finality of the decision rendered by
the court.
RULE 67 R.A. NO. 8974
The solicitor general is wrong in asserting that
Application section 50 of PD 1529 (property registration
decree) applies in the sense that the property
Expropriation in When National utilized and taken by the government may only be
general. Government conveyed by donation to the government. There
expropriates for is nothing that can more speedily and effectively
National Gov’t embitter a citizen and taxpayer against his
Infrastructure projects. government and alienate his faith in it, than an
injustice in unfair dealing. The government must
For Writ of Possession to Issue effect payment in the form of just compensation,
and it may be done through a negotiated sale, as
Government Government required to
granted by the RTC to the respondent by virtue of
required to make an make immediate
RA 8974 and EO 1035. (Republic v. Ortigas, G.R.
initial deposit. payment to the owner
No. 171496, 2014)
upon filing of the
complaint.
Defenses And Objections
Basis of Computing Amount To Be Paid
1. Omnibus Motion Rule — Subject to the
Assessed Value of Market Value of the provisions of Sec. 1, Rule 9, a motion attacking a
the property for property stated in the pleading, order, judgment or proceeding shall
purposes of taxation. tax declaration OR the include all objections then available, and all
current relevant zonal objections not so included shall be deemed
value of the BIR, waived. (Sec. 8, Rule 15)
whichever is higher,
and the value of the No Objections
infrastructures/improve If a defendant has no objection or defense to the
ments using the action or the taking of his property:
replacement/cost 1. He may file and serve a notice of appearance
method. and a manifestation to that effect, specifically
designating or identifying the property in
New System Of Immediate Payment Of Initial which he claims to be interested, within the
Just Compensation time stated in the summons.

ATENEO CENTRAL
2. Thereafter, he shall be entitled to notice of all compensation for the property sought to be taken.
proceedings affecting the same. (Sec. 3, (Sec. 5, Rule 67)
Rule 67)
Contents of the Order of Appointment
With Objections – Serve Answer 1. The time and place of the first session of the
If a defendant has objections to the filing of or the hearing to be held by the commissioners; and
allegations in the complaint, he shall serve his 2. The time within which their report shall be
answer within the time stated in the summons. submitted to the court. (Id.)
(Id.)
Objections to the appointment of any of the
Contents of Answer commissioners shall be filed with the court within
1. The answer shall specifically designate or 10 days from service, and shall be resolved within
identify the property in which he claims to 30 days after all the commissioners shall have
have an interest; received copies of the objections. (Id.)
2. State the nature and extent of the interest
claimed; and Oath
3. Adduce all his objections and defenses to the Before entering upon the performance of their
taking of his property. (Id.) duties, the commissioners shall take and
subscribe an oath that they will faithfully perform
No counterclaim, cross-claim or third-party their duties as commissioners. (Sec. 6, Rule 67)
complaint shall be alleged or allowed in the
answer or any subsequent pleading. (Id.) Scope of Powers of the Commissioners
1. Accept evidence which may be introduced by
Motion to dismiss is not permitted in a complaint either party;
for expropriation. (Masikip v. City of Pasig, G.R. 2. After due notice to the parties to attend,
No. 136349, 2006) examine the property sought to be
expropriated and its surroundings and
A defendant waives all defenses and objections measure the same. However, the parties may
not so alleged but the court, in the interest of consent to the contrary;
justice, may permit amendments to the answer to 3. Assess the consequential damages to the
be made not later than 10 days from the filing property and deduct from such the
thereof. (Sec. 3, Rule 67) consequential benefits to be derived by the
owner from the public use or purpose of the
However, at the trial of the issue of just property taken;
compensation, whether or not a defendant has 4. But in no case shall the consequential
previously appeared or answered, he may benefits assessed exceed the consequential
present evidence as to the amount of the damages assessed, or the owner be
compensation to be paid for his property, and he deprived of the actual value of his property so
may share in the distribution of the award. (Id.) taken. (Id.)
Failure to File Answer - Defendant NOT in Report

Default The court may order the commissioners to report
Note: Failure to file an answer does not produce when any particular portion of the real estate shall
the consequences of default in ordinary civil have been passed upon by them, and may render
actions; the defendant may nonetheless appear judgment upon such partial report, and direct the
at the trial to present evidence as to the just commissioners to proceed with their work as to
compensation of the claims and, thereafter, share subsequent portions of the property sought to be
in the judicial award. expropriated, and may from time to time so deal
with such property. (Sec. 7, Rule 67)
Appointment Of Commissioners;
Commissioners’ Report; Court Action Upon The commissioners shall make a full and
Commissioners’ Report accurate report to the court of all their
Upon the rendition of the order of expropriation, proceedings, and such proceedings shall not be
the court shall appoint not more than 3 competent effectual until the court shall have accepted their
and disinterested persons as commissioners to report and rendered judgment in accordance with
ascertain and report to the court the just their recommendations. (Id.).

ATENEO CENTRAL
1. Personal property - upon payment of just

Except as otherwise expressly ordered by the compensation;
court, such report shall be filed within 60 days 2. Real property - upon payment of just
from the date the commissioners were notified of compensation AND registration. (Secs. 10
their appointment, which time may be extended and 13, Rule 67)
in the discretion of the court. (Id.).
Effect Of Recording Of Judgment; Contents of
Upon the filing of such report, the clerk of the Judgment
court shall serve copies thereof on all interested 1. An adequate description of the particular
parties, with notice that they are allowed 10 days property or interest therein expropriated; and
within which to file objections to the findings of the 2. The nature of the public use or purpose for
report, if they so desire. (Id.). which it is expropriated.
Action Upon the Report When real estate is expropriated, a certified copy
Upon the expiration of the period of 10 days of such judgment shall be recorded in the registry
referred to in the preceding section, or even of deeds of the place in which the property is
before the expiration of such period but after all situated, and its effect shall be to vest in the
the interested parties have filed their objections plaintiff the title to the real estate so described for
to the report or their statement of agreement such public use or purpose. (Sec. 13, Rule 67)
therewith, the court may, after hearing:
1. Accept the report and render judgment in Remedies of a Property Owner for Non-
accordance therewith; or Payment of the Just Compensation for the
2. For cause shown, it may recommit the same Taking of his Property:
to the commissioners for further report of General rule: The private landowner cannot
facts; or execute on the judgment or recover the property.
3. It may set aside the report and appoint new Non-payment merely entitles the private
commissioners; or landowner to interest on the just compensation,
4. It may accept the report in part and reject it in until fully paid.
part; and
5. It may make such order or render such Exceptions:
judgment as shall secure to the plaintiff the 1. If the expropriated property earns income
property essential to the exercise of his right or the government has
of expropriation, and to the defendant just allocated/appropriated funds for the just
compensation for the property so taken. compensation, the landowner may
(Sec. 8, Rule 67) execute on such funds within five (5)
years from finality of the decision.
4. RIGHTS OF PLAINTIFF (Coscolluela v. CA, G.R. No. 77765,
UPON JUDGMENT AND August 15, 1988)
PAYMENT
2. An action for reconveyance or
After payment of the just compensation as recovery of possession, if payment of
determined in the judgment, the plaintiff shall just compensation has not been made
have the right to enter upon the property after the lapse of five (5) years from
expropriated and to appropriate the same for the finality of the judgment fixing just
public use or purpose defined in the judgment or compensation, under special
to retain possession already previously made in circumstances, including the fact that the
accordance with Section 2, Rule 67 of the Rules property taken is no longer devoted to
of Court. (Sec. 10, Rule 67) public use. (Republic v. Lim, G.R. No.
161656, June 29, 2005)
Title to the property expropriated passes from the
owner to the expropriator upon full payment of It is arbitrary and capricious for a government
just compensation. (Federated Realty Corp. v. agency to initiate expropriation proceedings,
CA, G.R. No. 127967, 2005) seize a person’s property, allow the judgment of
the court to become final and executory and then
When Title in Expropriation Becomes Vested refuse to pay on the ground that there are no

ATENEO CENTRAL
appropriations for the property earlier taken and banking institution; of the sale (except
profitably used. Levy and garnishment of NHA equity of redemption where the mortgagee
funds and property must be executed by the is 90 to 120 days, is a bank and the
sheriff as ordered by the court to compensate the and any time before mortgagor is a
respondents. (NHA v. Heirs of Guivelondo, G.R. confirmation of juridical entity, the
No. 154411, 2003) foreclosure sale. right to redeem may
be exercised until, but
G. FORECLOSURE OF REAL Exception: not after, the
ESTATE MORTGAGE (RULE 68) Where the mortgagee registration of the
is a bank, the right of certificate of
Foreclosure redemption may be sale/foreclosure with
Foreclosure of mortgage means the termination exercised within 1 the Register of
of all rights of the mortgagor in the property year after the sale of Deeds, which in no
covered by the mortgage. It denotes the the property (General case shall be more
procedure adopted by the mortgagee to terminate Banking Law of 2000, than three (3) months
the rights of the mortgagor on the property and Sec. 47) after the foreclosure,
includes the sale itself. (DBP v. Zaragoza, G.R. whichever is earlier.
No. 23493, 1978) (General Banking
Law, Sec. 47)
1. KINDS OF FORECLOSURE
(JUDICIAL FORECLOSURE Mortgagee can move Mortgagee has to file
AND EXTRAJUDICIAL for deficiency a separate action to
FORECLOSURE) judgment in the same recover any
action. deficiency.
Modes of Foreclosure of Real Estate
Buyer at a public Buyer at public
Mortgage
auction becomes the auction becomes
1. Judicial Foreclosure pursuant to Rule
absolute owner only absolute owner only
68;
after confirmation of after finality of an
2. Extrajudicial Foreclosure pursuant to
the sale. action for
Act No. 3135 as amended by Act 4118,
consolidation of
and A.M. No. 99-10-05-0. (Acbang v.
ownership.
Luczon, G.R. No. 164246, 2014)
Mortgagee need not Mortgagee is given a
The availment of the remedy under Rule 68 bars be given a special special power of
recourse to the subsequent filing of a personal power of attorney. attorney in the
action for collection of the same debt, in this case, mortgage contract to
under the principle of litis pendentia, considering foreclose the
that the foreclosure case only remains pending as mortgaged property in
it was not shown to have attained finality. (Marilag case of default.
v. Martinez, G.R. No. 201892, 2015)
Judicial Foreclosure Versus Extrajudicial Need For Special Power Of Attorney

Foreclosure Accordingly, Section 1 of Act No. 3135, which
prescribes for the procedure for the extra-judicial
JUDICIAL EXTRA-JUDICIAL foreclosure of real properties subject to real
FORECLOSURE FORECLOSURE estate mortgage, in relation to Circular No. 7-
(Rule 68) (Act No. 3135) 2002 and SC A.M. No. 99-10-05-0 requires that
the petition for extra-judicial foreclosure be
Complaint is filed with No complaint is filed. supported by evidence that petitioners hold a
the courts. No court intervention. special power or authority to foreclose. (Welbit
Construction Corp. v. Heirs of De Castro, G.R.
There is only an There is a right of No. 210286, 2018)
equity of redemption. redemption.
No right of Mortgagor has a right In judicial foreclosure unlike extra-judicial
redemption except of redemption for one foreclosure, mortgagee need not be given a
when mortgagee is a year from registration special power of attorney in the mortgage

ATENEO CENTRAL
contract to foreclose the mortgaged property in mortgage and protect his own lien. Where a junior
case of default. encumbrancer has been given, by the court, the
right to redeem after the completed foreclosure
Authority To Foreclose Extrajudicially under a senior mortgage, he must exercise his
Proceedings for the extrajudicial foreclosure of right within the time limited or be barred thereof.
real estate mortgages are governed by Act 3135, (Sunlife Assurance v. Diez, G.R. No. 29027,
as amended, entitled An Act to Regulate the Sale 1928)
of Property under Special Powers Inserted in or
Annexed to Real Estate Mortgages. As the title Application to Initiate Extra-judicial
itself suggests and as provided in Sec. 1 of the Foreclosure
Act, extrajudicial foreclosure sales are proper Proceedings for the extrajudicial foreclosure of
only when so provided in the real estate mortgage mortgages, as the name already suggests, are
contract. (Casano v. Magat, A.M. No. P-02-1539, not suits filed in a court. They are commenced not
Jan. 24, 2002) by the filing of a complaint, but by submitting an
application before an executive judge who, in
Procedure turn, receives the same neither in a judicial
Complaint in Action for Judicial Foreclosure capacity nor on behalf of the court. Necessarily,
In an action for the foreclosure of a mortgage or the orders of the executive judge in such
other encumbrance upon real estate, the proceedings, whether they be to allow or disallow
complaint shall set forth: the extrajudicial foreclosure of the mortgage, are
1. The date and due execution of the mortgage; not issued in the exercise of a judicial function
2. Its assignments, if any; but||| issued by the RTC Executive Judge in the
3. The names and residences of the mortgagor exercise of his administrative function to
and the mortgagee; supervise the ministerial duty of the Clerk of Court
4. A description of the mortgaged property; as Ex Officio Sheriff in the conduct of an
5. A statement of the date of the note or other extrajudicial foreclosure sale.. (Ingles v. Estrada,
documentary evidence of the obligation G.R. No. 141809, 2013)
secured by the mortgage, the amount claimed
to be unpaid thereon; and
6. The names and residences of all persons Where To File
having or claiming an interest in the property A mortgage may be foreclosed judicially by
subordinate in right to that of the holder of the bringing an action for that purpose, in the proper
mortgage, all of whom shall be made court which has jurisdiction over the area wherein
defendants in the action. (Sec. 1, Rule 68) the real property involved or a portion thereof, is
situated. (Sec.1, Rule 4).
Defendants in Judicial Foreclosure
1. Persons obliged to pay the mortgage debt; The venue of the extra-judicial foreclosure
2. Persons who own, occupy, or control the proceedings is the place where each of the
mortgaged premises or any part thereof; mortgaged property is located. (Benguet
3. Transferee or grantee of the property; Management Corp. v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No.
4. Second mortgagee or junior encumbrancers 153571, 2003)
or any person claiming a right or interest in
the property subordinate to the mortgage Judgment on Judicial Foreclosure for
sought to be foreclosed to foreclose their Payment of Sale
equity of redemption; but if the action is by If after the trial, the court finds that the matters set
the junior encumbrancer, first mortgagee forth in the complaint are true, it shall render a
MAY also be joined as defendant; and judgment containing the following matters:
5. The mortgagor even if not owner of the 1. An ascertainment of the amount due to the
mortgaged property should be included (to plaintiff upon the mortgage debt or obligation,
satisfy the deficiency). including interest and other charges as
approved by the court, as well as costs;
Effect of Junior Encumbrancer Not Impleaded 2. A judgment of the sum found due;
After completed foreclosure under a senior 3. An order that the amount found due be paid
mortgage, a junior encumbrancer may be given, to the court or to the judgment obligee within
by the court, the right to redeem the senior the period of not less than 90 days nor more

ATENEO CENTRAL
than 120 days from the entry of judgment;

The place of the sale It cannot be made
and
may be agreed upon legally outside of the
4. An admonition that in default of such
by the parties. In the province in which the
payment the property shall be sold at public
absence of such property sold is
auction to satisfy the judgment. (Sec. 2, Rule
agreement, the sale of situated; and in case
68)
real property or the place within said
personal property not province in which the
The judgment of the court on the above matters
capable of manual sale is to be made is
is considered a final adjudication of the case and
delivery shall be held the subject of
hence, is subject to challenge by the aggrieved
in the office of the stipulation, such sale
party by appeal or by other post-judgment
clerk of court of the shall be made in said
remedies.
Regional Trial Court place or in the
or the Municipal Trial municipal building of
The period granted to the mortgagor for the
Court which made the the municipality in
payment of the amount found due by the court is
order. (Sec. 15, Rule which the property or
not just a procedural requirement but a
39) part thereof is situated
substantive right given by law to the mortgagee
(Sec. 2, Act No. 3135)
as his first chance to save his property from final
disposition at the foreclosure sale. Hence, this
period cannot be omitted. (De Leon v. Ibañez, Posting Requirement
G.R. No. L-6967, 1954) Notice Requirement in Judicial Foreclosure
The foreclosure sale shall be conducted in the
Judicial Foreclosure Sale manner provided for an execution sale of real
If the defendant fails to pay the amount adjudged property under Rule 39, to wit:
within the period given, the court will order the 1. The court, upon motion, shall order the
foreclosure and execution sale of the mortgaged foreclosure sale;
property. The court, upon motion, shall order the 2. There must be a notice of sale posted for 20
property to be sold in the manner and under the days in the 3 public places in conspicuous
provisions of Rule 39 and other regulations areas of municipal or city hall, post office and
governing sales of real estate under execution. public market in the municipality or city where
(Sec. 3, Rule 68) the sale is to take place, describing the
property and stating where the property is to
Duty of Clerk of Court in an Extra-judicial be sold;
Foreclosure Sale 3. If the assessed value of the property exceeds
Upon the filing of the application, it shall be the P50,000.00 pesos, the notice must be
duty of the Clerk of Court: published once a week for 2 consecutive
1. Receive and docket the application; weeks in one newspaper selected by raffle,
2. Collect the filing fees; whether in English, Filipino, or any major
3. Examine whether the applicant has complied regional language published, edited and
with the requirements of Act 3135 before circulated or, in the absence thereof, having
conducting the public auction; general circulation in the province or city;
4. Sign and issue a certificate of sale, subject to 4. Written notice of the sale shall be given to the
the approval of the executive judge; and mortgagor, at least 3 days before the sale;
5. After the certificate of sale has been issued to 5. The notice shall specify the place, date and
the highest bidder, keep the complete records, exact time of the sale which should not be
while awaiting any redemption within a period earlier than nine o'clock in the morning and
of 1 from date of registration of the certificate not later than two o'clock in the afternoon;
of sale with the Register of Deeds concerned, (Sec. 15, Rule 39 vis-à-vis Sec. 3, Rule 68)
after which, the records shall be
archived.|(A.M. No. 99-10-05-0) A motion is needed. Such motion is non-litigious
and may be made ex parte. (GPI v. De Las
Where To Sell Cajigas, G.R. No. L-33913, 1931)
JUDICIAL EXTRAJUDICIAL
Notice Requirement in Extra-judicial
FORECLOSURE FORECLOSURE
Foreclosure

ATENEO CENTRAL
1. Notice shall be given by posting notices of the and not just to a select few chosen by the
sale for not less than 20 days in at least 3 publisher. Otherwise, the precise
public places of the municipality or city where objective of publishing the notice of sale
the property is situated; in the newspaper will not be realized.
2. If such property is worth more than P400, (Metropolitan Bank and Trust Co. v.
such notice shall also be published once a Peñafiel, G.R. No. 173976, 2009)
week for at least 3 consecutive weeks in a
newspaper of general circulation in the The crucial factor is not where the newspaper is
municipality or city; printed but whether the newspaper is being
3. The sale shall be made at public auction, circulated in the city or province where the
between the hours of nine in the morning and property is located. (Gotesco Properties, Inc. v.
four in the afternoon; and shall be under the Solidbank Corp., G.R. No. 209452, 2017)
direction of the sheriff of the province, the
justice or auxiliary justice of the peace of the In fact, to ensure a wide readership of the
municipality in which such sale has to be newspaper, jurisprudence suggests that the
made, or a notary public of said municipality, newspaper must also be appealing to the public
who shall be entitled to collect a fee of five in general. The Court has, therefore, held in
pesos for each day of actual work performed, several cases that the newspaper must not be
in addition to his expenses. (Secs. 3 & 4, Act devoted solely to the interests, or published for
No. 3135). the entertainment, of a particular class,
profession, trade, calling, race, or religious
Publication Requirement denomination. The newspaper need not have the
Judicial And Extra-Judicial Foreclosure: largest circulation so long as it is of general
Statutory provisions governing publication of circulation. (Id.)
notice of mortgage foreclosure sales must be
strictly complied with and slight deviations Need For Republication In Case Of
therefrom will invalidate the notice and render the Postponement
sale, at the very least, voidable. Certainly, the If the foreclosure sale does not push through as
statutory requirements of posting and publication scheduled, there is a need for re-publication and
are mandated and imbued with public policy re-posting of the notice thereof. (Metrobank v.
considerations. Failure to advertise a mortgage Nikko Securities Int’l Corp., G.R. No. 178479,
foreclosure sale in compliance with the statutory 2009)
requirements constitutes a jurisdictional defect,
and any substantial error in a notice of sale will Personal Notice To The Mortgagor – When
render the notice insufficient and will And When Not Needed
consequently vitiate the sale. (Caubang v.
Spouses Crisologo, G.R. No. 174581, Feb. 4, JUDICIAL FORECLOSURE: Notice must be
2015). sent to the mortgagor. (Sec. 15, Rule 39 vis-à-vis
Sec. 3, Rule 68)
The failure to post a notice is not per se a ground
for invalidating the sale provided that the notice EXTRA-JUDICIAL FORECLOSURE:eUnless
thereof is duly published in a newspaper of the parties stipulate, personal notice to the
general circulation. (Development Bank of the mortgagor in extrajudicial foreclosure
Philippines v. Aguirre, G.R. No. 144877, 2001) proceedings is NOT necessary because Section
3 of Act 3135 only requires the posting of the
Sufficiency Of Newspaper Publication notice of sale in three public places and the
To be a newspaper of general circulation, it is publication of that notice in a newspaper of
enough that: general circulation.||(Lim v. Development Bank of
1. It is published for the dissemination of the Phils., G.R. No. 177050, 2013)
local news and general information,
2. It has a bona fide subscription list of Confirmation of the Judicial Foreclosure Sale
paying subscribers After the foreclosure sale has been effected, the
3. Itt is published at regular intervals. mortgagee shall file a MOTION FOR ITS
4. Over and above all these, the newspaper CONFIRMATION. (Sec. 3, Rule 68)
must be available to the public in general,

ATENEO CENTRAL
The motion for confirmation:

1. Is non-litigious and may be made ex parte; 3. The court shall, upon approval of the bond,
2. Requires notice and hearing; order that a writ of possession issue,
3. Mortgagor will be allowed the opportunity to addressed to the sheriff of the province in
show cause why the sale should not be which the property is situated, who shall
confirmed and to inform them when his right execute said order immediately. (Sec. 7, Act
will be cut off; No. 3135, as amended)
4. If the mortgagor was not notified of the
hearing, the subsequent confirmation of the The procedure under Section 7 of Act No. 3135,
sale is vitiated as if no confirmation ever took as amended, may be availed of by a purchaser
place; seeking possession of the foreclosed property he
5. After the hearing and the court finds valid bought at the public auction sale after the
grounds, it shall issue an order confirming the redemption period has expired without
foreclosure sale, which is a judgment in itself redemption having been made. (Sps. Teves vs.
and is deemed a final adjudication. IC&CS Co., G.R. No. 216714, 2018)
Order of Confirmation The purchaser at the auction sale concerned

The title vests in the purchaser upon a valid whether in a judicial or extra-judicial
confirmation of the sale and retroacts to the date foreclosure shall have the right to enter upon
of sale. (Grimalt vs. Valazquez, G.R. No. L- and take possession of such property
11721, 1918) immediately after the date of the
confirmation of the auction sale and
The order of confirmation is appealable and if not administer the same in accordance with law.
appealed within the period for appeal becomes (Sec. 47, General Banking Law)
final.
In case of refusal of a debtor to surrender the
Possession By Purchaser Of Foreclosed property sold by the sheriff in a public auction, a
Property writ of possession may also be issued in favor of
See also further discussion on Mortgage & the mortgagee in cases of:
Foreclosure under Civil Law. 1. In an extra-judicial foreclosure of a realty
mortgage (Sec. 7, Act No. 3135); and
In an extrajudicial foreclosure of real property, the 2. In a judicial foreclosure of mortgage, a quasi
purchaser becomes the absolute owner thereof if in rem proceeding, provided that the
no redemption is made within 1 year from the mortgagor is in possession of the mortgaged
registration of the certificate of sale by those realty and no third person, not a party to the
entitled to redeem. Being the absolute owner, he foreclosure suit, had intervened. (Mabale v.
is entitled to all the rights of ownership over a Apalisok, G.R. No. L-46942, Feb. 6, 1979)
property. (Sps. Reyes vs. Sps. Chung, G.R. No.
228112, 2017) Remedy Of Debtor If Foreclosure Is Not
Proper
The purchaser may PETITION THE COURT, TO
GIVE HIM POSSESSION thereof during the See further discussions on Mortgage &
redemption period, provided: Foreclosure under Civil Law.
1. That he furnish a bond in an amount
equivalent to the use of the property for a If a mortgage creditor pursues foreclosure even
period of twelve months, to indemnify the after previously instituting a personal action for
debtor in case it be shown that the sale was recovery of debt, mortgage debtor can allege in
made without violating the mortgage or its answer splitting of cause of action since the
without complying with the requirements of said personal action constitutes a waiver of the
this Act. right to foreclosure. (Bachrach Motor Co., Inc vs.
Icarañgal, G.R. No. L-45350 1939)
Note: No such bond is required after the
redemption period if the property is not Mortgage debtor can file opposition to the motion
redeemed. for writ of possession alleging that notice and
hearing was not afforded before a confirmation
2. The petition shall be made under oath; and sale is ordered. Notice and hearing of motion for

ATENEO CENTRAL
confirmation are therefore essential to the validity

Equity of the Prerogative or right to
of the order of confirmation, not only to enable the
defendant mortgagor reacquire mortgaged
interested parties to resist the motion but also to
to extinguish the property after
inform them of the time when their right of
mortgage and retain registration of the
redemption is cut off. (Tiglao vs. Botones, G.R.
ownership of the foreclosure sale.
No. L-3619, 1951)
property by paying the
secured debt within
Right of Redemption
the 90-120 day period
Upon the finality of the order of confirmation or
set by the court after
upon the expiration of the period of redemption
the judgment
when allowed by law, the purchaser at the auction
becomes final. (Sec.
sale or last redemptioner, if any, shall be entitled
2, Rule 68)
to the possession of the property and he may
secure a writ of possession, upon, motion, from General rule: Must General rule: Exists
the court which ordered the foreclosure unless a be exercised within only in the case of
third party is actually holding the same adversely the 90 -120 day extrajudicial
to the judgment obligor. (Sec. 3, Rule 67) period after the foreclosure of the
judgment becomes mortgage
The import of Sec. 3 includes one vital effect— final
the equity of redemption of the mortgagor or
redemptioner is cut-off and there will be no further
redemption, unless allowed by law (as in the case
of banks as mortgagees). The equity of
redemption starts from the 90-120 day period set
in the judgment of the court up to the time before
the sale is confirmed by an order of the court.
Once confirmed, no equity of redemption may
further be exercised.
General Rule: There is no right of redemption in

a judicial foreclosure.
Exception: Judicial foreclosures by banks: 1 year

redemption period. (Cayton v. Zeonnix Trading
Corp., G.R. No. 169541, 2009; Sec. 47, General
Banking Law of 2000)
Equity of Redemption in Judicial Foreclosure

While there is no right of redemption in judicial
foreclosure, there is in favor of the mortgagor an
equity of redemption. This is simply the right of
the defendant mortgagor to extinguish the
mortgage and retain ownership of the property by
paying the secured debt within the 90-day period
after the judgment becomes final, in accordance
with Rule 68, or even after the foreclosure sale
but prior to its confirmation. (Huerta Alba Resort
v. CA, G.R. No. 128567, 2000)
Equity Of Redemption Versus Right Of

Redemption
EQUITY OF RIGHT OF
REDEMPTION REDEMPTION

ATENEO CENTRAL
Except: When, even Except: When, in a Right of Redemption under Judicial Foreclosure
after the foreclosure judicial foreclosure, (Rule 68)
sale itself has been the mortgagee is PNB If the mortgagee is a bank or banking institution,
made, no order of or a bank or banking the right of redemption is 1 year, counted from the
confirmation of the institution registration of the certificate of sale with the
sale has been made. PNB’s charter and the Register of Deeds (Sec. 47, General Banking
Otherwise, no General Banking Act Law of 2000; Huerta Alba Resort v. CA, G.R. No.
redemption can be confer on the 128567, 2000)
made anymore. mortgagor, his
successors-in-interest, Right of Redemption under Extrajudicial
or judgment creditor the Foreclosure (Act. No. 3135)
right to redeem the General Rule: Whether or not the mortgagee is
property sold on a non-bank or banking institution, the redemption
foreclosure after period is 1 year, counted from the registration of
confirmation by the the certificate of sale with the Register of Deeds.
court of the foreclosure
sale within one year Exception: If the mortgagor is a juridical person,
from the date of the the redemption period is either:
registration of the 1. Before registration of the certificate of
certificate of sale in the foreclosure sale with the Register of Deeds,
Registry of Property. or
Exception to 2. No more than 3 months after the foreclosure
exception: sale, whichever is earlier. (Sec. 47, General
Where the mortgagor is Banking Law of 2000)
a juridical entity whose
property has been the Disposition Of Proceeds Of Sale
subject of an Formula
extrajudicial Amount realized from the foreclosure sale, less
foreclosure, the right to costs of the sale, shall be paid to the person
redeem may be foreclosing.
exercised until, but not
after, the registration of Junior Encumbrancers
the certificate of When there shall be any balance or residue after
sale/foreclosure with paying off the mortgage debt due, the same shall
the Register of Deeds, be paid to:
which in no case shall 1. Junior encumbrancers in the order of their
be more than three (3) priority;
months after the 2. If there be no junior encumbrancers or if there
foreclosure, whichever is still a balance after paying off the junior
is earlier. (Sec. 47, encumbrancers, the same shall be paid to the
General Banking Act of mortgagor or any person entitled thereto.
2000) (Sec. 4, Rule 68)
Deficiency Judgment
Summary of Redemption Periods If there be a balance due to the plaintiff after
Equity of Redemption applying the proceeds of the sale, the court, upon
Regardless of who is the mortgagor or motion, shall render judgment against the
mortgagee, the period for equity of redemption is: defendant for any such balance.
1. Not less than 90 days nor more than 120
days from entry of judgment of foreclosure; Execution may issue immediately if the balance
or is all due. The plaintiff shall be entitled to
2. Even after the foreclosure sale but before execution at such time as the remaining balance
judicial confirmation of the sale (Huerta Alba shall become due and such due date shall be
Resort v. CA, G.R. No. 128567, 2000) stated in the judgment. (Sec. 7, Rule 68) The
deficiency judgment is in itself a judgment; thus,
it is also appealable.

ATENEO CENTRAL
No independent action need be filed to recover Writ Of Possession

the deficiency from the mortgagor. The deficiency See the prior discussion on Possession by
judgment shall be rendered upon motion of the Purchaser of Foreclosed Property.
mortgagee.
Upon the finality of the order of confirmation or
The motion must be made only after the sale and upon the expiration of the period of redemption
after it is known that a deficiency exists. Before when allowed by law, the purchaser at the auction
that, any court order to recover the deficiency is sale or last redemptioner, if any, shall be entitled
void. (Gov’t. of the Philippines v. Torralba, G.R. to the possession of the property unless a third
No. L-41573, 1935) party is actually holding the same adversely to the
judgment obligor. The said purchaser or last
The mortgagor who is not the debtor and who redemptioner may secure a writ of possession,
merely executed the mortgage to secure the upon motion, from the court which ordered the
principal debtor’s obligation, is not liable for the foreclosure. (Sec. 3, Rule 68)
deficiency, unless he assumed liability for the
same in the contract. (Philippine Trust Co. v. The writ of possession is a means of recognizing
Echaus Tan Siua, G.R. No. L-29736, 1929) and enforcing the rights of the purchaser
emphasized in Sec. 3 which provides that the
Since a deficiency judgment cannot be obtained confirmation of the sale operates to divest all
against the mortgagor who is not the debtor in the parties to the action of their respective rights and
principal obligation, the mortgagee may have to vest them in the purchaser. (RIANO, 2016)
file a separate suit against the principal debtor.
General Rule: There is no need for the purchaser
Instances When Court Cannot Render to notify parties of the proceedings. The law
Deficiency Judgment expressly authorizes the purchaser to petition for
1. Cases under the Recto Law (New Civil Code, a writ of possession by filing an ex parte motion.
Art. 1484, par. 3); (Carlos vs. CA, 537 SCRA 247)
2. When the mortgagor is a non-resident and is
not found in the Philippines; As an exception, the ministerial duty of the court
3. When mortgagor dies, mortgagee may file his to issue an ex parte writ of possession ceases
claim with the probate court (Sec. 7, Rule 86); once it appears that a third party, not the debtor-
4. If mortgagor is a third-party mortgagor but not mortgagor, is in possession of the property under
solidarily liable with debtor (Phil Trust v. Tan a claim of title adverse to that of the applicant.
Suisa, G.R. No. L-29736, 1929); (Sec. 33, Rule 39)
5. In case of a mortgage debt due from the
estate of a deceased mortgagor and the The remedy of a writ of possession, a remedy that
mortgage creditor availed of the third remedy is available to the mortgagee-purchaser to
which is to rely upon his mortgage alone and acquire possession of the foreclosed property
foreclosing the same within the statute of from the mortgagor, is made available to a
limitations (Sec. 7, Rule 86); and subsequent purchaser, but only after hearing and
6. When the deficiency arises under an after determining that the subject property is still
extrajudicial foreclosure. The mortgagee can in the possession of the mortgagor. (Sps. Reyes
recover by action (not by motion) any vs. Sps. Chung, G.R. No. 228112 2017, citing
deficiency in the mortgage account which Okabe v. Saturnina)
was not realized in the foreclosure sale. (PNB
v. CA, G.R. No. 103953, 1999) Annulment Of Sale
See further discussions on Mortgage &
Procedure When There is Surplus Foreclosure under Civil Law.
It is the duty of the mortgagee to return to the
mortgagor any surplus in the selling price during A judgment in the Annulment of Mortgage case
the foreclosure sale. (Sulit v. CA, G.R. No. will amount to res judicata in the Annulment of
119247, 1997) Foreclosure Sale case. (FCD Pawnshop vs.
Union Bank, G.R. No. 207914 2017)

ATENEO CENTRAL
The period within which to redeem the property

sold at a sheriff's sale is not suspended by the
institution of an action to annul the foreclosure
sale (Fundamentals of Redemption in Extra- H. PARTITION
Judicial Foreclosures, citing De Connejero, et al.
v. Court of Appeals, et al., L-21812; Castillo v. Partition
Samonte, L-13146, 1960; Daza v. Tomacruz, It is the separation, division, and assignment of
G.R. No. 37046, 1933; and Sumerariz v. property held in common among co-owners in
Development Bank of the Philippines, G.R. No. L- proportion to their respective interests in the said
23764, 1967). property. (Civil Code, Art. 1079).
2. THE GENERAL BANKING Note: The procedure for judicial partition is

LAW OF 2000 provided under Rule 69. For extrajudicial
partition, no court intervention is required. This is
Section 47. Foreclosure of Real Estate recognized in Rule 69, Sec. 12.
Mortgage. - In the event of foreclosure, whether
judicially or extra-judicially, of any mortgage on Nature of Partition
real estate which is security for any loan or other It is an action quasi in rem. (Valmonte v. CA, G.R.
credit accommodation granted, the mortgagor or No. 108538, 1996)
debtor whose real property has been sold for the
full or partial payment of his obligation shall have An action for partition implies that the property is
the right within one year after the sale of the real still owned in common. (Mangahas v. Brobio,
estate, to redeem the property by paying the G.R. No. 183852, 2010)
amount due under the mortgage deed, with
interest thereon at rate specified in the mortgage, In a complaint for partition, the plaintiff seeks,
and all the costs and expenses incurred by the first, a declaration that he is a co-owner of the
bank or institution from the sale and custody of subject properties, and second, the conveyance
said property less the income derived therefrom. of his lawful shares. (Heirs of Abalos v. Bucal,
However, the purchaser at the auction sale G.R. No. 156224, 2008)
concerned whether in a judicial or extra-judicial
foreclosure shall have the right to enter upon and Proof of legal acknowledgment as an heir is not a
take possession of such property immediately prerequisite before an action for partition may be
after the date of the confirmation of the auction filed. An action for partition is at once an action
sale and administer the same in accordance with for declaration of co-ownership and for
law. Any petition in court to enjoin or restrain the segregation and conveyance of a determined
conduct of foreclosure proceedings instituted portion of the properties involved. If the defendant
pursuant to this provision shall be given due asserts exclusive title over the property, the
course only upon the filing by the petitioner of a action for partition should not be dismissed.
bond in an amount fixed by the court conditioned
that he will pay all the damages which the bank Rather, the court should resolve the case and if
may suffer by the enjoining or the restraint of the the plaintiff is unable to sustain his claimed status
foreclosure proceeding. Notwithstanding Act as a co-owner, the court should dismiss the
3135, juridical persons whose property is being action, not because the wrong remedy was
sold pursuant to an extrajudicial foreclosure, shall availed of, but because no basis exists for
have the right to redeem the property in requiring the defendant to submit to partition. If,
accordance with this provision until, but not after, on the other hand, the court after trial should find
the registration of the certificate of foreclosure the existence of co-ownership among the parties,
sale with the applicable Register of Deeds which the court may and should order the partition of the
in no case shall be more than three (3) months properties in the same action. (Balo v. CA, G.R.
after foreclosure, whichever is earlier. Owners of 129704, 2005)
property that has been sold in a foreclosure sale
prior to the effectivity of this Act shall retain their Partition in Succession
redemption rights until their expiration. (R.A. No. In intestate succession, partition is the proper
8791, Sec. 47) remedy for compulsory heirs to get their legitime.

ATENEO CENTRAL
In testate succession, there can be no valid

partition among heirs until the will has been Non-Inclusion of a Co-Owner
probated. (Union Bank v. Santibañez, G.R. No. 1. Non-inclusion of co-owner BEFORE
149926, 2005) judgment: not a ground for motion to dismiss.
Plaintiff The remedy is to file a motion to include
The action shall be brought by the person who party;
has a right to compel the partition of real estate 2. Non-inclusion of co-owner AFTER judgment:
(Sec. 1, Rule 69) or of an estate composed of judgment is VOID because co-owners are
personal property, or both real and personal indispensable parties.
property (Sec. 13, Rule 69), i.e. a co-owner.
Note: Creditors/assignees of co-owners may
The plaintiff is a person who is the supposed co- intervene and object to a partition effected
owner of the property or estate sought to be without their concurrence. However, the
partitioned. creditors/assignees cannot impugn a
partition already executed, unless:
General Rule: Plaintiff is allowed to file a petition 1. There has been fraud; or
for partition ANY TIME as the Civil Code provides 2. In case partition was made
that NO co-owner shall be obliged to remain in notwithstanding a formal opposition
the co-ownership. It can be made any time as the presented to prevent it.
right to demand partition is imprescriptible.
(Bautista v. Grino-Aquino, G.R. No. 79958, The intervenor must show a legitimate and proper
1988). interest in the subject property (De Borja v. Jugo,
G.R.No. 45297, 1937)
Exceptions:
1. If a co-owner asserts adverse title to the Note: The Municipal Trial Court MAY HAVE
property, in which case the period of JURISDICTION in actions for partition if the value
prescription runs from such time of assertion of the real property is less than Three Hundred
of adverse title; Thousand (P300,000) if not in Metro Manila or
2. Existence of an agreement among co-owners less than Four Hundred Thousand (P400,000) if
to retain the property undivided for not located in Metro Manila.
exceeding ten (10) years (Civil Code, Art.
494); Complaint for Partition
3. When co-owners are prohibited by the donor 1. Nature and extent of petitioner’s title;
or testator for a period not exceeding twenty 2. Adequate description of the real estate of
(20) years (Civil Code, Arts. 494 & 1083); which partition is demanded; and
4. When partition is prohibited by law (Civil 3. A demand for the accounting of the rents,
Code, Art. 494); profits, and other income from the property
5. When the property is NOT subject to a which he may be entitled to.
physical division and to do so would render it
unserviceable for the use which it is Petitioner MUST join as defendants all other
unintended; (Civil Code, Art. 495); and persons interested in the property. (Sec. 1, Rule
6. When the condition imposed upon voluntary 69)
heirs before they can demand partition has
not yet been fulfilled (Civil Code, Art. 1084) A demand for the accounting MUST be included
as they are parts of the cause of action for
Defendant partition. They cannot be demanded in another
The defendants are all the co-owners of the action and will be BARRED if not set up in the
disputed property. All the co-owners MUST be same action. (Sec. 8, Rule 69)
joined. Accordingly, an action will not lie without
the joinder of all co-owners and other persons Two Stages In Every Action For Partition
having interest in the property. (Reyes v. 1. Determination of whether or not a co-
Cordero, G.R. No. L-14242, 1920). ownership exists, and if partition is
proper; and
All the co-owners, therefore, are
INDISPENSABLE parties.

ATENEO CENTRAL
This involves a determination of whether the The parties may also make the partition among
subject property is owned in common and themselves by proper instruments of
whether all the co-owners are made parties in the conveyance.
case. (Lacbayan v. Samoy, G.R. No. 165427,
2011) If they do agree, the court shall then confirm the
partition so agreed upon by all of the parties, and
The order may also require an accounting of rents such partition, together with the order of the court
and profits recovered by the defendant. This confirming the same, shall be recorded in the
order of partition is appealable. (Miranda v. CA, registry of deeds of the place in which the
G.R. No. L-33007, 1976) property is situated (Sec. 2, Rule 69)
If not appealed, then the parties may partition the If the parties CANNOT AGREE to the partition,
common property in the way they want. If they the appointment of commissioners shall be had
cannot agree, then the case goes into the second to preside over the partition proceedings.
stage. However, the order of accounting may in
the meantime be executed. (De Mesa v. CA, G.R. In a situation where there remains an issue as to
No. 109387, 1994) the expenses chargeable to the estate, partition
is inappropriate. In this case, petitioner does not
2. Accounting and actual partition of the dispute the findings that “certain expenses”
property. (Maglucot-Aw v. Maglucot, G.R. No. including those related to her father’s final illness
132518, 2000) and burial have not been properly settled. Thus,
the heirs have to submit their father’s estate to
Note: Multiple appeals are allowed. (Roman settlement because the determination of these
Catholic Archbishop of Manila v. CA, G.R. No. expenses cannot be done in an action for
77425, 1991) partition. But, the heirs or distributees of the
properties may take possession thereof even
From the first or second stages BEFORE before the settlement of accounts, as long as they
judgment of partition, appeal is by notice of first file a bond conditioned on the payment of the
appeal within 15 days or by record on appeal estate’s obligations. (Figuracion-Gerilla v. Vda.
within 30 days from notice of court order. AFTER de Figuracion, G.R. 154322, 2005)
judgment is rendered, the remedy against a
judgment of partition is only by notice of appeal Res Judicata in Partition Cases
within 15 days from receipt of judgment. There can still be res judicata in partition cases
concerning the same parties and the same
Order Of Partition And Partition By subject matter once the respective shares of the
Agreement co-owners have been determined with finality by
For an order of partition to issue, the court must a competent court with jurisdiction or if the court
determine determines that partition is improper for co-
1. Whether the plaintiff is truly a co-owner of the ownership does not or no longer exists. (Quintos
property; vs. Nicolas, G.R. No. 210252, 2014)
2. Whether there is indeed a co-ownership
among the parties; and Partition By Commissioners; Appointment Of
3. That a partition is not legally proscribed, thus Commissioners; Commissioner’s Report;
may be allowed. Court Action Upon Commissioner’s Report
If the parties are unable to agree upon the
The court shall order the partition of the property partition, the court shall appoint not more than
among all the parties in interest, if AFTER TRIAL three (3) competent and disinterested persons as
it finds that the plaintiff has the right to partition. commissioners to make the partition,
(Sec. 2, Rule 69). commanding them to set off to the plaintiff and to
each party in interest such part and proportion of
A final order decreeing PARTITION and the property as the court shall direct. (Sec. 3,
ACCOUNTING may be APPEALED by any party Rule 69)
aggrieved thereby. (see Miranda v. CA, G.R. No.
L-33007, 1976) Commissioners are NOT ALLOWED to
adjudicate on questions of title or ownership of
Partition by Agreement

ATENEO CENTRAL
the property. It is merely their duty to make OR the real estate, or of its value, if assigned or
effect the partition. sold as above provided, between the several
owners thereof. (Sec. 8, Rule 69)
Commissioners are required to take an OATH
that they will faithfully perform their duties as Judgment And Its Effects
commissioners. Such oath shall be FILED in
court. The judgment shall state definitely, by metes and
bounds and adequate description, the particular
In making the partition, the commissioners shall portion of the real estate assigned to each
view and examine the real estate, after due notice party.
to the parties to attend at such view and
examination, and shall hear the parties as to their The effect of the judgment shall be to vest in each
preference in the portion of the property to be set party to the action in severalty the portion of the
apart to them and the comparative value thereof, real estate assigned to him.
and shall set apart the same to the parties in lots
or parcels as will be most advantageous and If the whole property is assigned to one of the
equitable, having due regard to the parties upon his paying to the others the sum or
improvements, situation and quality of the sums ordered by the court the effect of the
different parts thereof. (Id.) judgment shall be to vest in the party making the
payment the whole of the real estate free from
Commissioner’s Report: any interest on the part of the other parties to the
1. The commissioners shall make a full and action.
accurate report to the court of:
2. Partition proceedings; If the property is sold and the sale confirmed by
3. Assignment of real estate to one of the the court, the judgment shall state the name of
parties; or the purchaser or purchasers and a definite
4. The sale of the same. (Sec. 6, Rule 69) description of the parcels of real estate sold to
each purchaser, and the effect of the judgment
Copies of the report shall be SERVED on ALL shall be to vest the real estate in the purchaser or
INTERESTED PARTIES. Opposition to such purchasers making the payment or payments,
partition must be commenced by filing an free from the claims of any of the parties to the
objection within ten (10) days from receipt of action.
report.
A certified copy of the judgment shall in either
Confirmation of the Court Required case be recorded in the registry of deeds of
No proceeding had before or conducted by the the place in which the real estate is situated,
commissioners shall pass the title to the property and the expenses of such recording shall be
or bind the parties UNTIL the court shall have taxed as part of the costs of the action. (Sec. 11,
ACCEPTED the report of the commissioners and Rule 69)
RENDERED JUDGMENT thereon.
Partition Of Personal Property
Court action upon commissioner’s report The provisions of this Rule shall apply to
After an objection has been filed OR the partitions of estates composed of personal
expiration of the ten (10) day period allowed for property, or of both real and personal property, in
such objection, the court may, UPON HEARING: so far as the same may be applicable. (Sec. 13,
1. Accept the report and render judgment in Rule 69)
accordance therewith; or,
2. For cause shown, recommit the same to the Prescription Of Action
commissioners for further report of facts; or General Rule: The right of action to demand
3. Set aside the report and appoint new partition does not prescribe (De Castro v. Echarri,
commissioners; or G.R. No. 5609, 1911)
4. Accept the report in part and reject it in part;
and Exception: Where one of the interested parties
5. Make such order and render such judgment openly and adversely occupies the property
as shall effectuate a fair and just partition of without recognizing the co-ownership (Cordova v.

ATENEO CENTRAL
Cordova, G.R. No. L-9936,1958) in which case, termination of his right

acquisitive prescription may set in. to the possession of
the property.
If a co-owner repudiates the co-ownership and
makes known such repudiation to the other co- The law does not Plaintiff must first
owners, then partition is no longer a proper require previous make such demand
remedy of the aggrieved co-owner. He should file demand for the which is jurisdictional
an accion reivindicatoria, which is prescriptible. defendant to vacate. in nature.
(Roque v. IAC, G.R. No. 75886, 1988)
The plaintiff must The plaintiff need not
I. FORCIBLE ENTRY AND prove that he was in have been in prior
UNLAWFUL DETAINER prior physical physical possession.
possession of the
Nature of Ejectment Proceedings premises until he was
Ejectment cases are summary proceedings deprived by the
intended to provide an expeditious means of defendant.
protecting actual possession of property. The 1 year period is The 1 year period is
(Tubiano v. Razo, G.R. No. 132598, 2000) generally counted counted from the date
from the date of of last demand.
Forcible Entry actual entry on the
Where one is deprived of physical possession of property.
real property by means of Force, Intimidation,
Strategy, Threats, or Stealth (FISTS). (Sec.1,
Rule 70,). Determining Forcible Entry or Unlawful
Detainer
Unlawful Detainer The allegation in the complaint that there was
Where one illegally withholds possession after unlawful withholding of possession is sufficient to
the expiration or termination of his right to hold make out a case for unlawful detainer. Hence, the
possession under any contract, express or phrase "unlawful withholding" has been held to
implied. (Id.). imply possession on the part of defendant, which
was legal in the beginning, having no other
source than a contract, express or implied, and
which later expired as a right and is being
FORCIBLE ENTRY UNLAWFUL withheld by defendant. (Ross Rica v Sps. Ong
DETAINER G.R. 132197, 2005)
Ground: Ground:
In ejectment cases, the complaint should embody
Deprivation of Unlawful withholding
such statement of facts as to bring the party
physical possession of possession of any
clearly within the class of cases for which Section
of any land or building land or building after
1 of Rule 70 provides a summary remedy, and
by FISTS, which shall the expiration or
must show enough on its face to give the court
include every situation termination of the
jurisdiction without resort to parol evidence. Such
or condition under right to hold
remedy is either forcible entry or unlawful
which one person can possession by virtue
detainer. (Zacarias v. Anacay, G.R. No. 202354,
wrongfully enter upon of any contract,
2014)
real property and express or implied.
exclude another, who (Sps. Del Rosario vs.
There are two reasons why the complaint was not
has had prior Gerry Roxas
for unlawful detainer. Firstly, by averring that the
possession, Foundation, G.R. No.
respondent constructed his shanty on the lot
therefrom. 170575, 2011).
without their consent and then praying that the
The possession of the The possession of the MeTC direct the respondent to pay them rent
defendant is unlawful defendant, which was from the inception of the respondent’s occupation
from the beginning; lawful in the of the lot, no other conclusion can be made
issue is which party beginning, becomes except that the petitioners had always considered
has prior de facto illegal by reason of respondent’s occupation of the same to be
possession. the expiration or unlawful from the very beginning. It is a settled

ATENEO CENTRAL
rule that in order to justify an action for unlawful ACCION ACCION ACCION
detainer, the owner’s permission or tolerance INTERDICTAL PUBLICIANA REIVINDICATORIA
must be present at the beginning of the
possession. Summary A plenary An action for the
action for the action (i.e., recovery of
Secondly, what the petitioners actually filed was recovery of full trial ownership, which
a fatally defective complaint for forcible entry, physical proceeding) necessarily
considering that there was no allegation therein possession for the includes the
regarding the petitioners’ prior physical where the recovery of Recovery of
possession of the lot. Dispossession the REAL possession.
has not lasted right of
more than one possession
In actions for forcible entry, two allegations are (1) year. when the
mandatory for the MTC to acquire jurisdiction: dispossession
first, the plaintiff must allege his prior physical has lasted for
possession of the property; and second, he must more than
also allege that he was deprived of his one (1) year.
possession by any of the means provided for in
Section 1, Rule 70 of the Rules of Court. Under MTC’s RTC’s RTC’s jurisdiction
jurisdiction jurisdiction if if the value of
only. the value of property exceeds
The word “possession” as used in forcible entry
property P20,000, or
and unlawful detainer, means nothing more than exceeds P50,000 in Metro
physical possession, not legal possession P20,000, or Manila.
contemplated in civil law." (Sales v Barro, G.R. P50,000 in
171678, 2008). Metro Manila.
1. DIFFERENTIATED FROM
ACCION PUBLICIANA Accion Interdictal
AND ACCION Exclusive original jurisdiction over forcible entry
REIVINDICATORIA and unlawful detainer suits is with the MTC. (B.P.
Blg. 129, as amended, Sec. 33[2])
Three (3) Kinds of Actions Available to
Recover Possession of Real Property Amount of rents and damages claimed does not
1. Accion interdictal - An action where the issue affect the jurisdiction of the MTC because they
is the right of physical or material possession are only incidental or accessory to the main
of the subject real property independent of any action.
claim of ownership. This includes forcible
entry and unlawful detainer; However, municipal courts have no jurisdiction
2. Accion publiciana - It is plenary action to over a forcible entry/unlawful detainer case
recover the legal right of possession which involving agricultural tenants. Jurisdiction is with
may be brought when the dispossession has the HLURB.
lasted for more than one (1) year. If at more
than one (1) year had elapsed, the action Accion Publiciana and Accion Reivindicatoria
should be not forcible entry or unlawful RTC has jurisdiction where the assessed value of
detainer but an accion publiciana; and the property exceeds P20,000 or, in Metro
3. Accion reivindicatoria - This action involves Manila, P50,000;
not only possession but recovery of ownership
of the property. 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)
Plaintiff

ATENEO CENTRAL
1. Forcible Entry: a person deprived of the sought to be recovered. (Zacarias v. Anacay,

possession of any land or building by force, G.R. No. 202354, 2014)
intimidation, threat, strategy, or stealth; or
2. Unlawful Detainer: 2. Unlawful Detainer
a. A lessor, vendor, vendee, or other person a. In unexpired lease contracts:
against whom the possession of any land
or building is unlawfully withheld after the General Rule: Counted from the date of the
expiration or termination of the right to last demand to pay and vacate in case of non-
hold possession, by virtue of any payment of rent or non-compliance with the
contract, express or implied, or; conditions of the lease. (Esteban v.
b. His/her legal representatives or assigns. MERALCO, G.R. No. 197725, 2013)
Note: The plaintiff in forcible entry or unlawful Exception: When subsequent demands were
detainer actions must be entitled to the physical merely reminders of the original demand, the
possession of the property. He/she does not 1-year period starts from the original demand.
necessarily have to be the owner of such. (Desbarats v. Vda. de Laureano, G.R. No. L-
21875, 1966)
Defendant
One who is in possession of the property who b. In occupation by mere tolerance:
may either be a/an: From the date of revocation of permit (i.e.
1. Lessee; demand to vacate (See Republic v. Sunvar
2. Sublessee; or Realty, G.R. No. 194880, 2012)
3. Intruder.
Jurisprudential Requisites for Forcible Entry
When Proceedings Instituted 1. First, the plaintiffs must allege their prior
Any time within one year after such unlawful physical possession of the property;
deprivation or withholding of possession. (Sec. 1, 2. Second, they must also assert that they were
Rule 70) deprived of possession either by force,
intimidation, threat, strategy, or stealth; and
The failure to allege the TIME when unlawful 3. Third, the action must be filed within one year
deprivation took place is fatal because this will from the time the owners or legal possessors
determine the start of the counting of the 1 year learned of their deprivation of physical
period for the filing of the summary action. possession of the land or building. (Dela Cruz
(Munoz v. CA, G.R. No. 102693, 1992) v. CA, G.R. No. 139442, 2006)
Distinction – Counting of 1-year Period Jurisprudential Requisites for Unlawful

1. Forcible Entry Detainer
A complaint sufficiently alleges a cause of action
General Rule: Counted from the date of the for unlawful detainer if it recites the following:
entry or taking of possession by use of force, 1. Initially, possession of property by the
intimidation, threat, or strategy defendant was by contract with or by
tolerance of the plaintiff;
The mere act of going to the property and 2. Eventually, such possession became illegal
excluding the lawful possessor therefrom upon notice by plaintiff to defendant of the
necessarily implies the exertion of force. termination of the latter’s right of possession;
(Bunyi v. Factor, G.R. No. 172547, 2009) 3. Thereafter, the defendant remained in
possession of the property and deprived the
Exception: In case of stealth, the one-year plaintiff of the enjoyment thereof; and
period should be counted from the demand to 4. Within one year from the last demand on
vacate upon knowledge or discovery of defendant to vacate the property, the plaintiff
such entry. instituted the complaint for ejectment.
(Zacarias v. Anacay, G.R. No. 202354, 2014)
It is essential in unlawful detainer cases of
this kind, that plaintiff's supposed acts of Prior Physical Possession; Exception
tolerance must have been present right from General Rule: Prior physical possession is
the start of the possession which is later required for the action to prosper.

ATENEO CENTRAL
1. Written notice served upon the person found

Exception: Possession can be acquired not only on the premises, or by posting such notice on
by material occupation, but also by the fact that a the premises if no person be found thereon
thing is subject to the action of one's will or by the (Sec. 2, Rule 70);
proper acts and legal formalities established for 2. By substituted service or registered mail;
acquiring such right. Because possession can 3. Jurisprudence provides that demand upon a
also be acquired by juridical acts to which the law tenant may be oral, but sufficient evidence
gives the force of acts of possession, e.g., must be adduced to show that there was
donations, succession, execution and registration indeed a demand like testimonies from
of public instruments, inscription of possessory disinterested and unbiased witnesses.
information titles and the like, it has been held (Jakihaca v. Aquino, G.R. No. 83982, 1990)
that one need not have actual or physical
occupation of every square inch of the property at Note: If several demands were made, the one
all times to be considered in possession. (Nunez year period is counted from the last demand letter
v. SLTEAS Phoenix, G.R. No. 180542, 2010) received, unless the subsequent demands were
merely in the nature of reminders of the original
Pleadings Allowed demand, in which case the one-year period is
The only pleadings allowed to be filed are the counted from the first demand.
complaint, compulsory counterclaim and cross-
claim pleaded in the answer, and the answers Effect of non-compliance with demand
thereto. All pleadings shall be verified. (Sec. 5, The lessor may proceed against the lessee if the
Rule 70) demand is not complied with AFTER:
1. 15 days in the case of land; or
Action On The Complaint 2. 5 days in case of buildings.
The court may:
1. Dismiss the case outright on any of the Prior demand in unlawful detainer is NOT
grounds for the dismissal of a civil action required when:
which are apparent therein; or 1. The purpose of the action is to terminate the
2. If no ground for dismissal is found, it shall lease because of expiry of term and not
forthwith issue summons. (Sec. 5, Rule 70) because of failure to pay rentals;
2. Purpose of suit is not for ejectment but for
When Demand Is Necessary enforcement of terms of contract; or
Two-fold Demand 3. When the defendant is not a tenant but a
In unlawful detainer cases, unless there exists a mere intruder. In which case it is forcible
stipulation to the contrary, such actions shall only entry, which does not require prior demand.
be commenced after demand is made on the (RIANO 2016 ed., p. 353-354)
lessee in any of the following forms:
1. To pay and vacate; or Preliminary Injunction And Preliminary
2. To comply with the conditions of the lease Mandatory Injunction
and vacate. The court may grant preliminary injunction to
prevent the defendant from committing further
A mere notice giving the lessee the alternative acts of dispossession against the plaintiff.
either to pay the rental or vacate the premises
does not comply with Section 2. (Vda. de Murga A possessor deprived of his possession through
v. Chan, G.R. No. L-24680, 1980) forcible entry or unlawful detainer may, within five
(5) days from the filing of the complaint, present
The term “vacate” need not be stated if there are a motion for the issuance of a writ of preliminary
other terms definitively implying that the tenant mandatory injunction to restore him in his
should vacate (Golden Gate Realty Corporation possession.
v. IAC, G.R. No. 74289, 1987) However, the
Golden Gate ruling will not apply if the demand is The court shall decide the motion within 30 days
ambiguous. (La Campana v. CA, G.R. No. L- from the filing thereof. (Sec. 15, Rule 70)
88246, 1993).
Note: If the case is pending, the petition for
Form of Demand preliminary injunction may only be filed by the

ATENEO CENTRAL
plaintiff; if the case is on appeal, the petition may

be filed by either the plaintiff or the defendant. Upon motion of the plaintiff, within 10 days from
(Sec. 15, Rule 70) the perfection of the appeal to the RTC in forcible
entry and unlawful detainer cases, the latter may
Resolving Defense Of Ownership issue a writ of preliminary mandatory injunction
When the defendant raises the issue of to restore the plaintiff in possession if the court is
ownership, the court may resolve the issue of satisfied that the defendant’s appeal is frivolous
ownership only under the following conditions: or dilatory, or that the appeal of the plaintiff is
1. When the issue of possession cannot be prima facie meritorious. (Sec. 20, Rule 70)
resolved without resolving the issue of
ownership; and Note: In forcible entry and unlawful detainer
2. The issue of ownership shall be resolved only cases, the judgment of the RTC against the
to determine the issue of possession. (Sec. defendant shall be immediately executory,
16, Rule 70) without prejudice to a further appeal that may be
taken therefrom. (Sec. 21, Rule 70)
The assertion by the defendant of ownership over
the disputed property does not serve to divest the The judgment is immediately executory in order
inferior court of its jurisdiction. The defendant to avoid injustice to a lawful possessor.
cannot deprive the court of jurisdiction by merely
claiming ownership of the property involved. Note: The judgment is immediately executory
(Rural Bank of Sta. Ignacia v. Dimatulac, G.R. only when the judgment is against the defendant.
No. 142015, 2003; Perez v. Cruz, G.R. No. If the judgment is in favor of the defendant, such
142503, 2003) is not immediately executory and can be
executed only after the lapse of the regular 15-
Questions to be Resolved in an Forcible Entry day period to appeal without the plaintiff having
1. Who had actual possession over the piece of perfected the same.
real property?
2. Was the possessor ousted therefrom within Even if RTC judgments in unlawful detainer cases
one year from the filing of the complaint by are immediately executory, a preliminary
force, threat, strategy or stealth? injunction may still be granted. There need only
3. Does he ask for the restoration of his be clear showing that there exists a right to be
possession? (Dizon v. Concina, G.R. No. L- protected and that the acts against which the writ
23756, 1969) is to be directed violate said right. (Benedicto v.
CA, G.R. No. 157604, 2005)
How To Stay The Immediate Execution Of
Judgment J. CONTEMPT
Defendant must take the following steps to stay According to Nature

the execution of the judgment: 1. Criminal; or
1. Perfect an appeal; 2. Civil.
2 File a supersedeas bond to pay for the
rents, damages and costs accruing down to According to Manner of Commission
the time of the judgment appealed from; and 1. Direct; or
3 Deposit periodically with the RTC, during 2. Indirect.
the pendency of the appeal, the adjudged
amount of rent due under the contract as Civil and Criminal Contempt Distinguished
determined in the judgment of the MTC, or if
there be no contract, the reasonable value of CIVIL CONTEMPT CRIMINAL
the use and occupation of the premises. CONTEMPT
(Sec. 19, Rule 70) It is the failure to do It is a conduct directed
something ordered to against the authority
Note: If the defendant can no longer pay this shall be done by a court or and dignity of the court
not defeat the appeal. He will, however, be a judge for the benefit or a judge acting
compelled to surrender possession of the of the opposing party judicially; it is an
property as the plaintiff will be entitled to therein and is obstruction of the
execution as a matter of right.

ATENEO CENTRAL
CIVIL CONTEMPT CRIMINAL DIRECT INDIRECT CONTEMPT

CONTEMPT CONTEMPT
therefore an offense administration of 4. Refusal to be dispossessed or

against the party in justice which tends to sworn as a ejected from any
whose behalf the bring the court into witness or to real property by the
violated order was disrepute or answer as a judgment or process
made. disrespect. witness; of any court of
5. Refusal to competent
The purpose is to The purpose is to subscribe an jurisdiction, enters
compensate for the punish, to vindicate affidavit or or attempts or
benefit of a party. the authority of the deposition when induces another to
court and protect its lawfully required enter into or upon
outraged dignity. to do so; such real property,
6. Acts of a party or for the purpose of
The rules of Should be conducted a counsel which executing acts of
procedure governing in accordance with the constitute willful ownership or
contempt proceedings principles and rules and deliberate possession, or in
or criminal applicable to criminal forum shopping; any manner disturbs
prosecutions cases, insofar as such and the possession
ordinarily are procedure is 7. Unfounded given to the person
inapplicable to civil consistent with the accusations or adjudged to be
contempt summary nature of allegations or words entitled thereto;
proceedings. contempt
in a pleading 3. Any abuse of or any
proceedings. tending to unlawful
embarrass the court interference with the
Direct and Indirect Contempt Distinguished or to bring it into processes or
disrepute. (Re: proceedings of a
DIRECT INDIRECT CONTEMPT
Letter dated 21 Feb. court not
CONTEMPT
2005 of Atty. Noel constituting direct
In general, it is It is not committed in the Sorreda, A.M. No. contempt under
committed in the presence of the court, 05-3-04-SC, 2005) Section 1 of this
presence of or so but done at a distance Rule;
near the court or which tends to belittle, 4. Any improper
judge as to obstruct degrade, obstruct or conduct tending,
or interrupt the embarrass the court and directly or indirectly,
proceedings before justice. to impede, obstruct,
it. or degrade the
administration of
justice;
Acts constituting Acts constituting indirect 5. Assuming to be an
direct contempt are: contempt are: attorney or an officer
1. Misbehavior in the 1. Misbehavior of an of a court, and
presence of or so officer of a court in acting as such
near the court as the performance of without authority;
to obstruct or his official duties or 6. Failure to obey a
interrupt the in his official subpoena duly
proceedings transactions; served; and
before it; 2. Disobedience of or 7. The rescue, or
2. Disrespect toward resistance to a attempted rescue, of
the court; lawful writ, process, a person or property
3. Offensive order, or judgment in the custody of an
personalities of a court, including officer by virtue of
towards others; the act of a person an order or process
who, after being

ATENEO CENTRAL
DIRECT INDIRECT CONTEMPT

Note: The penalty is immediately executory,
CONTEMPT
unless a bond is filed.
of a court held by
him. Two Modes of Commencing Proceeding for
8. Failure by counsel Indirect Contempt:
to inform the court of 1. Motu proprio by the court through an order
the death of his or any other formal charge requiring the
client, since it respondent to show cause why he should
constitutes an not be punished for contempt; and
improper conduct 2. Through a verified petition charging for
tending to impede indirect contempt with supporting particulars
the administration of and certified true copies of documents or
justice. (Sec. 3, Rule papers involved therein, and upon full
71) compliance with the requirements for filing
initiatory pleadings for civil actions in the
court concerned. (Sec. 4, Rule 71)
Requisites Before Accused May be Punished

For Indirect Contempt:
Remedy
1. Charge in writing to be filed or a show cause
1. He cannot appeal, but he may file certiorari
order issued by the court;
or prohibition under Rule 65.
2. Opportunity for person charged to appear
2. Execution of judgment shall be suspended
and explain his conduct; and
pending resolution of the petition, provided:
3. To be heard by himself or counsel. (Regalado
a. He files a bond fixed by the court which
v. Go, G.R. No. 167988, 2007)
rendered the judgment; and
b. Conditioned that he will abide by and
Where Charge is to be Filed
perform the judgment should the petition
Where the charge for indirect contempt has been
be decided against him (Sec. 2, Rule 71)
committed against a Regional Trial Court or a
court of equivalent or higher rank, or against an
Punishment for Contempt
officer appointed by it, the charge may be filed
1. RTC or court of equal or higher rank: Fine not
with such court.
exceeding P2,000 or imprisonment not
exceeding 10 days or both.
Where such contempt has been committed
2. MTC: Fine not exceeding P200 or
against a lower court, the charge may be filed
imprisonment not exceeding 1 day or both.
with the Regional Trial Court of the place in which
(Sec. 1, Rule 71)
the lower court is sitting; but
Note: If contempt consists in the refusal or
The proceedings may also be instituted in such
omission to do an act which is yet within the
lower court subject to appeal to the Regional Trial
power of the respondent to perform, he may be
Court of such place in the same manner as
imprisoned by order of the court concerned until
provided in Section 11 of this Rule. (Sec. 5, Rule
he performs it.
71)
Remedy
The SC not only has plenary disciplinary authority
May be appealed to the proper court as in
over attorneys but also has the inherent power to
criminal cases, but execution shall not be
punish for contempt. The former stems from the
suspended until bond is filed. (Sec. 11, Rule 71)
Court’s constitutional mandate to regulate
admission into the practice of law, which includes
Punishment if committed against:
as well authority to regulate the practice itself of
1. RTC or a court of equivalent or higher rank:
law; the latter is “necessary for its own protection
Fine not exceeding P30,000 or imprisonment
against an improper interference with the due
not exceeding 6 months or both.
administration of justice.” (Zaldivar v.
2. MTC: Fine not exceeding P5,000 or
Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 79690-707, 1988)
imprisonment not exceeding 1 month or both.
(Sec. 7, Rule 71)

ATENEO CENTRAL
Generally, non-parties may not be held for

contempt. However, if he is guilty of conspiracy
with any one of the parties in violating the court’s
orders, he may be liable. (Desa Enterprise v.
SEC, G.R. No. L-45430, 1982)
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 quasi-
judicial 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).

ATENEO CENTRAL

ATENEO CENTRAL
VI. SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS 1. Summary Settlement (small value

estate) (Rule 74)
2. Partition (Rule 69); and
TOPIC OUTLINE UNDER THE SYLLABUS 3. Settlement through letters testamentary
or letters of administration with or without
A. SETTLEMENT OF ESTATE OF DECEASED
will annexed (Rule 73, 75-90)
PERSONS
Nature of Settlement of Estate
1. Venue and process (RULE 73) A special proceeding for the settlement of estate
2. Summary settlement of estates (RULE 74)
is intended to settle the entire estate of the
3. Allowance or disallowance of wills (RULE
deceased. (Vda. De Reyes v. CA, G.R. No. L-
76)
4. Claims Against the Estate (RULE 86) 47027, 1989).
5. Payment of debts of the estate and Sales,
Mortgage, and other Encumbrances (RULE The settlement of a decedent’s estate is a
88 and 89) proceeding IN REM. All interested persons
6. Distribution and Partition (RULE 90) whether known to the parties or not may be
bound by it.
B. GUARDIANSHIP (Philippine Savings Bank vs. Lantin, G.R. No. L-
1. Venue (RULE 92) 33929, 1983)
2. Appointment of guardians (RULE 93)
3. General powers and duties of guardians Probate of a will is mandatory and takes
(RULE 96) precedence over intestate proceedings. If in the
4. Termination of guardianship (RULE 97) course of intestate proceedings pending before a
court, it is found that the decedent had left a last
C. WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS (RULE 102) will, proceedings for the probate of the latter
1. Writ of habeas corpus in relation to custody should replace the intestate proceedings even if
of minors (A.M. No. 03-04-04-SC) at that stage an administrator had already been
appointed, the latter being required to render final
D. CHANGE OF NAME (RULE 103) account and turn over the estate in his
possession to the executor subsequently
E. CANCELLATION OR CORRECTION OF appointed but this is without prejudice to the fact
ENTRIES IN THE CIVIL REGISTRY (Rule 108) that should the alleged last will be rejected or is
disapproved, the proceeding shall continue as
intestacy. (Uriarte vs CFI Of Negros, G.R. Nos. L-
F. CLERICAL ERROR LAW (RA No. 9048, as 21938-39,1970).
amended by RA 10172)
Two Kinds of Settlement
G. WRIT OF AMPARO (A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC) JUDICIAL EXTRAJUDICIAL
Testate (decedent left
H. WRIT OF HABEAS DATA (A.M. No. 08-1-16- a will) or intestate
SC) proceeding (decedent
did not leave a will)
I. RULES OF PROCEDURE ON instituted in the A proceeding where
ENVIRONMENTAL CASES (A.M. No. 09-6-8-SC) country where the the decedent left no
decedent had his wills and the heirs
1. Temporary Environmental protection Order
(TEPO) residence or had adjudicate the estate
2. Writ of continuing mandamus estate if a non- among themselves
3. Writ of Kalikasan resident. (R74, S2). without seeking
letters of
A. SETTLEMENT OF ESTATE OF a. Summary judicial administration (R74,
DECASED PERSONS proceedings (if value S1).
of the estate is below
Modes of Settlement of Estate of a Deceased P10,000).
Person / Person Presumed Dead. b. Regular settlement
proceedings.

ATENEO CENTRAL
Exception: Exclusionary Rule is not applied

Which court has jurisdiction. It depends on the when the decedent is an inhabitant of a foreign
gross value of the estate. country. In this case, the court of the province in
which a part of his estate may be found shall take
RTC MTC cognizance of the settlement of his estate.
Gross value of the Gross value of the (Uriarte v. CFI, G.R. Nos. L-21938-39, 1970).
estate exceeds estate is P2,000,000
P2,000,000. or below. The court in which the first case was filed shall
(R.A. No. 11576). have exclusive jurisdiction to decide said issue.
Should it be decided, in the proceedings before
Preferential Jurisdiction of the Probate Court the said court, that venue had been improperly
General Rule: The court first taking cognizance laid, the case pending therein should be
of the settlement of the estate of the decedent dismissed and the corresponding proceedings
shall exercise jurisdiction to the exclusion of all may, thereafter, be initiated in the proper court.
other courts. (Rule 73, Sec. 1; Vda. De Chua vs (In the matter of the Intestate of the Deceased
CA. G.R. No. 116835, 1998). Eusebio, G.R. No. L-8409, 1956).
It cannot be divested of such jurisdiction by the 1. VENUE AND PROCESS

subsequent acts of the parties (e.g. if they
entered into an extrajudicial partition settlement Where the estate is settled
or filed another petition for settlement in a proper DECEDENT VENUE
court of concurrent venue). (Cuenco v. CA, G.R. Decedent’s place of
Philippine resident
No. L-24742, 1973) residence.
In any place where
Delivery of the will is sufficient for jurisdiction to Non-resident of the any of the decedent’s
be acquired, even if no petition for its allowance Philippines. properties are
was filed until later because upon the will being located.
deposited, the court could motu proprio have
taken steps to fix time and place for proving the Residence
will and issued notices in accordance with Rule Personal / actual / physical habitation, his actual
76, Sec 3. (Rodriguez v. Borja, G.R. No. L-21993, residence or place of abode and not his
1966) permanent legal residence of domicile. (Fule v.
CA, G.R. Nos. L-40502 & 42670, 1976; Pilipinas
However: such court, may upon learning that: a Shell v. Dumlao, G.R. No. 44888, 1992).
petition for probate of the decedent's last will has
been presented in another court where the Intervention is not a matter of right but is left
decedent obviously had his conjugal domicile and to the trial court’s sound discretion.
resided with his surviving widow and their minor The trial court must also take into consideration
children, and that the allegation of the intestate the delay and consequent prejudice to the original
petition before it stating that the decedent died parties that the intervention will cause. In the
intestate may be actually false, may decline to settlement of a deceased’s estate, Sec. 1 of Rule
take cognizance of the petition and hold the 73 of the Rules of Court provides, “The court first
petition before it in abeyance, and instead defer taking cognizance of the settlement of the estate
to the second court which has before it the of a decedent, shall exercise jurisdiction to the
petition for probate of the decedent's alleged last exclusion of all other courts.” Another reason in
will. (Cuenco v. CA, G.R. No. L-24742, 1973). disallowing the intervention in a probate
proceeding is the legal precept that an
It is anomalous that the estate of a person who independent controversy cannot be injected into
died intestate should be settled in an intestate a suit by intervention. (Tirol v. Nolasco, GR No.
proceeding. Therefore, the intestate case should 230103, 2020).
be consolidated with the testate proceeding, and
the judge assigned to the testate proceeding Consolidation of Proceedings
should continue hearing the two cases. (Roberts If separate proceedings have been instituted for
v. Leonidas, G.R. No. L-55509, April 27, 1984) each estate, both proceedings may be
consolidated if they were filed in the same court.

ATENEO CENTRAL
(Bernardo v. CA, G.R. Nos. 111715 & 112876, Jurisdiction is limited and it includes only matters
2000) relating to the settlement of estates and the
probate of wills of persons, particularly:
Venue is procedural; not jurisdictional 1. Administration of the decedent's estate;
The laying of venue is procedural rather than 2. Payment of his debts;
substantive, relating as it does to jurisdiction of 3. Questions as to collation or advancements
the court over the person rather than the subject to the heirs;
matter. Venue relates to trial and not to 4. Liquidation of the conjugal partnership;
jurisdiction. It is a procedural, not a jurisdictional, and
matter. It relates to the place of trial or 5. Partition and distribution of the estate.
geographical location in which an action or
proceeding should be brought and not to the It also extends to matters incidental and collateral
jurisdiction of the court. It is meant to provide to the exercise of a probate court's recognized
convenience to the parties, rather than restrict powers such as selling, mortgaging or otherwise
their access to the courts as it relates to the place encumbering realty belonging to the estate.
of trial. In contrast, in criminal actions, it is (Heirs of Sandejas v. Lina, G.R. No. 141634,
fundamental that venue is jurisdictional it being 2001)
an essential element of jurisdiction. (Nocum v.
Tan, G.R. No. 145022, 2005). Probate Court’s Authority to Determine
Questions of Title to the Property
When is venue improperly laid
Unless and until the defendant objects to the General Rule: Questions as to title to property
venue in a motion to dismiss, the venue cannot cannot be passed upon by the probate court in
be truly said to have been improperly laid, as for the testate or intestate proceeding but should be
all practical intents and purposes, the venue, ventilated in a separate action.
though technically wrong, may be acceptable to
the parties for whose convenience the rules on Exception: To determine whether said property
venue had been devised. The trial court cannot should be included in the inventory or list of
pre-empt the defendant’s prerogative to object to properties to be administered by the
the improper laying of the venue by motu proprio administrator, the court may make a provisional
dismissing the case. (Rudolf Lietz Holdings Inc. determination. Such determination is provisional
v. The Registry of Deeds of Paranaque City, G.R. and not conclusive and is subject to the final
No. 133240, 2000) decision in a separate action regarding ownership
which may be instituted by the parties. (Pio
Remedy if venue is improperly laid Baretto Realty Development, Inc. v. CA, G.R. No.
General Rule: Ordinary appeal, not certiorari or 132362, 2001).
prohibition. Exception: If want of jurisdiction
appears on the record of the case (Rule 73, Sec. The probate court may decide such question:
1). 1. When all parties to such determination
are heirs;
However: Wrong venue is a waivable procedural 2. The question is one of collation or
defect, and such waiver may occur by laches advancement;
where a party had been served notice of the filing 3. When all the parties agree to submit the
of the probate petition for a year and allowed the question to the determination of the
proceedings to continue for such time before filing courts, and rights of third parties are not
a motion to dismiss. (Uriarte v. CFI, G.R. Nos. L- impaired. (Coca v. Borromeo, G.R. No. L-
21938-39, 1970). 27082, 1978).
Extent of jurisdiction of the probate court. Remedy for one who wants to resolve his/her
Probate. A proceeding to establish the validity of adverse claim of ownership
a will. File a separate action (for a final determination
of the conflicting claims of title) with the RTC.
Probate Jurisdiction (Pacioles, Jr. v. Chuatoco-Ching, G.R. No.
127920, 2005).

ATENEO CENTRAL
Powers and Duties of Probate Court. General Rule: A probate court cannot issue writs
In probate proceedings, the court: of execution because its orders usually refer to
1. Orders the probate of the will of the the adjudication of claims against the estate
decedent (R7, S1) which the executor or administrator may satisfy
2. Grants letters of administration of the WITHOUT the need of executor processes.
party best entitled thereto or to any (Angelita G. Vda. De Valera v. Hon. Macario M.
qualified applicant (R79, S5) Ofilada, G.R. No. L-27526, 1974).
3. Supervises and controls all acts of
administration; hears and approves Exceptions: The court may issue writs of
claims against the estate of the deceased execution on the following:
(R86, S11) 1. To satisfy the contributive shares of the
4. Orders payment of lawful debts (R88, devisees, legatees and heirs on
S11) possession of the decedent’s assets
5. Authorizes sale, mortgage or any (R88, S6);
encumbrance of real estate (R89, S7) 2. To enforce payment of the expenses of
6. Directs the delivery of the estate to those partition (R90, S3); and
entitled thereto (R90, S1) 3. To satisfy the cost when a person is cited
7. Issues warrants and processes for examination in probate proceedings.
necessary to compel the attendance of (R142, S13).
witnesses or to carry into effect their
orders and judgments, and all other Estate settlement upon dissolution of marriage
powers granted them by law (R73, S3); Upon dissolution of marriage by the death of
and either the husband or the wife, the community
8. If a person defies a probate order, it may property must be administered and liquidated in
issue a warrant for the apprehension and the in/testate proceedings of the deceased
imprisonment of such person until he spouse. If both have died, liquidation may be
performs such order or judgment, or is made in the in/testate proceedings of either.
released. (R73, S3). (R73, S2).
The court acts as trustee, and as such, should Probate Court’s Power to Liquidate the
jealously guard the estate and see to it that it is Conjugal Partnership.
wisely and economically administered, not Only the probate court can competently rule on
dissipated. (Timbol v. Cano, G.R. No. L-15445, whether the properties are conjugal and form part
1961). of the estate. It is only the probate court that can
liquidate the conjugal partnership and distribute
The authentication of a will decides only those the same to the heirs, after the debts of the estate
that touch upon the capacity of the testator and have been paid. (Romero v. CA, G.R. No.
the compliance with those requisites or 188921, 2012).
solemnities that the law prescribes for the validity
of wills. It does not determine nor even by Absence and Declaration of Presumptive
implication prejudge the validity or efficiency of Death
the provisions; the questions relating to these May be
Number of years that a
points remain entirely unaffected, and may be declared
person is absent
raised even after the will has been authenticated. dead for
(Teotico v. del Val, G.R. No. L-18753, 1965). 7 & 5 YEARS
All purposes
A trial court cannot make a declaration of heirship GR: If person
EXCEPT
in an ordinary civil action because matters related is 75 years
7 years succession
to the rights of filiation and heirship must be old and
(Art. 390,
ventilated in a special proceeding for the purpose below.
NCC).
of determining such rights (Bayagas v. Bayagas, All purposes
G.R. Nos. 187308 & 187517, 2013). including
XPN: Above
5 years succession
Probate Court’s Power to Issue Writs of 75 years old
(Art. 390,
Execution NCC).
10 YEARS

ATENEO CENTRAL
All purposes 2. Summary settlement of estates of small

If person is including value (R74, S2).
75 years old 10 years succession
and below. (Art. 390,
NCC).
4 YEARS EXTRAJUDICIAL SUMMARY
1. On board SETTLEMENT SETTLEMENT
4 years from
a vessel lost No court intervention Judicial adjudication,
loss of vessel
at sea. is required. although summary.
2. On board 4 years from The value of the Gross value of the
a missing loss of estate is immaterial. estate must not
airplane airplane exceed P10,000.
3. Lost while Allowed only in Allowed in both
All purposes
being with intestate succession. testate and intestate
including
the armed succession.
4 years succession
forces that There must be no Available even if
(Art. 391,
took part in a outstanding debts at there are debts; it is
NCC).
war the time of the the court which will
4. Lost in settlement of the make provision for its
circumstance estate. payment.
s where there 4 years Resorted to at the May be instituted by
is danger of instance of and by any interested party,
death. agreement of all heirs. even a creditor of the
estate, without the
If the absentee appears, or without appearing his consent of all heirs.
existence is proved, he may recover the balance Bond is filed with the Bond is filed with the
of his estate by motion in the same proceeding, Register of Deeds. court.
subject to the following conditions: Amount of the bond Amount of bond is to
1. All his debts must have been paid (R73, is equivalent to the be determined by the
S4); value of the personal court.
2. He shall recover his property in the property.
condition in which it may be found, and
the price of any property that may have a. Extrajudicial settlement by agreement by
been alienated or the property acquired sole heirs when allowed
therewith;
3. But he cannot claim either fruits of rents.
(Art. 392, NCC). Requirements:
1. Decedent died intestate (left no will);
The declaration of presumptive death of a person 2. There are no outstanding debts at the time
under Article 41 of the Family Code is a summary of settlement;
proceeding and not a special proceeding. 3. Heirs are all of legal age or minors
(Republic of the Philippines v. Jomoc, G.R. No. represented by judicial guardians or legal
163604, 2005). representatives;
4. The settlement is made in a public
2. SUMMARY SETTLEMENT OF instrument OR by means of an affidavit, in
ESTATES the case of a sole heir, duly filed with the
Register of Deeds;
Summary Settlement of Estates, in general. 5. If the decedent left only one heir: the heir
General Rule: Estate settlement should be executes an affidavit of self-adjudication.
judicially administered through an 6. If the decedent left more than one heir, the
administrator/executor. settlement must be made in a public
instrument
Exceptions: 7. Publication of the extrajudicial settlement
1. Extrajudicial settlement by agreement in a newspaper of general circulation in
between or among heirs. (R74, S1).

ATENEO CENTRAL
the province once a week for three The bond is required only when personality is
consecutive weeks; and involved. If it is a real estate, it shall be subject to
8. Filing of bond equivalent to the value of a lien in favor of creditors, heirs or other persons
personal property posted with the register for the full period of 2 years from such distribution
of deeds. and such lien cannot be substituted by a bond.
The bond is the value of the personal property

Form of Settlement certified by the parties under oath and conditioned
Nothing in Sec. 1, Rule 74 concludes that a written upon payment of just claims filed under Section 4,
instrument or other formality is an essential Rule 74 of the Rules of Court.
requisite to the validity of the partition. an oral
partition is valid (Vda. de Reyes v. CA, G.R. No. b. Two-year prescriptive period
92436, 1991).
An heir or interested person who was able to
Settlement in a private instrument is valid. The participate either in the extrajudicial or summary
requirement of a public instrument in Section 1, settlement of estate of the decedent has a period
Rule 74 is not constitutive of the validity but is of two years after the settlement and distribution
merely evidentiary in nature. However, to assail its validity. (Pedrosa v CA, G.R. No.
reformation of the instrument may be compelled. 118680, March 5, 2001).
(Hernandez v. Andal, G.R. No. L-273, 1947).
There is a disputable presumption that the
Failure to file the extrajudicial settlement or the decedent left no debts if no creditor files a petition
affidavit of self-adjudication does not affect its for letters of administration within two (2) years
validity when there are no creditors or when no after the death of the decedent. (Guico v.
rights of creditors are involved. Bautista, G.R. No. L-14921, 1960).
Good reasons When all the heirs are of lawful age Rules on Applicability of Prescriptive Period.
and there are no debts due from the estate, they
may agree in writing to partition the property General Rule: The period is two years from
without instituting the judicial administration or settlement of the estate (Rule 74, Sec. 4).
applying for the appointment of an administrator.
This two-year period applies:
It does not preclude the heirs from instituting 1. To persons who have participated or
administration proceedings, even if the estate has taken part or had notice of the
no debts or obligations, if they do not desire to extrajudicial partition; and
resort for good reasons to an ordinary action for 2. When the provisions of Section 1 of Rule
partition. 74 have been strictly complied with, i.e.,
that all the persons or heirs of the
Recourse to an administration proceeding even if decedent have taken part in the
the estate has no debts is sanctioned only if the extrajudicial settlement or are
heirs have good reasons for not resorting to an represented by themselves or through
action for partition. (Pereira v. CA, G.R. No. L- guardians. (Maria Pedrosa v. Court of
81147, 1989; Arcillas v. Montejo, G.R. No. L- Appeals, G.R. No. 118680, March 5,
21725, 1968) 2001).
Extrajudicial Settlement: on whom binding When heirs may exercise right:

Persons who did not participate nor had notice of 1. There has been undue deprivation of
an extrajudicial settlement would not be bound lawful participation on the estate on the
thereby. Publication that binds the world part of an heir or other interested person;
contemplates notice that has been sent out or 2. There exist debts against the estate; or
issued before any deed of settlement, partition, or 3. There has been undue deprivation of
both, is agreed upon, and not after such an lawful participation payable in money on
agreement has already been executed. (Cua v. the part of an heir or other interested
Vagas, G.R. No. 156356, 2006). persons.
Requirement of Bond

ATENEO CENTRAL
Note: The 2-year period is not a prescriptive not take part in it. (Cua vs Vargas, G.R. No.
period. There is nothing [in Sec. 4] which shows 156536, 2006).
clearly a statute of limitations and a bar of action
against third persons. It is only a bar against the Exception: The implied trust may be converted
parties who had taken part in the extrajudicial into an express trust ,which is imprescriptible,
proceedings but not against third persons not unless repudiated by the trustee. (Torbela v.
parties thereto (Sampilo and Salacup v. CA, G.R. Rosario, G.R. No. 140528, 2011). The
No. L-10474, 1958). prescriptive period is 10 years from repudiation of
the title, which must be proven by clear and
Special Period for Certain Individuals convincing evidence and made known to the
If on the date of the expiration of the 2-year beneficiary.
period, the creditor / heir is a: [MIPO]
1. Minor 3. Civil Code, Art. 1410 – imprescriptible.
2. Incapacitated
3. In Prison; or Heirs with no knowledge or who did not consent
4. Outside the Philippines to the deed of settlement may resort to an action
for annulment of the deed of extrajudicial
He may present his claim within 1 year after such settlement. (Reillo v. San Jose, G.R. No. 166393,
disability is removed (Rule 74, Sec. 5). 2009).
Exceptions: c. Affidavit of self-adjudication by

1. If the aggrieved heir is in possession of the sole heir
property – imprescriptible
General Rule: Extra-judicial settlement shall be
An action for reconveyance is imprescriptible done by means of a public instrument filed in the
when the plaintiff, the legal owner, and not the Register of Deeds. (R74, S1).
defendant registered owner, is in possession of
the land to be reconveyed (Heirs of Saludares v. Exception: If there is only one heir, he may
CA, G.R. No. 128254, 2004). adjudicate to himself the entire estate by means
of an affidavit filed in the Registry of Deeds. (R74,
2. If an innocent purchaser for value is in S1).
possession of the property – imprescriptible.
If a person misrepresents himself as the only heir,
Remedy: File damages against the other heirs an implied/constructive trust is created in favor of
who fraudulently caused the transfer to the the other heirs whose rights were violated. Action
innocent purchaser for value. (PEZA v. of reconveyance based on implied trust
Fernandez, G.R. 138971, 2001). prescribes 10 years from the issuance of TCT
over the property. (Marquez v. CA, G.R. No.
3. If the property is in the hands of other heirs who 125715, 1998).
caused the extrajudicial settlement.
If a person does not have knowledge of the
General Rule: 10 years from the issuance of extrajudicial partition, being an ex-parte
title, since a constructive trust was created proceeding, then he cannot be bound thereby.
(PEZA v. Fernandez G.R. No. 138971, 2001).
This period shall commence: d. Summary settlement of estates of
1. Upon the issuance of a new title over the small value, when allowed
property in question. (Marquez v. CA, G.R.
No. 125715, 1998); or Unlike extrajudicial settlement, summary
2. From time of actual notice – unregistered settlement of estates of small value may be
deed (Neri v. Heirs of Uy, G.R. No. 194366, chosen by the heirs regardless of whether the
2012). decedent died testate or intestate.
Publication does not constitute constructive Requisites:

notice to the heirs who had no knowledge or did 1. Petition filed by any interested person

ATENEO CENTRAL
2. Gross value of the estate, whether or not

the decedent died testate or intestate, Reconveyance based on implied trust
must not exceed ten thousand pesos An heir who is deprived of his share in the estate
(P10,000). since he did not participate, take part, or had no
3. Application must contain allegation of notice of the settlement of the estate may file an
gross value of estate. action for reconveyance within 10 years, which is
4. Upon hearing, the date of which: based on an implied or constructive trust. (Teves
a. Shall be set by court not less v. CA, G.R. No. 109963, 1999).
than one (1) month
b. nor more than three (3) months Action for Reconveyance; when
from date of last publication of imprescriptible
notice. An action for reconveyance is imprescriptible
5. Notice of hearing published once a week when the plaintiff, the legal owner, and not the
for three (3) consecutive weeks in a defendant registered owner, is in possession of
newspaper of general circulation. the land to be reconveyed. (Heirs of Saludares v.
6. Notice shall be served upon such CA, G.R. No. 128254, January 16, 2004).
interested persons as the court may
direct. Petition for Relief
7. Bond in an amount fixed by the court (not Grounds: (FAME)
value of personal property) conditioned 1. Fraud
upon payment of just claims under 2. Accident;
Section 4, Rule 74 of the Rules of Court. 3. Mistake;
(R74, S2). 4. Excusable negligence.
After such requisites are met, the court may Period to File
proceed summarily, without the appointment of Within sixty (60) days after the petitioner learns of
an executor or administrator. the judgment, final order or other proceeding to
be set aside, and not more than 6 months after
e. Remedies of aggrieved parties such judgment or final order was entered.
after extra-judicial settlement of
estate Note: Claim against the bond or real estate or
both may be availed of only within two (2) years
The following remedies are available to the after the settlement and distribution of the estate.
aggrieved party after extrajudicial settlement of Such bond or property will be charged with this
the estate: responsibility within 2 years regardless of
1. Claim Against the Bond or Real Estate or transfers of property.
Both (R74, S4)
2. Petition for Relief (R38) Reopening by Intervention Within
3. Reopening by Intervention Within Reglementary Period
Reglementary Period The following are allowed to intervene with leave
4. New Action to Annul Settlement Within of court:
Reglementary Period of Two Years; 1. Has a legal interest in the matter in litigation; or
5. Rescission in Case of Preterition of 2. Has such legal interest in the success of either
Compulsory Heir in Partition Tainted with of the parties, or an interest against both; or
Bad Faith (Art. 1104, NCC); and 3. Is so situated as to be adversely affected by a
6. Action for Reconveyance (Art. 1144, distribution/disposition of property in the
NCC) custody of the court or of an officer thereof.
7. Action to Annul Extrajudicial Settlement
(Neri v. Uy). 3. ALLOWANCE OR
DISALLOWANCE OF WILLS
Claim Against the Bond or Real Estate or Both
(R74, S4). Kinds of Wills
If there is an undue deprivation of lawful 1. Notarial Will
participation in the estate, the existence of debts 2. Holographic Will
against the estate or undue deprivation of lawful
participation payable in money. Requisites of a Notarial Will

ATENEO CENTRAL
1. Subscription - The will must be subscribed be executed and acknowledged on the same
(signed) at the end thereof by: occasion. More importantly, the will must be
a) The testator himself; or by subscribed by the testator, as well as by three or
b) The testator’s name written by some more credible witnesses who must also attest to
other person it in the presence of the testator and of one
another. The testator and the witnesses must
2. Attestation by witnesses - The act of 3 or acknowledge the will before a notary public. In
more credible witnesses of witnessing the any event, the variance in the dates of the will as
execution of the will in the presence of the to its supposed execution and attestation was
testator and of one another in order to see and satisfactorily and persuasively explained by the
take note mentally that such will has been notary public and the instrumental witnesses.
executed in accordance with the requirements (Ortega v. Valmonte, G.R. No. 157451, 2005).
prescribed by law.
Requisites of a Holographic Will
3. Marginal signatures - The testator or the 1. Entirely Written by the Hand of the Testator
person requested by him to write his name, and 2. Entirely Dated by the Hand of the Testator
the instrumental witnesses of the will must affix 3. Entirely Signed by the Hand of the Testator
their signatures on the left margin of each and 4. Executed in a Language or Dialect known to
every page of the will, except: the Testator.
a) In the last pages, when the will consists of
two or more pages; General Rule: Refers to the day, month, and
b) When the will consists of only one page; year of the will’s execution.
and
c) When the will consists of two pages, the Exception: When the only issue in question is
first of which contains all the testamentary whether the will was properly dated, and the due
dispositions and is signed at the bottom by execution of the will was genuinely admitted.
the testator and the witnesses, and the (Roxas v. De Jesus G.R. No. L-38338, 1985)
second contains only the attestation clause
duly signed at the bottom by the witnesses. Contents of the Petition for Allowance of Will.
1. Jurisdictional Facts (DR)
4. Page numbering - All the pages shall be a. Testator’s death;
numbered correlatively in letters placed on the b. Testator’s residence at the time
upper part of each page. This is not necessary of death OR the place where
when the will is written on one sheet only. testator left estate, if he is a non-
resident. (Palaganas v.
5. Attestation Clause - this contains: Palaganas, GR No. 169144,
a) The number of pages used - upon which 2011);
the will is written; 2. The Names, ages, and residences of the
b) That the testator signed (or expressly heirs, legatees, and devisees of the
caused another person to sign) the will testator or decedent;
and every page thereof in the presence of 3. The probable Value and character of the
the instrumental witnesses; property of the estate;
c) That the instrumental witnesses 4. The name of the person for whom Letters
witnessed and signed the will and all the are prayed;
pages thereof in the presence of the 5. If the will has not been delivered to the
testator and of one another. court, the name of the person having
custody of it.
6. Acknowledgment by Notary Public - Must be
acknowledged before a notary public by the Note: No defect shall render void the allowance
testator and the witnesses. of the will, or the issuance of letters testamentary
or of administration with the will annexed. (Rule
Note: Date in a notarial will 76, Sec. 2).
The conflict between the dates appearing on the
will does not invalidate the document, because The applicable law, therefore, confers jurisdiction
the law does not even require that a [notarial] will on the RTC or the MTC over probate proceedings

ATENEO CENTRAL
depending on the gross value of the estate, which 1. If the formalities required by law
value must be alleged in the complaint or petition (execution and attestation) have not been
to be filed. (Frianela v. Banayad Jr., G.R. No. complied with
169700, 2009). 2. If the testator was insane, or otherwise
mentally incapable of making a will at the
Proving a Lost or Destroyed Will; Requisites time of its execution
Whether the will was a notarial or a holographic 3. If it was executed through force or under
one, its loss or destruction may only be proved duress, or the influence of fear or threats
upon the concurrence of the following requisites: 4. If it was procured by undue and improper
1. Its execution and validity are established pressure and influence on the part of the
2. It must have been in existence at the time beneficiary or of some other person
of the testator’s death, or is shown to 5. If the signature of the testator was
have been fraudulently or accidentally procured by fraud or trick
destroyed during the lifetime of the 6. If the testator acted by mistake or did not
testator without his knowledge; and Its intend that the instrument he signed
provisions must be clearly and distinctly should be his will at the time of affixing
proved by at least two credible witnesses his signature thereto (R76, S9; Art. 839,
(R76, S6). NCC).
Proof of Lost or Destroyed Notarial Will The list is exclusive. No other grounds can serve
A lost or destroyed notarial will may be proved by to disallow a will.
a photocopy of the same coupled with the
testimony of the subscribing witness. Contesting a Will
In order that a person may be allowed to
Testimony of Witness Other than Subscribing intervene in a probate proceeding, he must have
Witness an interest in the estate, or in the will, or in the
property to be affected by it either as executor or
General Rule: With respect to a notarial will, the as a claimant of the estate. (Sumilang v.
courts must examine the testimony of the Ramagosa, G.R. No. L-23135, 1967).
subscribing witnesses.
Reprobate
Exceptions: A will allowed/probated in a foreign country may
The court may examine witnesses other than be allowed, filed and recorded in the Philippines.
subscribing witnesses in the following instances: (R77, S1).
1. The subscribing witness is insane;
2. The subscribing witness is dead; or Administration of an estate extends only to the
3. None of the subscribing witnesses reside in the assets of the decedent found within the state or
Philippines (R76, S7). country where it was granted. The administrator
appointed in one state has no power over
Photocopy of Holographic Will May Be property in another state or country. (R77, S4).
Allowed The probate of holographic wills is the
allowance of the will by the court after its due Petition to be filed in the Regional Trial Court.
execution has been proved. However, if the The Regional Trial Court where such petition is
holographic will has been lost or destroyed and filed shall fix a time and place for the hearing and
no other copy is available, the will cannot be cause notice thereof to be given as in case of an
probated because the best and only evidence is original will presented for allowance. (Rule 77,
the handwriting of the testator in said will. It is Secs. 1 and 2; Leon & Ghezzi v. Manufacturer
necessary that there be a comparison between Life Insurance Co, G.R. No. L-3677, 1951).
sample handwritten statements of the testator
and the handwritten will. But, a photostatic copy Requisites Before a Will Proved Abroad Will
of the holographic will may be allowed because Be Allowed in the Philippines
comparison can be made with the standard 1. The testator had his domicile in a foreign
writings of the testator. (Bonilla v. Aranza, G.R. country
No. L-58509, 1982). 2. The will has been admitted to probate in
such country – due execution of the will
Grounds for Disallowance of Will in accordance with foreign laws

ATENEO CENTRAL
3. The fact that the foreign tribunal is a 3. Such estate, after the payment of just
probate court with jurisdiction over the debts and expenses of administration,
proceedings shall be disposed of according to the will,
4. The law on probate procedure of the said so far as such will may operate upon it,
foreign country and proof of compliance and the residue, if any, shall be disposed
therewith of as provided by law in cases of estates
5. The lezgal requirements in said foreign in the Philippines belonging to persons
country for the valid execution of the will. who are inhabitants of another country.
(Vda. de Perez v. Tolete, G.R. No. 4. Any residue shall be disposed of as
76714, 1994). provided for estates in the Philippines
belonging to persons who do not reside
Foreign Laws Must be Proved in the country (R77, S4.)
A person who seeks to reprobate a will executed
in a foreign country must prove the laws and Under Article 16 of the Civil Code, it is the national
procedure of that foreign country on wills. law of the decedent that is applicable. Article
(Ancheta v. Guersey-Dalaygon, G.R. No. 1039 further provides that “capacity to succeed is
139868, June 8, 2006) governed by the law of the nation of the
decedent.” As a corollary rule, Section 4, Rule 77
In the absence of proof of the foreign law, it is of the Rules provides that such estate after
presumed that it is the same as in the Philippines. payment of just debts and expenses of
(ATCI Overseas Corporation v. Echin, G.R. No. administration shall be disposed of according to
178551, 2010) such will, so far as such will may operate upon it.
Whatever public policy or good customs may be
The court having jurisdiction over the reprobate involved in our system of legitimes, Congress has
of a will shall cause notice thereof to be given as not intended to extend the same to the
in the case of an original will presented for succession of foreign nationals. In any case, the
allowance. Thus, the publication and notice Court has also ruled that if land is invalidly
requirements as stated in Sections 3 and 4 of transferred to an alien who subsequently
Rule 76 of the Rules of Court are required in the becomes a citizen or transfers it to a citizen, the
reprobate. (R77, S2). flaw in the original transaction is considered
cured and the title of the transferee is rendered
The will of an alien who is abroad produces effect valid. (Ancheta v. Guersey-Dalaygon, G.R. No.
in the Philippines if made with the formalities 139868, 2006).
prescribed by the law of the place in which he
resides, or according to the formalities observed Administration
in his country, or in conformity with those which Administration extends only to the assets of the
this Code prescribes. Thus, proof that both wills decedent found in the State where the letters of
conform with the formalities prescribed by New administration was granted. (Leon &Ghezzi v.
York laws or by Philippine laws is imperative. Manufacturer Life Ins., G.R. No. L-3677, 1951).
(Vda. de Perez v. Tolete, G.R. No. 76714, 1994).
Two Kinds of Administrator
Effects of Probate 1. Principal Administrator: granted to the
After the finality of the allowance of a will, the person(s) in the jurisdiction of the decedent’s last
issue as to the voluntariness of its execution domicile;
(soundness of mind, formal requisites of the will) 2. Ancillary Administrator: granted in any other
cannot be raised anymore. (Gallanosa v. jurisdiction. It is the general theory that the
Arcangel, G.R. No. L-29300, 1978). ancillary administrator must remit the balance of
the estate in his territorial jurisdiction to the
Effects of Reprobate: principal administrator. (Johannes v. Harvey,
1. The will shall have the same effect as if G.R. No. 18600, 1992; Tayag v. Benguet, G.R.
originally proved and allowed in the No. L-23145, 1968).
Philippines.
2. Letters testamentary or administration These two proceedings are separate and
with a will annexed shall extend to all independent of each other. (CIR v. Fisher, et al.,
estates in the Philippines. G.R. No. L-11668, 1968).

ATENEO CENTRAL
supply a basis of a judgment for a sum certain.

4. CLAIMS AGAINST THE (Gaskell v. Tan Sit, G.R. No. 18405, 1922).
ESTATE CONTINGENT CLAIM: It is one in which liability
depends on some future event that may or may
Requirement to File Claims Against the Estate not happen, and which makes it uncertain
After granting letters testamentary or of whether there will be any liability at all.
administration, the court shall issue a notice
requiring all persons having money claims The rules provide that a contingent claim is to be
against the decedent to file them in the office of presented in the administration proceedings in
the clerk of court. (R86, S1) the same manner as any ordinary claim, and that
when the contingency arises which converts the
Purpose of Filing Claims Against contingent claim into a valid claim, the court
The Estate The purpose of presentation of claims should then be informed that the claim had
against decedents of the estate in the probate already matured. (Buan v. Laya, G.R. No. L-7593,
court is to protect the estate of deceased 1957).
persons. That way, the executor / administrator
will be able to examine each claim and determine DEFICIENCY JUDGMENT: A deficiency
whether it is a proper one which should be judgment is a contingent claim and therefore,
allowed. Further, the primary object of the must be filed with the probate court where the
provisions requiring presentation is to apprise the settlement of the deceased is pending. (First Nat’l
administrator and the probate court of the City Bank v. Cheng Tan, G.R. No. L-14234,
existence of the claim so that a proper and timely 1962).
arrangement may be made for its payment in full
or by pro-rata portion in the due course of the What happens to actions for money claims
administration, inasmuch as upon the death of a that are already pending in court against the
person, his entire estate is burdened with the decedent at the time of his death
payment of all of his debts and no creditor shall When the action is for recovery of money arising
enjoy any preference or priority; all of them shall from contract, express or implied, and the
share pro-rata in the liquidation of the estate of defendant dies before entry of final judgment in
the deceased. (Estate of Olave v. Reyes, G.R. the court in which the action was pending at the
No. L29407, 1983). time of such death, it shall not be dismissed but
shall instead be allowed to continue until entry of
Claims That May Be Filed Against The Estate final judgment. A favorable judgment obtained by
1. Money Claims; the plaintiff therein shall be enforced in the
2. Claims for Funeral Expenses; manner especially provided in these Rules for
3. Claims for Last Sickness of the Decedent; prosecuting claims against the estate of a
4. Judgment for Money Against The Defendant deceased person. (R3, S20.
(R86, S5).
Solidary Obligations
Money Claims Where the obligation of the decedent is solidary
This refers to all money claims arising out of with another debtor, the claim shall be filed
contract, quasi-contract, or law but do not refer to against the decedent as if he were the only debtor
those arising from crime or quasi-delict. Claims (R86, S6).
for money which are founded on tort or crime are
not money claims and should thus be filed against There is no need to implead the estate of the
the executor or administrator or against the heirs. decedent which is solidarily liable with another
(People v. Bayotas, G.R. No. 102007, 2004). person in a collection case filed against the latter.
The estate of the decedent is not considered an
These claims may be: indispensable party. The whole amount of
1. Due or not due; or obligation may proceed against any one of the
2. Absolute or Contingent solidary debtors pursuant to Art. 1216 of the Civil
Code. (Boston Equity Resources, Inc. v. Court of
ABSOLUTE CLAIM: This is such as claim as, if Appeals, G.R. No. 173946, 2013).
contested between living persons, would be the
proper subject of immediate legal action and When the spouses are sued for the enforcement
would of an obligation entered into by them, they are

ATENEO CENTRAL
being impleaded in their capacity as General rule: Within the time fixed in the notice
representatives of the conjugal partnership and which shall not be more than twelve (12) months
not as independent debtors such that the concept nor less than six (6) months after the date of the
of joint or solidary liability, as between them, does first publication.
not apply. Even assuming that to be true, the
nature of the obligation involved in this case is not Otherwise, the claims are barred forever.
solidary but rather merely joint. (Alipio v. CA, G.R.
No. 134100, September 29, 2000). Exception: BELATED CLAIMS – Claims not filed
within the original period fixed by the court.
Mortgage Debt Due From Estate
A creditor holding a claim against the deceased On application of a creditor who has failed to file
secured by mortgage or other collateral security his claim within the time previously limited, at any
may: time before an order of distribution is entered, the
court may, for cause shown and, on such terms,
1. Abandon the security and prosecute his as are equitable, allow such claim to be filed not
claim against the estate and share in the exceeding one (1) month from the order allowing
general distribution of the assets of belated claims (the order may either be in open
thereof; court or not). (R86, S2)
2. Foreclose his mortgage or realize upon
his security by action in court, making the Note: Money claims against the estate may be
executor or administrator a party allowed any time before an order of distribution is
defendant and if there is judgment for entered, at the discretion of the court for cause
deficiency, he may file a contingent claim and upon such terms as are equitable. At the time
against the estate within the statute of petitioner’s motion to direct payment of the
non-claims; or judgment credit was filed, no order of distribution
3. Rely solely on his mortgage and was issued yet. (Echaus v. Blanco, G.R. No. L-
foreclose (judicial or extrajudicial) the 30453, 1989).
same at anytime within the period of the
statute of limitations but he cannot be But: Under Rule 87, Sec. 2, the court has no
admitted as creditor and shall not receive authority to admit a belated claim for no cause or
in the distribution of the other assets of for an insufficient cause. (Barredo v. CA, G.R. No.
the estate. He will have no right to claim L-17863, 1962).
deficiency. (R86, S7; PNB v. CA, G.R.
No. 121597, 2001). State of non-claims.
The above remedies are distinct, independent, The Statute of non-claims refers to the specific
and period fixed by the probate court (following the 6-
exclusive of each other. (PNB v. CA, G.R. No. 12 month range) for the filing of claims against the
121597, 2001). estate for examination and allowance; otherwise,
the claims are barred forever.
This rule applies to mortgages entered into by the
decedent prior to his death, but also to mortgages The guidelines as to the statutes of non-
entered into by the administrator/executor for the claims are as follows:
benefit of the estate. Section 7, Rule 89 - that 1. The period fixed by the probate court
once must not be less than six months nor
the deed of real estate mortgage is recorded in more than 12 months from the date of
the proper Registry of Deeds, together with the first publication of the notice
corresponding court order authorizing the 2. Such period once fixed by the court is
administrator to mortgage the property, said deed mandatory and it cannot be shortened
shall be valid as if it has been executed by the 3. The statute of non-claims supersedes the
deceased himself. (PNB v. CA, G.R. No. 121597, statute of limitations.
2001).
The rule requires certain creditors of a deceased
Time within which claims shall be filed. person to present their claims for examination
and allowance within a specified period, the
purpose thereof being to settle the estate with

ATENEO CENTRAL
dispatch, so that the residue may be delivered to but only as to the adjustment of the claim. (R86,
the persons entitled thereto without their being S8) The executor or administrator having a claim
afterwards called upon to respond in actions for against the estate cannot simply pay himself from
claims, which, under the ordinary statute of the estate (Sison v Azarraga, G.R. No. 8470,
limitations, have not yet prescribed. (Santos v. 1915).
Manarang, G.R. No. L-8235, 1914).
5. PAYMENT OF DEBTS OF THE
The statute of non-claims supersedes the statute ESTATE
of limitations insofar as the debts of deceased
persons are concerned because if a creditor fails Requisites Before Payment of Money Claims
to file his claim within the time fixed by the court Against the Estate
in the notice, them the claim is barred forever. (In The following requisites must concur before the
re: Estate of De Dios, G.R. L-7940, Mar. 27, executor or administrator may pay the money
1913). claims against the estate:
1. A hearing is conducted
Exception 1: 2. The amounts of such claims are
The court, for good cause shown, may grant a ascertained, and
one month period for a creditor to file a claim 3. There are sufficient assets to pay the
which he failed to bring during the original period debts.
granted for the filing of claims.
Payment of Debts if Estate Sufficient
Such motion for leave to file a claim beyond the General rule: The payment of the debts of the
original period may be filed at any time during the estate must be taken (by order of preference):
administration proceedings provided no order of 1. From the portion or property designated
distribution has yet been entered. (Aquino, et al. in the will; (R88, S2)
v. Aquino, 103 Phil. 1107; cf. Danan, et al. v. 2. From the personal property, and
Buencamino, etc., et al., G.R. No. 57205, 1981). 3. From the real property.
Exception 2: If there is still a deficiency, it shall be met by

Claims not filed within the time given in the notice contributions by devisees, legatees, or heirs who
may be set forth as counterclaims in any action have been in possession of portions of the estate
that the executor or administrator may bring BEFORE debts and expenses have been settled
against the claimants. (R86, S5). and paid. (R88, S6).
A judgment for a money claim against the Exception: Instances When Realty Can Be
deceased cannot be enforced by writ of Charged First:
execution. A judgment against the deceased for 1. When the personal property is not
a money claim must be filed as a claim before the sufficient. (R88, S3)
probate court. If death of the defendant occurred 2. Where the sale of such personalty would
prior to levy, the judgment is not enforceable by be detrimental to the participants
writ of execution. The judgment creditor must file (everyone) of the estate. (R88, S3)
a claim in the probate court. 3. When sale of personal property may
injure the business or interests of those
Even if the testator acknowledged the debt in his interested in the estate. (R89, S2)
will and instructed the executor to pay such debt, 4. When the testator has not made
the Statute of Non-Claims must still be complied sufficient provision for payment of such
with. (Santos v. Manarang, G.R. No. L-8235, debts/expenses/legacies. (R89, S2)
1914). 5. When the decedent was, in his lifetime,
under contract, binding in law, to deed
Claim of executor or administrator against the real property to beneficiary. (R89, S8)
estate. 6. When the cedent during his lifetime held
If executor/administrator has a claim, he shall real property in trust for another person.
give notice to the court in writing and the court (R89, S9).
thereafter shall appoint a special administrator
with the same power and subjected to the same
liability as the general executor or administrator,

ATENEO CENTRAL
6. SALES, MORTGAGES AND of the order of the court, together with the
OTHER ENCUMBRANCES OF deed of the executor /administrator for
PROPERTY OF DECEDENT such real estate, which shall be as valid
as if the deed had been executed by the
Order of the Sale of Personal Property deceased in his lifetime. (R89, S7).
1. To pay the debts and expenses of
administration. Sale of Property Acquired on Execution or
2. To pay legacies. Foreclosure
3. To cover expenses for the preservation of The court may authorize an executor /
the estate. (R89, S1). administrator
to sell / mortgage / encumber real estate acquired
Regulations for Granting Authority to by him on execution or foreclosure sale, under
Sell/Mortgage/Encumber Estates the same circumstances and under the same
regulations as prescribed in this rule for the sale /
1. The executor / administrator shall file a mortgage/ encumbrance of other real estate.
written petition setting forth the debts due (R89,
from the deceased, the expenses of S6).
administration, the legacies, the value of
the personal estate, the situation of the Sale Beneficial to Interested Persons
estate to be sold /mortgaged / Sale of personal or real estate may be allowed
encumbered, and such other facts as when the court finds that it will be beneficial to the
show that the heirs, devisees and legatees although not
sale/mortgage/encumbrance is necessary to pay debts, legacies or expenses of
necessary or beneficial; administration. This must be upon application of
2. The court shall fix a time and place for the executor or administrator and on written
hearing such petition. There must be notice to interested persons. (R89, S4).
notice served on the time and place of the
hearing to persons interested. Opposition to Sale/Mortgage or Encumbrance
3. The court may require that the executor of Estate
/administrator shall give an additional Any interested person may give a bond in an
bond conditioned that such amount fixed by the court, conditioned to pay the
executor/administrator will account for debts, expenses of administration and legacies to
the proceeds of the sale /mortgage / prevent the court from granting the authority to
encumbrance; sell/mortgage or encumber such property. (R89,
4. The court may, by order stating S3).
compliance with the abovementioned
requirements, authorize the executor / Contingent Claim
administrator to sell / mortgage Claim that is subject to the happening of a future
/encumber, in proper cases, such part of uncertain event.
the estate as is deemed necessary, and
in case of sale the court may authorize it If the court is satisfied that a contingent claim duly
to be public or private, as would be most filed is valid, it may order the executor /
beneficial to all parties concerned. The administrator to retain in his hands sufficient
executor / administrator shall be estate to pay such contingent claim when the
furnished with a certified copy of such same becomes absolute, or, if the estate is
order; insolvent, sufficient to pay a portion equal to the
5. If the estate is to be sold at auction, the dividend of the other creditors. (R88, S4).
mode of giving notice of the time and
place of the sale shall be governed by the Requisites for the Estate to be Retained to
provisions concerning notice of execution Meet Contingent Claims:
sale; 1. Contingent claim is duly filed within the
6. There shall be recorded in the registry of two (2) year period allowed for the
deeds of the province in which the real creditors to present claims;
estate thus sold / mortgaged 2. Court is satisfied that the claim is valid;
/encumbered is situated, a certified copy

ATENEO CENTRAL
3. The claim has become absolute. (R88, His estate in the Philippines shall be so disposed
S5). of that his creditors in and outside the Philippines
may receive an equal share, in proportion to their
Contingent Claims Which Mature After the respective credits. (R88, S9)
Two
(2) Year Period for Filing of Claims Claim Proven Outside the Philippines Against
The assets retained in the hands of the executor an Insolvent Resident’s Estate Paid
/ Claims proven outside the Philippines where the
administrator, not exhausted in the payment of executor had knowledge and opportunity to
claims, shall be distributed by the order of the contest its allowance therein may be added to the
court to the persons entitled to the same. list of claims in the Philippines against the estate
of an insolvent resident and the estate will be
But the assets so distributed may still be applied distributed equally among those creditors. The
to claims of foreign creditors against insolvent non-
the payment of the claim when established, and residents and against insolvent residents would
the not be able to recover from the estate if there is
creditor may maintain an action against the no reciprocity with that creditor’s country granting
distributees to recover the debt, and such the same benefit to Filipinos. (R88, S10)
distributees and their estates shall be liable for
the However, the benefit of this and the preceding
debt in proportion to the estate they have sections shall not be extended to the creditors in
respectively received from the property of the another country if the property of such deceased
deceased. (R88, S5). person there found is not equally apportioned to
the creditors residing in the Philippines and the
Contributive Share of Devisees/Legatees/Heirs in other creditors, according to their respective
Possession of Portions of Estate for Debts If claims. (R88, S10).
devisees, legatees or heirs have taken
possession of portions of the estate before the Order of Payment of Debts
debts have been settled and paid have become Before the expiration of the time limited for the
liable to contribute for the payment of debts and payment of debts, the court shall order the
expenses, and the court, after hearing, may settle payment thereof. (R88, S11)
the amount of their several liabilities, and order
how much and in what manner each person shall Upon appeal, the court may suspend the order for
contribute. (R88, S6). the payment of debts or may order the distribution
among the creditors whose claims are definitely
Payment of Debts if Estate Insolvent or allowed, leaving in the hands of the
Assets executor/administrator sufficient assets to pay
Insufficient the claim disputed and appealed. (R88, S12).
If insufficient estate to pay all debts: The executor
/ Time for Payment of Debts and Legacies;
administrator shall pay the debts according to the Period for Successor of Deceased
concurrence and preference of credits provided Administrator/Executor
by Shall not exceed one (1) year in the first instance;
Articles 1059 and 2239-2251 of the Civil Code. but court may extend on application of executor /
(R88, S7). administrator and after hearing and notice
thereof. Extension must not exceed six (6)
After following the order of preference of credits, months for single extension. The whole period
if all the creditors belonging to one class cannot allowed to the original executor / administrator
be paid in full, then all of them will suffer a shall not exceed two (2) years.
reduction in proportion to that creditor’s claim. No
creditor of any one class shall receive any The successor of dead executor/administrator
payment until those of the preceding class are may be allowed an extension not to exceed six
paid. (R88, S8). (6) months. (R88, S15)
Estate of an Insolvent Non-Resident Disposed How to File a Claim: Two Methods

of

ATENEO CENTRAL
1. Delivering the claim with the necessary RULE 86 RULE 87

vouchers to the clerk of court and by As to whom it may be
serving a copy to the commenced
executor/administrator Actions that may be Actions that may be
2. Serve a copy on the executor or commenced against commenced directly
administrator. (R86, S9) the estate of the against the Executor /
deceased. Administrator.
An affidavit must support such claim, stating the
amount justly due, that no payments have been As to Actions covered
made thereon which are not credited and that ∙ Money claims, debts ∙ Recovery of real or
there are no offsets to the same. incurred by the personal property;
deceased during his ∙ Recovery of any
If the claim is contingent, an affidavit stating the lifetime, arising from Interest therein from
particulars must accompany the claim. Contract; the estate;
∙ Claims for Funeral ∙ Enforcement of a
Answer of Executor/Administrator expenses or for the Lien thereon; or
Within fifteen (15) days after service of a copy of last Sickness of the ∙ Actions to recover
the claim on the executor or administrator, he decedent; or damages for any
shall file his answer admitting or denying the ∙ Judgement for Injury to person or
claim. (R86, S10). money against the property, real or
decedent. person (i.e., torts).
Upon the filing of an answer to a claim, or
expiration of the time for such filing, the claim When Heirs May Sue
shall be set for trial with notice to both parties. Heirs may not sue the executor/administrator for
(R86, S12). recovery of property left by the decedent until
there is an order of the court assigning such lands
The judgment of the court approving or to such heir or until the time for paying debts has
disapproving a claim shall be appealable. (R86, expired. (R87, S3)
S13).
General Rule: Heirs have no legal standing to
ACTIONS BY AND AGAINST EXECUTORS sue for recovery or protection of property rights of
AND ADMINISTRATORS the deceased.
As a rule of thumb, actions which survive the Exceptions:

decedent’s death should be made against the 1. Pending the filing of administration
executor or administrator. Only the following proceedings
actions may be commenced against the executor 2. Administration proceedings have already
or administrator: been commenced, but an administrator
1. Recovery of real/personal property (or has not yet been appointed. (Go Chan v.
any interest therein) from the estate; Young, G.R. No. 131889, 2001)
2. Enforcement of a lien thereon; 3. The executor or administrator is unwilling
3. Action to recover damages for an injury or refuses to bring suit (Rioferio v. CA,
to person or property, whether real or G.R. No. 129008, 2004)
personal. (R87, S1). 4. The executor is alleged to have
participated in the act complained of and
Injury to property is not limited to injuries to he is made a party defendant (Vda. De
specific property, but extends to other wrongs by Reyes v CA, G.R. No. L-47027, 1989).
which personal estate is injured or diminished. To
maliciously cause a party to incur unnecessary Foreclosure of Mortgage Due to Estate
expenses is certainly injury to that party's Executor / administrator can foreclose a
property. (Board of Liquidators v. Heirs of Kalaw, mortgage
G.R. No. L-18805, 1967, citing Javier v. Araneta, belonging to the decedent. (R87, S5).
G.R. No. L-4369, 1953).
Discharge of Debt by Executor or
Comparative Table: Rule 86 vs. Rule 87 Administrator

ATENEO CENTRAL
An executor or administrator may compound with 1. Upon application of the creditors;

the debtor of the deceased for a debt due and 2. The creditors making the application pay
may give a discharge of such debt on receiving a such part of the costs and expenses;
just dividend of the estate of the debtor upon 3. Give security therefore to the executor or
approval of the court. (R87, S4). the administrator. (R87, S9)
Concealment/Embezzlement/Conveyance of Requisites Before Creditor May Bring Action:

Any of the Property of the Deceased 1. There is a deficiency of assets in the
Upon complaint of any interested person in the hands of an executor/administrator for
estate, the court may cite such suspected person the payment of debts and expenses of
to appear before it and examine him on oath on administration.
the matter of such complaint. 2. In his lifetime, the deceased had made or
attempted to make a fraudulent
If the suspected person refuses to appear or to conveyance of his property or had so
answer questions asked of him during the conveyed such property that by law, the
examination, the court may punish him for conveyance would be void as against
contempt and may commit him to prison until he other creditors.
submits to the order of the court. (R87, S6). 3. The subject of the attempted conveyance
would be liable to attachment in his
If even before the granting of the letters lifetime.
testamentary / letters of administration, a person 4. The executor/administrator has shown
embezzles or alienates any property of the no desire to file the action or failed to
deceased, such person shall be liable in favor of institute the same within a reasonable
the administrator or executor for double the value time.
of the property sold, embezzled, or alienated, to 5. Leave is granted by the court to the
be recovered for the benefit of the estate. (R87, creditor to file the action.
S8. 6. A bond is filed by the creditor.
7. The action by the creditor is in the name
Complaint of Executor/Administrator against of the executor/administrator.
Person Entrusted with Estate
The court may require such person entrusted with The last three requisites are unnecessary where
the estate to appear before it and render a full the grantee is the executor/administrator himself,
account of all property which came into his in which event, the action should be in the name
possession. Refusal to appear or give an of all the creditors.
accounting may be punished with contempt.
(R87, S7) 7. DISTRIBUTION AND
PARTITION
When executor or administrator may bring
action for property fraudulently conveyed by Liquidation
the deceased Liquidation refers to the determination of all
When there is a deficiency of assets in the hands assets of the estate and payment of all debts and
of an executor or administrator for the payment of expenses.
debts and expenses of administration and the
deceased fraudulently conveyed property to There are two requisites before the
avoid any right debt or duty, the executor or distribution of estate:
administrator may commence and prosecute to 1. Liquidation
final judgment such action for recovery of 2. Declaration of Estate
property.
The declaration of heirs is undertaken to
The action would be for the benefit of the determine to whom the residue of the estate
creditors. however, he shall not be bound to should be distributed. The declaration is made in
commence the action. the same proceeding, a separate action for the
declaration of heirs not being the proper
Unless: recourse.

ATENEO CENTRAL
independent action, which would be tried by

Project of partition another court or judge which may thus reverse a
The project of partition is a proposal for decision or order of the probate or intestate court
distribution of the hereditary estimates and already final and executed and reshuffle
determines persons entitled thereto. (Moran, properties long ago distributed and disposed of.
Comments on the Rules of Court, 1997 Ed. Vol. (Timbol v. Cano, G.R. No. L-15445, 1961).
3, 688-689)
The finality of the project of partition by itself Remedy of a Preterited Heir
alone does not terminate the probate proceeding. The intestate proceedings, although closed and
The probate court loses jurisdiction of an estate terminated, can still be opened within the
under administration only after the payment of all prescriptive period upon petition by the preterited
the debts and the remaining estate delivered to heir. (Solivio v CA, G.R. No. 83484, 1990).
the heirs entitled to receive the same. (Guilas v.
CFI of Pampanga, G.R. No. L-22695, 1972). Instances when probate court may issue writ
of execution
A judicial partition is not final and conclusive. It
does not prevent an heir from bringing an action General Rule: Probate court cannot issue writ of
to obtain his share, provided the prescriptive execution. (Pastor v. CA, G.R. No. L-56340,
period has not closed. (Mari v. Bonilla, G.R. No. 1983).
L-852, 1949).
Rationale: Its orders usually refer to the
Remedy of an heir entitled to residue but not adjudication of claims against the estate which
given his share. the executor / administrator may satisfy without
1. A heir entitled to the reside of the estate the need of executory process.
may demand his share through the
following causes of action: Exceptions:
2. A motion in the same probate or 1. To satisfy the contributive shares of the
administration proceedings; or devisees/legatees/heirs when the latter
3. A motion to reopen the settlement had entered prior possession over the
proceedings if it had been closed. estate. (R88, S6)
2. To enforce payment of the expenses of
If an heir has not received his share, his proper partition. (R90, S3)
remedy is to file a motion with the probate court 3. To satisfy the costs when a person is
for delivery to him of his share or if the estate cited for examination in probate
proceedings had been closed, he should file a proceedings. (R142, S13) (Vda. de
motion for reopening of the proceeding, within the Valera v. Ofilada, G.R. No. L-27526,
prescriptive period, and not to file an independent 1974).
action for annulment of the project of partition.
(Guilas v. Judge of CFI, G.R. No. L-26695, 1972) B. GUARDIANSHIP
As long as the order or distribution of the estate Guardianship

has not been complied with, the probate Guardianship is a trust relation in which one
proceedings cannot be deemed closed and person called a guardian acts for another called a
terminated, because a judicial partition is not final ward, whom the law regards as incapable of
and conclusive and does not prevent the heirs managing his own affairs. A guardian is
from bringing an action to obtain his share, appointed to safeguard the rights and interests of
provided the prescriptive period therefore has not minors and incompetent persons.
elapsed.
Guardian
The better practice, however, for the heir who has The person in whom the law has entrusted the
not received his share, is to demand his share custody and control of the person or estate or
through proper motion in the same probate or both of an infant, insane or other person
administrative proceedings, or for the reopening incapable of managing his own affairs.
of the probate or administrative proceedings if it
had already been closed, and not through an Ward

ATENEO CENTRAL
The person under guardianship whom the law 5. Those who are of unsound mind even
regards as incapable of managing his own affairs. though they may have lucid intervals;
6. Persons not being of unsound mind but
Kinds of Guardians by reason of age, disease, weak mind or
ACCORDING TO other causes CANNOT without outside
Scope or Extent Constitution aid, take care of themselves and manage
1. Guardian of the 1. Legal – deemed as their property. (Rule 92, Sec. 2)
person guardians WITHOUT
2. Guardian of the need for appointment Prodigality
property 2. Guardian ad litem – In order to render a person legally unfit to
3. General guardian – appointed by the court administer his own affairs, his acts of prodigality
those appointed by in an action in court must show a morbid mind and a disposition to
the court to have care 3. Judicial – spend or waste the estate so as to expose his
and custody of the appointed by the court family to want or to deprive his forced heirs of
person AND all of his in pursuance to law their inheritances. (Martinez v. Martinez, G.R. No.
property. (i.e. guardian for 445, 1902)
insane persons or
prodigals etc.) 2. APPOINTMENT OF
GUARDIANS
Rules 92-97 only applies to guardianship over
incompetents who are not minors Who May Petition For Appointment of
Guardianship for minors is now covered by AM Guardian for Resident Incompetent (FORD)
No. 003-03-05-SC (Rule on Guardianship of 1. Any relative;
Minors). 2. Friend;
3. Other person in behalf of resident
1. VENUE incompetent who has no parent or lawful
guardian;
Where to Institute Guardianship Proceedings 4. The Director of Health in favor of an
Ward Court insane person who should be
Resident RTC of the ward’s hospitalized or of an isolated leper.
Incompetent residence (R93, S1).
Non-Resident RTC of the place
Incompetent where the ward’s If the interested person is a creditor and
property is located. mortgagee of the estate of the minor, he cannot
(R92, S1). be appointed guardian of the person and property
Minor Family Court (Rule of the latter. (Garchitorrena v. Sotelo, G.R. No. L-
on Guardianship of 47867, 1942).
Minors, S3).
Jurisdictional Facts to Be Alleged:
The Guardianship Court does not have 1. Incompetency of the person for whom
jurisdiction to settle the controversy as to who has guardianship is sought
a better right or title to the properties conveyed in 2. The ward is domiciled in the Philippines
the course of the guardianship proceedings. The
controversy should be threshed out in a separate Who May Petition for Appointment of
action as the dispute is beyond the guardianship Guardian for Minors (ROMDI)
court’s jurisdiction. (Parco v. CA, G.R. No. L- 1. Relative
33152, 1982). 2. Other person on behalf of the minor
3. Minor himself if 14 years of age or over
An INCOMPETENT Includes (CLEP-DUN2): 4. DSWD and DOH, in case of an insane
1. Persons suffering the penalty of Civil minor who needs to be hospitalized
interdiction; 5. Anyone Interested in the estate of a
2. Hospitalized lepers; nonresident minor in case the minor is a
3. Prodigals; nonresident with property within the
4. Deaf and dumb who are unable to read Philippines (Rule on Guardianship of
and write; Minors, Sec. 2).

ATENEO CENTRAL
Who may be appointed guardians of minors 3. Ground rendering the appointment

1. Surviving grandparent; in case several necessary or convenient
grandparents survive, the court shall 4. Death of the parents of the minor or the
select any of them taking into account all termination, deprivation, or suspension of
relevant considerations their parental authority
2. The oldest brother or sister of the minor 5. Remarriage of the minor’s surviving parent
over 21 years of age, unless unfit or 6. Names, ages, and residences of Relatives
disqualified within the 4th civil degree of the minor, and of
3. The actual custodian of the minor over 21 persons having him in their care and custody;
years of age, unless unfit or disqualified. 7. Probable Value, character and location of the
4. Any other person, who in the sound property of the minor
discretion of the court, would serve the 8. Name, age, and residence of the person for
best interests of the minor (Rule on whom Letters of guardianship are prayed
Guardianship of Minors, S6).
The petition shall be verified; but no defect in the
Summary of who may file a petition for petition or verification shall render void the
appointment of guardian. issuance of letters of guardianship. (Rule 93,
Resident Minor Sec. 2).
Incompetent
1. Any relative; 1. Relative Contents of a Petition for Guardianship of
2. Friend; 2. Other person on Non-Resident Incompetent Who Has Estate in
3. Other person in behalf of the minor the Philippines.
behalf of resident 3. Minor himself if 14 1. Any relative;
incompetent who has years of age or over 2. Friend; or
no parent or lawful 4. DSWD and DOH, 3. Anyone interested in the estate – in
guardian; in case of an insane expectancy or otherwise (R93, S6).
4. The Director of minor who needs to
Health in favor of an be hospitalized Ancillary Guardianship
insane person who 5. Anyone Interested Refers to the guardianship in a state other than
should be in the estate of a that in which guardianship is originally granted.
hospitalized or of an nonresident minor in
isolated leper. case the minor is a Guardianship Proceedings
nonresident with After the petition is filed, the court shall fix the time
property within the and place for hearing the same and shall cause
Philippines notice to be given to persons mentioned in the
petition and to the incompetent himself. (Rule 93,
Contents of a Petition for Guardianship of Sec. 3).
Resident Incompetent. (JIRVL)
1. Jurisdictional facts; Notice is essential in order to confer jurisdiction
2. Incompetency rendering the appointment on the court where a petition for guardianship is
necessary or convenient; filed. (Herrera, Remedial Law III-A Special
3. Names, ages, and residence of the Proceedings and Special Rules Implementing the
Relatives of the minor or incompetent, Family Courts Act of 1997, 2005).
and of the person having him in their
care; At the hearing, the incompetent must be present,
4. Probable value and character of his if able to attend and there must be a showing that
estate; and notice was given. The court shall hear the
5. Name of the person for whom Letters of evidence of the parties and if the person in
guardianship are prayed. question is indeed an incompetent, it shall
appoint a suitable guardian of his person or
Contents of a Petition for Guardianship of a estate, or both, with the powers and duties
Minor. (JuWaG-DRe2-VaLe) hereinafter specified. (R93, S5).
1. Jurisdictional facts;
2. Name, age, and residence of the prospective Opposition to Petition
ward

ATENEO CENTRAL
Any interested person may file a written 1. To pay the ward's just debts out of:
opposition a. The personal estate and the real
on the following grounds: estate’s income;
1. Competency of the alleged incompetent; b. The real estate, if sufficient and only
and upon obtaining court order. (R96, S2).
2. Unsuitability of the person for whom
letters are prayed. (R93, S4). 2. To settle all the ward’s accounts; demand, sue
for or receive for all debts due the ward, or for the
Such Opposition to the Petition May Ask For same and give discharges to the debtor, on
the Following Reliefs: receiving a fair and just dividend of the estate and
1. Dismissal of petition; or effects; and appear for the ward in all
2. That the letters of guardianship issue to actions/proceedings, unless another person is
himself, or to any suitable person named appointed for that purpose. (R96, S3).
in the opposition. (R93, S4).
3. To manage the ward’s estate frugally and
Parents as Guardians without waste; apply the income / profits to the
1. If the value of the property or the annual comfortable and suitable maintenance of the
income of the child is P50,000 or less: ward and his family; and if the income / profits are
The father and mother jointly exercise insufficient, sell/encumber the real estate (upon
legal guardianship. court authorization). (R96, S4).
2. If the value exceeds P50,000:
a. The parent concerned files a 4. To render an inventory of the ward’s estate
verified petition for the approval within three (3) months after his appointment and
of the bond, the amount of annually thereafter, and upon application of
which the court may determine. interested persons.
b. BUT: The value of the bond must
not be less than 10% of the value 5. If any property of the ward not included in an
of the property of annual income inventory already rendered is discovered /
of the child (Art. 225, FC). acquired by the ward, like proceedings shall be
had for inventory and appraisement within three
Who May Petition for Judicial Determination (3) months; (R96, S7).
of Ward’s Competency
1. A person who has been declared 6. To render an accounting of the property for one
incompetent (1) year from his appointment and every year
2. His guardian; thereafter, and upon application of interested
3. Relative; persons.
4. Friend. (R97, S1).
A non-parent guardian is allowed the amount of
Who May Oppose his reasonable expenses incurred in the
1. Guardian; execution of his trust, plus just compensation for
2. Relative of the ward; his services, not exceeding 15% of the ward’s net
3. Any other person, in the discretion of the income. (R96, S8);
court. (R97, S1).
The court may authorize the guardian to join in an
The petition shall be verified under oath. A assent to an estate partition held by the ward
hearing will then be set by the court and jointly or in common with others. The authority
reasonable notice shall be given to the guardian shall only be granted after hearing, notice to the
of the incompetent and to the incompetent ward’s relatives, and a careful investigation as to
himself. If it be found that the person is no longer the proposed action’s necessity/propriety. (R96,
incompetent, his competency shall be adjudged S5);
and the guardianship shall cease. (R97, S1).
Proceedings When A Person is Suspected of
3. GENERAL POWERS AND Embezzling or Concealing Property of the
DUTIES OF GUARDIANS Ward
Upon complaint of the guardian or ward or any
General Powers and Duties of Guardians: person interested in the ward’s estate, that

ATENEO CENTRAL
anyone is suspected of having embezzled / If it appears to be probable that such sale or

concealed / conveyed away any of the encumbrance is necessary or is beneficial, the
ward/estate’s property, the court may cite the court shall make an order directing the next of kin
suspected person to appear for examination and of the ward or all persons interested in the estate
may order to secure the estate. (R96, S6). to appear and show cause why the petition
should not be allowed. (R95, S2).
Purpose: To secure evidence from persons
suspected of embezzling, concealing or There shall be a hearing where the court shall
conveying away any property of the ward so as to refuse the petition or order such sale or
enable the guardian to institute the appropriate encumbrance for the maintenance of the ward
action to obtain possession of and secure title to and his family or for the incompetent’s benefit.
the property. (Cui v. Piccio, G.R. No. L-
5131,1952). No order of sale granted shall continue in force
more than one (1) year after granting the same,
General Rule: Generally, the guardianship court without a sale being had. (R95, S4).
exercising special and limited jurisdiction cannot
actually order the delivery of the property of the It is not necessary for the grant of authority to sell
ward found to be embezzled, concealed or the ward’s income be insufficient to maintain and
conveyed. educate him; it being enough that the sale is for
the ward’s benefit. (Tavera v. El Hogar Filipino,
Exception: Only in extreme cases, where G.R. No. L-5893, 1956).
property clearly belongs to the ward or where his
title thereto has been already judicially decided, Investment of Proceeds and Management of
may the court direct its delivery to the guardian. Estate
The court may authorize and require the guardian
In effect, there can only be delivery or return of to invest the proceeds of sale and encumbrances,
the embezzled, concealed or conveyed property and any other of his ward’s money in his hands,
of the ward, where the right or title of said ward is as shall be for the best interest of all concerned,
clear and undisputable. However, where title to and may make orders for the management,
any property said to be embezzled, concealed or investment, and disposition of the estate and
conveyed is in dispute, under the Cui case, the effects, as circumstances may require. (R95, S5)
determination of said title or right whether in favor
of the person said to have embezzled, concealed While Sec. 5 requires judicial authority in order
or conveyed the property must be determined in that a guardian may invest the ward’s money, it
a separate ordinary action and not in does not provide that said authority must be
guardianship proceedings. (Parco v. CA, G.R. either prior to or expressed. (PTC v. Ballesteros,
No. L-33152, 1982). G.R. No. L-8532, 1957).
Conflicts regarding the ownership or title to the The court's approval of the annual inventories
property in the hands of the guardian in his and accounts submitted by the guardian, with the
capacity as such should be litigated in a separate conformity of the U. S. Veterans Administration
proceeding, the court in the guardianship and the mother of the minors, where the
proceeding being solely concerned with the investment of the properties of the wards made
ward’s care and custody and proper without securing previous judicial authority, was
administration of his properties. (Viloria v. mentioned and accounted for, amounts to a
Administrator of Veterans Affairs, G.R. No. L- ratification of the acts of the guardian and
9620, 1957). compliance with the provisions of Section 5, Rule
95 of the Rules of Court. (Stegner v. Stegner,
Selling and Encumbering Property of Ward The G.R. No. L-8532, 1957).
guardian may present a verified petition stating
that: 1. Income of estate is insufficient to maintain Conditions of the Bond of Guardians
the ward and his family; or Before an appointed guardian enters upon the
2. When it is for the benefit of the ward. (R95, S1) execution of his trust, or letters of guardianship
issue, he shall give a bond.

ATENEO CENTRAL
The Bond shall be conditioned: 2. The ward has died (Rule on

1. To make and return, within three (3) Guardianship over Minors, Sec. 25).
months, the estate’s inventory of the
estate of his ward which shall come to his Grounds for Removal or Resignation of
possession or knowledge; Guardians of Minors
2. To faithfully execute the duties of his 1. Insanity
trust, to manage and dispose of the 2. Becomes incapable of discharging his
estate according to ward’s best interests, trust
and to provide for the ward’s proper 3. Found to be unsuitable
care/custody/education; 4. Has wasted/mismanaged the property of
3. To render a true and just account of the the ward
estate in his hands and all 5. Has failed to render an account or make
proceeds/interest derived therefrom; a return for thirty days after it is due.
4. At the expiration of his trust, to settle his
accounts with the court and deliver the No motion for removal or resignation shall be
remaining estate to the person lawfully allowed unless the guardian has submitted the
entitled thereto; proper accounting of the property of the ward and
5. To perform all court orders. (R94, S1). the court has approved the same. (Rule on
Guardianship over Minors, Sec. 25).
In case of breach of the bond’s conditions, the
bond may be prosecuted in the same proceeding Rule on Guardianship Over Minors (A.M. No.
or in a separate action, for the use and benefit of 03-02-05-SC, effective May 1, 2003)
the ward or of any person legally interested in the
estate. (R94, S 3). Rules on
Rules 92-97 Guardianship of
New bond Whenever necessary, the court may Minors
require a new bond to be given by the guardian. Guardianship of
After notice to interested persons, the sureties on Guardianship of
incompetents who
the old bond may then be discharged from further minors.
are not minors.
liability when no injury will result to interested
parties. (R94, S2). Who are minors.
1. Persons who are below 18 years of age;
4. TERMINATION OF or
GUARDIANSHIP 2. Those over 18 years of age but unable to
fully take care of themselves or protect
Termination of Guardianship of Incompetents themselves from abuse, neglect, cruelty,
1. Competency of the ward has been exploitation, or discrimination, because
judicially determined; (R97, S1) of a physician or mental disability or
2. Death of guardian or of ward; condition (Sec. 1).
3. Guardianship is no longer necessary.
(R97,S3). Who may petition for appointment of
guardian.
Ground for Removal or Resignation of 1. The Minor himself, if 14 years of age or
Guardian of Incompetents over;
1. Guardian becomes insane; 2. Any Relative;
2. Incapable of discharging trust; 3. Other person on behalf of a minor;
3. Unsuitable to discharge functions; 4. The Secretary of Social Welfare and
4. Wastage or mismanagement of the Development; and
property of the ward 5. The Secretary of Health in case of an
5. Failure to render account or make a insane minor who needs to be
return within thirty (30) days after it was hospitalized.
due. (R97, S2)
Where to file the petition.
Termination of Guardianship of Minors Family Court of the province or city where minor
1. The ward has come of age actually resides. (Sec. 3).

ATENEO CENTRAL
Grounds to allege in petition. Amount and Conditions Before he enters upon

1. Death, continued absence, or incapacity the execution of his trust, or letters of
of his parents; guardianship issue, an appointed guardian may
2. Suspension, termination, or deprivation be required to post a bond in such sum as the
of parental authority; court shall determine and conditioned as follows:
3. Remarriage of his surviving parent, if the
latter is found unsuitable to exercise 1. To make and return to the court, within
parental authority; or three months after the issuance of his
4. When the Best interests of the minor so letters of guardianship, a true and
require (Sec. 4). complete Inventory of all the property,
real and personal, of his ward which shall
Qualifications to consider for guardians. come to his possession or knowledge or
1. Moral character; to the possession or knowledge of any
2. Physical, mental, and psychological other person in his behalf;
condition; 2. To faithfully execute the duties of his
3. Financial status; trust, to manage and dispose of the
4. Relationship of trust with the minor; property according to this rule for the best
5. Availability to exercise the powers and interests of the ward, and to provide for
duties of a guardian for the full period of his proper care, custody and education;
the guardianship; 3. To render a true and Just account of all
6. Lack of conflict of interest with the minor; the property of the ward in his hands, and
and of all proceeds or interest derived
7. Ability to manage the property of the therefrom, and of the management and
minor. disposition of the same, at the time
designated by this rule and such other
Who may be appointed guardian. times as the court directs; and at the
In default of parents or a court-appointed expiration of his trust, to settle his
guardian, the court may appoint a guardian of a accounts with the court and deliver and
minor, observing, as far as practicable, the pay over all the property, effects, and
following order of preference: monies remaining in his hands, or due
1. Surviving Grandparent, and in case from him on such settlement, to the
several grandparents survive, the court person lawfully entitled thereto; and
shall select any of them taking into 4. To perform all orders of the court and
account all relevant considerations; such other duties as may be required by
2. The oldest Brother or sister of the minor law.
over 21 years of age, unless unfit or
disqualified; Bonds of Parents as Guardian of Property of
3. The Actual custodian of the minor over Minor
21 years of age unless unfit or Bond is required if the market value of the child's
disqualified; and properties or income exceeds P50,000.
4. Any Other person, who, in the sound
discretion of the court would serve the The bond shall not be less than 10% of the value
best interests of the minor (Sec. 6). of the properties or income. (Sec. 16).
Time and Notice of Hearing Guardian May Sell or Encumber Property

Notice must be given to persons named in the When:
petition including the minor if over 14 years old. 1. The income of the estate is insufficient to
This is a jurisdictional requirement. (Sec. 8). maintain and educate the ward; or
2. It appears that it is for the benefit of the
Opposition to Petition ward
Majority of alleged minor, or suitability of the
person for whom letters are prayed. The authority to sell or encumber shall not extend
beyond 1 year, unless renewed by the court.
Bond of Guardian;

ATENEO CENTRAL
Grounds for Removal or Resignation of The object of the writ of habeas corpus is to
Guardian – When the Guardian: inquire into the legality of the detention, and, if the
1. Becomes insane or otherwise incapable detention is found to be illegal, to require the
of discharging his trust; release of the detainee. (Mangila v. Judge
2. Is found thereafter to be unsuitable; Pangilinan, G.R. no. 160739, 2013).
3. Has wasted or mismanaged the property
of the ward; or When Habeas Corpus Proper:
4. Has failed to render an account or make 1. All cases of illegal confinement/detention
a return within 30 days after it was due. by which any party is deprived of his
liberty;
NOTE: Before a motion for removal or resignation 2. If the rightful custody of a person is
may be granted under Sec. 24, the guardian must withheld from the one entitled to it.
submit the proper accounting of the property of 3. As a post-conviction remedy, it may be
the ward and the court has to approve the same. allowed when, as a consequence of a
judicial proceeding, any of the following
exceptional circumstances is attendant:
Termination of Guardianship over Minors a. there has been a deprivation of a
The ward has died, or has come of age. constitutional right resulting in
the restraint of a person;
Guardianship’s termination may be motu proprio b. the court had no jurisdiction to
or by a verified motion by any person allowed to impose the sentence; or
file a petition for guardianship on the grounds of c. the imposed penalty has been
majority and/or death of the ward. excessive, thus voiding the
sentence as to such excess. (Go
The guardian shall notify the court of such fact vs. Dimagiba, G.R. No. 151876,
within 10 days of its occurrence. (Sec. 25) June 21, 2005)
4. Invasion or rebellion, when public safety
C. WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS requires it. (Art. VII, Sec. 18 of the 1987
Constitution).
Writ of Habeas Corpus
Under Section 1, the writ of habeas corpus shall Nature
extend to all cases of illegal confinement or Proceedings in habeas corpus are separate and
detention by which any person is deprived of his distinct from the main case from which the
liberty, or by which the rightful custody of any proceedings spring. They rarely, if ever, touch the
person is withheld from the person entitled merits of the case and require no pronouncement
thereto except as otherwise expressly provided with respect thereto. They deal simply with the
by law. (R102, S1). detention of the prisoner and stop with the
authority by virtue of which he is detained. (Ching
It may be analogized to a proceeding in rem and v. Insular Collector of Customs, G.R. No. L-
instituted for the sole purpose of fixing the status 10972, 1916).
of a person. (Herrera, Remedial Law III-A Special
Proceedings and Special Rules Implementing the General Rule:
Family Courts Act of 1997, 2005). Writ of habeas corpus shall not issue if the
restraint is voluntary. (Sombong v. CA, G.R. No.
Note: Actual physical restraint is not required; 111876, 1996).
any restraint which will prejudice freedom of
action is sufficient. (Moncupa v. Enrile, G.R. No. Exception:
63345, 1986). Writ of habeas corpus is a proper remedy to
enable parents to regain custody of a minor, even
Purposes Its vital purposes are to obtain if the minor is in the custody of a 3rd person of his
immediate relief from illegal confinement, to own free will. (Sombong v. CA, G.R. No. 111876,
liberate those who may be imprisoned without 1996).
sufficient cause, and to deliver them from
unlawful custody. (Velasco v. Court of Appeals, Rationale:
G.R. No. 118644, 1995). Custody cases involving minors are prosecuted
to determine custody rights over a child.

ATENEO CENTRAL
safeguards of human life and liberty must be

Writ of habeas corpus and violation of preserved, and not destroyed. (Mangila v. Judge
constitutional rights. Pangilinan, G.R. no. 160739, 2013).
The most basic criterion for the issuance of the
writ is that the individual seeking such relief be Exception: It does not, however, follow that if
illegally deprived of his freedom of movement or certiorari is available, an application for a writ of
placed under some form of illegal restraint. The habeas corpus will absolutely be barred. writ of
writ cannot be used to directly assail a judgment habeas corpus may, nevertheless, be available in
rendered by a competent court or tribunal which, exceptional cases, for the writ should not be
having duly acquired jurisdiction was not ousted considered subservient to procedural limitations
of this jurisdiction through some irregularity in the which glorify form over substance. It must be kept
course of the proceedings. Writ of habeas corpus in mind that although the question most often
may also be availed as a post-conviction remedy considered in both habeas corpus and certiorari
when, as a consequence of a judicial proceeding, proceedings is whether an inferior court has
any of the following exceptional circumstances is exceeded its jurisdiction, the former involves a
attendant: (1) deprivation of a constitution right collateral attack on the judgment and reaches the
resulting in the restraint of a person; (2) court had body but not the record, while the latter assails
no jurisdiction to impose the sentence or; (3) directly the judgment and reaches the record but
imposed penalty has been excessive, thus not the body. (Velasco v. Court of Appeals, G.R.
voiding the sentence as to such excess. Mere No. 118644, 1995).
allegation of a violation of one’s constitutional
right is not enough. The violation of constitutional Note: Void Judgment of Conviction In a case
right must be sufficient to void the entire where there is a conviction but a violation of right
proceedings. (In re: Abellana v. Paredes, GR No. against self-incrimination is indeed violated, the
232006, 2019). writ of habeas corpus shall issue. Said void
judgment of conviction may be challenged by an
Errors of Fact or Law – not correctible by attack through habeas corpus. This writ may
Habeas Corpus issue even if another remedy which is less
Mere errors of fact or law, which did not have the effective may be availed of by the defendant.
effect of depriving the trial court of its jurisdiction Thus, failure by the accused to appeal does not
over the case and the person of the defendant, preclude a recourse to the writ. The writ may be
are not correctible in a petition for the issuance of granted upon a judgment already final. (Chavez
the writ of habeas corpus; if at all, these errors v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-29169, 1968).
must be corrected on certiorari or on appeal, in
the form and manner prescribed by law. 1. CONTENTS OF THE PETITION
When Other Remedies are Available Who may file an application for a writ of
The inquiry in a habeas corpus proceeding is habeas corpus.
addressed to the question of whether the The application shall be by petition signed and
proceedings and the assailed order are, for any verified by:
reason, null and void. The writ is not ordinarily 1. The party for whose relief it is intended;
granted where the law provides for other or
remedies in the regular course, and in the 2. Some person on his behalf. (R102, S3).
absence of exceptional circumstances.
The Petition Shall Set Forth the Following
Moreover, habeas corpus should not be granted 1. The person in whose behalf the
in advance of trial. The orderly course of trial must application is made is imprisoned or
be pursued and the usual remedies exhausted restrained of his liberty;
before resorting to the writ where exceptional 2. Name of the person detaining another or
circumstances are extant. In another case, it was assumed appellation;
held that habeas corpus cannot be issued as a 3. Place where he is imprisoned or
writ of error or as a means of reviewing errors of restrained of his liberty; or
law and irregularities not involving the questions 4. A copy of the commitment or cause of
of jurisdiction occurring during the course of the detention, or allegation that there’s none.
trial, subject to the caveat that constitutional (R102, S3).

ATENEO CENTRAL
before said judge to show the

Who may grant the writ cause of the imprisonment or
1. Supreme Court or any member thereof – restraint. (R102, S6).
enforceable anywhere in the Philippines
and made returnable before any court Service of the writ
2. Court of Appeals or any member thereof Service of the writ shall be made by leaving the
-enforceable anywhere in the Philippines original with the person to whom it is directed and
and made returnable before any court preserving a copy on which to make return of
3. Regional Trial Court or a judge thereof – service. (R102, S7).
enforceable only within his judicial
district, returnable only to itself. (R102, Defect of form
S2). No writ of habeas corpus can be disobeyed for
defect or form IF it sufficiently states in whose
The Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals and custody or under whose restraint the party
Regional Trial Courts have concurrent jurisdiction imprisoned is held AND the court or judge to
to issue Writs of Habeas Corpus. whom he is to be brought. (R102, S9).
In the absence of all Regional Trial Court may in Execution of writ

a province or city, Municipal Trial Court judges The officer to whom the writ is directed shall
may hear and decide petitions for a writ of habeas convey the person imprisoned or restrained
corpus in that province or city. before the court allowing the writ and on such
date and time specified in the writ unless such
Family courts have exclusive original jurisdiction person cannot be produced without danger by
to issue a writ of habeas corpus involving the reason of some sickness or infirmity.
custody of minors (RA 8369).
The officer shall make due return of the writ,
The Sandiganbayan may grant the writ only if it is together with the day and cause of the caption
in aid of its appellate jurisdiction. (Festin, Special and restraint of such person. (R102, S8).
Proceedings: A Foresight to the Bar Exam, 2nd
Ed. 2011).
2. CONTENTS OF THE RETURN
Procedure for grant of writ
1. Filing of the verified petition; Return shall be in writing and shall state:
2. Allowance of Writ if determined by the 1. Whether he has or has not the party in his
judge that the writ ought to issue; custody or power, or under restraint;
3. Service of writ by sheriff or other officer; 2. The authority and the true and whole
4. Return filed; reply to the return, if any. cause of restraint, set forth at large, with
5. Hearing on return a copy of the writ, order execution, or
6. Judgment on the petition – dismissal of other process, if any, upon which the
the petition or order of discharge from party is held;
imprisonment/restraint. 3. If the party is in his custody or power or is
restrained by him, and is not produced,
To whom writ served: particularly the nature and gravity of the
1. In case of imprisonment by an officer – sickness or infirmity of such party by
the writ shall be directed to such officer reason of which he cannot, without
and shall command him to have the body danger, be bought before the court or
of the person restrained before the court judge;
designated in the writ. 4. If he has had the party in his custody or
2. In case of imprisonment by a person not power, or under restraint, and has
an officer – the writ shall be directed to an transferred such custody or restraint to
officer and shall command him to another, particularly to whom, at what
a. Take and have to body of the time, for what cause, and by what
person restrained before the authority such transfer was made. (R102,
court designated in the writ; and S10).
b. Summon the private person by
whom he is restrained to appear

ATENEO CENTRAL
The return or statement shall be signed and recommitted to imprisonment or admitted to bail
sworn to by the person who makes it if the in the discretion of the judge. (R102, S14)
prisoner is not produced, unless the return is
made and signed by a sworn public officer in his When prisoner discharged if no appeal
official capacity. (R102, S11). When the court is satisfied that a prisoner is
unlawfully imprisoned or restrained, an order will
Hearing upon return be made for the discharge from confinement.
When the writ is returned before the judge, he Such discharge will not be effective until a copy
may forthwith hear and examine the return and of the order is served on the officer or person
such other matters as are submitted for detaining the prisoner. (R102, S5).
consideration. (R102, S12).
Appeal
Effect of failure to file a return Appeal may be made forty-eight (48) hours from
Failure of petitioners to file a return of the writ notice of the judgment or final order.
warrants dismissal of the petition. Unless the
allegations in the return are controverted, they This shall be in the form of a notice of appeal.
are deemed to be true or admitted. (Florendo v. (R41, S3).
Javier, G.R. No. L-36101, 1979).
When return evidence of cause of restraint and Prisoner discharged upon a writ of habeas corpus
when only a plea of facts; effect of petitioner’s shall not be again imprisoned for the same
failure to file a reply to the return or to controvert offense, unless, by lawful order or process of a
statements in the return during the hearing. court having jurisdiction over the cause or
offense.
If the return is filed by an officer who is the
respondent detaining the person concerned - if Those who recommits or imprisons or causes to
the prisoner is in custody under a warrant of be committed or imprisoned for the same offense
commitment (public authority) in pursuance of any person set at liberty, shall forfeit the sum of
law, the return is considered prima facie evidence one thousand pesos (P1000) and may also be
of the legality of the commitment, imprisonment punished for contempt. (R102, S17)
or restraint. (R102, S13).
3. PEREMPTORY WRIT AND
Thus, the failure of petitioners to file a reply to the PRELIMINARY CITATION
return or controvert the matters stated in the
return, warrants dismissal of the petition. Unless Peremptory writ
the allegations in the return are controverted, they A peremptory writ is a written document
are deemed to be true or admitted (Florendo v. unconditionally commanding the respondent to
Javier, G.R. No. L-36101, 1979). have the body of the detained person before the
court at a time and place specified therein. Issued
If the return is filed by an officer in case the if the cause of the detention appears to be
prisoner is restrained by a private authority or patently illegal. Noncompliance with this is
person - the return is considered only a plea of punishable.
facts, and the party claiming the custody must
prove such facts. Failure to reply to the return or Preliminary citation
controvert the return is not fatal to the petition. A writ of preliminary citation requires the
(R102, S13). respondent to appear and show cause why the
peremptory should not issue. If the person is
When lawfully imprisoned: when recommitted detained under governmental authority and the
or when bailed illegality of his detention is not patent from the
If it appears that the prisoner was lawfully petition for the writ, the court issues the citation to
committed and is charged with an offense the government officer having custody to show
punishable by death, he shall not be released, cause why the habeas corpus writ should not
discharged or bailed. issue.
If he is lawfully imprisoned and is charged with an In a habeas corpus petition, the order to present
offense not punishable by death, he may be an individual before the court is a preliminary step

ATENEO CENTRAL
in the hearing of the petition. The respondent

must produce the person and explain the cause General Rule: The release, whether permanent
of his detention. However, this order is not a or temporary, of a detained person, renders the
ruling on the propriety of the remedy or on the petition for habeas corpus moot and academic.
substantive matters covered by the remedy.
Thus, the order to produce the body is not Exceptions: Petition may prosper When there
equivalent to a grant of the writ of habeas corpus. are restraints attached to his release which
(In the Matter of the Petition for Habeas Corpus precludes freedom of action, in which the court
of Alejano vs. Cabuay, G.R. No. 160792, 2005). can still inquire into the nature of his involuntary
restraint. (Villavicencio v. Lukban, G.R. No. L-
4. WHEN NOT PROPER OR APPLICABLE 14639, 1919; Moncupa v. Enrile, G.R. No. L-
63345, 1986).
Instances when the writ of habeas corpus is
not proper: Where there are grounds for grave doubts about
the alleged release of the detainees, [such as]
1. For asserting or vindicating denial of right where the standard and prescribed procedure in
to bail (Galvez v. CA, G.R. No. 114046, effecting the release has not been followed.
1994); (Dizon v. Eduardo, L-59118, 1988).
2. For correcting errors in appreciation of
facts or appreciation of law – where the 5. WHEN WRIT DISALLOWED OR
trial court had no jurisdiction over the DISCHARGED
cause, over the person of the accused,
and to impose the penalty provided for by The writ is not allowed when
law, the mistake committed by the trial 1. Person is in custody of an officer
court, in the appreciation of the facts a. Under process issued by a court
and/or in the appreciation of the law or judge; or
cannot be corrected by habeas corpus b. By virtue of a judgment; or
(Sotto v. Director of Prisons, G.R. No. L- c. By virtue of an order of the court;
18871, 1962); d. and that the court or judge had
3. Once a person detained is duly charged jurisdiction to issue the process,
in court, he may no longer file a petition render the judgment or make the
for habeas corpus. His remedy would be order.
to quash the information or warrant. 2. Jurisdiction appears after writ is allowed
(Rodriguez v. Judge Bonifacio, A.M. NO. 3. Person is charged with or convicted of an
RTJ-99-1510, 2000); offense in the Philippines
4. Even granting that a person was illegally 4. Person is suffering imprisonment under
arrested, the petition for a Writ of Habeas lawful judgment (R102, S4)
Corpus will NOT prosper because the
detention falls under a “legal process” by
virtue of the complaint filed against him.
(Velasco v. CA, G.R. No. 116884, 1995);
5. If the accused was illegally detained, the
proper remedy would be the quashal of
the warrant of arrest and not a writ of
habeas corpus. (Ilagan v. Enrile, G.R.
No. 70748, 1985)
Posting of bail is not a bar for the accused to

challenge the validity of his arrest. (R114, S26)
Effect of release of detained person on the

petition

ATENEO CENTRAL
6. DISTINGUISH: WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS, WRIT OF AMPARO, AND WRIT OF HABEAS

DATA
HABEAS CORPUS AMPARO HABEAS DATA

ESSENCE
The writ of habeas corpus it
involves the right to liberty. It
extends to all cases of illegal
confinement or detention by The writ of habeas data involves
The writ of amparo involves the
which any person is deprived of the right to privacy in life, liberty,
right to life, liberty, and security.
his liberty, or by which the or security.
rightful custody of any person is
withheld from the person entitled
to.
AVAILABILITY
The writ of amparo is available It is a remedy available whose
It is a writ directed to the person to one whose right to life, liberty, right to privacy in life, liberty, or
detaining another, commanding and security are violated or security is violated or threatened
him to produce the body of the threatened with violation by an by an unlawful act or omission
prisoner at the designated time unlawful act or omission of a of a public official or employee,
and place, with the day and public official or employee, or of or of a private individual or entity
cause of his capture and a private individual or entity. engaged in the gathering,
detention, to do, submit to, and collecting, or storing of data or
receive whatever the court of The writ covers extralegal information regarding the
judge awarding the writ shall killings and enforced person, family, home, and
consider in that behalf disappearances or threats correspondence of the
thereof aggrieved party.
AVAILABILE AGAINST
A violation or threatened
violation by the right to privacy
in life, liberty, or security by an
A violation or threatened unlawful act or omission of:
violation by an unlawful act or 1. A public official
Deprivation of liberty; and
omission of: 2. A public employee
Withholding of the rightful
1. A public official 3. A private individual Engaged
custody of the person
2. A public employee in the gathering, collecting, or
3. A private individual or entity storing of data or information
regarding the person, family,
home, and correspondence of
the aggrieved party.
COVERAGE
1. Gathering
1.All cases of illegal
2. Collecting
confinement or detention by
3. Storing of data or information
which any person is deprived of
his liberty 1. Extrajudicial killings
Regarding:
2. Enforced disappearances
1. Personal
2. The rightful custody of any
2. Family
person is withheld from the
3. Home
person entitled thereto
4. Correspondence
WHO MAY FILE

ATENEO CENTRAL
Aggrieved party, or any qualified

person or entity in the following
order:
1. Any member of the immediate
family, namely: the spouse,
children, and parents of the General Rule: aggrieved party
aggrieved party
2. Any ascendant, descendant, Exception: In cases of
Party for whose relief it is or collateral relative of the extralegal killings and enforced
intended, or by some person on aggrieved party within the 4th disappearances, the petition
his behalf. civil degree of consanguinity or may be filed by any member of
affinity, in default of those the immediate family of the
mentioned in the preceding aggrieved party, namely: the
paragraph, or spouse, children and parents.
3. Any concerned citizen,
organization, association, or
institution, if there’s no known
member of the immediate family
or relative of the aggrieved party
VENUE
1. Regional Trial Court where
the petitioner or respondent
1. Regional Trial Court of the
resides, or that which has
1. Regional Trial Court where place where the threat, act, or
jurisdiction over the place where
the person is detained omission was committed or any
the data or information is
2. Sandiganbayan of its elements occurred
gathered, collected, or stored, at
3. Court of Appeals 2. Sandiganbayan
the option of the petitioner
4. Supreme Court 3. Court of Appeals
2. Sandiganbayan
5. Or any Justice of the three 4. Supreme Court
3. Court of Appeals
preceding courts 5. Or any Justice of the three
4. Supreme Court When the
preceding courts
actions concern public data files
of government offices
ENFORCEABILITY
If issued by the Sandiganbayan,
Court of Appeals, Supreme
Court: Anywhere in the
Philippines Anywhere in the Philippines Anywhere in the Philippines
Issued by the Regional Trial

Court: Judicial District
WHERE WRIT RETRUNED
Issued by the Regional Trial Issued by the Regional Trial
Court or judge thereof: Before Court or judge thereof: Before
such court or judge such court or judge
Issued by the Regional Trial
Issued by the Sandiganbayan, Issued by the Sandiganbayan,
Court or judge thereof: Before
Court of Appeals, or justice Court of Appeals, or any of its
such court or judge
thereof: Any Regional Trial justices:
Court where the threat, act, or 1. Before such court or justice 2.
Issued by the Sandiganbayan,
omission was committed or any Any Regional Trial Court of the
Court of Appeals, or any of its
of its elements occurred place where the petitioner or
justices: Before such court or
respondent resides, or that
justice thereof
Issued by the Supreme Court of which has jurisdiction over the
any of its justices: place where the data or
∙ Before such court or justice information is gathered,
thereof collected, or stored

ATENEO CENTRAL
∙ Sandiganbayan or Court of
Appeals or any of its justices Issued by the Supreme Court or
∙ Any Regional Trial Court where any of its justices:
the threat, act, or omission was 1. Before such court or justice
committed or any of its elements thereof
occurred 2. Before the Court of Appeals
or the Sandiganbayan or any of
its justices
3. Any Regional Trial Court of
the place where the petitioner or
respondent resides, or that
which has jurisdiction over the
place where the data or
information is gathered,
collected, or stored
WHEN TO FILE/ DOCKET FEES
On any day at any time.
Only indigent petitioner is
On any day at any time. exempt from docket fees and
Exempt from docket and other
other lawful fees.
lawful fees.
CONTENTS OF THE PETITION
1. Personal circumstances of 1. Personal circumstances of
the petitioner the petitioner and respondent
2. Name and personal 2. Manner the right to privacy is

circumstances of the respondent violated or threatened and how
responsible for the threat, act, or it affects the right to life, liberty,
omission, or, if the name is or security of the aggrieved
unknown or uncertain, the party
respondent may be described
by an assumed appellation 3. Actions and recourses taken
1. Person in whose behalf the by the petition to secure the
application is made is 3. Right to life, liberty, and data or information
imprisoned or restrained on his security of the aggrieved party
liberty violated or threatened with 4. Location of the files,
violation by an unlawful act or registers, or databases, the
2. Officer or name of the person omission of the respondents, government office, and the
by whom he is so imprisoned or and how such threat or violation person in charge, in possession,
restrained; or, if both are is committed with the attendant or in control of the data or
unknown or uncertain, such circumstances detailed in information if known
officer or person may be supporting affidavits
described by an assumed 5. Reliefs prayed for, which may
appellation, and the person who 4. Investigation conducted, if include the updating,
is served with the writ shall be any, specifying the names, rectification, suppression, or
deemed the person intended personal circumstances, and destruction of the database or
addresses of the investigating information or files kept by the
authority or individuals, as well respondent
as the manner and conduct of
the investigation, together with 6. In cases of threats, the relief
any report. may include a prayer for an
order enjoining the act
5. Actions and recourses taken complained of; and
by the petitioner to determine
the fate or whereabouts of the 7. Such other relevant reliefs as
aggrieved party and the identity are just and equitable.

ATENEO CENTRAL
of the person responsible for the

threat, act, or omission, and The petition shall be inwriting
and must be verified.
6. Relief prayed for The petition
must be signed and verified
ISSUANCE OF THE WRIT
∙ Writ shall be issued if on its
∙ Writ shall be issued if it ∙ Writ shall be issued if on its face it ought to issue
appears that the writ ought to face it ought to issue ∙ The clerk of court shall issue
issue ∙ The clerk of court shall issue the writ under the seal of the
∙ The clerk of the court shall the writ under the seal of the court and cause it to be served
issue the writ under the seal of court; or in case of urgent within three days from the
the court; or in case of necessity, the justice or the issuance; or, in case of urgent
emergency, the judge may issue judge may issue the writ under necessity, the justice or judge
the writ under his own hand, and his or her own hand, and may may issue the writ under his or
may depute any person to serve deputize any officer or person to her own hand, and may
it serve it deputize any officer or person
serve it
SUMMARY HEARING
Not later than 10 working days
Not later than seven days from
Not Applicable from the date the writ was
the date the writ was issued
issued.
HOW WRIT IS SERVED
∙ By leaving the original with the The writ shall be served upon The writ shall be served upon
person to whom it is directed the respondent by a judicial the respondent by a judicial
and preserving a copy on which officer or by a person deputized officer or by a person deputized
to make return of service by the court, justice, or judge by the court, justice, or judge
∙ If that person cannot be found, who shall retain a copy on which who shall retain a copy on which
or has not the prisoner in his to make a return of service. In to make a return of service. In
custody, then the service shall case the writ cannot be served case the writ cannot be served
be made on any other person personally on the respondent, personally on the respondent,
having or exercising such the rules on substituted service the rules on substituted service
custody shall apply shall apply
RETURN
∙ The return or statement shall
be signed by the person who
∙ Verified written return, together
makes it
with supporting affidavits within
∙ The return shall also be sworn Within 72 hours after service of
five 5 working days from service
by him if the prisoner is not the writ, the respondent shall file
of the writ
produced a verified written return together
∙ The period may be reasonably
∙ In all other cases unless the with supporting affidavits
extended by the Court for
return is made and signed by a
justifiable reasons
sworn public officer in his official
capacity
EFFECT OF FAILURE TO RETURN
∙ Hearing of the petition shall
proceed ex parte.
∙ The court may also grant the
Hearing of the petition shall petitioner such relief as the
proceed ex parte. petition may warrant unless the
court in its discretion requires
the petitioner to submit
evidence.
PROHIBITED PLEADINGS AND MOTIONS
1. Motion to dismiss 1. Motion to dismiss

ATENEO CENTRAL
2. Motion for extension of time 2. Motion for extension of time

to file return, opposition, to file return, opposition,
affidavit, position paper, and affidavit, position paper, and
other pleadings other pleadings
3. Dilatory motion for 3. Dilatory motion for
postponement postponement
4. Motion for bill of particulars 4. Motion for bill of particulars
5. Counter claim or cross-claim 5. Counterclaim or cross-claim
6. Third party complaint 6. Third party complaint
7. Reply 7. Reply
8. Motion to declare defendant 8. Motion to declare respondent
in default in default
9. Intervention 9. Intervention
10. Memorandum 10. Memorandum
11. Motion for reconsideration of 11. Motion for reconsideration of
interlocutory orders or interim interlocutory orders or interim
relief orders; and relief orders; and 12. Petition for
12. Petition for certiorari, certiorari or mandamus or
mandamus, or prohibition prohibition against any
against any interlocutory order interlocutory order
AVAILABLE INTERIM RELIEFS
1. Temporary protection order
2. Inspection order
3. Production order
4. Witness protection order
JUDGMENTS
The court shall render judgment
When the court or judge has within ten days from the time the
examined into the cause of petition is submitted for decision
caption and restrained of the If the allegations in the petition
prisoner, and is satisfied that he are proven by substantial
The court shall render judgment
is unlawfully imprisoned or evidence, the court shall enjoin
within ten (10) days from the
restrained, he shall: the act complained of, or order
time the petition is submitted for
∙ Forthwith order his discharge the deletion, destruction, or
decision. If the allegations in the
from confinement rectification of the erroneous
petition are proven by
∙ Such discharge shall not be data or information and grant
substantial evidence, the court
effective until a copy of the order other relevant reliefs as may be
shall grant the privilege of the
has been served on the officer just and equitable’ otherwise,
writ and such reliefs as may be
or the person detaining such the privilege of the writ shall be
proper and appropriate;
prisoner denied
otherwise, the privilege shall be
denied
If the officer or person detaining Upon its finality, the judgment
the prisoner does not desire to shall be enforced by the sheriff
appeal, the prisoner shall be or any lawful officers as may be
forthwith released designated by the court, justice,
or judge within five working days
APPEAL
Any party may appeal from the
Any party may appeal from the final judgment or order of the
final judgment or order to the Supreme Court under Rule 45.
48 hours from notice of
Supreme Court under Rule 45.
judgment appealed from by
The appeal may raise questions
ordinary appea
The appeal may raise questions of fact or law or both
of fact or law or both The period of appeal shall be
five working days from the date

ATENEO CENTRAL
The period of appeal shall be of notice of the judgment or final

five working days from the date order
of notice of adverse judgment
INSTITUTION OF SEPARATE ACTION
The Rules does not preclude the The Rule does not preclude the
filing of separate criminal, civil, filing of separate criminal, civil,
or administrative actions or administrative actions
EFFECT OF FILING CRIMINAL ACTION
When a criminal action has When a criminal action has
been commenced, no separate been commenced, no separate
petition for the writ shall be filed. petition for the writ shall be filed.
The reliefs under the writ shall The reliefs under the writ shall
be available by motion in the be available by motion in the
criminal case criminal case
CONSOLIDATION
When a criminal action is filed
When a criminal action is filed
subsequent to the filing of a
subsequent to the filing of a
petition for the writ, the latter
petition for the writ, the latter
shall be consolidated with the
criminal action.
criminal action
When a criminal action and a
When a criminal action and a
separate civil action are filed
separate civil action are filed
subsequent to a petition for a
subsequent to a petition for a
writ of habeas data, the petition
writ of amparo, the latter shall
be consolidated with the criminal
criminal action.
action.
After consolidation, the
After consolidation, the
procedure under this Rule shall
procedure under this Rule shall
continue to govern the
continue to the disposition of the
disposition of the reliefs in the
reliefs in the petition
petition

ATENEO CENTRAL
1. WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

IN RELATION TO CUSTODY In cases involving minors, the purpose of a
OF MINORS petition for habeas corpus is not limited to the
production of the child before the court. The main
Where filed purpose of the petition for habeas corpus is to
The Family Court has exclusive original determine who has the rightful custody over the
jurisdiction to hear petitions for custody of minors child. Therefore, mere production of the body of
and the issuance of the writ of habeas corpus in the child does not moot the petition for habeas
relation to custody of minors. The petition for corpus if custody has not yet been decided.
custody of minors shall be filed with the Family (Bagtas v. Hon. Santos, GR No. 166682, 2009)
Court of the province or city where the petitioner
resides or where the minor may be found. Such Who may file
petition shall be enforceable only within the The Committee chose the phrase “any person
judicial region to which the Family Court belongs. claiming custody” as it is broad enough to cover
(Sec. 3, A.M. NO. 03-04-04-SC) the following: 1. The unlawful deprivation of the
custody of a minor; or 2. Which parent shall have
The petition may also be filed with the CA or the the care and custody of a minor, when such
Supreme Court and such petition shall be parent is in the midst of nullity, annulment or legal
enforceable anywhere within the Philippines. separation proceedings. (Sec. 2, A.M. NO. 03-04-
(Sec. 20, A.M. NO. 03-04-04-SC) 04-SC)
The Court is tasked with the duty of promulgating Defendant must file answer; period to file Within
special rules or procedure for the disposition of 5 days from service of summons and a copy of
family cases with the best interests of the minor the petition (Sec. 6)
as primary consideration, taking into account the
United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Motion to Dismiss
Child. It should be clarified that the writ is issued A motion to dismiss the petition is not allowed
by the Family Court only in relation to custody of except on the ground of lack of jurisdiction over
minors. An ordinary petition for habeas corpus the subject matter or over the parties. Any other
should be filed in the regular Court. The issue of ground that might warrant the dismissal of the
child custody may be tackled by the Family Court petition shall be raised as an affirmative defense
without need of a separate petition for custody in the answer. (Sec. 6, A.M. NO. 03-04-04-SC)
being filed. (Sec. 20, A.M. NO. 03-04-04-SC)
Case Study Report
Requisites Upon the filing of the verified answer of the
1. That the petitioner has the right of expiration of the period to file it, the court may
custody over the minor; order a social worker to make a case study of the
2. That the rightful custody of the minor is minor and the parties and to submit a report and
being withheld from the petitioner by recommendation to the court at least three (3)
respondent; and days before the scheduled pre-trial. (Sec. 8, A.M.
3. That it is to the best interest of the minor NO. 03- 04-04-SC)
concerned to be in the custody of
petitioner and not that of the respondent. Pre-Trial; Effects of Failure to Appear
(Sombong v. CA, G.R. No. 111876, Pre-trial is mandatory. (Sec. 9, A.M. NO. 03-04-
1996) 04- SC)
The mother who has custody of the child cannot If the petitioner fails to appear personally at the
refuse to present the child to the court after the pre-trial, the case shall be dismissed, unless his
issuance of the writ on the basis of the child of counsel or a duly authorized representative
tender years doctrine. It is not legal basis to appears in court and proves a valid excuse for the
deprive the father of custody. Also, Such petition non-appearance of the petitioner. If the
did not grant custody to the father but merely respondent has filed his answer but fails to
required the mother to bring the child to court to appear at the pre-trial, the petitioner shall be
determine custody. (Salientes v. Abanilla, G.R. allowed to present his evidence ex parte. The
No. 162734, 2006) court shall then render judgment on the basis of

ATENEO CENTRAL
the pleadings and the evidence thus presented

(Sec. 11).
Provisional order awarding custody Hold Departure Order
After and answer has been filed or the expiration The minor child subject of the petition shall not be
of the period to file it, the court may issue a brought out of the country without prior order from
provisional order awarding the custody of the the court while the petition is pending. The court
minor. motu proprio OR upon application under oath
may issue ex parte a hold departure order
The following order of preference shall be addressed to the Bureau of Immigration and
observed as far as practicable: Deportation of the Department of Justice a copy
1. Both parents jointly; of the hold departure order within 24 hours from
2. Either parent, taking into account all its issuance and through the fastest available
relevant considerations especially the means of transmittal (Sec 16, A.M. NO. 03-04-04-
choice of the minor over seven (7) years SC)
of age and of sufficient discernment,
unless parent chosen is unfit; Appeal
3. The grandparent, if there are several, Notice of Appeal within fifteen (15) days from
then the grandparent chosen by the notice of denial of motion for reconsideration or
minor over seven (7) years of age and of new trial.
sufficient discernment, unless
grandparent chosen is unfit or No appeal shall be allowed unless a motion for
disqualified; reconsideration or new trial is filed. (Sec. 19, A.M.
4. The eldest brother or sister over twenty- NO. 03-04-04-SC)
one (21) years of age, unless he or she
is unfit or disqualified; Confidentiality of the proceedings
5. The actual custodian of the minor over The hearings on custody of minors may, at the
twentyone (21) years of age, unless the discretion of the court, be closed to the public and
former is unfit or disqualified; or the records of the case shall not be released to
6. Any other person or institution the court nonparties without its approval (Sec. 21, A.M.
may deem suitable to provide proper NO. 03- 04-04-SC).
care and guidance for the minor. (Sec.
13, A.M. NO. 03- 04-04-SC)
Under Section 1, Rule 102, the writ of habeas

corpus is available, not only in cases of illegal
confinement or detention by which any person is
deprived of his liberty, but also in cases involving
the rightful custody over a minor.
The general rule is that parents should have

custody over their minor children. But the State
has the right to intervene where the parents,
rather than care for such children, treat them
cruelly and abusively, impairing their growth and
well-being and leaving them emotional scars that
they carry throughout their lives unless they are
liberated from such parents and properly
counseled. (Vingson Yu v. Cabcaban, UDK No.
14817, 2014, A.M. NO. 03-04- 04-SC)
Temporary visitation rights

The court shall provide in its order awarding
provisional custody appropriate visitation rights to
the non-custodial parent or parents, unless the
court finds said parent or parents unfit or
disqualified. (Sec. 15, A.M. NO. 03-04-04-SC)

ATENEO CENTRAL
D. CHANGE OF NAME
Differences under Rule 103, Republic Act No. 9048, and Rule 108
RULE 103 RULE 108 RA 9048 RA 10172
Substantial change of Cancellation or Clerical Error Act An Act Further
name. Correction of Entries in Authorizing the City or
the Civil Registry Municipal Civil Registrar
or the Consul General
to Correct Clerical or
Typographical Errors in
the Day and Month in
the Date of Birth of Sex
of a Person Appearing
in the Civil Register
Without Need of a
Judicial Order
Change of full name Change or corrections Change of first name or Change of first name or
in the ff entries in the nickname, date of birth nickname, the day and
Civil Registry: and change of sex of a month in the date of
1. Births person where it is birth or sex of a person
2. Marriages patently clear there was where it is patently clear
3. Deaths a clerical or that there was a clerical
4. Legal Separation typographical error or or typographical error or
5.Judgments of mistake in the entry mistake in the entry.
Annulments of Marriage
6. Judgments Declaring
Void a Marriage
7. Legitimations
8. Adoptions
9.Acknowledgment of
Natural Children
10. Naturalization
11. Election
12. Loss or Recovery of
Citizenship
13. Civil Interdiction
14.Judicial
Determination of
Filiation
WHOM MAY FILE
A person desiring to Any person interested in Any person having
change his name. any act, event, order or direct and personal
decree concerning the interest in the correction
civil status of persons of a clerical or
which has been typographical error in an
recorded in the civil entry and/or change of
register first name or nick name
files a verified petition in
the form of an affidavit.
VENUE
RTC of the province RTC of the city or 1. Local civil registry
where the petitioner has province where the office or Clerk of the
been residing for 3 corresponding civil Shari’a Court where the
years prior to the filing of registry is located record being sought to
the petition

ATENEO CENTRAL
be corrected or
changed is kept;
2. If petitioner has
already migrated to
another place in the
country,petition
receiving civil registrar
of the place where the
interested party is
presently residing or
domiciled; or
3. Citizens of the
Philippines who are
presently residing or
domiciled in foreign
countries; nearest
Philippine Consulates
WHAT TO FILE
Signed and verified Verified petition for Verified petition in the Affidavit, subscribed
petition. cancellation or form of an affidavit and sworn to before any
correction of any entry (summary procedure) person authorized by
law to administer oaths.
GROUNDS FOR CHANGE OF NAME
1. When the name is Upon good and valid The petitioner finds the
ridiculous, dishonorable grounds, the entries in first name or nickname
or extremely difficult to the civil registry may be to be ridiculous, tainted
write or pronounce; cancelled and with dishonor or
2. When the change corrected. extremely difficult to
results as a legal write or pronounce;
consequence, as in
legitimation; The new first name or
3. When the change will nickname has been
avoid confusion; habitually and
4. Having continuously continuously used by
used and been known the petitioner and he
since childhood by a has been publicly
Filipino name, unaware known by that by that
of her alien parentage; first name or nickname
5. A sincere desire to in the community: or
adopt a Filipino name to
erase signs of former The change will avoid
alienage, all in good confusion.
faith and without
prejudicing anybody;
and
6. When the surname
causes embarrassment
and there is no showing
that the desired change
of name was for a
fraudulent purpose or
that the change of name
would prejudice public
interest (Republic v.

ATENEO CENTRAL
Wong, GR No. 97906,

1992).
PUBLICATION AND POSTING
At least once a week At least once a week At least once a week
for three consecutive for three consecutive for two consecutive
weeks in a newspaper weeks in a newspaper weeks in a newspaper
of general circulation of general circulation of general circulation
(notice of hearing). (notice of hearing) (petition)
No posting No posting Duty of the Civil
Registrar or Consul to
post the petition in a
conspicuous place for
ten consecutive days
APPEAL
Court of Appeals, under Court of Appeals, under Civil Registrar General
Rule 109 Rule 109 (head of NCSO)
1. Grounds for change of name
Grounds for Change of Name Under Rule 103:

The Supreme Court has recognized the following Order for Hearing
as valid and compelling reasons to change one’s If the verified petition is sufficient in substance and
name: form, the court shall fix a date and place for a
1. Name is ridiculous, dishonorable, or extremely hearing by way of an order.
difficult to write or pronounce
2. Change results as a legal consequence, as in The order shall be published for three (3)
legitimation successive weeks in some newspaper of general
3. Change will avoid confusion circulation published in the province. (R103, S3)
4. When one has continuously used and been
known since childhood by a Filipino name, and Hearing
was unaware of alien parentage The date of the hearing shall NOT be within thirty
5. Sincere desire to adopt Filipino name to erase (30) days prior to an election nor within four (4)
signs of former alienage, all in good faith and months after the LAST publication of notice.
without prejudicing anybody (R103, S3)
6. Surname causes embarrassment and there is
no showing that the desired change of name was Opposition
for a fraudulent purpose or that the change of Any interested person may oppose. The Solicitor
name would prejudice public interest. General or the proper fiscal SHALL appear on
behalf of the Government. (R103, S4)
Grounds for change of first name or nickname
under RA 9048 Judgment
A person’s first name or nickname may be Upon satisfactory proof of compliance with the
changed on the following grounds: publication requirement and that the allegations of
1. The petitioner finds the first name or the petition are true, the court shall adjudge that
nickname to be ridiculous, tainted with the name be changed. (R103, S5).
dishonor, or extremely difficult to write or
pronounce A procedure for correction of entries can be
2. The new first name or nickname has been availed of to change the status from married to
habitually and continuously used by the single. Rule 108 cannot be availed of to determine
petitioner and he has been publicly known the validity of marriage, but the court cannot nullify
by that first name or nickname in the the proceedings before the trial court where all the
community; or parties had been given the opportunity to contest
3. The change will avoid confusion (RA the allegations of respondent; the procedures
9048, Sec. 4) were followed, and all the evidence of the parties
had already been admitted and examined.

ATENEO CENTRAL
1. First name
If applicant indeed sought, not the nullification of 2. Nickname
marriage as there was no marriage to speak of, but 3. Day and month in the date of birth; and
the correction of the record of such marriage to 4. Sex
reflect the truth as set forth by the evidence.
Otherwise stated, in allowing the correction of the Entries subject to cancellation or correction
subject certificate of marriage by cancelling the under Rule 108, in relation to Republic Act No.
wife portion thereof, the trial court did not, in any 9048
way, declare the marriage void as there was no
marriage to speak of. (Republic v. Olaybar, G.R. Upon good and valid grounds, the following
No. 189538, 2014) entries in the civil register may be cancelled or
corrected:
E. CANCELLATION AND CORRECTION 1. Births
OF ENTRIES IN THE CIVIL REGISTRY 2. Marriage;
3. Deaths;
Who may file 4. Legal separations;
Any person interested in any act, event, order or 5. Judgments of annulments of marriage;
decree concerning the civil status of persons 6. Judgments declaring marriages void
which had been recorded in the civil register may from the beginning;
file a verified petition for the cancellation or 7. Legitimations;
correction of any entry relating thereto. (R108, S1) 9. Adoptions;
10. Acknowledgments of natural children;
Where Filed 11. Naturalization;
The petition shall be filed with the RTC of the 12. Election, loss or recovery of citizenship;
province where the corresponding civil registry is 13. Civil interdiction;
located. (R108, S1) 14. Judicial determination of filiation;
15. Voluntary emancipation of a minor; and
Significance of R.A. No. 9048 16. Changes of name. (R108, S2).
With the passage of RA 9048, an entry in a civil
register may now be changed or corrected when it Parties to the Proceeding
involves clerical or typographical errors and The Civil Registrar and all interested persons shall
change of first name, the day and month in the be made parties to the proceeding. (R108, S3)
date of birth or sex of a person where it is patently
clear that there was a clerical or typographical Notice and Publication
error or mistake in the entry, which can be Persons named in the petition must be given
corrected or changed by the concerned city or notice of the time and place set for hearing the
municipal civil registrar or consul general (RA petition. Such order must also be published once
9048, Sec. 1) a week for three (3) consecutive weeks in a
newspaper of general circulation in the province.
Clerical or typographical errors in entries of the (R108, S4).
civil register are now to be corrected and changed
without need of a judicial order and by the city or General Rule: Notice and publication is
municipal civil registrar or consul general. (Lee v. mandatory.
Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 118387, 2001)
Exception: There is substantial compliance when
Coverage of R.A. No. 9048 there is publication. It may be deemed sufficient
Changes in entries in a civil register under R.A. notice that vests jurisdiction with the court because
No. 9048 are limited only to clerical or an action to correct and cancel entries is an action
typographical errors. These are errors that are in rem. (Republic v. Kho G.R. No. 170340, 2007).
“harmless and innocuous…which are visible to the
eyes or obvious to the understanding and can be Opposition
corrected or changed only by reference to other The Civil Registrar and any interested person may
existing record or records.” (RA 9048, S2[3]). file his opposition within fifteen (15) days.
The following entries may now be changed

through administrative proceedings: F. CLERICAL ERROR LAW

ATENEO CENTRAL
WHO MAY FILE WHERE TO FILE Form

PETITION An affidavit, subscribed and sworn to before any
Any person having With the local civil person authorized by law to administer oaths.
direct and personal registry office of the
interest in the city or municipality The affidavit shall set forth facts necessary to
correction of a where the record establish the merits of the petition and shall show
clerical or being sought to be affirmatively that the petitioner is competent to
typographical error in corrected or changed testify to the matters stated.
an entry and/or is kept.
change of first name The petitioner shall state the particular erroneous
or nickname in the entry or entries, which are sought to be corrected
civil register and/or the change sought to be made.
In case the petitioner With the local civil
has already migrated registrar of the place Supporting Documents
to another place in where the interested 1. A certified true machine copy of the certificate
the country and it party is presently or of the page of the registry book containing
would not be practical residing or domiciled. the entry or entries sought to be corrected or
for such party, in changed;
terms of 2. At least two (2) public or private documents
transportation showing the correct entry or entries upon
expenses, time and which the correction or change shall be based;
effort to appear in and
person before the 3. Other documents which the petitioner or the
local civil registrar city or municipal civil registrar or the consul
keeping the general may consider relevant and necessary
documents to be for the approval of the petition.
corrected or changed 4. Certification from the appropriate law
Citizens of the With the nearest enforcements, agencies that he has no
Philippines who are Philippine pending case or no criminal record
presently residing or Consulates.
domiciled in foreign Requirements for a petition for correction of
countries erroneous entry concerning the date of birth or
(Sec. 3, RA 9048) the sex of a person to be entertained
The petition is accompanied by earliest school
1. GROUNDS FOR CHANGE FOR FIRST record or school documents such as, but not
NAME OR NICKNAME limited to:
1. Medical records
Grounds 2. Baptismal certificate and
1. The petitioner finds the first name or nickname 3. Other documents issued by religious
to be ridiculous, tainted with dishonor or authorities
extremely difficult to write or pronounce.
2. The new first name or nickname has been Requirements for entry involving change of
habitually and continuously used by the gender corrected
petitioner and he has been publicly known by Petition is accompanied by a certification issued
that by that first name or nickname in the by an accredited government physician attesting
community: or to the fact that the petitioner hasn’t undergone sex
3. The change will avoid confusion. change or sex transplant.
2. FORMS AND CONTENT OF PETITION Publication requirement

Published at least once a week for two
Kinds of Petitions consecutive weeks (1 x 2) in a newspaper of
a. Correction of a clerical or typographical error, general circulation.
or
b. For change of first name or nickname

ATENEO CENTRAL
Copies The petitioner may seek reconsideration with the

3 copies of petition and its supporting papers shall civil registrar general or file the appropriate petition
be distributed as follows: with the proper court.
1. First copy to the concerned city or If civil registrar general fails to exercise power to
municipal civil registrar or consul general impugn decision of city or municipal civil registrar
2. Second copy to the Office of the Civil or of consul general, such decision shall become
Registrar General and final and executory.
3. Third copy to the petitioner
Petition is denied by city or municipal civil
3. DUTIES OF THE CITY OR MUNICIPAL registrar or consul general
CIVIL REGISTRAR OR CONSUL GENERAL Petitioner may either appeal decision to the civil
registrar or file the appropriate petition with the
Duties proper court.
1. Examine the petition and its supporting
documents G. WRIT OF AMPARO
2. Post the petition in a conspicuous place
provided that purpose for 10 consecutive days 1. COVERAGE
after he finds petition and its supporting
documents sufficient in form and substance. Remedy available to those whose right to life,
3. Act on the petition and shall render a decision liberty and security is violated or threatened with
not later than 5 working days after completion violation by an unlawful act or omission of a public
of the posting and/or publication requirement. official or employee or a private individual or entity.
4. Transmit a copy of his decision together with It covers extra-legal killings and enforced
the records of the proceedings to the Office of disappearances or threats thereof. (Sec. 1, A.M.
the Civil Registrar General within 5 working No. 07-9-12-SC, October 24, 2007)
days from date of decision
5. Can collect reasonable fees as a condition for The writ of amparo does not cover impairment of
accepting petition. the right to travel. For it to be granted, petitioner
a. Indigent petitioner shall be exempt must show that his right to travel was curtailed to
from payment of said fee. such an extent as to threaten his right to life, liberty
and security for which there is no readily available
4. DUTIES AND POWERS OF CIVIL recourse or remedy. (Reyes v. CA, G. R. No.
REGISTRAR GENERAL 182161, 2009)
Duties Extralegal Killings

1. Within 10 working days from receipt of the Killings committed without due process of law (i.e.
decision granting a decision, exercise power without legal safeguards or judicial proceedings).
to impugn such decision by way of an
objection based on the ff grounds: Enforced Disappearances
a. Error isn’t clerical or typographical; 1. Attended by the following circumstances:
b. Correction of an entry or entries in the 2. Arrest/detention/abduction of a person by a
civil registrar is substantial or government official or organized groups or
controversial as it affects the civil private individuals acting with the in/direct
status of a person; or acquiescence of the State;
c. The basis used in changing the first 3. Carried out by or with the authorization,
name or nickname of a person doesn’t support or acquiescence of the State or a
fall under Sec. 4. political organization;
2. Immediately notify the city or municipal civil 4. Refusal of the State to disclose the fate or
registrar or the consul general of the action whereabouts of the person concerned, or
taken on the decision. refusal to acknowledge the deprivation of
3. Upon receipt of the notice thereof, the city or liberty, which places such persons outside the
municipal civil registrar or the consul general protection of the law.
shall notify the petitioner of such action. 5. Intention is to remove the person from the
protection of law for a prolonged period of
time. (Navia v. Paradico, G.R. No. 18446,
Reconsideration 2012)

ATENEO CENTRAL
entire procedure outlined in A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC,

“Any threat” the Rule on the Writ of Amparo. (Sec. De Lima v.
The term “any threat” cannot be taken to mean Gatdula, G.R. No. 204528, 2013)
every conceivable threat in the mind that may
cause one to fear for his life, liberty, or security. In The writ of amparo was conceived to provide
the context of the Amparo rule, only actual threats, expeditious and effective procedural relief against
as may be established from all the facts and violations or threats of violation of the basic rights
circumstances of the case, can qualify as a to life, liberty, and security of persons; the
violation that may be addresses under the Rule on corresponding amparo suit, however, is not an
the Writ of Amparo. (In re: Ladaga, G.R. No. action to determine criminal guilt requiring proof
189689, 2013) beyond reasonable doubt or administrative liability
requiring substantial evidence that will require full
Instances Which Do Not Fall Under Life, and exhaustive proceedings. (The Secretary of
Liberty, or Security National Defense v. Manalo, G.R. No. 180906,
The threatened demolition of a dwelling by virtue 2008)
of a final judgment of the court is not included
among the enumeration of rights for a writ of Preventive and Curative Roles of the Writ
amparo. Their claim to their dwelling, assuming The writ of amparo serves both preventive and
they still have any despite the final and executory curative roles in addressing the problem of
judgment adverse to them, does not constitute extralegal killings and enforced disappearances.
right to life, liberty and security. (Canlas v.
NAPICO, G.R. No. 182795, 2008). It is preventive in that it breaks the expectation of
impunity in the commission of these offenses;
The writ of amparo is not available against a
Barangay Captain’s alleged trespass of It is curative in that it facilitates the subsequent
petitioner’s property since it is merely a violation of punishment of perpetrators as it will inevitably yield
petitioner’s property rights. (Sps. Pador v. leads to subsequent investigation and action.
Arcayan, G.R. No. 183649, 2013)
In the long run, the goal of both the preventive and
The restriction on the petitioner’s right to travel as curative roles is to deter the further commission of
a consequence of the pendency of the criminal extralegal killings and enforced disappearances.
case filed against him was not unlawful, and thus (Secretary of Defense v. Manalo, G.R. No.
not a valid ground to invoke issuance of Writ of 180906, 2008)
Amparo. (Reyes v. CA, G.R. No. 182161, 2009)
Government Involvement an indispensable
The writ of amparo is not available in order for a requirement
biological mother to recover custody of child from To fall within the ambit of A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC in
the DSWD. There is no enforced disappearance. relation to RA 9851, the disappearance must be
When what is involved is the issue of child custody attended by some government involvement. This
and the exercise of parental rights over a child, hallmark of State participation differentiates an
who, for all intents and purposes, has been legally enforced disappearance case from an ordinary
considered a ward of the State, the Amparo rule case of a missing person. (Navia v. Pardo, G.R.
cannot be properly applied. (Caram v. Segui, G.R. No. 184467, 2012)
No. 193652, 2014).
Distinguish from Habeas Corpus and Habeas
The writ of amparo cannot be availed of by an alien Data (include this heading if table exists in
detained by the Bureau of Immigration by virtue of previous items)
legal process. (Mison v. Gallegos, G.R. Nos.
210759, 211403, and 211590, 2015) Note: See table above for the comparison of
Habeas Corpus, Habeas Data and Writ of Amparo
Distinguish Privilege of the Writ of Amparo
from Actual Order called Amparo Does non-appearance of the petitioner affect
The privilege of the Writ of Amparo should be the validity of a writ of habeas data?
distinguished from the actual order called the Writ No. That petitioner did not appear in the
of Amparo. The privilege includes availment of the proceedings at such stage (SC) for fear of

ATENEO CENTRAL
reprisals does not affect the validity of the writ government from the demand of the people such
granted by the CA. (In the Matter of the Petition for as respondents.
the Writ of Amparo and Habeas Data in Favor of
Noriel Rodriguez, G.R. No. 191805, Apr 16, 2013) Instead, the amparo production order may be
likened to the production of documents or things
Examples on instances when a writ of habeas under Section 1, Rule 27 of the Rules of Civil
data may issue Procedure. (The Secretary of National Defense v.
In the case of Noriel Rodriguez, three separate Manalo, G.R. No. 180906, 2008).
acts were committed by the respondents which
justify the issuance by the CA of the Writ of 3. WHO MAY FILE
Amparo. First is the taking videos of the photos of
petitioner’s relatives hung on the wall of the house, The petition may be filed by
and the innermost portions of the house. There is 1. Aggrieved Party; or
no reasonable justification for doing this. Second 2. Any qualified person or entity in the following
is the abduction and torture of the petitioner by the order:
respondents. Third, the failure to conduct a fair a. Any member of the immediate family
and effective investigation similarly amounted to a b. Any ascendant, descendant or
violation of, or threat to Rodriguez’s rights to life, collateral relative of the aggrieved
liberty, and security. (In the Matter of the Petition within the fourth (4th) civil degree of
for the Writ of Amparo and Habeas Data in Favor consanguinity or affinity
of Noriel Rodriguez, G.R. No. 191805, Apr 16, c. Any concerned citizen, organization,
2013) association or institution
2. DIFFERENCES BETWEEN AMPARO Filing by the aggrieved OR representative

AND SEARCH WARRANT suspends the right of all others. (Sec. 2, A.M. No.
07-9-12-SC)
WRIT OF AMPARO SEARCH
WARRANT Where to file
PURPOSE 1. Regional Trial Court - of the place where the
Protective: To protect Special Process. threat, act or omission was committed OR any
a person’s right to of its elements occurred; or
life, liberty, or 2. Sandiganbayan; or
security. 3. Court of Appeals; or
WHERE FILED 4. Supreme Court.
SC, CA, SB or RTC RTC / MTC within
where threat or act whose territorial When issued by the Regional Trial Court, the writ
committed. jurisdiction / judicial shall be returnable to such court or judge.
region a crime was
committed. When issued by the Sandiganbayan or the Court
PERSON INITIATING of Appeals, the writ shall be returnable before such
Private / public Peace officer or law court or judge, or to the Regional Trial Court of the
person enforcement agency place where the threat, act or omission was
committed or any of its elements occurred.
SEIZURE OF PERSONALITY
Under IO & PO, Personal property is When issued by the Supreme Court, the writ shall
personality is not seized. be returnable before such court or judge, the Court
seized but inspected of Appeals, the Sandiganbayan, or the Regional
or copied. Trial Court of the place where the threat, act or
omission was committed or any of its elements
The production order under the Amparo Rule occurred.
should not be confused with a search warrant for
law enforcement under Article III, Section 2 of the The writ shall be enforceable anywhere in the
1987 Constitution. This Constitutional provision is Philippines. (Sec. 3, A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC)
a protection of the people from the unreasonable
intrusion of the government, not a protection of the No docket fees shall be paid. (Sec. 4, A.M. No. 07-
9-12-SC)

ATENEO CENTRAL
dismissal of the petition if not strictly followed.

4. CONTENTS OF PETITION Where, the petitioner has substantially complied
with the requirement by submitting a verified
Contents petition sufficiently detailing the facts relied upon,
1. Personal circumstances of the petitioner; the strict need for the sworn statement that an
2. The name and personal circumstances of the affidavit represents is essentially fulfilled.
respondent responsible for the threat, act or
omission, or, if the name is unknown or The failure to attach the required affidavits was
uncertain, the respondent may be described fully cured when the respondent and her witness
by an assumed appellation; (Mrs. Talbin) personally testified in the CA
3. The right to life, liberty and security of the hearings held on January 7 and 17 and February
aggrieved party violated or threatened with 18, 2008 to swear to and flesh out the allegations
violation by an unlawful act or omission of the of the petition. Thus, even on this point, the petition
respondent, and how such threat or violation cannot be faulted. (Razon v. Tagitis, G.R. No.
is committed with the attendant circumstances 184298, 2009)
detailed in supporting affidavits;
4. The investigation conducted, if any, specifying When respondent’s denial is not supported by
the names, personal circumstances, and affidavits, petition cannot be denied
addresses of the investigating authority or Section 17 of the Rules for the Writ of Amparo
individuals, as well as the manner and conduct requires that the respondent, who is a public
of the investigation, together with any report; official or employee, must prove that extraordinary
5. The actions and recourses taken by the diligence as required by applicable laws, rules and
petitioner to determine the fate or regulations was observed in the performance of
whereabouts of the aggrieved party and the duty. When the petitioner has categorically stated
identity of the person responsible for the that police cars have driven by her house with
threat, act or omission; and alarming regularity after she identified her
6. The relief prayed for the petition may include husband's body, respondent’s blanket denial
a general prayer for other just and equitable without affidavits from his police officers is not
reliefs. enough to the deny the issuance of the Writ.
Respondent’s failure to exert the extraordinary
Note: The petition may be filed on any day, diligence expected of him hints at a motive against
including Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays, and the petitioner. (Sanchez v. Darroca, G.R. No.
at any time, from morning to evening. 242257, October 15, 2019)
Test for Sufficiency in Amparo Petition Issuance of the writ

The test in reading the petition for the writ of Upon the filing of the petition, the court, justice or
amparo should be to determine whether it contains judge shall immediately order the issuance of the
the details available to the petitioner under the writ if on its face it ought to issue. (Sec. 6, A.M. No.
circumstances, while presenting a cause of action 07-9-12-SC)
showing a violation of the victim’s rights to life,
liberty and security through State or private party 5. CONTENTS OF RETURN
action.
When to file return
The petition should likewise be read in its totality, Within 72 hours after service of the writ, the
rather than in terms of its isolated component respondent shall file a verified written return
parts, to determine if the required elements – together with supporting affidavits.
namely, of the disappearance, the State or private
action, and the actual or threatened violations of The period to file cannot be extended except on
the rights to life, liberty or security – are present. highly meritorious grounds.
(Razon v. Tagitis, G.R. No. 184298, 2009)
The return shall contain:
Lack of supporting Affidavits is NOT a ground Lawful defenses;
for dismissal of the petition 1. The steps or actions taken to determine the
This requirement, however, should not be read as fate or whereabouts of the aggrieved party;
an absolute one that necessarily leads to the

ATENEO CENTRAL
2. All relevant information in the possession of Habeas Corpus cases. (Sec. 19, A.M. No. 07-9-
the respondent pertaining to the threat, act or 12-SC)
omission against the aggrieved party; and
3. If the respondent is a public official or Archival of Cases
employee, the return shall further state acts: The court shall not dismiss the petition, but shall
a. To verify identity of aggrieved party archive it, if upon its determination it cannot
b. To recover and preserve evidence proceed for a valid cause such as the failure of
c. To identify and collect witness petitioner or witnesses to appear due to threats on
statements their lives. (Sec. 20, A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC)
d. To determine cause, manner,
location, and time of death or 8. INSTITUTION OF SEPARATE ACTION
disappearance
e. To identify and apprehend persons This Rule shall not preclude the filing of separate
involved criminal, civil or administrative actions. (Sec. 21,
f. Bring suspected offenders before a A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC)
competent court (Sec. 9, A.M. No. 07-
9-12-SC) It would be inappropriate to apply to amparo
proceedings the doctrine of command
Note: General denial is not allowed. responsibility as a form of criminal complicity
through omission, for individual respondents’
Effects Of Failure To File A Return criminal liability, if there be any, is beyond the
The Court or justice shall proceed to hear the reach of amparo. In other words, the Court does
petition ex parte. (Sec. 12, A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC). not rule in such proceedings on any issue of
criminal culpability, even if incidentally a crime or
6. OMNIBUS WAIVER RULE an infraction of an administrative rule may have
been committed. (Rubrico v. Macapagal-Arroyo,
All defenses shall be raised in the return, G.R. No. 183871, 2010)
otherwise, they shall be deemed waived (Sec. 10,
A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC). 9. EFFECT OF FILING A CRIMINAL
ACTION
7. PROCEDURE FOR HEARING
A separate petition for the writ of amparo cannot
The hearing shall be summary in nature. However, be filed, but the remedies available under the writ
the court, justice, or judge MAY call for a may be availed by motion in the criminal action
preliminary conference to simplify the issues and (Sec. 22, A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC).
look at possibility of obtaining stipulations and
admissions from the parties. Hearing shall be from 10. INTERIM RELIEFS AVAILABLE TO
day to day until completed; same priority as PETITIONER AND RESPONDENT
petitions for writ of habeas corpus. (Sec. 13, A.M.
No. 07-9-12-SC) Upon filing of the petition or any time before final
judgment, the court may grant any of the following
Hearing shall be set not later than seven (7) days reliefs to petitioner:
from the issuance of the writ. 1. Temporary Protection Order – the court, upon
motion or motu proprio, may order that the
Judgment petitioner or the aggrieved party and any
The court shall render judgment within ten (10) member of the immediate family be protected
days from the time the petition is submitted for in a government agency or by an accredited
decision. (Sec. 6, A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC) person or private institution capable of
keeping and securing their safety.
Appeal
Any party may appeal from the final judgment or 2. Inspection Order: the court, upon motion and
order to the Supreme Court under Rule 45. The hearing, may order any person in possession
appeal may raise questions of fact or law or both. or control of a designated property to permit
The period of appeal shall be five (5) working days entry for inspecting relevant
from the date of notice of the adverse judgment. objects/operations/ property.
Appeal shall be given the SAME priority as

ATENEO CENTRAL
3. Production order: the court, upon motion and consistent with the admissible evidence adduced.
hearing, may order any person to produce and In other words, we reduce our rules to the most
permit inspection of documentary or object basic test of reason—i.e., to the relevance of the
evidence (i.e. documents, papers, accounts, evidence to the issue at hand and its consistency
etc.). with all other pieces of adduced evidence. Thus,
even hearsay evidence can be admitted if it
4. Witness protection order - The court, justice or satisfies this basic minimum test. (Rodriguez v.
judge, upon motion or motu proprio, may refer Macapagal-Arroyo, G.R. no. 191805, 2013)
the witnesses to the Department of Justice for
admission to the Witness Protection, Security Though hearsay evidence is generally considered
and Benefit Program, pursuant to Republic Act inadmissible under rules of evidence, such may be
No. 6981. (Sec. 14, A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC) considered in a writ of amparo proceeding if
required by the unique circumstances of the case.
Availability of interim reliefs to respondent It is the totality of the obtaining situation that must
Upon verified motion of the respondent and after be taken into consideration to determine if a
due hearing, the court, justice or judge may issue petitioner is entitled to a Writ of Amparo. Police
an inspection order or production order. (Sec. 15, surveillance because of the petitioner’s
A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC) relationship with a suspected member of the NPA,
creates a real threat to life, liberty, or security.
11. QUANTUM OF PROOF IN (Sanchez v. Darroca, G.R. No. 242257, October
APPLICATION FOR ISSUANCE OF 15, 2019)
WRIT OF AMPARO
Command responsibility in amparo
Quantum of proof in application for issuance proceedings
of writ of amparo The doctrine of command responsibility may be
1. Establish claims by substantial evidence used to determine whether respondents are
2. If respondent is a private individual or entity, accountable for and have the duty to address the
he must prove that ordinary diligence was abduction of Rodriguez in order to enable the
observed in the performance of duty courts to devise remedial measures to protect his
3. If public official or employee, he must prove rights.
that extraordinary diligence was observed in (Rodriguez v. Macapagal-Arroyo, G.R. No.
the performance of duty. (Sec. 17, A.M. No. 181805, 2011)
07-9-12-SC)
Amparo proceedings determine
Respondent public official of employee CANNOT 1. Responsibility, or the extent the actors have
invoke the PRESUMPTION OF REGULARITY. been established by substantial evidence to
have participated in whatever way, by action
The failure to establish that the public official or omission, in an enforced disappearance,
observed extraordinary diligence in the and
performance of duty does not result in the 2. Accountability, or the measure of remedies
automatic grant of the privilege of the amparo writ. that should be addressed to those who:
It does not relieve the petitioner from establishing a. Exhibited involvement in the enforced
his or her claim by substantial evidence. The disappearance without bringing the
omission or inaction on the part of the public level of their complicity to the level of
official provides, however, some basis for the responsibility defined above;
petitioner to move and for the court to grant certain b. Are imputed with knowledge relating
interim reliefs. (Yano v. Sanchez, G.R. No. to the enforced disappearance and
186640, 2010) who carry the burden of disclosure; or
c. Carry, but have failed to discharge,
Hearsay evidence may be considered in the burden of extraordinary diligence
amparo proceedings in the investigation of the enforced
The fair and proper rule is to consider all the pieces disappearance.
of evidence adduced in their totality, and to
consider any evidence otherwise inadmissible
under our usual rules to be admissible if it is

ATENEO CENTRAL
Thus, although there is no determination of getting to said person or entity. (Vivares v. St.
criminal, civil or administrative liabilities, the Theresa’s College, G.R. No. 202666, 2004)
doctrine of
Instances when the writ is NOT applicable
command responsibility may nevertheless be The writ of habeas data cannot be invoked in labor
applied to ascertain responsibility and disputes where there is no unlawful violation of the
accountability within these foregoing definitions right to life, liberty, or security. (Meralco v. Lim,
(Id.). G.R. No. 184768, 2010)
H. WRIT OF HABEAS DATA The writ of habeas data will not issue to protect
purely property or commercial concerns, nor when
a. Writ Of Habeas Data Generally the grounds invoked in support of the petitions
therefor are vague and doubtful. (Lee v. Ilagan,
Scope of writ and availability of writ G.R. No. 203254, 2014).
The Writ of Habeas Data is a remedy available to
any person whose right to privacy in life, liberty or b. Who May File
security is violated or threatened by an unlawful
act or omission of a public official or employee, or ANY aggrieved party may file a petition for the writ
of a private individual or entity engaged in the of habeas data. (Sec. 2, A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC).
gathering, collecting or storing of data or
information regarding the person, family, home In cases of extra-legal killings and enforced
and correspondence of the aggrieved party. (Sec. disappearances
1, A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC) Petition filed in order of preference:
1. Any member of the immediate family of the
It also involves the right to privacy in life, liberty or aggrieved; or in default thereof,
security of the aggrieved party and covers 2. Any ascendant, descendant or collateral
extralegal killings and enforced disappearances. relative of the aggrieved party within the fourth
(Sec. 2, A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC) (4th) civil degree of consanguinity or affinity.
(Sec. 2, A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC)
In order for the privilege of the writ to be granted,
there must exist a nexus between the right to c. Where Filed
privacy on the one hand, and the right to life, liberty
or security on the other. (Manila Electric Company 1. Regional Trial Court - of the place where
v. Lim, G.R. No. 184769, 2010) petitioner or respondent resides, or that which
has jurisdiction over the place where the data
Note: Habeas data is NOT limited to cases of or information is gathered, collected or stored
enforced disappearances and extralegal killings. at the option of the petitioner; or
(Vivares v. St. Theresa’s College, G.R. No. 2. Supreme Court; or
202666, 2004) 3. Court of Appeals; or
4. Sandiganbayan – when the action concerns
“Engaged” in gathering, collecting, or storing public data files of government offices (Sec. 3,
of data A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC)
Habeas data cannot be invoked when the
respondents are not gathering, collecting, or When issued by the Regional Trial Court, the writ
storing data or information. (Castillo v. Cruz, G.R. shall be returnable to such court or judge.
No. 182165, 2009)
When issued by the Sandiganbayan or the Court
To "engage" means "to do or take part in of Appeals, the writ shall be returnable such court
something." It does not necessarily mean that the or justice, or to the Regional Trial Court of the
activity must be done in pursuit of a business. place where petitioner or respondent resides, or
Whether such undertaking carries the element of that which has jurisdiction over the place where
regularity, as when one pursues a business, and the data or information is gathered, collected or
is in the nature of a personal endeavor, for any stored.
other... reason or even for no reason at all, is When issued by the Supreme Court, the writ shall
immaterial and such will not prevent the writ from be returnable before such court or judge, the Court
of Appeals, the Sandiganbayan, or the Regional

ATENEO CENTRAL
Trial Court of the place where petitioner or confidentiality of the source of information of
respondent resides, or that which has jurisdiction media and others;
over the place where the data or information is 2. In case of respondent in charge, in possession
gathered, collected or stored or in control of the data or information subject
of the petition:
Enforceability
The writ shall be enforceable ANYWHERE in the a. A disclosure of the data or information
Philippines. (Sec. 4, A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC) about the petitioner, the nature of
such data or information, and the
Docket Fees purpose for its collection
NO docket fees shall be paid by the INDIGENT b. The steps or actions taken by the
petitioner. (Sec. 5, A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC) respondent to ensure the security and
confidentiality of the data or
d. Contents Of The Petition information
c. The currency and accuracy of the data
Verified and written petition shall contain or information held; and
1. Personal circumstances of petitioner and 3. Other allegations relevant to the resolution of
respondent; the proceeding (Sec. 10, A.M. No. 08-1-16-
2. Manner the right to privacy is violated or SC)
threatened and its effects;
3. Actions and recourses taken by the petitioner Note: General denial is not allowed.
to secure the data or information;
4. The location of files, registers, or databases, g. Procedural Matters For The Writ
the government office, and the person in
charge or control; Procedure And Hearing
5. The reliefs prayed for; The hearing shall be summary in nature. However,
6. Such other relevant reliefs as are just and the court, justice, or judge may call for a
equitable. (Sec. 6, A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC) preliminary conference to simplify the issues and
look at possibility of obtaining stipulations and
e. Issuance Of The Writ admissions from the parties. (Sec. 15, A.M. No.
08-1-16-SC)
Upon filing of the petition, the court shall
immediately order the issuance of the writ if on its Judgment
face it ought to issue. The court shall render judgment within ten (10)
days from the time the petition is submitted for
The Clerk of Court shall cause it to be served decision.
within three (3) days from the issuance.
Upon finality, the judgment shall be enforced by
The writ shall set the date and time for summary the sheriff or any lawful officer within five (5)
hearing which shall not be later than ten (10) work working days. (Sec. 16, A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC)
days from the date of its issuance. (Sec. 7, A.M.
No. 08-1-16-SC) Appeal
Any party may appeal from the final judgment or
f. Contents Of The Return order to the Supreme Court under Rule 45. The
appeal may raise questions of fact or law or both.
The respondent shall file a verified written return The period of appeal shall be five (5) working days
together with supporting affidavits within five (5) from the date of notice of the adverse judgment or
working days from service of the writ. This period final order. Appeal shall be given the SAME priority
may be extended by the court for justifiable as Habeas Corpus and Amparo cases. (Sec. 19,
reasons. A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC)
The return shall contain the following: When Petition Heard In Chambers
1. Lawful defenses such as national security, A hearing in chambers may be conducted where
state secrets, privileged communications, the respondent invokes the defense that the
release of the data or information in question shall

ATENEO CENTRAL
compromise national security or state secrets, or For how long is the TEPO effective
when the data or information cannot be divulged Only for seventy-two (72) hours from date of the
to the public due to its nature or privileged receipt of the TEPO by the party or person
character. (Sec. 12, A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC) enjoined.
Consolidation Within said period, the court where the case is

When a criminal action is filed subsequent to the assigned, shall conduct a summary hearing to
filing of a petition for the writ, the latter shall be determine whether the TEPO may be extended
consolidated with the criminal action. until the termination of the case.
When a criminal action and a separate civil action What must the court do after issuing the TEPO
are filed subsequent to a petition for a writ of The court where the case is assigned, shall
habeas data, the latter shall be consolidated with periodically monitor the existence of acts that are
the criminal action. After consolidation, the the subject matter of the TEPO even if issued by
procedure under this Rule shall continue to govern the executive judge, and may lift the same at any
the disposition of the reliefs in the petition. time as circumstances may warrant.
Effect Of Filing A Criminal Action 2. WRIT OF CONTINUING

When a criminal action has been commenced, no MANDAMUS
separate petition for the writ shall be filed. The
relief under the writ shall be available to an When any agency or instrumentality of the
aggrieved party by motion in the criminal case. government or officer thereof:
(Sec. 22, A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC) 1. Unlawfully neglects the performance of an act
which the law specifically enjoins as a duty
Note: The effect is the same as in amparo cases. resulting from an office, trust or station in
connection with the enforcement or violation of
Institution Of Separate Action an environmental law rule or regulation or a
The filing of a petition for the writ of habeas data right therein, or
shall not preclude the filing of separate criminal, 2. Unlawfully excludes another from the use or
civil or administrative actions. (Sec. 20) enjoyment of such right and there is no other
plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the
Quantum Of Proof Required ordinary course of law:
Substantial evidence is required to prove the
allegations in the petition (Sec. 16, A.M. No. 08-1- The person aggrieved thereby may file a
16-SC). verified petition in the proper court:
1. Alleging the facts with certainty, attaching
I. RULES OF PROCEDUREE FOR thereto supporting evidence, specifying that
ENVIRIONMENTAL CASES the petition concerns an environmental law,
rule or regulation, and
1. TEMPORARY
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION ORDER 2. Praying that judgment be rendered
commanding the respondent to do an act or
When will a Temporary Environmental series of acts until the judgment is fully
Protection Order (TEPO) be issued satisfied, and
If it appears from the verified complaint with a 3. To pay damages sustained by the petitioner by
prayer for the issuance of an Environmental reason of the malicious neglect to perform the
Protection Order (EPO) that the matter is of duties of the respondent, under the law, rules
extreme urgency and the applicant will suffer or regulations.
grave injustice and irreparable injury.
The petition shall also contain a sworn certification
Who may issue ex parte a TEPO of non-forum shopping. (R8, S1)
1. The executive judge of the multiple-sala court Where is the petition filed
before raffle or The petition shall be filed with the:
2. The presiding judge of a single-sala

ATENEO CENTRAL
1. Regional Trial Court exercising jurisdiction It is an extraordinary remedy that deals with
over the territory where the actionable neglect damage that transcends political and territorial
or omission occurred or boundaries. Magnitude is measured by the degree
2. Court of Appeals of environmental damage that prejudices the life,
3. Supreme Court (R8, S2) health or property of inhabitants in two or more
cities or provinces. (A.M. No. 09-6-8-SC, p. 133)
Note: The petitioner shall be exempt from the
payment of docket fees. (R8, S3) Who may avail of the writ
1. A natural or juridical person;
Procedurally, its filing before the courts is similar 2. Entity authorized by law; or
to the filing of an ordinary writ of mandamus. 3. People’s organization, non-governmental
However, the issuance of a Temporary organization, or any public interest group
Environmental Protection Order is made available accredited by or registered with any
as an auxiliary remedy prior to the issuance of the government agency “on behalf of persons
writ itself. whose constitutional right to a balanced and
healthful ecology is violated. (R7, S1)
It may be availed of to compel the performance of
an act specifically enjoined by law. It permits the The requirement of accreditation of a group or
court to retain jurisdiction after judgment in order organization is for the purpose of verifying its
to ensure the successful implementation of the existence. The accreditation is a mechanism to
reliefs mandated under the court’s decision. prevent “fly by night” groups from abusing the writ.
(A.M. No. 09-6-8-SC, p. 133)
For this purpose, the court may compel the
submission of compliance reports from the What acts are covered by the writ
respondent government agencies (A.M. No. 09-6- The unlawful act or omission of a public official or
8-SC, p. 142) employee, or private individual or entity, involving
environmental damage of such magnitude as to
3. WRIT OF KALIKASAN prejudice the life, health or property of inhabitants
in two or more cities or provinces. (A.M. No. 09-6-
Definition 8-SC, p. 133)
It is a remedy available to a natural or juridical
person, entity authorized by law, people’s Requisites for the writ to issue
organization, non-governmental organization, or 1. There is an actual or threatened violation of
any public interest group accredited by or the constitutional right to a balanced and
registered with any government agency, on behalf healthful ecology;
of persons whose constitutional right to a balanced 2. The actual or threatened violation arises from
and healthful ecology is violated, or threatened an unlawful act or omission of a public official
with violation by an unlawful act or omission of a or employee, or private individual or entity; and
public official or employee, or private individual or 3. The actual or threatened violation involves or
entity, involving environmental damage of such will lead to an environmental damage of such
magnitude as to prejudice the life, health or magnitude as to prejudice the life, health or
property of inhabitants in two or more cities or property of inhabitants in two or more cities or
provinces. (R7, S1) provinces (Segovia v. The Climate Change
Commission, G.R. No. 211010, 2017)
The concept of continuing mandamus was first
introduced in Metropolitan Manila Development
Authority v. Concerned Residents of Manila Bay. Petitioner has the burden to prove the
Now cast in stone under Rule 8 of the Rules, the following:
writ of continuing mandamus enjoys a distinct 1. Environmental law, rule or regulation violated
procedure than that of ordinary civil actions for the or threatened to be violated;
enforcement/violation of environmental laws. 2. Act or omission complained of; and
(Dolot vs. Paje, G.R. No. 199199, August 27, 3. The environmental damage of such
2013) magnitude as to prejudice the life, health or
property of inhabitants in two or more cities or
What is the nature of Writ of Kalikasan provinces

ATENEO CENTRAL
In case the respondent fails to file a return, the

A party claiming the privilege for the issuance of a court shall proceed to hear the petition ex parte
Writ of Kalikasan has to show that a law, rule or (R7, S10)
regulation was violated or would be violated. (LNL
Archipelago Minerals, Inc. v. Agham Party List, What reliefs may be granted under the writ
G.R. No. 209165, 2016) 1. Directing respondent to permanently cease
and desist from committing acts or neglecting
Absent a showing that the executive is guilty of the performance of a duty in violation of
“gross abuse of discretion, manifest injustice or environmental laws resulting in environmental
palpable excess of authority,” the general rule destruction or damage;
applies that discretion cannot be checked via this 2. Directing the respondent public official,
petition for continuing mandamus. (Segovia vs. government agency, private person or entity to
The Climate Change Commission, G.R. No. protect, preserve, rehabilitate or restore the
211010, 2017) environment;
3. Directing the respondent public official,
Where to file the petition government agency, private person or entity to
1. The petition shall be filed with monitor strict compliance with the decision
2. The Supreme Court or and orders of the court;
3. With any of the stations of the Court of 4. Directing the respondent public official,
Appeals (R7, S3) government agency, or private person or
entity to make periodic reports on the
Note: The petitioner is exempt from the payment execution of the final judgment; and
of docket fees. (R7, S4) 5. Such other reliefs which relate to the right of
the people to a balanced and healthful ecology
What is the effect of filing the petition or to the protection, preservation,
The filing of a petition for the issuance of the writ rehabilitation or restoration of the
of kalikasan shall not preclude the filing of environment, except the award of damages to
separate civil, criminal or administrative actions individual petitioners (R7, S15)
(R7, S16)
What is the mode of appeal
How is the writ served Within fifteen (15) days from the date of notice of
The writ should be served against the respondent, the adverse judgment or denial of motion for
preferably in person. If personal service cannot be reconsideration, any party may appeal to the
made, the rules on substituted service shall apply. Supreme Court under Rule 45 of the Rules of
(R7, S6) Court. The appeal may raise questions of fact (R7,
S16)
What must the return contain
The respondent must state all defenses to show WRIT OF WRIT OF
that he did not: KALIKASAN CONTINUING
1. Violate MANDAMUS
2. Threaten to violate SUBJECT MATTER
3. Allow the violation of any environmental law, I. Available K. Directed
rule, or regulation; or against an unlawful against:
4. Commit any act resulting to environmental act or omission of a L. The unlawful
damage of such magnitude as to prejudice the public official or neglect in the
life, health, or property of inhabitants of two or employee, or private performance of an
more cities (R7, S8) individual or entity, act which the law
involving specifically enjoins
All defenses not raised are deemed waived. A environmental as a duty resulting
general denial of allegations in the petition shall be damage of such from an office, trust
considered an admission thereof (R7, S8) magnitude as to or station in
prejudice the life, connection with the
health, or property of enforcement or
inhabitants in two or violation of an
What is the effect of failure to file a return more cities or environmental law
provinces.

ATENEO CENTRAL
J. rule or regulation or a such as ocular

Magnitude ofright therein; or inspection order and
environmental M. production order.
damage is aThe unlawfully DAMAGES FOR PERSONAL INJURY
condition sine qua exclusion of another No damages may be Allows damages for
non in a petition for from the use or awarded. the malicious neglect
the issuance of a writ enjoyment of such A party who avails of of the performance of
of Kalikasan and right and in both this petition but who the legal duty of the
must be contained in instances, there is no also wishes to be respondent, identical
the verified petition. other plain, speedy indemnified for to R65, RoC.
and adequate injuries suffered may
remedy in the file another suit for
ordinary course of the recovery of
law. damages since the
WHO MAY FILE Rule on Writ of
Natural or juridical Only the one who is Kalikasan allows for
person, entity personally aggrieved the institution of
authorized by law, by the unlawful act or separate actions.
people’s omission.
organization, non- - end of topic -
governmental
organization, or any
public interest group
accredited by or
registered with any
government agency,
on behalf of persons
whose right to a
balanced and health
ecology is violated or
threatened to be
violated.
RESPONDENT
May be a private Only the government
individual or entity. or its officers.
EXEMPTION FROM DOCKET FEES
Both are exempted.
VENUE
Supreme Court or The Regional Trial
Any of the stations of Court exercising
the Court of Appeals jurisdiction over the
territory where the
actionable neglect or
omission occurred;
The Court of
Appeals; or
The Supreme Court
DISCOVERY MEASURES
Incorporates the Does not contain any
procedural provision for
environmental right of discovery measures
access to information
through the use of
discovery measures

ATENEO CENTRAL

ATENEO CENTRAL
5. Demurrer to Evidence
VII. Criminal Procedure
6. Revised Guidelines on Continuous Trial
(A.M. No. 15-06-10-SC)
TOPIC OUTLINE UNDER THE SYLLABUS:
K. JUDGMENT (RULE 120)
A. GENERAL CONCEPTS 1. Promulgation of Judgment
1. Criminal jurisdiction; concept and requisites
for exercise L. MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL OR
2. When injunction may be issued RECONSIDERATION (RULE 121)
B. PROSECUTION OF OFFENSES (RULE 110) M. Appeal (RULE 122)

1. Appeals from the Municipal Trial Courts
C. PROSECUTION OF CIVIL ACTION (RULE 111) 2. Appeals from the Regional Trial Courts
3. Appeals from the Court of Appeals
D. PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION 4. Section 13, Rule 124
1. Executive vs. judicial determination of 5. Appeals from the Office of the Ombudsman
probable cause 6. Appeals from resolutions of the Office of
the City Prosecutor
E. ARREST (RULE 113) 7. Appeals Sandiganbayan
1. Arrest Without Warrant, When Lawful
2. Requisites of a Valid Warrant of Arrest N. SEARCH AND SEIZURE (RULE 126)
3. Determination of Probable Cause for
Issuance of Warrant of Arrest O. PROVISIONAL REMEDIES IN CRIMINAL
CASES (RULE 127)
F. BAIL (RULE 114)
1. Nature P. THE RULE ON CYBERCRIME WARRANTS
2. When a Matter of Right; Exceptions (A.M No. 17-11-03-SC)
3. When a Matter of Discretion
G. ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA (RULE 116)

1. Searching Inquiry (People v. Pagal, G.R.
No. 241257, September 29, 2020)
2. Improvident Plea
H. MOTION TO QUASH (RULE 117)

1. Grounds
2. Double Jeopardy
3. Provisional Dismissal
I. PRE-TRIAL (RULE 118)

1. Pre-Trial Agreement
2. Non-Appearance During Pre-Trial
3. Pre-Trial Order
J. TRIAL (RULE 119)

1. Trial In Absentia
2. Examination of Witness for the Prosecution
(See People v. Sergio,G.R. No. 240053,
October 9, 2019)
3. Requisites for Discharge of Accused to
Become a State Witness
4. Effects of Discharge of Accused as State
Witness

ATENEO CENTRAL
A. GENERAL CONCEPTS Rules of criminal procedure are given retroactive

application in so far as they benefit the accused.
Criminal Procedure (PP v. Buabayan, G.R. No. 112459, 2003)
It is the method prescribed by law for the
apprehension and prosecution of persons Jurisdiction
accused of any criminal offense and for their It is the power or authority given by the law to a
punishment, in case of conviction. court or tribunal to hear and determine certain
controversies. It is the power of courts to hear and
It is the series of processes by which criminal laws determine a controversy involving rights which are
are enforced and by which the State prosecutes demandable.
persons who violate the penal laws. It regulates
the steps by which one who committed a crime is 1. CRIMINAL JURISDICTION –
punished. (PP v. Lacson, G.R. No. 149453, 2003) CONCEPT AND REQUISITES
FOR EXERCISE
Criminal Procedure v. Civil Procedure
Whereas civil procedure is that branch of remedial It is the power of a State to try and punish a person
law concerned with civil rights and redress of for a violation of its penal laws. (PP v. Mariano,
private wrongs not amounting to crime. G.R. No. L-40527, 1976)
CRIMINAL LAW CRIMINAL SUBJECT MATTER FROM JURISDICTION

PROCEDURE OVER PERSON OF THE ACCUSED
Substantive Remedial or JURISDICTION OVER JURISDICTION

Procedural SUBJECT MATTER OVER THE PERSON
It declares what acts It provides how the act OF THE ACCUSED
are punishable is to be punished Derived from the law Acquired either by his
It defines crimes, treats It provides for the arrest or his voluntary
for their nature and method by which a appearance in court.
provides for their person accused of a
It can never be acquired May be acquired by
punishment crime is arrested, tried,
solely by consent of the consent of the
and punished
accused. The parties accused or by waiver
cannot waive it. of objections or failure
System of Procedure to invoke the objection
The system of procedure in the Philippines is
Objection that the court If he fails to make his
accusatorial or adversarial where two contending
has no jurisdiction over objection in time, he
parties appear before the court, which hears them
the subject matter may will be deemed to have
impartially and renders judgment only after trial.
be made at any stage of waived it.
(Queto v. Catolico, G.R. No. L-25204 & L-25219,
the proceeding and the
1970)
right to make such
objection is never
Liberal Construction of the Rules of Procedure
waived, even on appeal.
The rules of criminal procedure shall be liberally
construed in favor of the accused and strictly REQUISITES FOR EXERCISE OF CRIMINAL
against the State to even the odds in favor of the
accused against whom the entire machinery of the JURISDICTION
State is mobilized. It is construed as a legal
safeguard in furtherance of the rights of the a) JURISDICTION OVER SUBJECT MATTER
accused.
The offense, by virtue of the imposable penalty or
its nature, is one which the court is by law
These Rules shall be liberally construed in order
authorized to resolve.
to promote their objective of securing a just,
speedy and inexpensive disposition of every
This jurisdiction is conferred by law, and not simply
action and proceeding (Rule 1, Sec. 6)
by rules. The conferment must be clear and it
Retroactive effect of the Rules on Criminal
cannot be presumed. On the other hand, criminal
Procedure

ATENEO CENTRAL
jurisdiction over a criminal case is determined Crimes against national security include
by the allegations in the complaint or information treason, conspiracy and proposal to
(Mobilia Products v. Umezawa, G.R. No. 149357, commit treason, misprision of treason,
2005) espionage, inciting to war and giving
motives for reprisal, violation of
For the Sandiganbayan, both the nature of the neutrality, correspondence with hostile
offense and the positions occupied by the accused country and flight to enemy’s country.
are conditions sin qua non before the Crimes against laws of nations are piracy
Sandiganbayan can validly take cognizance of the and mutiny.
case. (Uy v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 105965-70,
1999) 2. Where an offense is committed on a railroad
train, in an aircraft, or in any other public or
b) JURISDICTION OVER TERRITORY private vehicle while in the course of its trip,
the criminal action may be instituted and tried
Venue is jurisdictional and a court is bereft of in the court of any municipality or territory
jurisdiction to try an offense committed outside its where such train, aircraft or other vehicle
limited territory. The offense must have been passed during such trip, including the place
committed or any of its essential ingredients took of departure and arrival [Rule 110, Sec. 15
place within the territorial jurisdiction of the court. (b)].
In criminal cases, venue is an essential element of
jurisdiction, thus, cannot be waived (Navaja v. De 3. Where an offense is committed on board a
Castro, G.R. No. 182926, 2015). vessel in the course of its voyage, the
criminal action may be instituted and tried in
If the evidence adduced during the trial shows that the proper court of the first port of entry or of
the offense was committed somewhere else, the any municipality or territory through which the
court should dismiss the action for want of vessel passed during such voyage subject to
jurisdiction. (Treñas v People, G.R. No. 195002, the generally accepted principles of
2012). international law [Rule 110, Sec. 15 (c)].
Exception/s: 4. In those cases where the Supreme Court, in

1. Where the offense was committed under the the interest of truth and impartial justice and
exceptional circumstances provided for in pursuant to its constitutional powers,
Article 2 of the Revised Penal Code, the transfers the place of trial from one place to
offense is cognizable before Philippine courts another.
even if committed outside of the territory of
the Philippines. 5. Where the case is cognizable by the
Sandiganbayan, the jurisdiction depends
Note: Article 2 of the RPC includes offenders who upon the nature of the offense and the
(SCION) position of the accused. The offense need not
be tried in the place where the act was
a. Should commit an offense while on a committed but where the court actually sits.
Philippine ship or airship;
b. Should forge or counterfeit any coin or Note: When the greater convenience of the
currency note of the Philippine Islands or accused and of the witnesses, or other
obligations and securities issued by the compelling considerations so require, a case
Government of the Philippine Islands; originating from one geographical region may
c. Should be liable for acts connected with be heard in another geographical region.
the introduction into these Islands of the (R.A. 8249, Sec. 2)
obligations and securities mentioned
above. 6. In cases of written defamation. The case may
d. While being public officers and be filed in the province or city where the
employees, should commit an offense in offended party held office at the time of the
the exercise of their functions; or commission of the offense if he is a public
e. Should commit any of the crimes against officer, or in the province or city where he
national security and the law of nations. actually resided at the time of the commission

ATENEO CENTRAL
of the offense in case the offended party is a 1. Motion to quash a complaint on the ground of
private individual. (RA. 4363) lack of jurisdiction over the person of the
accused
7. In cases of illegal recruitment, the criminal 2. Motion to quash a warrant of arrest (Miranda
action can be filed in the Regional Trial Court v. Tuliao, G.R. No. 158763, 2006).
of the province or city where the crime was
committed or where the offended party Special Rule on Application for Admission to
actually resides at the time the offense was Bail
committed (R.A. 10022, Rule IV, § 6). In narrow cases involving special appearances, an
accused can invoke the processes of the court
8. Trafficking in persons, criminal action shall be even though there is neither jurisdiction over the
filed where the offense was committed, or person nor custody of the law. However, if a
where any of its elements occurred, or where person invoking the special jurisdiction of the court
the trafficked person actually resides at the applies for bail, he must first submit himself to the
time of the commission of the offense (R.A. custody of the law.
9208, § 9). The State shall exercise
jurisdiction over any act, even if committed Custody of Law v. Jurisdiction over the Person
outside the Philippines and whether or not (Miranda v Tuliao).
such act or acts constitute an offense at the Jurisdiction over
Custody of Law
place of commission, it being a continuing the person
offense, having been commenced in the Required before the Required for the
Philippines and other elements having been court can act upon the adjudication of other
committed in another country if the suspect application for bail reliefs
or accused: Accomplished by Acquired upon his
either arrest or arrest or voluntary
a. Is a Filipino citizen, voluntary surrender appearance
b. Is a permanent resident of the Philippines,
or Doctrine of Estoppel
c. Has committed the act against a citizen of General Rule: Lack of jurisdiction may be raised
the Philippines. at any stage of the proceedings, in the trial court
or on appeal. (US v. de la Santa, G.R. No. L-3181,
No prosecution may be commenced if a 1907).
foreign government has prosecuted or is
prosecuting such person except upon the Exception: After voluntarily submitting a cause
approval of the Secretary of Justice. (R.A. and encountering an adverse decision on the
No. 9208, Sec. 26-A) merits, it is too late for the losing party to question
the jurisdiction of the court.
Note: This is a non-exclusive list. There are other
special penal laws which have extraterritorial While the jurisdiction of a tribunal may be
application. challenged at any time, sound public policy bars
the petitioners from so doing after their having
c) JURISDICTION OVER THE PERSON OF procured that jurisdiction themselves, speculating
THE ACCUSED on the fortunes of litigation. (People v. Munar, G.R.
No. L-37642, 1973; Tijam v. Sibonghanoy, G.R.
The person charged with the offense must have No. L-21450, 1968).
been brought to the court’s presence for trial,
forcibly by warrant of arrest or upon his voluntary Determination of Criminal Jurisdiction (NPAL)
submission to the court. 1. Determined by the Nature of the offense
and/or Penalty attached thereto and not what
General Rule: Seeking affirmative relief is may be meted out after trial but by the extent
deemed to be submission to the jurisdiction of the of the penalty which the law imposes for the
court. It may be effected by filing a motion to offense. It is the imposable penalty over the
quash, appearing for arraignment, participating in lower penalty that might be adjudged.
the trial or by giving bail. (Santiago v. Vasquez, (People v. Purisima G.R. No. L-40902, 1976)
G.R. No. 99289-90, 1993)
Exception:

ATENEO CENTRAL
2. Determined by the Allegations in the (b) Over all offenses punishable with
complaint or information, not by the result of imprisonment of not more than 6 years
proof or by the trial court’s appreciation of the irrespective of the amount of fine (prision
evidence presented. It is also not determined correccional);
by the caption or charges in the complaint. (c) Over all offenses punishable with fine only
amounting to not more than P4,000.00
3. Determined by the Law in force at the time of without the penalty of imprisonment.
the institution of the criminal action (when the (d) Over all offenses (except violations of RA
action is filed) and not at the time of the 3019 and Arts. 210 to 212 of RPC)
commission of the offense. (De la Cruz v. committed by public officers and
Moya, G.R. No. L-65192, 1988) employees in relation to their office,
including those employed in GOCCs and
Principle of Adherence of Jurisdiction by private individuals charged as co-
Once jurisdiction is vested in the court, it is principals, accomplices or accessories,
retained up to the end of litigation. It remains with punishable with imprisonment of not more
the court until the case is finally terminated. (Dela than 6 years or where none of the accused
Cruz v. Moya, G.R. No. L-65192, 1988; Sanchez holds a position classified as Grade “27”
v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 120011, 1999) and higher;
(e) In all cases of damage to property through
General Rule:: Once vested, jurisdiction cannot criminal negligence, regardless of other
be withdrawn by: penalties and the civil liabilities arising
1. Subsequent amendment or stipulation therefrom;
(People v. Chupeco, G.R. No. 19568, 1964) (f) In cases of summary procedure for
or; violations of B.P. 22 (Bouncing Checks
2. Subsequent statutory amendment of the rules Law). (A. M. No. 00-11-01-SC)
of jurisdiction. (g) Summary procedure in cases of traffic
violations, violations of the rental law,
Exemption: the succeeding statute: violations of city or municipal ordinances,
a) Expressly provides otherwise; or violations of BP 22, and all other offenses
b) Is construed that it is intended to operate where the penalty does not exceed 6
to actions pending before its amendment months imprisonment and/or P1,000 fine,
(Binay v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. irrespective of other penalties or civil
120011, 1999) liabilities arising therefrom, and in
offenses involving damage to property
Jurisdiction is retained regardless of: through criminal negligence where the
1. Whether the evidence proves a less offense imposable fine does not exceed P10,000.
that that charged in the information (h) Jurisdiction over cases where the
2. The subsequent happening of events, imposable penalty is destierro considering
although of a character which would have that in the hierarchy of penalties under
prevented jurisdiction from attaching in the Article 71 of the Revised Penal Code,
first instance. destierro follows arresto mayor which
involves imprisonment. (People v.
JURISDICTION OF CRIMINAL COURTS Eduarte, G.R. No. 88232, 1990)
a) CRIMINAL JURISDICTION OF THE MTC 2. Special Jurisdiction - Applications for bail in

AND RTC criminal cases in the absence of all RTC judges in
a province or city. (B.P. 129, Sec. 35)
Jurisdiction is based on violations committed and
penalty imposed. Municipal Trial Courts have no jurisdiction over
cases which by provision of special law fall within
Municipal Trial Court the jurisdiction of the Regional Trial Courts or the
1. Exclusive Original Jurisdiction - Sandiganbayan, even if the maximum penalty
(a) Over all violations of city or municipal prescribed by such special law is less than 6
ordinances committed within their years. Included in such exceptions are election
respective territorial jurisdictions; offenses, libel or written defamation, and violation

ATENEO CENTRAL
of Section 39 of the Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972 c. Jurisdiction over Money Laundering Cases
(R.A. No. 6425). (except those committed by public officers and
If a family court does not exist in the place of the private persons in conspiracy with such public
petitioner for an application of a temporary persons falling under the jurisdiction of the
protection order (TPO) or a permanent protection Sandiganbayan).
order (PPO), it may be filed with the metropolitan
trial court, municipal trial court, municipal circuit
trial court with territorial jurisdiction over the place 2. Appellate Jurisdiction - Over all cases
of residence of the petitioner (Sec. 10, Anti- decided by the MTC within its territorial jurisdiction.
Violence Against Women and Their Children Act
of 2004). 3. Special Jurisdiction - Jurisdiction to handle
exclusively criminal cases as designated by the
The municipal trial court, metropolitan trial court, Supreme Court.
or municipal circuit trial court that has territorial
jurisdiction over the barangay that issued the Jurisdiction over Complex Crimes
barangay protection order (BPO) also has the Jurisdiction over the whole complex crime is
jurisdiction over complaints of violation of the BPO
lodged with the trial court having jurisdiction to
(Sec. 21, Anti-Violence Against Women and Their
Children Act of 2004). impose the MAXIMUM and MOST SERIOUS
penalty imposable of an offense forming part of the
Regional Trial Court complex crime. It must be prosecuted integrally
1. Exclusive Original Jurisdiction – and must not be divided into component offenses,
a. The Regional Trial Court shall have which may be made subject of multiple information
jurisdiction over all criminal cases which are brought in different courts. (Cuyos v. Garcia, G.R.
not within the exclusive jurisdiction of any No. L-46934, 1988)
court, tribunal or body and appeals from all
cases decided by lower courts in their Jurisdiction over Continuing Crimes
respective territorial jurisdiction. Continuing offenses are consummated in one
place yet by the nature of the offense, the violation
Note: Those punishable by fine only (without of the law is deemed continuing (e.g. estafa and
imprisonment) amounting to more than P4,000.00 libel). As such, the courts of the territories where
fall under the jurisdiction of the RTC. the ESSENTIAL INGREDIENTS of the crime took
place have concurrent jurisdiction.
b. Over criminal cases specifically conferred
by special laws: The court which FIRST acquires jurisdiction
i. Libel and written defamation. excludes the other courts (Morillo v. People, 775
Administrative Order No. 104-96, 1996, Phil. 192 (2015)).
designated the RTC as a special court
having jurisdiction in libel cases. Jurisdiction of Family Courts
ii. Violations of the Comprehensive R.A. No. 8369 establishing the Family Court
Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002. granting it exclusive jurisdiction over child and
Regardless of its penalty, the family cases names: criminal cases where one or
jurisdiction falls within the Regional Trial more of the accused is below 18 years of age but
Court designated as Drugs Court. not less than 9 years of age or where one or more
(People v. Morales, G.R. No. 126623, of the victims is a minor at the time of the
1997; RA. No. 9165, Sec. 90). commission of the offense, provided that if the
iii. But if the case involves a minor, the minor is found guilty, the court shall promulgate
jurisdiction lies with the Family Courts. sentence and ascertain any civil liability which the
(R.A. 8369, §5) accused may have incurred. (The sentence shall
iv. Violations of intellectual property rights. be suspended without need of an application
(A.M. No. 03-03-03-SC, 2003) pursuant to the “Child and Youth Welfare Code”).
v. Election offenses The jurisdiction depends on the parties not the
penalty.(P.D. 603; See R.A. No. 10630)

ATENEO CENTRAL
If the minor involved in the case, either as the 6. Violations of R.A. No. 9160 as amended by
victim or the child-in-conflict-with-law (accused), is R.A. No. 9194 (Anti-Money Laundering Act of
already dead, the regular courts will have 2001) when committed by public officers and
jurisdiction over the case. (People v. Yadao, G.R. private persons who are in conspiracy with
No. 162144-54, 2012). such public officers.
b) JURISDICTION OF THE SANDIGANBAYAN Officials under the Exclusive Jurisdiction of

the Sandiganbayan:
Exclusive Original Jurisdiction in All Cases
1. Officials of the EXECUTIVE branch,
Involving:
occupying SALARY GRADE 27 or higher,
1. Violations of R.A. No. 3019 as amended (Anti-
specifically including:
Graft and Corrupt Practices Act).
a. Provincial Governors, Vice
Governors, Members of the
2. Violations of R.A. No. 1379 (An Act Declaring
Sangguniang Panlalawigan, and
Forfeiture in favor of the state any property
Provincial Treasurers, Assessors,
found to have been unlawfully acquired by
Engineers and other Provincial
Public Officer or Employee and providing for
Department Heads
the procedure therefore, which prescribes the
b. City Mayors, Vice Mayors, Members
penalties for violation thereof).
of the Sangguniang Panlungsod and
City Treasurers, Assessors,
3. Crimes mentioned in Chapter 2 Section 2 Title
Engineers and other Provincial
VII Book 2 of the Revised Penal Code (i.e.
Department Heads
Art.210: Bribery, Art.211: Indirect Bribery, Art.
c. Officials of the diplomatic service
212: corruption of Public Officials).
occupying the position of consul and
higher
4. Other offenses or felonies whether simple or
d. Philippine Army and Air Force
complexed with other crimes committed by
Colonels, Naval Captains and all
public officials and employees in relation to
officers of higher rank
their office.
e. Officers of the PNP, while occupying
the position of provincial director and
The Offense is “in relation to the office”
those holding the rank of senior
when:
superintended or higher
a. The offense is intimately connected with
f. City and Provincial Prosecutors and
the office of the offender and perpetrated
their assistants, and officials and
while he was in the performance of his
prosecutors in the Office of the
official functions
Ombudsman and special prosecutors
b. The crime cannot exist without the office
g. President/ Directors/ Trustees/
c. The office is a constituent element of the
Managers of GOCCs, state
crime as defined in the statute
universities, or educational
institutions/foundations
If the character of being “in relation to his
office” is absent or is not alleged in the
Note: Those specifically mentioned herein (a-g)
information, the crime committed falls within
need not be with a salary grade of 27 or higher to
the exclusive original jurisdiction of ordinary
be under the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan.
courts and not the Sandiganbayan.
(Inding v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 143047,
2004)
5. Civil and criminal cases filed pursuant to and
in connection with Executive Order Nos. 1, 2,
2. Members of the CONGRESS and officials
14 and 14-A, issued in 1986;
thereof classified as Grade 27 and up;

ATENEO CENTRAL
3. Members of the JUDICIARY without prejudice those enumerated in the law, the case falls
to Constitutional provisions; under either the regular courts or the
Sandiganbayan, as the case may be.
4. Chairmen and members of
CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSIONS without 3. That the Regional Trial Court shall have
prejudice to Constitutional provisions; exclusive original jurisdiction where the
information:
5. All other national and local officials classified (a) does not allege any damage to the
as Grade ’27’ and higher under the government or any bribery; or
Compensation and Position Classification Act (b) alleges damage to the government or
of 1989; bribery arising from the same or closely
related transactions or acts in an amount not
6. Other offenses or felonies whether simple or exceeding One million pesos (P1,000,000.00)
complexed with other crimes committed by the (R.A. No. 10660).
public officials and employees mentioned in
subsection “A” of this section in relation to their Note: The civil case initiated first will be
office; suspended when a criminal case is filed in the
Sandiganbayan
For Sandiganbayan to have jurisdiction over
officers as enumerated under RA 10660, they 2. When injunction may be
should have been officers at the time of the issued to restrain criminal
commission of the crime, from the wording of RA prosecution
10660, “where one or more of the accused are General Rule: Writs of injunction or prohibition to
officials… at the time of the commission of the restrain a criminal prosecution are NOT available.
offense.” and not at the time of the
commencement of the case. (RA 10660, Sec. Why? injunction will not lie to enjoin a criminal
4(a)) prosecution because public interest requires that
criminal acts be immediately investigated and
In case private individuals are charged as co- prosecuted for the protection of society (People v.
principals, accomplices or accessories with public Grey, GR No. 180109, 2010).
officers or employees, including those employed in
government-owned or controlled corporations, Exceptions:
they shall be tried jointly with said public officers 1. To afford adequate protection to the
and employees in the proper courts which shall constitutional rights of the accused
exercise exclusive jurisdiction over them. (Disini v. 2. When necessary for the orderly
Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 169823-24, 2013) administration of justice or to avoid
oppression or multiplicity of actions
Exception/s: 3. When there is a prejudicial question which is
1. Election offenses – jurisdiction falls under sub judice
the Regional Trial Court as provided for in the 4. When the acts of the officer are without or in
Omnibus Election Code even if they are excess of authority
committed by public officers classified as 5. Where the prosecution is under an invalid
Grade 27 and higher and in relation to their law, ordinance or regulation
offices 6. When double jeopardy is clearly apparent
7. Where the court has no jurisdiction over the
2. Court Martial cases – offenses committed by offense
members of the Armed Forces and other 8. Where it is a case of persecution rather than
persons subject to military law are cognizable prosecution
by court martial if such offenses are “service 9. Where the charges are manifestly false and
connected” as expressly enumerated in R.A. motivated by the lust for vengeance
No. 7055. If the particular offense is not one of

ATENEO CENTRAL
10. When there is clearly no prima facie case

against the accused and the motion to
quash on that ground has been denied.
(People v. Grey, G.R. No. 180109, 2010;
Samson v. Guingona, Jr. G.R. No. 123504,
2000; Brocka v. Enrile, G.R. Nos. 69683-65,
1990)
Note: A preliminary injunction has been issued by

the Supreme Court to prevent the threatened
unlawful arrest of petitioners (Lopez v. de la Cruz,
G.R. No. L-6229, 1954)
Note: As a general rule, mandamus cannot be

used to compel the exercise of discretion of the
prosecutor. The courts can issue a writ of
mandamus only to compel the prosecutor to
decide on the complaint but it cannot direct the
prosecutor what to decide. The prosecutor still has
the discretion on what to do, either to file
information with the court or dismiss the complaint.
However, the moment he finds one to be so liable

it becomes his inescapable duty to charge him
therewith and to prosecute him for the same. In
such a situation, the rule loses its discretionary
character and becomes mandatory. Thus, where
despite the sufficiency of the evidence before the
prosecutor, he refuses to file the corresponding
information against the person responsible, he
abuses his discretion. His act is tantamount to a
deliberate refusal to perform a duty enjoined by
law. (MBTC v Reynaldo, G.R. No. 164538, 2010)

ATENEO CENTRAL
B. PROSECUTION OF CRIMINAL For offenses where preliminary investigation is not

OFFENSES (Rule 110) required, for criminal offenses in Metro Manila or
chartered cities, the complaint must be filed with
CRIMINAL ACTIONS, HOW INSTITUTED the Office of the Prosecutor. In contrast, for
criminal offenses outside Metro Manila, the
The Legal Nature of Prosecution of Offenses complaint/information must be filed with the
Prosecution peculiar to the Executive (function is provincial prosecutor or directly with the Municipal
to see that laws are faithfully executed) (Soberano Trial Courts.
v. People, GR No. 154269, 05 October 2005)
Effect of Institution of Criminal Action on
DOJ is not a quasi-judicial office or agency; Prescriptive Period
preliminary investigation, infra, not a quasi-judicial General Rule: The institution of the criminal action
proceeding (De Lima v. Reyes, GR No. 209330, interrupts the running of the period of prescription
11 January 2016) of the offense charged.
Prosecution under the direct control and Exception: If otherwise provided in special laws.
supervision of the public prosecutor (Section 5,
Rule 110, infra); may turn over actual prosecution There is no more distinction between cases
to private prosecutor but can at any time take over punished under the RPC and those covered by
(Mobilia Products, Inc. v. Umezawa, GR No. SPLs. Irrespective of whether the offense charged
149357, 04 March 2005) is punishable by the Revised Penal Code or by a
special law, it is the filing of the complaint or
Criminal Action information in the office of the public prosecutor for
One by which the State prosecutes a person for an purposes of the preliminary investigation that
act or omission punishable by law. interrupts the period of prescription (Disini v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 169823-24, 2013).
Offenses Where a Preliminary Investigation is
Required HOWEVER, as provided in the Revised Rules on
Preliminary investigation is required for offenses Summary Procedure, only the filing of an
where the penalty prescribed by law is AT LEAST Information tolls the prescriptive period where the
4 years, 2 months and 1 day (prision correccional crime charged is involved in an ordinance
max) of imprisonment without regard to the fine. (Jadewell Parking v. Lidua, G.R. No. 169588
(Rule 112, Sec. 1(2)) October 7, 2013).
For all other offenses Prescription of Crimes punished under the

It is instituted DIRECTLY with the Municipal Trial RPC (Art. 90)
Court and Municipal Circuit Trial Court or the
complaint is filed with the Office of the Prosecutor. CRIME PRESCRIPTIVE
(Rule 110, Sec. 1) PERIOD
Crimes punishable by 20 years

A complaint for offenses cognizable by the
death, reclusion
Regional Trial Court is NOT filed directly with the perpetua or reclusion
Regional Trial Court either for purposes of temporal
preliminary investigation or for commencement of
the criminal prosecution. Crimes punishable by 15 years
other afflictive penalties
Rule for Manila and other Chartered Cities
The complaint shall be filed with the Office of the Crimes punishable by a 10 years
Prosecutor unless otherwise provided in their correctional penalty except arresto mayor,
charters (Rule 110, Sec. 1). 5 years

ATENEO CENTRAL
Crime of libel or other 1 year (Romualdez v. Marcelo, G.R. Nos. 165510-33,

similar crimes 2006)
Crime of oral 6 months In cases involving special penal laws, the

defamation and slander commencement of proceedings for the
by deed prosecution of the accused serves to interrupt the
prescriptive period, even if the case is not filed yet
Light offenses 2 months with the appropriate court (J. Caguioa, Perez v.
Sandiganbayan), G.R. No. 245862, 2020).
Act No. 3326
It governs the prescriptive periods of violations of Examples of laws that have their own
special laws, or offenses other than those prescriptive periods:
penalized under the RPC. a. Election offenses – shall prescribe after five
years after the date of their commission. If the
Prescriptive Period for Violation of Special discovery of the offense be made in an
Penal Laws election contest proceedings, the period of
prescription shall commence on the date on
CRIME PRESCRIPTIVE
which the judgment of such proceedings
PERIOD
becomes final and executory. (BP Blg. 881)
Offenses punished only 1 year
by a fine or by b. Genocide law – crimes defined and penalized
imprisonment for not under the Philippine Act on Crimes Against
more than one month, International Humanitarian Law, Genocide,
or both and Other Crimes Against Humanity, their
prosecution, and the execution of sentences
Offenses punished by 4 years imposed on their account, shall not be
imprisonment for more subject to any prescription. (R.A. 9851)
than month but less
than 2 years Katarungang Pambarangay Law Local
Government Code
Offenses punished by 8 years
While the dispute is under mediation, conciliation
imprisonment for 2
or arbitration, the filing of the complaint before
years or more, but less
the Punong Barangay shall interrupt the
than 6 years
prescriptive period but in no case shall the
Offenses punished by 12 years interruption exceed 60 days from the filing of the
imprisonment for 6 complaint. (Sec. 410 (c) RA 7160) However, the
years or more Except for treason, 20 filing of a complaint for purposes of preliminary
years investigation starts the prosecution process.
Violations of municipal 2 months The prescriptive periods shall resume upon receipt
ordinances by the complainant of:
1. the complaint; or
The only proceeding that could interrupt the 2. the certificate of repudiation; or
running of prescription is that which is filed or 3. the certification to file the action issued the
initiated by the offended party before the Lupon or Pangkat Secretary
appropriate body or office. If the proceedings are
null and void, In contemplation of the law, no
proceedings exist that could have merited the
suspension of the prescriptive periods. Criminal cases required to be filed with the
Lupon

ATENEO CENTRAL
Offenses punishable by imprisonment not 2. In the name of the People of the Philippines;
exceeding one (1) year or a fine not exceeding and
P5,000 (Sec. 408(c), LGC) and where the parties 3. Against all persons who appear to be
actually reside in the same city or municipality responsible for the offense involved (Rule
110, Sec. 2).
Exceptions
When: The information must be “against all persons who
a. One party is the Government or any appear to be responsible for the offense involved.”
subdivision thereof While the prosecutor has discretion to determine
b. One party is a public officer or employee, who should be included in the information, he can
and the dispute relates to the performance be compelled by mandamus if he abuses his
of his official functions discretion by refusing to include a person as a co-
c. There is no Private offended party accused despite sufficient evidence. (Guiao v.
d. Parties actually reside in different cities or Figueroa, et. al, G.R. No. L-6481, 1954)
municipalities, EXCEPT in cases where
such barangays adjoin each other AND However, before mandamus may be resorted to,
the parties agree to amicable settlement the petitioner must exhaust all remedies in the
by an appropriate lupon ordinary course of law (i.e. filing a motion in the
e. The accused is under police custody or trial court for such inclusion) (Aquino, et al. v.
detention Mariano, et al., G.R. No. L-30485, 1984)
The Real Offended Party An infirmity in the information, such as lack of

It is the People of the Philippines. authority of the officer signing it, cannot be cured
by silence, acquiescence, or even by express
Since the crime is also an outrage against the consent. (Cudia v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No.
PRIVATE OFFENDED PARTY, he is entitled to 110315, 1998) However, this shall not be a bar to
intervene in its prosecution in cases where the civil a subsequent prosecution under a subsequent
action is IMPLIEDLY instituted therein. But the valid information.
State remains the principal offended party, the
offense having been committed against the People A Complaint:
of the Philippines. 1. Sworn written statement;
2. Charging a person with an offense; and
When the criminal action is instituted in the name 3. Subscribed by:
of the private offended party (or not People of the a. The offended party;
Philippines), the defect is merely of form and may b. Any peace officer; or
be cured at any stage of the trial. c. Other public officer charged with the
enforcement of the law violated (Rule 110,
The Rules on Criminal Procedure do not require Sec. 3).
as a condition sine qua non to the validity of the
proceedings (in the preliminary investigation) the Where a preliminary investigation is required (i.e.,
presence of the accused for as long as efforts to where the imposable penalty is at least 4 years,
reach him were made, and an opportunity to two months and 1 day), the complaint is filed with
controvert evidence of the complainant is the prosecutor (Rule 110, Sec. 1).
accorded him. The obvious purpose of the rule is
to block attempts of unscrupulous respondents to Where a preliminary investigation is not required
thwart the prosecution of offenses by hiding (i.e., where the imposable penalty is less than 4
themselves or by employing dilatory tactics. years, two months and 1 day), the complaint may
(Sierra v. Lopez, Adm. Case No. 7549, 2008) be filed with the prosecutor (in Metro Manila) or
directly with the MTC/MCTC (for cases over which
The Information: MTC has jurisdiction) (Rule 110, Sec. 1).
1. Must be in writing;

ATENEO CENTRAL
The complaint as defined under Section 3 is be an accusation “in

different from the complaint filed with the writing.”
Prosecutor’s Office which refers to the one filed in
COURT for the commencement of a criminal
prosecution for violation of a crime usually
cognizable by Municipal Trial Courts as well as to WHO MAY FILE THEM, CRIMES THAT CANNOT
a complaint filed by an offended party in PRIVATE BE PROSECUTED DE OFICIO
CRIMES or those which cannot be prosecuted de
Persons Authorized to File a Complaint
oficio.
1. Offended party;
2. Any peace officers;
The Complaint filed in the Prosecutors Office,
3. Other public officer charged with the
On The Basis Of Which The Prosecutor May
enforcement of the law violated (Rule 112,
Conduct A Preliminary Investigation, Refers
Sec. 3)
To:
1. Any sworn written complaint;
Persons Authorized to File an Information
2. Filed by an offended party or any peace
1. City or provincial prosecutor and their
officer, or other public officer charged with the
assistants
enforcement of law violated.
2. Duly appointed special prosecutors (Rule
112, Sec. 4)
Under the Rules on Summary Procedure:
A complaint may be directly filed in the Municipal
General Rule: A Complaint or Information may
Trial Court, provided that in Metro Manila and in
only be filed or dismissed if there is a prior written
chartered cities, the criminal action may only be
authority or approval of either:
commenced by the filing of information, which
1. Provincial prosecutor; or
means, only by the prosecutor, except when the
2. City prosecutor; or
offense cannot be prosecuted de oficio as in
3. Chief state prosecutor; or
private crimes (Sec. 11, Revised Rules on
4. Ombudsman or his Deputy
Summary Procedure).
(Rule 112, Sec. 4)
Complaint vs. Information
Exception: Offenses or crimes that cannot be
COMPLAINT INFORMATION prosecuted de oficio, such as:
a. In private offenses (concubinage, adultery,
Subscribed by the Subscribed by the
seduction, abduction, acts of lasciviousness);
offended party, any prosecutor. It does not
and
peace officer or other have to be subscribed
b. Defamations imputing any of the aforesaid
officer charged with the by the offended party
offenses wherein a sworn written complaint is
enforcement of the law or any peace officer or
required in accordance with Section 5 of this
violated. other peace officer
Rule.
charged with the
enforcement of the
Prosecution in the Regional Trial Courts is always
law.
commenced by information.
Filed either in the Filed in court.
MTC/MCTC or with the A complaint containing private offenses and
provincial/city defamation must be filed by the offended party.
prosecutor’s office.
In case of variance between the complaint filed by
Needs to be sworn Requires no oath. the offended party and the information in crimes
Merely requires that it against chastity, the complaint controls. (People v.
Oso, G.R. No. L-42571, 1935)

ATENEO CENTRAL
A defectively crafted information, such as that All criminal actions commenced by complaint or
alleging multiple offenses in a single complaint or information shall be prosecuted under the direction
information transgresses Section 13, Rule 110 of and control of the prosecutor (Rule 110, Sec. 5).
the Rules of Court. The failure to make a timely
objection to such defect however is deemed to be Private Prosecutor May Prosecute the Case in
a waiver of the said objection. (People v. Santiago, Case of:
G.R. No. 137281, 2001) 1. Heavy work schedule of the public
prosecutor; or
In upholding People v. Garfin, the court firmly 2. In the event of lack of public prosecutors
instructs that the filing of an Information by an (Rule 110, Sec. 5).
officer without the requisite authority to file the
same constitutes a jurisdictional infirmity which Provided:
cannot be cured by silence, waiver, acquiescence, 1. Authorized in writing by the Chief of the
or even by express consent. Hence, such ground Prosecution Office or the Regional State
may be raised at any stage of the proceedings Prosecution; and
(Quisay v. People G.R. No. 216920, 2016). 2. Subject to the approval of the Court (Rule
1102, Sec. 5).
Prosecutor’s Decision Subject to Review by:
1. The Secretary of Justice who exercises Once so authorized, private prosecutor shall
supervision and control over the prosecutor’s continue to prosecute the case up to the end of
actions and who may sustain, modify or set trial unless the authority is revoked or withdrawn.
aside the prosecutor’s resolution on the
matter (Rule 112, Sec. 4, last paragraph); Prior to the filing of the information in court,
and the prosecutor has full control of the case.
2. In appropriate cases, by the courts when the He decides who should be charged in court and
prosecutor acts with grave abuse of who should be excluded from the information.
discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction.
But once the case is already filed in court, the
Remedies of the Offended Party if the same can no longer be withdrawn or dismissed
Prosecutor Refuses to File an Information: without the tribunal’s approval. Should the
1. File an appeal with the Secretary of Justice, prosecutor find it proper to conduct a
who in the exercise of his/her supervisory reinvestigation of the case at such stage, the
powers as department head, my reverse the permission of the Court must be secured (Crespo
opinion of the investigator and designate a v. Mogul, G.R. No. L-53373, 1987)
special prosecutor to review and handle the
case. Private Prosecutor Participation
2. Institute administrative charges against the A public prosecutor may allow a private prosecutor
erring prosecutor. (i.e., a lawyer engaged by the private offended
3. File criminal charges under Art. 208 of the party) to actively handle the conduct of the trial:
Revised Penal Code.
4. File civil action for damages under Art. 27 of 1. Where the civil action arising from the crime
Civil Code. is deemed instituted in the criminal action.
5. File an action for mandamus to compel the 2. The Public Prosecutor must be present
prosecutor to file such information only if during the proceedings and must take over
there is grave abuse of discretion. But the the conduct of the trial from the private
general rule is that a prosecutor cannot be prosecutor at any time the cause of the
compelled to file an Information by prosecution may be adversely affected.
mandamus.
CONTROL OF PROSECUTION Thus, where the prosecutor has turned over the
Full Discretion and Control of the Prosecutor active conduct of the trial to the private prosecutor
who presented testimonial evidence even when

ATENEO CENTRAL
the public prosecutor was absent during the trial, paragraph of Section 4 of P.D. No. 1606, as
the evidence presented could not be considered amended by R.A. No. 8249.
valid evidence of the People.
NOTE: A complaint for the prosecution of the
Note: This rule applies ONLY to courts, which are crimes of adultery, concubinage, seduction,
provided by law with prosecutors, and not to abduction, rape, and acts of lasciviousness under
municipal courts that have no trial prosecutors, in Art. 344 of the RPC only starts the prosecution of
which case the evidence presented by the private the crime and does not confer jurisdiction on the
prosecutor can be considered as evidence for the court to try the case.
People.
Even when a complaint is defective for being
The conformity of the public prosecutor is not signed and filed by the chief of police and not by
necessary to give the aggrieved party personality the complainant, the court may still acquire
to question an order quashing search warrants jurisdiction over the case. The complaint required
(WWW Corp v. People, G.R. No. 161106, 2014) in Article 344 of the RPC is but a condition
precedent to the exercise by the proper authorities
Appeal Procedure for Prosecution Before of the power to prosecute the guilty parties. The
Court of Appeals and Supreme Court complaint simply starts the prosecutory
General Rule: Only the SOLICITOR GENERAL proceeding but does not confer jurisdiction in the
may bring or defend actions in behalf of the court to try the case.
Republic of the Philippines, or represent the
People or State in criminal proceedings elevated Article 344 is not determinative of the jurisdiction
before the Court of Appeals and the Supreme of courts over private offenses because the same
Court. is governed by the Judiciary Law and not the RPC.
(People v. Yparraguire, G.R. No. 124391, 2000)
Exceptions:
1. When the State and the offended party are Prosecution of Private Crimes
deprived of due process because the Who May Prosecute
prosecution is remiss in its duty to protect the 1. Adultery and Concubinage –
interest of the State and the offended party; a. Only by the offended spouse who should
and have the status, capacity, and legal
2. When the private offended party questions representation at the time of filing of the
the civil aspect of a decision of a lower court. complaint regardless of age
(Heirs of Delgado v. Gonzalez, G.R. No. b. Both guilty parties must be included in the
184337, 2009) complaint.
c. The offended party did not consent to the
The Solicitor General (SolGen) has control of offense nor pardoned the offenders (Sec. 5
appeals. It may abandon or discontinue the Rule 110).
prosecution of the case in the exercise of its sound
discretion and may even recommend the acquittal 2. Seduction, Abduction and Acts of
of an accused when it believes that the evidence Lasciviousness – Prosecuted exclusively and
does not warrant the accused’s conviction. successively by the following persons in this
order:
However, in all cases elevated to the Supreme a. By the offended woman;
Court by way of petition for review against b. By the parents, grandparents or legal/
decisions or final orders of the judicial guardians in that successive order,
Sandiganbayan, it is the Office of the if the offended party is a minor or of age
Ombudsman, through its Special Prosecutor, but suffers from physical or mental
which shall represent the People of the Philippines disability;
pursuant to the second sentence, third to the last

ATENEO CENTRAL
c. By the State pursuant to the doctrine of as pardon even when the offender has already
parens patriae, when the offended party commenced serving his sentence.
dies or becomes incapacitated before she
could file the complaint and she has no Distinction between pardon and consent
known parents, grandparents or PARDON CONSENT
guardians (Sec. 5 Rule 110).
Refers to past acts Refers to future
3. Defamation imputing to a person any of the of adultery acts
foregoing crimes of concubinage, adultery,
seduction, abduction, rape or acts of In order to absolve In order to absolve
lasciviousness – Only by the party or parties the accused from the accused from
defamed by imputation of committing the liability must be liability, it is
crimes specified (Revised Penal Code, Art. extended to both sufficient even if
360) offenders granted only to the
offending spouse
If the offended party is of legal age and does not Given after the Given before the
suffer from physical or mental disability, she alone commission of the commission of the
can file the complaint to the exclusion of all (Sec. crime crime
5 Rule 110).
Who Can Give Pardon General Rule: The subsequent marriage between
1. Adultery and Concubinage – Only the the party and the accused extinguishes the
offended spouse not otherwise incapacitated, criminal liability of the latter, together with that of
can validly extend the pardon or consent the co-principals, accomplices and accessories.
contemplated therein.
Note: Pursuant to Article 344 of the Revised Penal
2. Seduction, abduction and acts of Code, seduction, abduction, acts of lasciviousness
lasciviousness and rape, the marriage of the offender with the
a. The offended minor, if with sufficient offended party shall extinguish the criminal action
discretion can validly pardon the accused or remit the penalty already imposed upon him.
by herself if she has no parents or where
the accused is her own father and her Exception/s:
mother is dead; 1. Where the marriage was invalid or contracted
b. The parents, grandparents or guardian of in bad faith in order to escape criminal liability
the offended minor, in that order, cannot (People v. Santiago, G.R. No. L-27972, 1927);
extend a valid pardon in said crimes 2. In “private libel” or the libelous imputation of
without the conformity of the offended the commission of the crimes of concubinage,
party, even if the latter is a minor; adultery, seduction, abduction, rape, or acts of
c. If the offended woman is of age and not lasciviousness, and in slander by deed
otherwise incapacitated, only she can (People v. Orzame, 39 O.G. 1168); and
extend a valid pardon. 3. In multiple rape, insofar as the other accused
in the other acts of rape respectively
General Rule: The pardon refers to pardon committed by them are concerned (People v.
BEFORE filing of the criminal complaint in court. Bernardo, 38 O.G. 3749)
Pardon effected after the filing of the complaint in
court does not prohibit the continuance of the The acquittal or death of one of the accused in the
prosecution of the offense (People v Dela Cerna, crime of adultery does not bar the prosecution of
G.R. No. 136899-904, 2002) the other accused. (United States v. Topiño, G.R.
No. 11895, 1916).
Exception: In rape, marriage between the
offender and the offended party would be effective

ATENEO CENTRAL
However, the death of the offended spouse before For as long as the ultimate facts constituting the
the filing of the complaint for adultery bars further offense have been alleged, an Information will be
prosecution, BUT if the offended spouse died valid. (People v. Sandiganbayan Fourth Division,
AFTER the filing of the corresponding complaint, G.R. No. 160619, 2015)
his death will not prevent the proceeding from
continuing to its ultimate conclusion. Purpose
To safeguard the constitutional right of an accused
Effect of Desistance of Complainant to be informed of the nature and cause of the
It does not bar the People from prosecuting the accusation against him so that he can duly prepare
criminal action. BUT it does operate as a waiver his defense (Serapio v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No.
of the right to pursue civil indemnity. 128268, January 29, 2003).
An offended party in a criminal case has sufficient Substantial defect in the information cannot be
personality to file a special civil action for certiorari, cured by evidence that would jeopardize the
in proper cases, even without the imprimatur of the accused’s right to be informed of the true nature of
State. In so doing, the complainant should not the offense he is charged with.
bring the action in the name of the People of the
Philippines. The action may be prosecuted in the Name of the Accused
name of the said complainant. (Perez v. Hagonoy 1. If name is known: The name and surname of
Rural Bank, Inc., G.R. No. 126210, 2000) the accused or any appellation or nickname
by which he has been or is known
SUFFICIENCY OF COMPLAINT OR
2. If name cannot be ascertained: A fictitious
INFORMATION name with a statement that his true name is
A complaint or information is sufficient if it unknown.
states the: (NDANAP) 3. If true name thereafter disclosed: Such true
1. Name of the accused; name shall be inserted in the complaint or
2. Designation of the offense by a statute information and record. (Rule 110, Sec. 7)
3. Acts or omission complained of as
constituting the offense; While one or more persons, along with specified
4. Name of the offended party; and named accused, may be sued as “John
5. Approximate date of the commission of the Does,” an information against all accused
offense; and described as “John Does” is void; an arrest
6. Place where the offense was committed warrant against them is also void.
(Sec. 6. Rule 110).
An error in the name of the accused is not
The non-inclusion of some of the names of the reversible as long as his identity is sufficiently
eyewitnesses in the information does not preclude established. This defect is curable at any stage of
the prosecutor from presenting them during trial. the proceedings as insertion of the real name of
(People v. Dela Cruz, G.R. No. 137967, 2001) the accused is merely a matter of form (People v.
Padica, G.R. No. 102645, 1993)
Test of sufficiency of the complaint or
information: A mistake in the name of the accused is not
The test is whether the crime is described in equivalent, and does not necessarily tantamount
intelligible terms with such particularity as to to, a mistake in the identity of the accused
apprise the accused, with reasonable certainty, of especially when sufficient evidence is adduced to
the offense charged to enable the accused to show that the accused is pointed to as one of the
suitably prepare for his defense. (Lazarte, Jr. v. perpetrators in the crime. (People v. Amodia, G.R.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 180122, 2009) No. 173791, 2008)

ATENEO CENTRAL
Note: Filing of Information instead of complaint by inter alia, both "the designation of the offense
the prosecutor in private offenses, is valid provided given by the statute" and "the acts or omissions
that the complaint affidavit is attached thereto. complained of as constituting the offense." Failure
to aver this crucial ingredient – that the purported
General Rule: An accused cannot be convicted of acts were employed as a prerequisite for
an offense that is not clearly charged in the admission or entry into the organization – would
complaint or information. To convict him of an prevent the successful prosecution of the criminal
offense other than that charged in the complaint or responsibility of the accused, either as principal or
information would be violative of the Constitutional as accomplice, for the crime of hazing. Plain
right to be informed of the nature and cause of the reference to a technical term – in this case, hazing
accusation. (Patula v. People, G.R. No. 164457, – is insufficient and incomplete, as it is but a
2012) characterization of the acts allegedly committed
and thus a mere conclusion of law.
Exception: Crimes necessarily included or
includes the offenses charged in the complaint. However, failure to allege that the purported acts
were not covered by the exemption relating to the
Every element of the offense must be stated in the duly recommended and approved "testing and
information. What facts and circumstances are training procedure and practices" for prospective
necessary to be included therein must be regular members of the AFP and the PNP is not
determined by reference to the definitions and fatal. This exemption is an affirmative defense in,
essentials of the specified crimes. The not an essential element of, the crime of
requirement of alleging the elements of a crime in accomplice to hazing. It is an assertion that must
the information is to inform the accused of the be properly claimed by the accused, not by the
nature of the accusation against him so as to prosecution. (People v. Bayabos, G.R. No.
enable him to suitably prepare his defense. The 171222, 2015).
presumption is that the accused has no
independent knowledge of the facts that constitute DESIGNATION OF OFFENSE
the offense. (People v. Valdez, G.R. No. 175602, The Information or Complaint Must State or
2013) Designate the Following Whenever Possible:
Note: As embodied in Section 14 (1), Article III of 1. The designation of the offense given by the
the 1987 Constitution, no person shall be held to statute. (If there is no designation of the
answer for a criminal offense without due process offense, reference shall be made to the
of law. Further, paragraph 2 of the same section, section/subsection of the statute punishing it)
it provides that in all criminal prosecutions, the 2. The statement of the acts or omissions
accused has a right to be informed of the nature constituting the offense, in ordinary, concise
and cause of the accusation against him. It is and particular words.
further provided under Sections 8 and 9 of Rule 3. The specific qualifying and aggravating
110 of the Revised Rules of Court that a complaint circumstances must be stated in ordinary and
or information to be filed in court must contain a concise language (Sec. 8, Rule 110).
designation given to the offense by the statute,
besides the statement of the acts or omissions For qualifying and aggravating circumstances to
constituting the same, and if there is no such be appreciated, it must be alleged in the complaint
designation, reference should be made to the or information. (People v. Lapore, G.R. No.
section or subsection of the statute punishing it 191197, 2015)
and the acts or omissions complained of as
constituting the offense. (People v. Taundo, G.R. A practical consequence of non-allegation of a
No. 207816, 2016) detail that aggravates the liability is to prohibit the
introduction or consideration against the accused
Section 6, Rule 110 of the Rules of Court, of evidence that tends to establish that detail. (PP
expressly states that the information must include, v. Valdez G.R. No. 175602, 2012)

ATENEO CENTRAL
2. The date of last conviction or release;

In rape cases, relationship of the accused and the 3. The other previous conviction or release of
victim must be stated in the accusatory portion of the accused and dates (PP v. Venus, G.R.
the complaint. Every element of the offense must No. 45141, 1936).
be properly alleged especially if the accused is
being charged of a crime in its qualified form the The qualifying and aggravating circumstances
qualifying circumstances must be stated with cannot be appreciated even if proved, unless
certainty to enable a person of common alleged in the information. (PP v. Perreras, G.R.
understanding to be appraised of the acts or No. 139622, 2001)
omission that he is charged with. (People v Bali-
balita G.R. No. 134266, 2000) It is not the designation of the offense in the
complaint or information that is controlling. (PP v.
Rationale: The seriousness of a criminal Samillano, G.R. No. L-31375, 1974)
prosecution requires a clear specification of the
offense charged, consistently with the right of the The facts alleged therein, and not its title,
accused to be informed of the nature and cause of determine the nature of the crime. (El Pueblo de
the accusation against him. Also, this is essential Filipinas v. Magdowa, G.R. No. L-48457, 1941)
to avoid surprise on the part of the accused and to
afford him the opportunity to prepare his defense In rape cases, the concurrence of the minority of
accordingly. the victim and her relationship with the offender is
a special qualifying circumstance which should be
The real question is not, “Did he commit a crime both alleged (People v. Cantos, G.R. No. 129298,
given in the law some technical and specific 1999) and proved (People v. Manggasin, G.R.
name?” BUT, “Did he perform the acts alleged in Nos. 130599-600, 1999) with certainty in order to
the body of the information?” If he did, it is of no warrant the imposition of the (maximum) penalty.
consequence to him, either as a matter of
procedure or of substantive right, how the law The accused may be convicted of a crime more
denominates the crime. serious than that named in the title or preliminary
part if such crime is covered by the facts alleged in
“Try and attempt to rape” in the information is not the body of the information and its commission is
sufficient. (PP v. Dimaano, G.R. No. 168168, established by evidence. (Buhat v. CA, G.R. No.
2005) 119601, 1996)
The Supreme Court held that “That the said An accused could not be convicted under one act
accused by means of force and intimidation, to wit: when he is charged with a violation of another if
by then and there, willfully, unlawfully and the change from one statute to the other involves:
feloniously drag said AAA, his own daughter, 12
years of age, minor, inside a bedroom and 1. A change in the theory of the trial;
undressed her and put himself on top of her and 2. Requires of the defendant a different
thereafter have carnal knowledge with said AAA defense; or
against her will and without her consent” complies 3. Surprises the accused in any way. (U.S. v.
with the requirements of a sufficient information. Panlilio, G.R. No. L-9876, 1914)
(PP v. Ching, G.R. No. 177150, 2007)
Acts or Omissions Complained of as
In case of allegation of the aggravating Constituting the Offense
circumstance of HABITUAL DELINQUENCY, it The acts or omissions complained of must be
should NOT be generally averred. alleged in such form as is sufficient to enable a
person of common understanding to know what
The information must SPECIFY: offense is intended to be charged, and enable the
1. The commission of the crimes; court to pronounce proper judgment. No

ATENEO CENTRAL
information for a crime will be sufficient if it does entering the polling precinct, in violation of
not accurately and clearly allege the elements of the Election Code. The law provided that
the crime charged. Every element of the offense “The voters shall have the right to freely
must be stated in the information. What facts and enter the polling place as soon as they
circumstances are necessary to be included arrive unless there are more than forty
therein must be determined by reference to the voters waiting inside, in which case they
definitions and essentials of the specified crimes. have the right to enter in the order of their
(People v. Canceran, G.R. No. 206442, 2015) arrival as those who are inside go out,
which the latter shall immediately do after
If one or more elements of the offense have not having cast their votes.” The accused
been alleged in the information, the accused argued that the Information failed to allege
cannot be convicted of the offense charged, even an offense because the Information did not
if the missing elements have been proved during state that there were forty or less voters.
the trial.
The Supreme Court held: The limitation —
Even the accused’s entering a plea of guilty to when there are more than forty voters
such defective information will not cure the defect, waiting inside — on the right of a voter to
nor justify his conviction of the offense charged. freely enter the polling place does not
constitute an essential part of the definition
Note: The new rule requires that the qualifying and of the crime contemplated in section 133 of
aggravating circumstances be alleged in the the Revised Election Code. Instead, it is but
information. a matter which the accused must assert,
and establish as a defense, and not for the
1. Purposes: prosecution to anticipate, allege, and
a. To enable the court to pronounce a proper disprove.
judgment;
b. To furnish the accused with such a b. Where the law alleged to have been
description of the charge as to enable him to violated:
make a defense; Applies only to specific classes of persons
c. As a protection against further prosecution and special conditions; and
for the same cause.
The exemptions from its violation are so
2. Rules on Negative Averments: incorporated in the language defining the
a. Where the law alleged to have been crime that the ingredients of the offense
violated: cannot be accurately and clearly set forth if
Prohibits generally acts therein defined; Is the exemption is omitted, the information
intended to apply to all persons must show that the accused does not fall
indiscriminately; within the exemptions. (U.S. v. Pompeya,
G.R. No. L-10255, 1915)
But prescribes certain limitations or
exceptions from its violation the information There, the Supreme Court gave the
is sufficient if it alleges facts which the following example: “Suppose xxx that there
offender did as constituting a violation of was a law providing that all persons who
law, without explicitly negating the performed manual labor on Sunday should
exception, as the exception is a matter of be punished, with a provision that if such
defense which the accused has to prove. labor should be performed out of necessity,
(People vs. San Juan, G.R. No. L-22944, the person performing it would not be
1968) liable. In such a case, in the complaint, in
order to show a good cause of action, it
There, the Information alleged that the would be necessary to allege that the labor
accused prevented the offended party from was not performed under necessity. In

ATENEO CENTRAL
other words, the complaint, in order to be the place of actual commission is within Makati
free from objection raised by a demurrer, City and the place of commission is not an
must show that the person accused of the essential place of the offense charged.
crime, in the absence of proof, is
punishable under the law. One who In cases of falsification of private documents, the
performed labor under necessity would not venue is the place where the document is actually
be liable.” falsified, to the prejudice of or with intent to
prejudice a third person, regardless whether or not
When an exception or negative allegation the falsified document is put to the improper or
is not an ingredient of the offense and is a illegal use for which it was intended. (Navaja v De
matter of defense, it need not be alleged. Castro, G.R. No. 182926, 2015)
(U.S. v. Chan Toco, G.R. No. L-3851,
1908) Date of Commission of the Offense
General Rule: It is not necessary to state in the
3. Complex Crimes: Where what is alleged in the complaint or information the precise date the
information is a complex crime and the evidence offense was committed. (People v. Bacus, G.R.
fails to support the charge as to one of the No. 208354, 2015)
component offenses, the defendant can be
convicted of the offense proven. Exception: If the date is material ingredient of the
offense. (Examples: Election offenses, Infanticide)
Place of the Commission of the Offense
General Rule: A complaint or information is The remedy against an indictment that fails to
sufficient if it appears from the allegation that the allege the time of commission of the offense with
offense was committed or some of its essential sufficient definiteness is a motion for bill of
ingredients occurred at some place, within the particulars (Rule 116, Sec. 10). The failure to
territorial jurisdiction of the court (Rule 110, Sec. move or specification or the quashal of the
10). information on any of the grounds provided for in
the Rules deprives the accused of the right to
Exception: When the place of commission is an object to evidence which could be lawfully
essential element of the offense, the place of introduced and admitted under an information of
commission must be alleged with particularity more or less general terms but which sufficiently
(Rule 110, Sec. 10). e.g. trespass to dwelling, charges the accused with a definite crime.
destructive arson, robbery in an inhabited house. Besides, the exact date of the commission of the
crime is not an essential element of the crime.
Purpose: To show territorial jurisdiction of the (People v. Elpedes, G.R. No. 137106-07, 2001)
court.
“On or about the 27th day of November 2000” was
There may be conviction if it appears that the held to be sufficient. (People v. Delfin, G.R. No.
crime was committed not at the place alleged 201572, 2014)
in the information, provided that:
1. The place of actual commission was within The phrase “on or about” in the Information does
the jurisdiction of the court; and not require the prosecution to prove any precise
2. The particular place of commission is not an date. (Escandor v. People, G.R. No. 211962,
essential element of the offense charged. 2020)
For example, in a case for murder, where the However, it was also held that the phrase “on or
Information alleges that the victim was shot on about the year 1992” encompasses not only the
Ayala Avenue but the evidence presented shows twelve months of 1992, but includes the years prior
that the shooting took place along Paseo de and subsequent to 1992. Therefore, the accused
Roxas, the accused may still be convicted since was deprived of his right to intelligently prepare for

ATENEO CENTRAL
his defense and convincingly refute the charges Specific and identifiable,
Immaterial – will not
against him. (People v. Pareha, G.R. No. 202122, such as jewelry in a list
result in the acquittal
2014) (Senador v People, G.R.
of the accused
No. 201620, 2013)
Failure to specify the exact date or times when the
rape occurred does not ipso facto make the CAUSE OF THE ACCUSATION
Information defective on its face, as the gravamen The acts or omissions complained of as
of rape is carnal knowledge of the woman (People constituting the offense and the qualifying and
v. Cinco, G.R. No. 186460, 2009) aggravating circumstances must be stated in
ordinary and concise language and not
Name of the Offended Party necessarily in the language used in the statute but
The complaint or information must state the: in terms sufficient to enable a person of common
1. Name and surname of the persons against understanding to know what offense is being
whom or against whose property the offense charged as well as its qualifying and aggravating
was committed or any appellation or circumstances and for the court to pronounce
nickname by which such person has been or judgment (Sec. 9, Rule 110).
is known.
2. If the offended party is a juridical person, it is The information need not reproduce the law
sufficient to state its name, or any name or verbatim in alleging the acts or omissions that
designation by which it is known or by which constitute the offense. If its language is
it may be identified, without need of averring understood, the constitutional right to be informed
that it is a juridical person or that it is of the nature and cause of the accusation against
organized in accordance with law. the accused stands unviolated.
3. If there is no better way of identifying him, he
must be described under a fictitious name. If This mandate to be informed of the nature and
true name is thereafter disclosed or cause of the accusation against him does not
ascertained, the Court must cause true name require a verbatim reiteration of the law. The use
to be inserted in the complaint or information of derivatives, synonyms, and allegations of basic
and record. facts constituting the crime will suffice. (Omar
4. In crimes against property, if the name of the Villarba v. CA, G.R. No. 227777, June 15, 2020)
offended party is unknown, the property must
be described with such particularity as to Effect of Failure to allege:
properly identify the particular offense • Any of the elements of the offense: the
charged (Sec. 12, Rule 110). accused cannot be convicted of the
offense charged, even if the missing
To constitute larceny, robbery, embezzlement, elements have been proven during trial.
obtaining money by false pretenses, malicious • Qualifying and Aggravating
mischief, etc., the property obtained must be that Circumstances: Such are not considered
of another person, and indictment for such offense even if proven during the trial (Viray v.
must name the owner and a variance in this People, G.R. No. 205180)
respect between the indictment and the proof will
be fatal. DUPLICITY OF THE OFFENSE; EXCEPTION
Rule in Crimes Against Property The information is defective when it charges two
EFFECT OF ERROR or more DISTINCT or DIFFERENT offenses.
SUBJECT MATTER IN DESIGNATION OF
OFFENDED PARTY General rule: A complaint or information must
General and not Fatal – results in the charge only one offense.
identifiable, such as acquittal of the
money unlawfully taken accused

ATENEO CENTRAL
Exception: When the law prescribes a single

punishment for various offenses (Sec. 13, Rule Where the law with respect to an offense may be
110). committed in any of the different modes provided
by law, the indictment in the information is
Duplicitous Information sufficient if the offense is alleged to have been
Duplicity in criminal pleading is the joinder of two committed in one, two or more modes specified
or more distinct and separate offenses in the same therein. The various ways of committing the
count of an indictment or information. It is offense should be considered as a description of
duplicitous if it charges two or more different only one offense and the information cannot be
offenses. dismissed on the ground of multifariousness.
Purpose When several people are killed by separate bullets

To give the defendant the necessary knowledge of from a single automatic weapon, Art. 48 of RPC
the charge to enable him to prove his defense. will not apply. Each person killed became the
The State should not heap upon the defendant two victim, respectively, of a separate crime. Although
or more charges which might confuse him in his the burst of shots was caused by one single act of
defense. pressing the trigger of the automatic weapon, the
person firing it has only to keep pressing the
Remedy trigger with his finer and it would fire continually.
Filing of a Motion to Quash (Rule 110, Sec. 3[f]) Hence, it is not the single act of pressing the trigger
Waiver which produced the several felonies, but the
When the accused fails, BEFORE number of bullets which were discharged (People
ARRAIGNMENT (entering a “plea”) is completed, v Tabaco, G.R. No. 100382-100385, 1997).
to move for the quashal of the information which
charges 2 or more offenses, he thereby waives the AMENDMENT OR SUBSTITUTION OF
objection and may be found guilty of as many COMPLAINT OR INFORMATION
offenses as those charged and proved during the
Amendment
trial (Rule 120, Sec. 3).
Adding or striking out an allegation or the name of
any party, or by correcting a mistake in the name
Exceptions to the Rule on Duplicity
of a party or a mistaken or inadequate allegation
1. Continuous crimes;
or description in any other respect, so that the
2. Complex crimes;
actual merits of the controversy may speedily be
3. Special complex crimes;
determined, without regard to technicalities, and in
4. Crimes susceptible of being committed in
the most expeditious and inexpensive manner
various modes; and
(Rule 10, Sec. 1)
5. Crimes of which another offense is an
ingredient. (People v. Camerino, G.R. No. L-
Before the Accused Enters His Plea, the
13484, 1960)
Prosecutor May:
Without leave of court amend an information in
Requisites of Continuous Crime (PUU):
form or in substance:
1. Plurality of acts performed separately during a
1. Upgrade the offense;
period of time;
2. Allege qualifying and aggravating
2. Unity of penal provision infringed upon or
circumstances; or
violated;
3. Change the offense charged (Rule 110,
3. Unity of criminal intent which means that two
Sec. 14).
or more violations of the same penal provision
are united in one and the same intent leading
With leave of court, motion by the prosecutor and
to the perpetration of the same criminal
notice to the offended party when amendment:
purpose or claim (Gamboa v. CA, G.R. No. L-
1. Downgrades the offense charged; or
41054 November 28, 1975).

ATENEO CENTRAL
2. Excludes from the information a co-accused formal amendment. (Pacoy v. Cajigal, G.R. No.
(Rule 110, Sec. 14). 157472, 2007)
The court shall state the reasons in resolving the An amendment is merely formal if it did not change
motion and copies thereof furnished all parties, the essence of the offense or cause surprise as to
especially the offended party. deprive petitioner of the opportunity to meet the
new information. If the amendment only states with
After the Plea precision something that was already included in
Formal amendment only with leave of court, the original Information, it is merely a formal
and without causing prejudice to the rights amendment. (Omar Villarba v. CA, G.R. No.
of the accused 227777, 2020)
2. But when a fact supervenes which changes
the nature of the crime charged in the The amendment is substantial “when a defense of
information or upgrades it to a higher crime, the accused, under the original complaint or
in which case, there is a need for another information, would no longer be available after the
arraignment of the accused under the amendment is made, and when any evidence the
amended information (Rule 110, Sec. 14). accused might have would be inapplicable to the
complaint or information, as amended. (Kummer
Test as to whether a Defendant is Prejudiced v. People, G.R. No. 174461, 2013)
by the Amendment General Rule: After arraignment, the prosecutor
1. Whether a defense under the information as may no longer amend the information which
it originally stood would be available after changes the nature of the crime, as it will prejudice
the amendment is made; and the substantial rights of the accused (Mendez v.
2. Whether any evidence defendant might People, G.R. No. 179962, June 11, 2014).
have would be equally applicable to the
information in the new form as in the other Exception: When a fact supervenes which
(People v. Borromeo, G.R. No. L-62737 changes the nature of the crime charged in the
June 29, 1983). information or upgrades it to a higher crime, the
prosecutor, with leave of court, may amend the
When an amendment is formal or substantial information to allege such supervening fact and
The amendment is formal when it does not change upgrade the crime charged to the higher crime
the nature of the crime alleged therein, or affect brought about by such supervening fact provided
the essence of the offense, or cause surprise; or it will not prejudice the rights of the accused.
deprive the accused of an opportunity to meet the
new averment. (Ricarze v. Court of Appeals, G.R. HOWEVER, if the supervening event which
No. 160451, 2007) changes the nature of the crime to a more serious
one occurred after the accused has been
An amendment which does not change the nature convicted, which makes the amendment of the
of the crime alleged therein, does not expose the information no longer the remedy of the
accused to a charge which could call for a higher prosecution, the prosecution can and should
penalty, does not affect the essence of the offense charge the accused for such more serious crime,
or cause surprise or deprive the accused of an without placing the accused in double jeopardy,
opportunity to meet the new averment had each there being no identity of the offense charged in
been held to be one of form and not of substance- the first information and in the second one.
not prejudicial to the accused and, therefore, not
prohibited by Section 14, Rule 110. (People v. Amendments to Information May Be Allowed
Casey, G.R. No. L-30146, 1981) when:
Changing the word “Homicide” to “Murder” in the 1. It does not deprive the accused of the right to
caption of the case, without any change in the invoke prescription;
facts constituting the offense charged, is purely a 2. It does not affect or alter the nature of the
offense originally charged;

ATENEO CENTRAL
3. It does not involve a change in the basic amendment which does not adversely affect any
theory of the prosecution so as to require the substantial right of the accused; and (5) an
accused to undergo any material charge or amendment that merely adds specifications to
modification in his defense; eliminate vagueness in the information and not to
4. It does not expose the accused to a charge introduce new and material facts, and merely
which would call for a higher penalty; states with additional precision something which is
5. It does not cause surprise or deprive the already contained in the original information and
accused of an opportunity to meet the new which adds nothing essential for conviction for the
averment. crime charged.
Substitution of the Complaint or Information The test as to whether a defendant is prejudiced

1. Before Plea – double jeopardy does not by the amendment is whether a defense under the
arise. information as it originally stood would be available
after the amendment is made, and whether any
2. Anytime AFTER Plea – (no double jeopardy evidence defendant might have would be equally
and bail for witness) applicable to the information in the one form as in
a. Mistake has been made in charging the the other. An amendment to an information which
proper offense or the accused cannot be does not change the nature of the crime alleged
convicted of the offense charged, therein does not affect the essence of the offense
b. Court shall dismiss the original complaint or cause surprise or deprive the accused of an
or information upon the filing of a new one, opportunity to meet the new averment had each
c. Provided, accused will not be placed in been held to be one of form and not of substance.
double jeopardy (Ricarze v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 160451, 9
February 2007)
When it becomes manifest at any time before
judgment that a mistake has been made in Amendment vs. Substitution
charging the proper offense and the accused AMENDMENT SUBSTITUTION
cannot be convicted of the offense charged or any
other offense necessarily included therein, the May involve either Involves
accused shall not be discharged if there appears formal or substantial substantial change
good cause to detain him. In such case, the court changes. from original
shall commit the accused to answer for the proper charge.
offense and dismiss the original case upon the
filing of the proper information. Amendment before Substitution of
the plea has been information must
Note: A substantial amendment consists of the entered can be be with leave of
recital of facts constituting the offense charged effected without leave court as the
and determinative of the jurisdiction of the court. of court. original information
All other matters are merely of form. has to be
dismissed.
The following have been held to be mere formal When an amendment Another
amendments: (1) new allegations which relate only is only as to form, preliminary
to the range of the penalty that the court might there is no need for investigation is
impose in the event of conviction; (2) an another preliminary entailed and the
amendment which does not charge another investigation and the accused has to
offense different or distinct from that charged in the retaking of the plea of plead anew to the
original one; (3) additional allegations which do not the accused. new information.
alter the prosecution’s theory of the case so as to
cause surprise to the accused and affect the form
of defense he has or will assume; (4) an

ATENEO CENTRAL
An amended Requires or for his witnesses and other evidence in another

information refers to presupposes that place (Treñas v. People, G.R. No. 195002, 2012)
the same offense the new
charged in the original information General Rule
information or to an involves a different Penal laws are territorial; hence Philippine courts
offense which offense which does have no jurisdiction over crimes committed outside
necessarily includes not include or is not the Philippines. It cannot be waived or changed by
or is necessarily necessarily the agreement of the parties or by consent of the
included in the included in the defendant.
original charge, original charge,
hence substantial hence the accused Exception
amendments to the cannot claim There are crimes punished under the RPC and
information after the double jeopardy. under special penal laws which have
plea has been taken extraterritorial jurisdiction.
cannot be made over a. Felonies under Art. 2 of the RPC
the objection of the b. Those committed on a railroad, train,
accused, for if the aircraft, or any other public or private vehicle
original would be in the course of its trip
withdrawn, the c. Those committed on board a vessel in the
accused could invoke course of its voyage
double jeopardy. d. Piracy
e. Libel
f. Cases filed under B.P. 22
Variance between Indictment and Proof: g. Cases of Illegal Recruitment under R.A.
1. When the offense proved is less serious than 8042
and is necessarily included in the offense h. Those falling under R.A. 10175
charged, in which case, the defendant shall i. Transitory or Continuing Offenses
be convicted of the offense proved;
In exceptional circumstances, to ensure a fair
2. When the offense proved is more serious trial and impartial inquiry, the Supreme Court shall
than and includes the offense charged, in have the power to order a change of venue or
which case the defendant shall be convicted place of trial to avoid the miscarriage of justice
of the offense charged; (1987 Constitution, Section 5(4), Art. VIII).
3. When the offense proved is neither included INTERVENTION OF OFFENDED PARTY

in, nor does it include, the offense charged
and is different therefrom, in which case the General Rule
court should dismiss the action and order the Offended party has the right to intervene by
filing of new information charging the proper counsel in the prosecution of the criminal action
offense. (Substitution of information applies where the civil action for recovery of civil liability is
in this case). instituted in the criminal action pursuant to Rule
111, Sec. 16).
VENUE OF CRIMINAL ACTIONS
Exception/s:
Venue in Criminal Case is Jurisdictional, Being 1. Where from the nature of the crime and law
an Essential Element of Jurisdiction defining and punishing, no civil liability arises
in favor of the offended party (e.g., charge of
Purpose: Plunder, which involves government funds
To ensure that the defendant is not compelled to only, as opposed to Estafa, where the money
move to, and appear in, a different court from that belongs to a private person);
of the province where the crime was committed as 2. Where the offended party has waived the
it would cause him great inconvenience in looking right to civil indemnity (e.g., Estafa, where the

ATENEO CENTRAL
offended party states that he/she waives

recovery of actual and other damages); or
3. Where the offended party has already
instituted an action (e.g., Estafa, where the
offended party has filed a separate civil
action to recover actual and other damages).
Where the offended party withdrew a reservation

to file a separate civil action, the private prosecutor
may still intervene in the prosecution of the
criminal case, by conducting the examination of
witnesses under the control of the prosecutor.
HOWEVER: Once the offended party has filed a

separate civil action arising from the crime, he may
not withdraw such civil case in order to intervene
in the criminal prosecution. He loses the right to
intervene. He no longer has any standing in the
criminal case, except to be a prosecution witness.
Q: Where a criminal action has been provisionally

dismissed upon motion of the prosecutor, can the
case be revived upon motion of the offended
party?
A: NO, because the offended party or complaining
witness cannot act for the prosecutor.

ATENEO CENTRAL
C. PROSECUTION OF CIVIL ACTION not of the corporation itself. (Gosiaco vs. Ching,
(RULE 111) G.R. No. 173807, 2009)
RULE ON IMPLIED INSTITUTION OF CIVIL When Reservation Shall Be Made:

ACTION WITH CRIMINAL ACTION 1. Before the prosecution starts to present its
evidence; and
General Rule 2. Under circumstances affording the offended
When a criminal action is instituted, the civil action party a reasonable opportunity to make such
for the recovery of the civil liability arising from the reservation (Rule 111, Sec. 1(2)).
offense shall be deemed instituted with the
criminal action. (Rule 111, Sec. 1). Where No Reservation Shall Be Allowed
Criminal action for violation of B.P. 22 and
Exception: Unless the offended party Estafa–Unless a separate civil action has
1. Waives the civil action; been filed before the institution of the criminal
2. Reserves his right to institute the civil action action, no such civil action can be instituted
separately; or after the criminal action has been filed as the
3. Institutes the civil action prior to the criminal same has been included therein.
action (Rule 111, Sec. 1).
Where the civil action has been filed separately
The civil action that is deemed instituted with the before the criminal action, it may be consolidated
criminal action refers only to that arising from the upon application with the court trying the latter
offense charged or civil liability “ex delicto.” case.
(Solidum v. People, G.R. No. 192123, 2014).
Instead of instituting two separate cases, one for
Under the Rules, where the civil action for criminal and another for civil, only a single suit
recovery of civil liability is instituted in the criminal shall be filed and tried. The policy laid down by the
action pursuant to Rule 111, the offended party rules is to discourage the separate filing of the civil
may intervene by counsel in the prosecution of the action. (Heirs of Simon v. Chan, CA, G.R. No.
offense. (Lee v. Chua, G.R. No. 181658, 2013). 157547, 2011)
Note on juridical persons: Nowhere in B.P. Blg. The civil liability arising from the act of issuing a
22 is it provided that a juridical person may be bouncing check can be the subject of both civil
impleaded as an accused or defendant in the actions deemed instituted with the estafa case and
prosecution for violations of that law, even in the the BP 22 violation. In the crimes of both estafa
litigation of the civil aspect thereof. Nonetheless, and violations of BP 22, Rule 111 of the Rules of
the substantive right of a creditor to recover due Court expressly allows, even automatically, the
and demandable obligations against a debtor- institution of a civil action without need of election
corporation cannot be denied or diminished by a by the offended party. (Rodriguez v. Ponferrada,
rule of procedure. G.R. Nos. 155531-34, 2005)
Nothing in Section 1(b) of Rule 111 prohibits the Claims arising from an offense which is cognizable
reservation of a separate civil action against the by the SB – a civil action filed prior to the criminal
juridical person on whose behalf the check was action has to be transferred to the subsequently
issued. What the rules prohibit is the reservation filed criminal action for consolidation and joint
of a separate civil action against the natural person determination with the civil action. (P.D. No.1606
charged with violating B.P. Blg. 22, including such as amended by R.A. No. 8249, Sec. 4);
corporate officer who had signed the bounced
check. NOTE: The filing of the criminal action necessarily
carries with it the filing of the civil action, and no
The civil action that is impliedly instituted based on right to reserve the filing of such civil action
B.P. 22 is only the civil liability of the signatory and separately from the criminal action shall be

ATENEO CENTRAL
recognized. However, where the civil action had 3. Require only a preponderance of evidence
been filed separately but judgment has not been (Rule 111, Sec. 3).
rendered, and a criminal case is filed before the
Sandiganbayan or appropriate court, said civil Exception: A plaintiff cannot recover damages
action shall be transferred thereto. Otherwise, the twice for the same act or omission of the
civil action shall be deemed abandoned. (P.D. No. defendant.
1606, as amended by R.A. No. 10660, Sec. 4)
Purpose: To make the court’s disposition of the
3. Tax cases (R.A. No. 9282, Sec. 7[b][1]); and criminal case of no effect whatsoever on the
separate civil case.
4. Civil actions, which can be filed and
prosecuted independently of the criminal NOTE: This is subject to the rule prohibiting
action, namely, those provided in Articles 32, double recovery.
33, 34 and 2176 of the Civil Code.
WHEN SEPARATE CIVIL ACTION IS
Although the criminal and civil actions may be SUSPENDED
joined in the criminal case, they are distinct from
General Rule: Primacy of Criminal Action Over
each other. The plaintiffs in the two actions are
Civil Action
different.
After the filing of the criminal action, the civil action
arising therefrom, which has been reserved,
THEREFORE: Even if the accused started serving
cannot be instituted until final judgment has been
his sentence within the 15-day period from the
rendered in the criminal action (Rule 111, Sec. 2).
promulgation of the judgment of conviction by the
lower court, thereby making the judgment against
If the civil action is instituted before the criminal
him final, the complainant may, within the 15-day
action and the criminal action is subsequently
reglementary period, ask that the civil liability be
commenced, the pending civil action shall be
fixed by the court, if 1) the judgment does not
suspended until final judgment of the criminal
adjudicate any civil liability, as the judgment
action has been rendered (Rule 111, Sec. 2).
regarding civil liability has not become final; and 2)
the court still has jurisdiction to adjudge the civil
Exceptions:
liability.
1. In cases of independent civil actions based
upon Articles 32, 33, 34 and 2176 of the Civil
NOTE: Only the civil liability arising from the crime
Code (Rule 111, Sec. 3);
charged (cause of action arising from delict) as a
2. In cases where the civil action presents a
felony is deemed instituted. Civil liability arising
prejudicial question; and
from other sources of obligations (law, quasi-
3. Where the civil action is not one intended to
contract and quasi-delict) are no longer deemed
enforce the civil liability arising from the
instituted such as those under Article 32, 33, 34
offense.
and 2176 of the Civil Code which can be
prosecuted even without reservation.
Article 29 of the Civil Code merely emphasizes
that a civil action for damages is not precluded by
WHEN CIVIL ACTION MAY PROCEED the acquittal of an accused for the same criminal
act or omission. It does not state that the remedy
INDEPENDENTLY
can be availed of only in a separate civil action.
General Rule: Independent civil actions under
Articles 32, 33, 34 and 2176 of the Civil Code: While the criminal action is pending, the running of
1. May be brought by the offended party; the period of prescription of the civil action which,
2. Proceed independently of criminal action; either 1) cannot be instituted separately or 2)
and whose proceeding has been suspended, shall be
tolled.

ATENEO CENTRAL
not exist. (Coscolluela v. Sandiganbayan. G.R.

Consolidation of Criminal and Civil Cases No. 191411, 2013)
Before Judgment on the Merits
Before judgment on the merits is rendered in the The acquittal of an accused who is also a
civil action, the same may, upon motion of the respondent in an administrative case does not
offended party be consolidated with the criminal conclude the administrative proceedings, nor carry
action in the court trying the criminal action. This with it relief from administrative liability. Only
is a modification on the rule on primacy of criminal substantial evidence is necessary in
action (Rule 111, Sec. 1, last paragraph). administrative cases. (Gupilan-Aguilar v. Office of
the Ombudsman, G.R. No. 197307, 2014, see also
Where Effected Dy v. People, G.R. No. 189081, 2016)
The consolidation must be effected in the criminal
court, irrespective of the nature of the offense, the The Supreme Court, in Co v. Muñoz (G.R. No.
amount of the civil claim or the rank of the court 181986, 2013) ruled that there was no libel
trying the civil case. committed because Muñoz’s remarks were
privileged communication, and since malice was
In cases where consolidation is given due course, no longer presumed, there was no civil liability on
the evidence presented and admitted in the civil his part.
case shall be deemed automatically reproduced in
the criminal action without prejudice to the right of Criminal liability for estafa is not affected by a
the prosecution to cross-examine the witnesses compromise or novation of contract, since it is a
presented by the offended party in the criminal public offense (Metrobank v. Reynaldo, G.R. No.
case and of the parties to present additional G.R. No. 164538, 2010)
evidence.
EFFECT OF THE DEATH OF ACCUSED OR
The consolidated criminal and civil cases shall be CONVICT ON CIVIL ACTION
tried and decided jointly (Rule 111, Sec. 2).
Before Arraignment
The criminal action shall be dismissed without
General Rule: Civil liability is not extinguished by
prejudice to the offended party’s filing any civil
an acquittal where:
action against the estate of the deceased (Rule
111, Sec. 4).
1. The acquittal is based on reasonable doubt,
if the civil case has been reserved.
After Arraignment and During the Pendency of
2. The decision contains a declaration that the
the Criminal Action
liability is not criminal but only civil in nature.
General Rule: Death extinguishes the civil liability
3. The civil liability is not derived from or based
arising from delict or the offense (Rule 111, Sec.
on the criminal act of which the accused is
4).
acquitted. (Sapiera v. Court of Appeals, G.R.
No. 128927, 1999).
Exception: Where civil liability is predicated on
other sources of obligations such as law, contract,
Exception: If there is a finding in the final
quasi-contract, and quasi-delict (Asilo v. People
judgment in the criminal action that the act or
G.R. Nos. 159017-18, 2011) - Independent civil
omission from which the civil liability may arise did
action
not exist. (Ching v. Nicdao, G.R. No. 141181,
2007)
Both may be continued against the estate or legal
representative of the accused after proper
The acquittal of petitioner does not bar the
substitution, or against said estate, whatever the
offended party from pursuing a subsequent civil
case may be. Heirs of the deceased shall be
case based on the delict, UNLESS, the judgment
substituted for the deceased defendant without
of acquittal expressly declares that the act or
requiring the appointment of an executor or
omission from which the civil liability may arise did
administrator. The court may also appoint a

ATENEO CENTRAL
guardian ad litem for minor heirs. The criminal other than delicts; in which case, the victim may
case is reduced to a civil action. (People v. Lipata file a separate civil action against the estate of the
y Ortiza, G.R. No. 200302, 2016) accused, as may be warranted by law and
procedural rules. (People v. Layag, G.R. No.
If the civil action has been reserved and 214875, 2016).
subsequently filed or such civil action has been
instituted, when the accused died, then such civil PREJUDICIAL QUESTION
action will proceed and substitution of parties shall
be ordered by the court pursuant to Section 16 Prejudicial Question
Rule 3 of the Rules of Court. It arises in a case, the resolution of which is a
logical antecedent of the issue involved in the
The Supreme Court, in People v. Lipata, ruled that criminal case and the cognizance of which
there was no separate civil case instituted prior to pertains to another tribunal (Omictin v. CA, G.R.
the criminal case. Neither was there any No.148004, January 22, 2007)
reservation for filing a separate civil case for the
cause of action arising from quasi-delict. Under the A prejudicial question is a question based on a fact
present Rules, the heirs of Cueno should file a distinct and separate from the crime, but so
separate civil case in order to obtain financial intimately connected with it that its ascertainment
retribution for their loss. The lack of a separate civil determines the guilt or innocence of the accused.
case for the cause of action arising from quasi- For it to suspend the criminal action, it must
delict leads us to the conclusion that, a decade appear not only that the civil case involves facts
after Cueno’s death, his heirs cannot recover even intimately related to those upon which the criminal
a centavo from the amounts awarded by the CA prosecution would be based, but also that in the
(People v. Lipata, G.R. No. 200302, 2016). resolution of the issue or issue raised in the civil
case, the guilt or innocence of the accused would
After Final Judgment necessarily be determined (J. Caguioa, Mathay v.
The action is enforced as a money claim against Mathay, G.R. No. 218964, 2020).
the estate. (Rule 86)
Suspension of the criminal case due to a
Judgment in Civil Action Not A Bar prejudicial question is only a procedural matter,
A final judgment rendered in a civil action and is subject to a waiver by virtue of prior acts of
absolving the defendant from civil liability is not a the accused.
bar to a criminal action against the defendant for
the same act or omission subject of the civil action Purpose: To avoid two conflicting decisions (Jose
(Rule 111, Sec. 5). v. Suarez, 556 SCRA 773).
Note: Where the criminal case was dismissed Where to File Petition for Suspension By
before trial because the offended party executed Reason of Prejudicial Question
an affidavit of desistance, the civil action thereof is Office of the Prosecutor or the court conducting
similarly dismissed. the preliminary investigation (Rule 111, Sec. 6).
Upon accused's death pending appeal of his Time to Plead

conviction, the criminal action is extinguished A petition for suspension of the criminal action
inasmuch as there is no longer a defendant to based upon the pendency of a prejudicial question
stand as the accused; the civil action instituted in a civil action may be filed with the office of the
therein for the recovery of the civil liability ex prosecutor or the court conducting the preliminary
delicto is ipso facto extinguished, grounded as it is investigation. Even during preliminary
on the criminal action. However, it is well to clarify investigation, a petition for suspension based on
that accused's civil liability in connection with his prejudicial question can be filed before the
acts against the victim may be based on sources investigating officer.

ATENEO CENTRAL
When the criminal action has been filed in court for Exception: The Supreme Court has relaxed this
trial, the petition to suspend shall be filed in the rule in terms of the scope of application, extending
same criminal action at any time before the it to a previously instituted administrative case and
prosecution rests (Rule 111, Sec. 6). a subsequent civil case (Quiambao v. Osorio, G.R.
No. L-48157, 1998) and also a previously
Elements of Prejudicial Question based on instituted administrative case and a subsequent
Jurisprudence criminal case (San Miguel Properties, Inc. vs. Sec.
1. The civil case involves facts intimately related Hernando Perez, G.R. No. 166836, 2013).
to those upon which the criminal prosecution
would be based The Supreme Court acknowledged in those cases
2. In the resolution of the issue or issues raised that there was an INTIMATE CORRELATION OR
in the civil action, the guilt or innocence of the INTIMATE RELATION between the two cases.
accused would necessarily be determined;
3. Jurisdiction to try said question must be The annulment of marriage is not a prejudicial
lodged in another tribunal. (People v. question in the criminal case for parricide. (Joselito
Arambulo, G.R. No. 186597, 2015) Pimentel v. Maria C. Pimentel, G.R.172060,
2010).
Elements of Prejudicial Question Based on the
Rules of Court A prejudicial question need not conclusively
1. The previously instituted civil action involves resolve the guilt or innocence of the accused. It is
an issue similar or intimately related to the enough that it tests the sufficiency of the
issue raised in the subsequent criminal allegations in the information in order to sustain
action. further prosecution of the criminal case. (San
2. The resolution of such issue determines Miguel Properties v. Perez, G.R. No. 192253,
whether or not the criminal action may 2013)
proceed (Rule 111, Sec. 7).
The phrase “previously instituted” in Rule 111
In a case where one party filed a civil case to nullify Section 7 was inserted to qualify the nature of the
a share purchase agreement (civil case #1) while civil action involved in a prejudicial question in
the other party sought an injunction on the relation to the criminal action. This interpretation is
subsequent transfer of shares (civil case #2) and further buttressed by the insertion of the word
subsequently filed a criminal action for qualified “subsequent” directly before the term criminal
theft, the criminal proceeding may be suspended action. There is no other logical explanation other
on the ground of a prejudicial question. Should the than the civil action must precede the criminal
court rule that the share purchase agreement is action for there to be a prejudicial question.
invalid in the first civil case and should the court (Dreamwork Construction v. Janiola and Famini,
declare in the second civil case that she is not G.R. No. 184861, 2009)
entitled to the return of the stocks, then there is no
taking of personal property with intent to gain. B.P. 22 controversies generally present a special
Hence, a prejudicial question exists as the issues class of cases with consistent rulings against the
are intimately connected and its ascertainment appreciation of a prejudicial question. The issue in
determines the guilt or innocence of the accused the criminal cases is whether the petitioner is guilty
(Mathay v. People, G.R. No. 218964, June 30, of violating B.P. 22, while in the civil case, it is
2020). whether the private respondents are entitled to
collect from the petitioner the sum or the value of
Requirement of Previous Civil Action and the checks. The resolution in the civil action is not
Subsequent Criminal Action determinative of the guilt or innocence of the
General Rule: The civil action must be previously accused in the criminal action. Mere issuance of a
instituted vis-à-vis a criminal action for the doctrine worthless check with knowledge of the
of prejudicial question to apply (Rule 111, Sec. 6). insufficiency of funds constitutes the crime. (Yap
v. Cabales, G.R. No. 159186, 2009)

ATENEO CENTRAL
was filed, this is equivalent to the filing of 40

An independent civil action based on fraud different information, as each count represents an
initiated by the defrauded party does not raise a independent violation of the law. Filing fees, are
prejudicial question to stop the proceedings in a therefore, due for each count. (Chua v. Executive
pending criminal prosecution of the defendant for Judge, G.R. No. 202920, 2013).
estafa through falsification. The result of the
independent civil action is irrelevant to the issue of Purpose of Execution: to prevent offended party
guilt or innocence of the accused. In no case, from using the prosecutor’s office and the court as
however, may the offended party recover vehicles for recovery of the face value of the
damages twice for the same act or omission check, without paying the corresponding filing fees
charged in the criminal action. (Consing, Jr. vs.
People, G.R. No. 161075, 2013) Damages Other Than Actual
1. If these damages are specified in the
A prejudicial question in an administrative case complaint or information, the corresponding
filed with the HLURB suspends the criminal action filing fees should be paid, otherwise, the trial
because the action for specific performance was court will not acquire jurisdiction over such
civil in nature but could not be instituted elsewhere other damages.
except in the HLURB whose jurisdiction over the
action was exclusive and original. (San Miguel 2. If not specified in the complaint or
Properties v. Perez, G.R. No. 192253, 2013). information, the grant and amount thereof are
left to the sound discretion of the trial court,
RULE ON FILING FEES IN CIVIL ACTION the corresponding filing fees need not be paid
DEEMED INSTITUTED WITH THE CRIMINAL and shall simply constitute a first lien on the
ACTION judgment.
CASE FILING FEES REQUIRED 3. In an appeal of a criminal case, the appellate

Actual court may impose additional damages or
None
damages increase or decrease the amounts of
Based on the amount of the check; damages upon the accused-appellant.
BP 22 paid in full upon filing of the criminal
and civil actions 4. Additional penalties cannot be imposed upon
Estafa Based on the amount involved a co-accused who did not appeal, but
Based on the amount in the complaint. modifications of the judgment beneficial to
Damages If there is no specified amount in the him are considered in his favor.
other complaint, filing fees shall be
than assessed in accordance with the 5. The offended party in a criminal case may
Actual Rules, and shall be a first lien on the appeal the civil aspect despite the acquittal of
judgment. the accused. Where the trial court convicted
Actual Damages the accused, but dismissed the civil action
General Rule: No filing fees are required for instituted therein, the offended party may
amounts of actual damages (Rule 111, Sec. 1). appeal the dismissal to the CA.
Exception: Criminal action for violation of B.P. 22 6. If aggravating circumstance is not alleged but
which is deemed to include the corresponding civil proven in trial, the court will not consider such
action. The offended party shall, upon the filing of aggravating circumstance in the award of
the criminal and civil actions, pay in full the filing damages
fees based on the face value of the check as the
actual damages. Compromise on Civil Aspect
The offended party may compromise the civil
Where a total of 40 counts of violation of B.P. 22 aspect of a crime, provided that it must be entered

ATENEO CENTRAL
before or during the pendency of the case, and not investigating officer acts upon reasonable belief. It
after final judgment. A compromise on the civil implies probability of guilt and requires more than
aspect is valid even if it turns out to be bare suspicion but less than evidence to justify a
unsatisfactory either to one or both of the parties. conviction. (Manebo v. Acosta, G.R. No. 169554,
2009, see also SEC v. Santos, G.R. No. 195542,
IMPORTANT: Section 1, Rule 111, Rules of 2014)
Court now expressly provides that no
counterclaim, cross-claim or third-party complaint When Required
may be filed by the accused in the criminal case, General Rule: BEFORE the filing of a complaint
but any cause of action which could have been or information for an offense where the penalty
subject thereof may be litigated in a separate civil prescribed by law is at least 4 years, 2 months and
action. 1 day without regard to the fine.
RATIONALE: Exception: If the accused was lawfully arrested

1. The counterclaim of the accused will without warrant (Rule 112, Sec. 1).
unnecessarily complicate and confuse the
criminal proceedings; The dismissal of the case by the investigator will
2. The trial court should confine itself to the not constitute double jeopardy and will not bar the
criminal aspect and the possible civil liability filing of another complaint for the same offense,
of the accused arising out of the crime. but if re-filed, the accused is entitled to another
preliminary investigation. (Solado Law Offices v.
HOWEVER: The accused, who is presumed CA, G.R. No. 219914, 2016 citing Estrada v.
innocent, has a right to file a separate civil action Ombudsman, G.R. No. 212140-41, 2015).
in the same way that the offended party can avail
of this remedy. To disallow the accused from filing Who Conducts
a separate civil action for quasi-delict, while The rules provide that only the following officers
refusing to recognize his counterclaim in the are authorized to conduct preliminary
criminal case, is to deny him due process of law, investigations:
access to the courts, and equal protection of the 1. Provincial or City Prosecutors and their
law. (Casupanan v. Laroya, G.R. No. 145391, assistants;
2002). 2. National and Regional State Prosecutors;
3. Other officers as may be authorized by
D. PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION law. (Section 2, Rule 112)
(RULE 112)
NATURE OF RIGHT
Definition
It is an inquiry or a proceeding to determine The right of an accused to a preliminary
whether there is sufficient ground to engender a investigation is not a constitutional but merely a
well-founded belief that a crime has been statutory right. Nonetheless, it is a component
committed and that the respondent is probably part of due process in criminal justice and is a
guilty thereof and should be held for trial (Rule substantive right. It is subject to the requirements
112, Sec. 1). of both substantive and procedural due process
(Duterte v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 130191.
Nature April 27, 1998)
It is purely executive in nature; not adjudication nor
rule-making (Santos v. Go, G.R. No. 156801,
A preliminary investigation is not a trial and
2005). The courts can only come in when there is
does not involve the examination of witnesses
grave abuse of discretion on the part of the
by way of direct or cross-examinations
prosecution. PI is based on probable cause. It
(Bautista v. CA, G.R. No. 143375, July 6, 2001).
does not import absolute certainty, and need not
be based on clear and convincing evidence. The
A preliminary investigation is merely inquisitorial

ATENEO CENTRAL
and is often the only means of discovering whether No. 120468, 2001)
a person may be reasonably charged with a crime,
to enable the prosecutor to prepare the Failure by the accused to request for preliminary
information. investigation within 5 days from the time he learns
of the filing of the complaint or information in
It is not yet a trial on the merits, for its only purpose instances where the accused is lawfully arrested
is to determine whether a crime has been without a warrant (Rule 112, Sec. 6).
committed and whether there is probable No Right of Preliminary Investigation
cause to believe that the accused is guilty When a person is lawfully arrested without a
thereof. (Enrile v. Judge Manalastas, G.R. No. warrant unless there is a waiver of the provisions
166414, October 22, 2014) of Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code.
Preliminary investigation is not the occasion Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code provides for
for the full and exhaustive display of the the periods within which the public officer or
parties’ evidence. The merits and validity of the employee detaining a person for some legal
accusation or defense and the admissibility of ground is directed to deliver such person to the
testimonies and evidence are better ventilated judicial authorities (12, 18 or 36 hours depending
during trial (Ricaforte v. Jurado, G.R. No. 154428, upon the penalties prescribed for the offense).
Sept. 5, 2007).
HOWEVER: The Accused Can Ask for
The right to a preliminary investigation is a Preliminary Investigation: If he is subjected to
personal right and may be waived expressly or by lawful arrest or inquest proceeding, he can ask for
implication (People v. Lazo, G.R. No. 75367. June preliminary investigation BEFORE the filing of the
19, 1991). complaint/ information BUT he must sign a
waiver in accordance with Article 125, Revised
Lack of preliminary investigation is not a ground to Penal Code.
quash or dismiss a complaint or information, nor
does it affect the court’s jurisdiction (Pilapil v. By virtue of Section 2 of RA 7438, any waiver by
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 101978. April 7, 1993). the person arrested or detained or under custodial
investigation shall be in writing, signed by such
If there was no preliminary investigation and an person in the presence of his counsel, otherwise
objection was raised, the court, instead of such waiver shall be null and void.
dismissing the complaint or information, should
order the conduct of such investigation (Estrada v. AFTER the filing of the information/complaint, the
Ombudsman, G.R. 212140-41, 2015). accused may, within 5 days from the time he
learns of its filing ask for preliminary investigation.
Right to Speedy Disposition of Cases in
Preliminary Investigation If the accused is already arraigned, he waives his
Inordinate delay in the resolution of the preliminary right to preliminary investigation.
investigation when unjustified violates the accused
right to speedy disposition of cases (J. Caguioa, Note: This rule has been partially amended by
Perez v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 245862, 2020). A.M. 05-0-8-26-SC. The amendments took effect
on October 3, 2005. The amendment removed the
Waiver conduct of preliminary investigation from the
Failure of the accused to invoke his right to a judges of the first level courts.
preliminary investigation constitutes a waiver of
such right and any irregularity that attended it. The Burden of Proof
right may be forfeited by inaction and can no It is the duty of the prosecution, and not the
longer be invoked for the first time at the appellate Sandiganbayan tasked to act as an impartial court,
level. (People v. Liwanag y Buenaventura, G.R. to discharge the burden of proof that one’s right to

ATENEO CENTRAL
a speedy disposition of a case was not violated (J.

Caguioa, Javier v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. Required before the filing of a
237997, 2020) complaint or information for an
offense where the penalty
PURPOSES OF PRELIMINARY prescribed by law is > 4 yr, 2 mo,
INVESTIGATION and 1 day
To determine W/N a warrant of
Purposes:
arrest or a commitment order
1. To determine whether a crime has been
Judge (Rule shall be issued and that there is
committed and whether there is probable
112, Secs. 5 & a necessity of placing
cause to believe that the accused is guilty
8) respondent under immediate
thereof (Bautista v. CA, G.R. No. 143375,
custody in order not to frustrate
July 6, 2001).
the ends of justice
When making a warrantless
Note: Probable cause for purposes of filing a
arrest, and he has probable
criminal information is defined as such facts as are Peace Officer
cause to believe based on
sufficient to engender a well-founded belief that a or Private
personal knowledge of facts
crime has been committed and that the Person (Rule
or circumstances that the
respondent is probably guilty thereof. Probable 113, Sec. 5[b])
person to be arrested has
cause, although it requires less than evidence
committed it
justifying a conviction, demands more than bare
Judge (Rule To determine W/N a search
suspicion (Callo-Claridad v. Esteban, G.R. No.
126, Sec. 4) warrant shall be issued
191567, March 20, 2013)
Officers Authorized To Conduct Preliminary
2. To preserve evidence and keep the witnesses
Investigation
within the control of the State.
1. Provincial or City Prosecutor and their
assistants
3. To determine the amount of bail, if the offense
2. National and Regional State Prosecutors
is bailable. (Callo-Claridad vs. Esteban, G.R.
3. Such other officers as may be authorized by
No. 191567, 2013)
law such as the COMELEC, Ombudsman
and PCGG (Rule 112, Sec. 2).
Note: It must be stressed that a preliminary
investigation is essentially prefatory and
Note: Their authority to conduct preliminary
inquisitorial. It is not a trial based on the merits of
investigations shall include all crimes cognizable
the case. (Community Rural Bank of Guimba, Inc.
by the proper court in their respective territorial
v. Judge Talavera, A.M. No. RTJ-05-1909, 2005)
jurisdictions. (As amended by A.M. No. 05-8-26-
SC, effective October 3, 2005)
WHO MAY DETERMINE EXISTENCE OF
PROBABLE CAUSE MTC Judges No Longer Authorized to Conduct
Preliminary Investigation
Instances When Probable Cause Needs To Be By implication, Municipal Trial Court judges in
Established Manila and in chartered cities have not been
WHO PURPOSE OF granted the authority to conduct Preliminary
DETERMINES DETERMINATION Investigation, as the officers authorized to do so
To determine W/N there is are the prosecutors
sufficient ground to engender
Investigating Note: A.M. No. 05-8-26-SC, which took effect on
a well-founded belief that a
Officer (Rule 3 October 2005, amended Rules 112 and 114 by
crime has been committed,
112, Secs. 1 & removing the conduct of preliminary investigation
that the respondent is
3) from judges of the first level courts. Thus, only the
probably guilty thereof, and
should be held for trial ff. officers are authorized to conduct PI:

ATENEO CENTRAL
1. Provincial or City Prosecutors and their

assistants; Primary jurisdiction over cases
2. National and Regional State Prosecutors; cognizable by the
and Sandiganbayan, and may take
3. Other officers as may be authorized by law. over, at any stage, from any
(Conquilla v. Bernardo, A.M. No. MTJ-09- investigatory agency of the
1737, 2011) Gov’t, the investigation of such
cases
Note: Although courts must respect the executive PCGG, Investigate, file, and prosecute
determination of probable cause, the trial courts assisted by cases falling under its
may still independently determine probable cause. OSG (EO No. jurisdiction, which are generally
They are not irrevocably bound to the 14, 1986) cases of ill-gotten wealth
determination of probable cause by the prosecutor
and the DOJ. Election Offenses
The exclusive jurisdiction of the COMELEC to
The trial court actually has the following options investigate and prosecute election offenses
upon the filing of a criminal information: inheres even if the offender is a private individual
(1) immediately dismiss the case if the evidence or public officer or employee, and in the latter
on record clearly fails to establish probable cause; instance, irrespective of whether the offense is
(2) issue a warrant of arrest if it finds probable committed in relation to his official duties or not. In
cause; and other words, it is the nature of the offense, namely,
(3) order the prosecutor to present additional an election offense as defined in the Omnibus
evidence within five days from notice in case of Election Code and in other election laws, and not
doubt as to the existence of probable cause. The the personality of the offender that matters.
RTC is allowed to dismiss the charge of estafa
against Ang notwithstanding the executive Regarding Offenses Falling Within the Original
determination of probable cause by the Jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan
prosecutor. If we were to construe otherwise, we Prosecutors of offenses falling within the original
would be contradicting the basic principle that jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan shall, after their
"once an information is filed in RTC, any conclusion, transmit the records and their
disposition of the case rests already in the sound resolutions to the Ombudsman or his deputy for
discretion of the court." (Anlud Metal Recycling appropriate action.
Corporation v. Ang, G.R. No. 182157, 2015).
Moreover, the prosecutor cannot dismiss the
Other Officers Who are Authorized by Law to complaint without the prior written authority of the
Determine Probable Cause Ombudsman or his deputy, nor can the prosecutor
OFFICER INSTANCES file an information with the Sandiganbayan without
COMELEC, being deputized by, and without prior written
through its duly Election offenses punishable authority of, the Ombudsman or his deputy.
authorized legal under the OEC
officers The Ombudsman is clothed with the authority to
(Omnibus Prior to amendment, all election conduct preliminary investigation and to prosecute
Election Code, offenses all criminal cases involving public officers and
Sec. 265) employees, not only those within the jurisdiction of
Investigate and prosecute any the SB, but also those within the jurisdiction of the
Office of the act or omission of any public regular courts. Section 15 of R.A. No. 6770
Ombusdman officer or employee, office or (Ombudsman Act of 1989) does not make any
(Ombudsman agency, when such act or distinction. “Any illegal act or omission of any
Act, Sec. 15[1]) omission appears to be illegal, public official” is broad enough to embrace any
unjust, improper, or inefficient crime committed by a public officer or employee.

ATENEO CENTRAL
Such grant of primary jurisdiction over cases may avail of the special civil action of certiorari
cognizable by the SB does not necessarily imply under Rule 65.
the exclusion from its jurisdiction of cases
involving public officers and employees Absent any showing of grave abuse of discretion
cognizable by other courts. (Uy v. Sandiganbayan, however, the SC will not interfere and overturn the
G.R. Nos. 105965-70, 1999) Ombudsman’s findings of probable cause in
investigating criminal complaints. The executive
In criminal prosecutions, a reinvestigation, like an determination of probable cause is a highly factual
appeal, renders the entire case open for review, matter and as the Ombudsman is armed with the
regardless of whether a motion for reconsideration power to investigate, it is in a better position to
or reinvestigation was sought. The Ombudsman assess the strengths or weaknesses of the
should not be limited in its review. It is clear from evidence on hand to make a finding of probable
R.A. No. 6770 that the Ombudsman may motu cause. Since the SC is not a trier of facts, it shall
propio conduct a reinvestigation. (Roxas v. defer to the sound judgment of the Ombudsman.
Vasquez, G.R. No. 114944, 2002) (Arroyo v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 210488,
2020)
The Ombudsman
The power of the Ombudsman to investigate The Ombudsman DOES NOT Have the
extends to any illegal act or omission of any public Following Powers:
official, whether or not the same is committed in 1. To prosecute before the SB cases involving
relation to his office. impeachable officers, involving any offense
which carries with it the penalty of removal
Moreover, the jurisdiction of the Office of the from office, or any penalty wherein the
Ombudsman should not be equated with the service of which would amount to removal
limited authority of the Special Prosecutor under from office because by constitutional
Section 11 of RA 6770. Certainly, the lawmakers mandate, they can only be removed from
did not intend to confine the investigatory and office by way of impeachment for culpable
prosecutory powers of the Ombudsman to these violations of the Constitution, treason,
types of cases. The Ombudsman is mandated by bribery, graft and corruption, other high
law to act on all complaints against officers and crimes, or betrayal of public trust
employees of the government and to enforce their 2. To prosecute public officers or employees
administrative, civil and criminal liability in every who have committed election offenses.
case where the evidence warrants. The law 3. To file an information for an offense
likewise allows him to direct the Special cognizable by the regular courts.
Prosecutor to prosecute cases outside the
Sandiganbayan's jurisdiction in accordance with Effects of an Incomplete Preliminary
Section 11 (4c) of RA 6770. (Uy v. Investigation
Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 105965-70, 1999) 1. It does not warrant the quashal of the
information
Section 4(d) of Administrative Order No. 07 2. It does not affect the court’s jurisdiction or the
disallows the filing of a motion to quash or dismiss validity of the information.
a complaint filed with the Ombudsman, except on
the ground of lack of jurisdiction. A motion to dismiss is now a prohibited pleading
during preliminary investigation.
Which remedy may an aggrieved party avail of
against resolutions of the Ombudsman in The respondent is now required to submit counter-
criminal or non-administrative cases? affidavits and other supporting documents relied
The law is silent. Hence, appeal is not available as upon by him for his defense.
a remedy because the right to appeal is a statutory
privilege and may be availed of only if there is a The respondent has now the right to examine the
statute to that effect. However, an aggrieved party evidence submitted by the complainant of which

ATENEO CENTRAL
he may not have been furnished and to obtain judge makes a preliminary examination of the
copies thereof at his expense. evidence submitted, and on the strength thereof,
and independent from the findings of the public
If respondent cannot be subpoenaed, or if prosecutor, determines the necessity of placing
subpoenaed but does not submit his counter- the accused under immediate custody in order not
affidavit within 10 days, investigating officer shall to frustrate the ends of justice. (Young v. People,
resolve the complaint based on the evidence G.R. No. 213910, 2016)
presented by the complainant.
There are two kinds of determinations of probable
Rights of Respondent in a Preliminary cause:
Investigation: 1. Preliminary Investigation: Done by the
1. To examine the evidence submitted by the Executive Department
complainant. 2. Preliminary Examination: Done by the
2. To submit counter-affidavit. Judicial Department (Mendoza v. People,
3. To be present in the clarificatory hearing G.R. No. 197293, 2014)
(Rule 112, Sec. 3).
EXECUTIVE JUDICIAL
Note: The Rules do not require the presence of DETERMINATION DETERMINATION
the respondent in the Preliminary Investigation. Made by the proper
What is required is that he be given the opportunity officer (prosecutor)
to controvert the evidence of the complainant by during preliminary Made by the judge to
submitting counter-affidavits. investigation to ascertain whether a
ascertain whether warrant of arrest should
A clarificatory hearing is optional on the part of the there is enough be issued against the
investigating officer. If the investigating prosecutor evidence to support accused.
is already satisfied that he can reasonably an Information
determine the existence of probable cause based being filed
on the parties’ evidence thus presented, he may The judge must satisfy
terminate the proceedings and resolve the case.. The investigating
himself that based on
(De Ocampo v. Secretary of Justice, G.R. No. prosecutor
the evidence submitted,
147932, 2006, Fenix v. CA, G.R. No. 189878, evaluates if the
there is necessity for
2016) facts are sufficient
placing the accused
1. EXECUTIVE VS. JUDICIAL to engender a well-
under custody in order
DETERMINATION OF founded belief that
not to frustrate the ends
PROBABLE CAUSE a crime has been
of justice. If the judge
committed and that
finds no probable
Determination of probable cause is either the accused is
cause, the judge cannot
executive or judicial in nature. The first pertains to probably guilty
be forced to issue the
the duty of the public prosecutor during preliminary thereof.
arrest warrant.
investigation for the purpose of filing an
information in court. At this juncture, the Since a preliminary investigation does not finally
investigating prosecutor evaluates if the facts are adjudicate the rights and obligations of parties,
sufficient to engender a well-founded belief that a "probable cause can be established with hearsay
crime has been committed and that the accused is evidence, as long as there is substantial basis for
probably guilty thereof. crediting the hearsay” (Reyes v. Ombudsman,
G.R. Nos. 212593-94, 2016).
On the other hand, judicial determination of
probable cause refers to the prerogative of the The executive determination of probable cause is
judge to ascertain if a warrant of arrest should be within the exclusive domain of the prosecutor and,
issued against the accused. At this stage, the absent grave abuse of discretion, this

ATENEO CENTRAL
determination cannot be interfered with by the Where an assistant fiscal or state prosecutor who
courts. (Baya v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. has investigated the case recommends the
204978-83, 2020) dismissal of the case but his findings are reversed
by the Provincial or City Fiscal or by the Chief
RESOLUTION OF INVESTIGATION State Prosecutor on the ground that a prima facie
PROSECUTOR case exists, the Provincial or City Fiscal or the
Chief State Prosecutor may, by himself, and on the
After having filed the information, the prosecutor is basis of the same sworn statements and evidence
called upon to prosecute the case in court. At this submitted:
stage, unlike judges who are mandated to display 1. File the information against the respondent;
cold neutrality in hearing cases, the prosecutors or
are not required to divest themselves of their 2. Direct any other assistant fiscal or state
personal convictions and refrain from exhibiting prosecutor to do so, without conducting
partiality. But while he may strike hard blows, he another preliminary investigation (Rule 112,
is not at liberty to strike foul ones (People v. Sec. 4).
Cawaling, G.R. No. 117970, 1988).
Role of Secretary of Justice
The Prosecutor shall Certify Under Oath in the The Secretary of Justice is not prevented from
Information that: entertaining an appeal from the accused or from
1. He or she, or an authorized officer personally the offended party even after the information has
examined the complainant and his witnesses; been filed and the trial court has arraigned the
2. There is reasonable ground that a crime has accused. Section 4 of DOJ 223 should be
been committed and the accused is probably construed as merely enjoining the Secretary of
guilty thereof; Justice to refrain, as far as practicable, from
3. The accused was informed of the complaint entertaining a petition for review or appeal from the
and of the evidence against him/her; and action of the prosecutor once the complaint or
4. The accused was given an opportunity to information is filed in court.
submit controverting evidence (Rule 112,
Sec. 4). If the Secretary reverses the ruling of the
provincial or city prosecutor or chief state
Note: Under Sec. 1 Rule 112, the investigating prosecutor or the Ombudsman or his deputy,
prosecutor is tasked to determine whether there is the Secretary shall:
sufficient ground to engender a well-founded belief 1. Direct the prosecutor to file the
that a crime has been committed and that the corresponding information without
respondent is herein guilty. If he finds probable conducting another preliminary investigation;
cause, he executes a certification at the bottom of or
the information. However, such certification by 2. Dismiss or move for the dismissal of the
itself is ineffective and not binding to the court. It complaint or information with notice to the
cannot be the sole basis for the finding of probable parties (Rule 112, Sec. 4).
cause of the trial judge. (Samuel Lee v. KBC Bank
N.V., G.R. No. 164673, 2010). Note: A provincial or city prosecutor has neither
the personality nor the legal authority to review or
REVIEW
overrule the decision of the secretary. The only
No complaint or information may be filed or time that a motion for reinvestigation may be filed
dismissed by an investigating prosecutor without is when there is newly discovered evidence. Such
the prior written authority or approval of the must be filed before the secretary of justice rules
provincial or city prosecutor or the Ombudsman or on an appeal of the resolution in the preliminary
his deputy (Rule 112, Sec. 4). investigation. (Community Rural Bank of Guimba,
Inc. v. Talavera, A.M. No. RTJ-05-1909, 2005)
Action by Provincial / City Fiscal or Chief State
Prosecutor

ATENEO CENTRAL
Note: The Secretary of Justice is empowered to where the power is exercised in an arbitrary and
review the actions of the Provincial Fiscal during despotic manner by reason of passion or hostility.
the preliminary investigation or the reinvestigation (Callo-Claridad v. Esteban, G.R. No. 191567,
by virtue of Section 4, Rule 112 of the Rules of 2013)
Court which recognizes the Secretary of Justice's
power to review the actions of the investigating A Rule 43 petition is not allowed since the
prosecutor, even motu proprio. (Fortaleza v. Secretary is not acting in a quasi-judicial function
Gonzales, G.R. No. 179287, 2016) when reviewing the investigating prosecutor’s
resolution. (Callo-Claridad v. Esteban, G.R. No.
Note: Under Rule 112, Section 4 of the Rules of 191567, 2013)
Court, the Secretary of Justice may motu proprio
reverse or modify resolutions of the provincial or If the penalty for the offense is reclusion perpetua
city prosecutor or the chief state prosecutor even or life imprisonment, the remedy from the DOJ is
without a pending petition for review. The appeal to the Office of the President. From the OP,
Secretary of Justice exercises control and the remedy is appeal to the CA under Rule 43.
supervision over prosecutors and it is within her-
authority to affirm, nullify, reverse, or modify the Note: The Court declared in Santos-Dio v. CA that
resolutions of her prosecutors. while a judge's determination of probable cause is
generally confined to the limited purpose of issuing
Section 4 of Republic Act No. 10071 also gives the arrest warrants, he is nonetheless authorized
Secretary of Justice the authority to directly act on under Section 5 (a), Rule 112 of the Revised Rules
any "probable miscarriage of justice within the of Criminal Procedure to immediately dismiss
jurisdiction of the prosecution staff, regional the case if the evidence on record clearly fails
prosecution office, and the provincial prosecutor or to establish probable cause. A judge may
the city prosecutor." Accordingly, the Secretary of dismiss the case for lack of probable cause only in
Justice may step in and order a reinvestigation clear-cut cases when the evidence on record
even without a prior motion or petition from a plainly fails to establish probable cause - that is
party in order to prevent any probable when the records readily show uncontroverted,
miscarriage of justice. (De Lima v. Reyes, G.R. and thus, established facts which unmistakably
No. 209330, 2016) negate the existence of the elements of the crime
charged. (Young v. People, G.R. No. 213910,
Review by the CA of the Secretary of DOJ’s 2016)
finding of probable cause under Rule 65.
Under the doctrine of separation of powers, the Appeal to the Office of the President
courts have no right to directly decide matters over Appeals from or petition for review of
which full discretionary authority has been decisions/orders/resolutions of the Secretary of
delegated to the Executive Branch of the Justice on preliminary investigations of criminal
Government, or to substitute their own judgments cases are entertained by the Office of the
for that of the Executive Branch, represented in President.
this case by the Department of Justice.
Requisites:
Courts will not interfere with the executive 1. Offense involved is punishable by reclusion
determination of probable cause for the perpetua to death
purpose of filing an information, in the 2. New and material issues are raised which
absence of grave abuse of discretion. were not previously presented before the
Department of Justice and were not ruled
That abuse of discretion must be so patent and upon
gross as to amount to an evasion of a positive duty 3. Prescription of the offense is not due to lapse
or a virtual refusal to perform a duty enjoined by within 6 months from notice of questioned
law or to act at all in contemplation of law, such as resolution

ATENEO CENTRAL
4. Appeal or petition for review is filed within 30 accusation, as well as the admissibility of
days from notice (Memorandum Circular No. testimonies and evidence, are better ventilated
58, June 30, 1993) during trial proper than at the level of determining
probable cause. Thus, the judge shall not
Effects of Exclusion of Other Persons from the consider the defenses in finding probable
Information cause (Hasegawa v. Giron, G.R. No. 184536
1. If during the trial, evidence is shown that such August 14, 2013).
persons should have been charged, the fact
that they were not included in the information The judge will order the arrest if the imposable
does not relieve them of criminal liability, and penalty of the offense is more than 4 years, 2
they can be subsequently prosecuted. months and 1 day.
2. The accused that has been charged with the
offense is not allowed to escape punishment For crimes under summary procedure, an
merely because it develops in the course of arraignment has to be set.
the trial that there were other guilty
participants in the crime. What the Constitution underscores is the exclusive
3. It does not vitiate the validity of the and personal responsibility of the issuing judge to
information. Neither is the same a ground for satisfy himself of the existence of probable cause.
a motion to quash (Socrates v. In satisfying himself of the existence of probable
Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 116259-60 cause for the issuance of a warrant of arrest, the
February 20, 1996). judge is not required to personally examine the
complainant and his witnesses. Following
Effect if the Information is Filed by Someone established doctrine and procedure, he shall:
Not Authorized by Law 1. Personally evaluate the report and the
The court does not acquire jurisdiction. The supporting documents submitted by the fiscal
accused’s failure to assert lack of authority on the regarding the existence of probable cause
part of the prosecutor in filing the information does and, on the basis thereof, issue a warrant of
not constitute a waiver thereof. (People v. Garfin, arrest; or
G.R. No. 153176, 2004. Quisay v. People G.R. No. 2. If on the basis thereof he finds no probable
216920, 2016). cause, he may disregard the fiscal’s report
and require the submission of supporting
WHEN WARRANT OF ARREST MAY ISSUE affidavits of witnesses to aid him in arriving at
a conclusion as to the existence of probable
If the judge, upon the filing of the complaint or cause.
information with the court, finds probable cause,
he/she shall issue a warrant of arrest or a Sound policy dictates this procedure, otherwise
commitment order (if the accused had already judges would be unduly laden with the preliminary
been arrested) and hold him/her for trial. examination and investigation of criminal
complaints instead of concentrating on hearing
If the judge does not find probable cause, he may and deciding cases filed before their courts.
either dismiss the case or give the prosecutor a (Soliven v. Makasiar, G.R. Nos. L-82585, L-82827,
period of 5 days to file additional evidence (Rule and L-83979, 1988)
112, Sec. 5).
A warrant issued by the judge solely on the basis
However, if the evidence on record shows that, of the report and recommendation of the
more likely than not, the crime charged has been investigating prosecutor, without personally
committed and that respondent is probably guilty determining the existence of probable cause by
of the same, the judge should not dismiss the case independently examining sufficient evidence
and thereon, order the parties to proceed to trial. submitted by the parties during the Preliminary
(Young vs. People, GR No. 213910, 2016) Investigation is not valid.
The validity and merits of a party’s defense or

ATENEO CENTRAL
Effect of a Finding of Probable Cause DOJ from taking cognizance of an appeal, by way
It merely binds the suspect to stand trial. It is not of a petition for review, by an accused in a criminal
a pronouncement of guilt (Vilarosa v. OMB, G.R. case from an unfavorable ruling of the
No. 221418, January 23, 2019). investigating prosecutor. Such merely advises the
DOJ, “as far as practicable, to refrain from
entertaining a petition for review or appeal from the
Remedies of the Accused Who Believes that action of the fiscal, when the complaint of
there is No Probable Cause to Hold Him for information has already been filed in Court.”
Trial:
1. Motion to dismiss on such ground More specifically, it stated: “In order to avoid a
2. Motion for the determination of probable situation where the opinion of the Secretary of
cause. Justice who reviewed the action of the fiscal may
be disregarded by the trial court, the SOJ, should,
Note: Under the Revised Guidelines for as far as practicable, refrain from entertaining a
Continuous Trial of Criminal Cases, a motion for petition for review or appeal from the action of
judicial determination of probable cause is a the fiscal, when the complaint or information has
prohibited motion (A.M. No. 15-06-10-SC) already been filed in the court. The matter should
be left entirely for the determination of the Court.
Where an information has already been filed in (Roberts, Jr. V. CA)
court and the Secretary of Justice reversed the
prosecutor’s finding of probable cause, what Reinvestigation
should the trial court do upon the prosecutor’s Once the complaint or information is filed in court,
motion to dismiss? any motion for reinvestigation is addressed to the
sound discretion of the court (Leviste v. Alameda,
The judge should make his/her own assessment G.R. No. 182677, August 3, 2010).
of the evidence and not just rely on the conclusion
of the prosecutor; otherwise the court becomes a While the trial court judge has the power to order
mere rubber stamp. the reinvestigation of the case by the prosecutor,
he may not, before the prosecutor concluded the
DOJ Secretary’s power of review vis-à-vis the reinvestigation, recall said order, set the case for
court’s jurisdiction arraignment and trial, without gravely abusing his
Generally, all criminal actions either commenced discretion.
by complaint or information shall be prosecuted
under the direction and control of the fiscal. Basis for Reinvestigation
1. New evidence had been discovered which
However, once a complaint or information is filed materially affects the order, directive or
in Court, any disposition of the case, [either] decision;
dismissal or the conviction or acquittal of the 2. Grave errors of facts or laws or serious
accused, rests in the sound discretion of the Court. irregularities have been committed prejudicial
Although the fiscal retains the direction and control to the interest of the movant.
of the prosecution of criminal cases even while the
case is already in Court he cannot impose his NOTE: The rule now is that the investigating
opinion on the trial court. The Court is the best and judge’s power to order the arrest of the accused is
sole judge on what to do with the case before it. limited to instances in which there is a necessity
The determination of the case is within its for placing him in custody in order not to frustrate
exclusive jurisdiction and competence. (Crespo v. the ends of justice. Thus, even if the judge finds
Mogul, G.R. No. L-53373, 1987) probable cause, he cannot, on such ground alone,
issue a warrant of arrest. He must further find if
Clarification of the Doctrine in Crespo v. Mogul there is a necessity of placing the accused under
There is nothing in Crespo v. Mogul which bars the immediate custody in order not to frustrate the

ATENEO CENTRAL
ends of justice. (See A.M. No. 05-8-26-SC) Procedure to Be Followed if

Complaint/Information filed with MTC/MCTC:
The investigating judge has no power to reduce or 1. Evaluate the evidence presented;
change the crime charged in order to justify the 2. Examine the witnesses in the form of
grant of bail to the accused. The power belongs searching questions or answers; and
to the prosecutor. 3. Require the submission of additional
evidence if necessary (Rule 112, Section 6).
After the conclusion of his PI, the judge has to
transmit to the provincial prosecutor his resolution If a complaint or information is filed directly with the
and entire records of the case, regardless of Municipal Trial Court, [xxx] the judge is given the
whether he finds probable cause or sufficient discretion to merely issue summons instead of a
ground to issue a warrant of arrest. warrant of arrest if he does not find it necessary to
place the accused under custody. [xxx] Whether it
When Warrant of Arrest Not Necessary is necessary to place the accused in custody in
1. When the accused is already under detention order not to frustrate the ends of justice is left to
2. When the accused is lawfully arrested the judge’s sound judgment. (Sesbreo v. Aglugub,
without a warrant A.M. No. MTJ-05-1581, 2005)
3. When the offense is penalized by a fine only
(Rule 112, Sec. 6 (c)) For cases under the Revised Rules on Summary
Procedure, upon finding of probable cause, the
When accused is lawfully arrested without judge will order the arraignment of the accused.
warrant
General Rule: No complaint or information shall REMEDIES OF ACCUSED IF THERE WAS NO
be filed for an offense which is penalized by PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION
imprisonment of at least 4 years, 2 months and 1
day without Preliminary Investigation. Remedies of the Accused:
1. Before a complaint or information is filed, he
Exception: In case a person is ARRESTED may ask for a preliminary investigation but he
WITHOUT A WARRANT, a complaint or must sign a waiver of the provision of Art. 125
information may only be filed after an inquest is of the RPC in the presence of his counsel; if
conducted in accordance with existing rules (Rule it is refused, he may file a petition for
112, Sec. 7). certiorari
CASES WHERE A PRELIMINARY 2. After the filing of the complaint or information

INVESTIGATION IS NOT REQUIRED in court without a preliminary investigation,
the accused may, within 5 days from the time
Cases where the penalty imposed is less than 4 he learns of its filing, ask for a Preliminary
years 2 months and 1 day. Investigation (Sec. 6 Rule 112);
Upon the finding of probable cause, a warrant of 3. Refuse to enter a plea upon arraignment and
arrest must be issued and arraignment has to be object to further proceedings upon such
set. (Rule 112, Section 6). ground;
While the determination of probable cause to 4. Raise lack of preliminary investigation as

charge a person of a crime is the sole function of error on appeal (US v. Banzuela, 1915);
the prosecutor, the trial court may, in the protection
of one’s fundamental right to liberty, dismiss the 5. File for prohibition (Conde v. CFI, 1923).
case if, upon a personal assessment of the
evidence, it finds that the evidence does not Note: The absence of a preliminary investigation
establish probable cause. (Mendoza v. People, does not impair the validity of the information or
G.R. No. 197293, April 21, 2014) otherwise render it defective. Neither does it affect

ATENEO CENTRAL
the jurisdiction of the court or constitute a ground b. Note down the disposition on the referral
for quashing the information. The trial court, document;
instead of dismissing the information, should hold c. Prepare a brief memorandum indicating the
in abeyance the proceedings and order the public reasons for the action taken
prosecutor to conduct a preliminary investigation. d. Forward the same, together with the record
(Villaflor v. Viva, G.R. No. 134744, 2001) of the case to the City or Provincial
Prosecutor for appropriate action (Sec. 9
INQUEST DOJ Circular No. 61).
Definition Filing of Complaint or Information in case of

Inquest is an informal and summary investigation absence or unavailability of Inquest
conducted by a public prosecutor in criminal cases Prosecutor
involving persons arrested and detained without The complaint may be filed by the offended party
the benefit of a warrant of arrest issued by the or a peace officer directly with the proper court on
court for the purpose of determining whether or not the basis of the affidavit of the offended party or
said persons should remain under custody and arresting officer or person.
correspondingly charged in court. (DOJ
Department Circular No. 61, 1993) Accused may ask for a preliminary
investigation; conditions to do so
Conducted by Inquest Prosecutor Before the filing of a complaint or information, the
The inquest is conducted by a public prosecutor person arrested without a warrant may ask for a
who is assigned inquest duties as an Inquest preliminary investigation by a proper officer, but he
Officer and is to discharge his duties, unless must sign a waiver of the provisions of Article 125
otherwise directed, only at the police of the RPC.
stations/headquarters of the PNP in order to 1. If the accused allows himself to be
expedite and facilitate the disposition of inquest arraigned without asking for a preliminary
cases. (Sec. 2, Part II, Manual for Prosecutors). investigation, he is deemed to have
waived the right to such PI.
General Rule: Detained person should be present 2. If the complaint or information was filed
during inquest proceedings. without PI, the accused may, within 5 days
from the time he learns of the filing of the
Exception: When reasons exist that would information, ask for a preliminary
dispense with his presence like confinement in a investigation with the same right to
hospital, detention in a place requiring maximum adduce evidence in his favor in the
security or his presence is not feasibly by reason manner prescribed in this Rule. (5–day
of age, health or similar factors (Sec. 6, Part II, period is MANDATORY; failure to file
Manual for Prosecutors). within the said period amounts to a
waiver)
Duty of Inquest Officer 3. Where the information was amended
1. To determine if the arrest of the detained without a new PI having been conducted,
person is valid; the 5-day period is computed from the
2. If found valid he shall: time the accused learns of the filing of said
a. Ask the detainee if he desires to avail of amended information (Rule 112, Sec. 7).
himself preliminary investigation
b. If he does, he shall be made to execute a The inquest must pertain to the offense for
waiver of the provision of Art. 125 of the which the arrest was made.
RPC. This rule is exemplified by Beltran v. People (G.R.
3. If the arrest was not made in accordance with No. 175013, 2007). “The joint affidavit of Beltran’s
the law and/or the Rules, he shall: arresting officers states that the officers arrested
a. Recommend the release of the person Beltran, without a warrant, for Inciting to Sedition,
arrested or detained

ATENEO CENTRAL
and not for Rebellion. Thus, the inquest prosecutor Section 3. Notwithstanding the preceding section,
could only had conducted as he did conduct an the Secretary of Justice reserves the right to
inquest for Inciting to Sedition and no other. evaluate, in the interest of justice, to afford fair
Consequently, when another group of prosecutors play and prevent the miscarriage of justice, motu
subjected Beltran to a second inquest proceeding proprio or upon written and signed complaint, any
for Rebellion, they overstepped their authority resolution of the Prosecutor General, Regional
rendering the second inquest void.” State Prosecutors and Provincial/City
Prosecutors. This residual power of review shall
The inquest proceedings must be terminated conform with the constitutional requirements of
within the period prescribed under the provisions
due process and will be covered by a relevant
of Art. 125 of the RPC (DOJ Circ. No. 61, Sec. 3
department circular to be issued by the Office of
(1993) )
the Secretary of Justice.
E. ARREST (RULE 113)

OTHER MATTERS ARREST, HOW MADE
Where a Motion for Reinvestigation is Granted Arrest

Where the trial court has granted a motion for It is the taking of a person into custody in order that
reinvestigation, it must hold in abeyance the he may be bound to answer for the commission of
arraignment and trial of the accused until the an offense (Rule 113, Sec. 1).
prosecutor shall have conducted and made a
report on the result of the reinvestigation (People How an Arrest is Made
v. Beriales, G.R. No. L-39962. April 7, 1976). 1. By actual restraint of the person to be
arrested; or
2022 NPS RULE ON APPEAL (Dated 13 July 2. By his/her submission to the custody of the
2022) person making the arrest (Rule 113, Sec. 2).
Relevant sections on the Rule on Appeal
governing all ruling of prosecutors in the National A policeman in the performance of duty is justified
Prosecution Service (NPS): in using such force as is reasonably necessary to
Section 1. Office of the Secretary of Justice shall secure and detain the offender, overcome his
review the appeals from resolutions of the resistance, prevent his escape, recapture him if he
Prosecutor General in cases subject to its escapes, and protect himself from bodily harm. In
preliminary investigation as referred by various case injury or death results from the policeman’s
government agencies, and resolutions of exercise of such force, the policeman could be
Provincial/City Prosecutors in cases cognizable by justified in inflicting the injury or causing the death
the RTCs. of the offender if the policeman had used
necessary force.
Section 2. Resolutions of the Provincial/City
Prosecutors in cases cognizable by the MeTCs, Since a policeman’s duty requires him to
MCTCs, and MTCs shall be reviewed on appeal overcome the offender, the force exerted by the
by the Prosecutor General in his/her capacity as policeman may therefore differ from that which
the Regional State Prosecutor in the NCR and by ordinarily may be offered in self-defense.
the Regional State Prosecutors with respect to However, a policeman is never justified in using
their respective regions. Cases decided on appeal unnecessary force or in treating the offender with
by the Prosecutor General and by the Regional wanton violence, or in resorting to dangerous
means when the arrest could be affected
State Prosecutors under this provision shall be
otherwise (Cabanlig v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No.
considered final and no longer appealable to the
148431, 2005).
Office of the Secretary of Justice.
NOTE: After an arrest, the accused undergoes

ATENEO CENTRAL
custodial investigation. However, custodial had otherwise submitted himself to the jurisdiction
investigation may also happen even if the accused of the court. This must be so, for the return
was not arrested. A custodial investigation mentioned in the section refers not to the physical
includes the practice of issuing an "invitation" to a delivery of the very same copy of the process to
person who is investigated in connection with an the issuing court, but to the report of the officer
offense he is suspected to have committed, charged with its execution on the action taken by
without prejudice to the liability of the "inviting" him thereon.
officer for any violation of law (Sec. 2(f), R.A.
7438). This means that even those who voluntarily In short, the 10-day period provided in Rule 113,
surrendered before a police officer must be Section 4 is only a directive to the officer executing
apprised of their Miranda rights. The invocation of the warrant to make a return to the court. (People
these rights applies during custodial investigation, vs. Givera, G.R. No. 132159, 2001
which begins "when the police investigation is no
longer a general inquiry into an unsolved crime but
has begun to focus on a particular suspect taken The Judge Issues a Warrant of Arrest in Two
into custody by the police who starts the Instances:
interrogation and propounds questions to the 1. Upon the filing of the information by the
person to elicit incriminating statements" (People prosecutor.
v. Chavez, G.R. No. 207950, 2014). In issuing this kind of warrant, the judge does
not personally examine the complainant and
Modes of Arrest: the witnesses he may produce, but he merely
1. Arrest by virtue of a warrant; and evaluates personally the report and supporting
2. Arrest without a warrant under exceptional documents and other evidence adduced
circumstances as may be provided by during the preliminary investigation and
statute. submitted to him by the prosecutor, and if he
finds probable cause on the basis thereof, he
Duty of Arresting Officer issues the warrant for the arrest of the
1. Arrest the accused; and accused.
2. Deliver him to the nearest police station or jail
without unnecessary delay (Rule 113, Sec. 3). 2. Upon application of a peace officer
In this kind of warrant, the judge must
Execution of Warrant personally examine the applicant and the
A warrant of arrest has no expiry date. It remains witnesses he may produce, to find out whether
valid until arrest is effected or the warrant is lifted. there exists probable cause, otherwise, the
warrant issued is null and void. He must
However, head of the office shall cause the subject the complainant and the witnesses to
warrant to be executed within 10 days from receipt searching questions. The reason for this is
thereof. Within 10 days after expiration of the there is yet no evidence on record upon which
period, the arresting officer assigned to execute he may determine the existence of probable
the same shall submit a report to the judge who cause.
issued the warrant. In case of his failure to execute
the warrant, he shall state the reasons thereof 1. Arrest without warrant, when
(Rule 113, Sec. 4). lawful
Unlike a search warrant, the validity of which is Lawful Warrantless Arrest:

limited to ten days, after which it becomes void 1. In Flagrante Delicto – When IN HIS/HER
(Rule 126, Section 10), no time limit is fixed for the PRESENCE, the person to be arrested has
validity of a warrant of arrest. The arrest warrant committed, is actually committing, or is
continues to be in force so long as it has not been attempting to commit an offense.
recalled or the person named therein arrested or

ATENEO CENTRAL
For a warrantless arrest of a person caught in (Comerciante v. People, G.R. No. 205926, 2015).
flagrante delicto to be valid, two requisites must
concur: 1) the person arrested must execute an Test of Immediacy
overt act indicating that he has just committed, is There must be a large measure of immediacy
actually committing, or is attempting to commit a between the time the offense was committed and
crime; and 2) such overt act is done in the the time of the arrest (Rolito Go v. CA, G.R. No.
presence or within the view of the arresting officer. 125299, 1999)
Thus, flight per se must not always be attributed to
one’s consciousness of guilt (People v. Edaño, A warrantless arrest was invalidated because it
G.R. No. 188133, 2014). was made three days after the commission of the
crime (Posadas v. Ombudsman, G.R. No. 131492,
A valid warrantless arrest gives the officers the 2000). The requirement of “immediacy” between
right to search the area for objects relating to the the time of the commission of the crime and the
crime and seize them only if they are in plain view. time of arrest is absent (see People v. Del Rosario,
In the course of their lawful intrusion, if items G.R. No. 127755, 1999)
plainly visible were discovered, the police officers
would be justified in seizing them. A valid Personal Knowledge
warrantless arrest means that the search and The person making the arrest has personal
seizure that resulted from it are likewise lawful. knowledge of the fact that a crime was committed
The objects obtained from such lawful search and because at the time of his arrest, he has
seizures are admissible in evidence (Saraum v. reasonably worthy information in his possession
People, G.R. No. 205472, 2016). coupled with his own observation and fair
inferences therefrom that the person arrested has
An accused act of standing on the street and probably committed the offense; the arresting
holding a plastic sachet in his hands, are not by officer may even rely on information supplied by a
themselves sufficient to incite suspicion of criminal witness or a victim of the crime (Pestilos v.
activity or to create probable cause enough to Generoso, G.R. No. 182601, 2014).
justify a warrantless arrest. The accused may have
wavied his objection to the validity of the arrest by Note: The standards for evaluating the factual
failing to raise it before plea, but he did not waive basis supporting a probable cause assessment
his right to object to the admissibility of the are not less stringent in warrantless arrest
evidence seized from him (Dominguez v. People, situation than in a case where a warrant is sought
G.R. No. 235898, 2019). from a judicial officer. The probable cause
determination of a warrantless arrest is based on
2. Hot Pursuit – When an offense HAS JUST information that the arresting officer possesses at
BEEN COMMITTED and he has probable the time of the arrest and not on the information
cause to believe based on PERSONAL acquired later. (Pestilos v. Generoso, G.R. No.
KNOWLEDGE of facts and circumstance that 182601, 2014).
the person to be arrested has committed it.
Rule 113, Section 5(b) of the Rules of Court
This doctrine is different from in flagrante delicto in pertains to a hot pursuit arrest. The rule requires
the sense that this does not require the arresting that an offense has just been committed. It
officer or person to personally witness the connotes “immediacy in point of time.” That a
commission of the offense. What is important is crime was in fact committed does not
the immediacy of the arrest reckoned from the automatically bring the case under this rule. An
commission of the crime. However, it is not arrest under Rule 113, Section 5(b) of the Rules of
enough that the arresting officer had reasonable Court entails a time element from the moment the
ground to believe that the accused had just crime is committed up to the point of arrest. (Sapi
committed a crime; a crime must, in fact, have v. People, G.R. No. 200370, 2017)
been committed first and that the arresting officer
knows for a fact that it has been committed 3. When the person to be arrested is a prisoner

ATENEO CENTRAL
who has escaped from a penal establishment

or place where he is serving final judgment or Time of Making Arrest
temporarily confined while his case is pending It may be made on any day and at any time of the
or has escaped while being transferred from day or night (Rule 113, Sec. 16).
one confinement to another (Rule 113, Sec.
5). METHOD OF ARREST
4. When a person who has been lawfully A. By officer with warrant

arrested escapes or is rescued (Rule 113,
Sec. 13). Inform the person to be arrested of the:
1. Cause of the arrest and
5. By the bondsman for the purpose of 2. The fact that a warrant has been issued for
surrendering the accused (Rule 114, Sec. 23). his arrest (Rule 113, Sec. 7).
6. Where the accused released on bail attempts Exception/s:

to leave the country without permission of the 1. When a person flees; or
court (Rule 114, Sec. 23). 2. When a person forcibly resists before the
officer has opportunity to so inform him; or
Law enforcers may search an arrested person for 3. When the giving of such information will
dangerous weapons or anything that may be used imperil his arrest (Rule 113, Sec. 7).
as proof of the commission of an offense, without
need of a search warrant. Section 5(b) authorizes The officer need not have the warrant in his
warrantless arrest “when an offense has in fact just possession at the time of the arrest but after the
been committed.” The word “just” implies arrest, if the person arrested so requires, the
immediacy in point of time. warrant shall be shown to him as soon as
practicable. (Mallari v. CA, G.R. No. 110569,
Delivery of the detained person to the proper 1996).
judicial authorities means the filing of the
complaint or information with the municipal trial B. By officer without warrant
court or with the inquest fiscal or prosecutor who
shall then decide either to order the release of the Inform the person to be arrested of:
detained person or to file the corresponding 1. His authority and
information in court. 2. The cause of the arrest (Rule 113, Sec. 8).
An accused who enters his plea of NOT guilty and Exception/s:

participates in the trial waives the illegality of the 1. When the person is engaged in the
arrest. Objection to the illegality must be raised commission of an offense; or
before arraignment, otherwise it is deemed 2. Pursued immediately after its commission; or
waived, as the accused had voluntarily submitted 3. Has escaped, flees; or
himself/herself to the jurisdiction of the court. 4. Forcibly resists before the officer has
opportunity to so inform him; or
The usual procedure in a buy-bust operation is for 5. When giving of such information will imperil
the police officers to arrest the pusher of drugs at the arrest (Rule 113, Sec. 8).
the very moment he hands over the dangerous
drugs to the poseur-buyer. In a case where the Note: With port security personnel's functions
poseur-buyer calls up his superior after receiving having the color of state-related functions and
the money, and only thereafter gives a go-signal deemed agents of government, the Bill of Rights
to arrest the suspect, the operation is an illegal raid applies in this case.
rather than a buy-bust operation. (People v. Lim,
G.R. No. 141699, 2002) Searches pursuant to port security measures are

ATENEO CENTRAL
not unreasonable per se. The security measures 2. That the officer has announced his/her
of x-ray scanning and inspection in domestic ports authority and purpose for entering therein;
are akin to routine security procedures in airports. 3. That the officer has requested and been
Reason: there is a reasonable reduced denied admittance (Rule 113, Sec. 11).
expectation of privacy when coming into airports
or ports of travel. Note: Rule is applicable both where there is a
warrant and where there is a valid arrest without a
Travelers are often notified through airport public warrant.
address systems, signs and notices in their airline
tickets that they are subject to search and, if any Note: This rule also does not cover a private
prohibited materials or substances are found, such individual making an arrest.
would be subject to seizure. These
announcements place passengers on notice that Right to Break Out of the Building or Enclosure
ordinary constitutional protections against to Effect Release
warrantless searches and seizures do not apply to An officer making an arrest who has entered a
routine airport procedures. building or enclosure may break out therefrom
when necessary to liberate himself/herself (Rule
It is also important to note that routine baggage 113, Sec. 12).
inspections are different from a customs search.
Although customs searches usually occur within Arrest after Escape or Rescue
ports or terminals, it is important that the search If a person arrested escapes or is rescued, any
must be for the enforcement of customs laws. person may immediately pursue or retake him
(Dela Cruz v. People, G.R. No. 209387, 2016) without a warrant at any time and in any place
within the Philippines (Rule 113, Sec. 13).
C. By Private person
Right of an Attorney or Relative to Visit the
Inform the person to be arrested of: Person Arrested
1. Intention to arrest him and The attorney of the person arrested has the right
2. The cause of the arrest (Rule 113, Sec. 9). to visit and confer privately with such person in jail
or any place of custody at any hour of the day or
Exception/s: night (Rule 113, Sec. 14).
1. The person to be arrested is engaged in the
commission of an offense; 2. Requisites of a valid warrant
2. Pursued immediately after its commission; of arrest
3. Has escaped, flees;
4. Forcibly resists before the officer has Essential Requisites of a Valid Warrant of
opportunity to so inform him; or Arrest:
5. When giving of such information will imperil 1. The arrest warrant must be issued upon
the arrest (Rule 113, Sec. 9). PROBABLE CAUSE.
2. Probable cause must be DETERMINED
Officer May Summon Assistance PERSONALLY by a judge.
Arresting officer may orally summon as many 3. There must be an examination UNDER
persons as he deems necessary to assist him in OATH OR AFFIRMATION of the complainant
effecting the arrest (Rule 113, Sec. 10). and the witnesses he may produce.
4. The warrant must PARTICULARLY
Note: This rule does not cover a private individual DESCRIBE the person to be seized. (PHIL.
making an arrest. CONST. art. III, Sec. 2)
Right of Officer to Break Into Building or 3. Determination of probable

Enclosure; Requisites: cause for issuance of warrant
1. That the person to be arrested is or is of arrest
reasonably believed to be in the said building;

ATENEO CENTRAL
which the court acquired jurisdiction over the

(See discussion under Preliminary Investigation) person of the accused must be made before he
enters his plea; otherwise, the objection is deemed
Pendency of a motion for reconsideration, motion waived. (People v. Lugnasin, G.R. No. 208404,
for reinvestigation, or petition for review is not a 2016).
cause for the quashal of a warrant of arrest
previously issued because the quashal of a [Note: Rule 113 is best read in conjunction with
warrant of arrest may only take place upon the Rule 126 & Cybercrime Warrants.]
finding that no probable cause exists. (Aguinaldo
vs Ventus, GR No.176033, 2015)
The probable cause determination of a

warrantless arrest is based on information that the
arresting officer possesses at the time of the arrest
and not on the information acquired later. (People
vs Pestilos, GR No. 182601, 2014)
Note: Section 6 of Rule 112 specifically provides

that before a warrant of arrest or a commitment
order may be issued by the judge, there must first
be a judicial determination of probable cause by
the judge himself. In one case, it was held that a
motion for judicial declaration of probable cause is
moot and academic when a warrant of arrest is
subsequently issued. (Hao v. People, G.R. No.
183345, 2014)
Probable Cause for Search Warrant of Arrest v.

Search Warrant
WARRANT OF SEARCH
ARREST WARRANT
Determination of Determination of
whether there is a whether a crime was
necessity of placing the committed and that
accused under items connected to
immediate custody in the crime are likely to
order not to frustrate the be found in the place
ends of justice specified by the
warrant.
Note: Failure to raise an objection to the

irregularity of his arrest before his arraignment and
active participation in the trial of the case results to
the petitioner’s submission to the jurisdiction of the
court, thereby curing any defect in his arrest. An
accused is estopped from assailing any irregularity
of his arrest if he fails to raise this issue or to move
for the quashal of the information against him on
this ground before arraignment. Any objection
involving a warrant of arrest or the procedure by

ATENEO CENTRAL
before the court has acquired custody over him.

F. BAIL (RULE 144)
Upon assumption of the obligation of bail, the
sureties become in law the jailers of their principal.
1. Nature
(People v. Gako, G.R. No. 135045, December 15,
2000)
Bail
It is the security given for the release of a person
Prosecution Witness May also be Required to
in custody of the law, furnished by him or a
Post Bail to Ensure Their Appearance at the
bondsman, to guarantee his appearance before
Trial of the Case where:
any court as required under the conditions
1. There is a substitution of information. (Rule
hereinafter specified. (Rule 114, Section 1)
110, Sec. 4)
2. Where the court believes that a material
Note: The term “punishable” under Sections 4 and
witness may not appear at the trial. (Rule
7 of Rule 114 refers to the prescribed and not
119, Sec. 14)
imposable penalty. (People v. Valdez and
Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 216007-09, 2015)
Requiring Arraignment Before Grant of Bail Is
Not Valid
Purpose of Bail
Bail does not require arraignment. As long as
6. To honor the presumption of innocence until
there is deprivation of liberty or voluntary
his guilt is proven beyond reasonable doubt;
surrender, one can apply for bail. (Serapio v.
7. To enable him to prepare his defense without
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 148468, 2003)
being subject to punishment prior to
conviction.
The trial court could ensure the presence of the
accused at the arraignment precisely by granting
Note: In order to be able to avail of bail, there must
bail and ordering his presence at any stage of the
be either: a) custody over the person or b)
proceedings such as arraignment. (Rule 114,
voluntary surrender (Paderanga v. CA, G.R. No.
Section 2[b])
115407 August 28, 1995)
The accused will be placed in a position where he
Forms of Bail:
has to choose between 1) filing a motion to quash
1. Corporate surety;
and thus delay his release on bail and; 2)
2. Property bond;
foregoing the filing of a motion to quash so that he
3. Cash deposit; and
can be arraigned at once and thereafter be
4. Recognizance (Rule 114, Sec. 1).
released on bail. These scenarios certainly
undermine the accused’s constitutional right not to
Bail Bond vs. Recognizance
be put on trial except upon valid complaint or
BAIL BOND RECOGNIZANCE information sufficient to charge him with a crime
An obligation given by An obligation of record, and his right to bail. (Lavides v. Court of Appeals,
the accused with one or entered into before G.R. No. 129670, 2000)
more sureties and some court or
made payable to the magistrate duly All Kinds of Bail are Subject to the Following
proper officer with the authorized to take it, Conditions:
condition to be void with the condition to do 1. Unless the court directs otherwise, the bail
upon performance by some particular act bond posted by an accused remains in force
the accused of such at all stages of the case until promulgation of
acts as he may legally the judgment of the Regional Trial Court.
be required to perform. 2. The accused shall appear before the proper
court whenever required by the court or rules.
Note: A person is “in the custody of law” when he 3. Failure of the accused to appear at the trial
has been arrested or otherwise deprived of his without justification despite due notice shall
freedom or when he has voluntarily submitted be deemed a waiver of his right to be present
himself to the jurisdiction of the court by thereat. The trial may proceed in absentia.
surrendering to the proper authorities. 4. The bondsman shall surrender the accused
to court for execution of the final judgment.
As bail is intended to obtain or secure one’s
provisional liberty, the same cannot be posted

ATENEO CENTRAL
Note: If the accused presents his notice of appeal, witness in petition for bail may be in the form
the trial court will order the accused to be taken allowed by subheading III, item no. 11, par. b
into custody in the absence of a new bail bond on (Form of Testimony) of the Revised Guidelines,
appeal duly approved by the court. If the accused provided that the demeanor of the witness is
does not appeal, the bondsman must produce the not essential in determining his/her credibility.
accused on the 15th day from promulgation of
sentence for service of sentence. 2. Petition for bail shall be heard and resolved
within a non-extendible period of 30 calendar
The prohibition against requiring excessive bail is days from date of the first hearing, except in
enshrined in the Constitution. The obvious drug cases which shall be heard and resolved
rationale is that imposing bail in an excessive within 20 calendar days, without need of oral
amount could render meaningless the right to bail. argument and submission of memoranda,
The court has wide latitude in fixing the amount of consistent with the summary nature of the
bail. Thus, the amount should be high enough to proceedings.
assure the presence of the accused when required
but no higher than is reasonably calculated to fulfill 3. Motion for reconsideration on the resolution of
this purpose. Bail is not intended as a punishment, petition for bail shall be resolved within a non-
nor as a satisfaction of civil liability which would extendible period of 10 calendar days from date
necessarily await the judgment of the appellate of submission of the motion
court. (Yap v. CA and the People, G.R. No.
141529, 2001) 2. When a matter of right;
exceptions
No release or transfer except on court order or
bail When Bail is a Matter of Right:
No person under detention by legal process shall 1. Before or after conviction by the MTC; and
be released or transferred except upon order of 2. Before conviction by RTC for all offenses
the court or when he is admitted to bail. (Rule 114, punishable by lower than death, reclusion
Sec. 3) perpetua, or life imprisonment (Rule 114,
Sec. 4)
Application for Bail does not necessarily mean
submission to the jurisdiction of the court Note: Prosecution does not have the right to
Bail cannot be posted before custody of the oppose or to present evidence for its denial.
accused has been acquired by the judicial
authorities either by his arrest or voluntary
surrender. When Bail is a Matter of Discretion:
1. Before conviction, in offenses punishable by
Being in the custody of the law signifies restraint death, reclusion perpetua or life
on the person, who is thereby deprived of his own imprisonment
will and liberty, binding him to become obedient to 2. After conviction by the RTC of a non-capital
the will of the law. offense (Rule 114, Sec. 5).
The outright dismissal of the case even before the Note: Prosecution is entitled to present evidence
court acquires jurisdiction over the person of the for its denial.
accused is authorized under § 6(a) Rule 112 of the
Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure and the In hearing the petition for bail, the prosecution has
Revised Rules on Summary Procedure (§ 12a). the burden of showing that the evidence of guilt is
(Miranda v. Tuliao, G.R. No. 158763, 2006) strong pursuant to § 8 of Rule 114. In bail
proceedings, the prosecution must be given ample
Period to Decide Petition For Bail (A.M. No. 15- opportunity to show that the evidence of guilt is
06-10-SC, Revised Guidelines for Continuous strong. While the proceeding is conducted as a
Trial in Criminal Cases) regular trial, it must be limited to the determination
of the bailability of the accused. It should be brief
1. A petition for bail filed after the filing of the and speedy, lest the purpose for which it is
information shall be set for summary hearing available is rendered nugatory (People v. Singh,
after arraignment and pre-trial. Testimony of a et. al., G.R. No. 129782, 2001).

ATENEO CENTRAL
The Commissioner of Immigration the power and

The test is not whether the evidence establishes discretion to grant bail in deportation proceedings.
guilt beyond reasonable doubt but rather whether The grant of bail is merely permissive and not
it shows evident guilt or a great presumption of mandatory or obligatory on the part of the
guilt. As such, the court is ministerially bound to Commissioner. The exercise of the power is wholly
decide which circumstances and factors are discretionary (Ong See Hang v. Commissioner of
present which would show evident guilt or Immigration, Np. L-9700, 1962).
presumption of guilt (People v. Cabral, G.R. No.
131909, February 18, 1999). Bail in Extradition Proceedings
If bail can be granted in deportation cases, we see
The hearing determining the grant of bail as a no justification why it should not also be allowed in
matter of discretion is indispensable. Said hearing extradition cases. Considering that the Universal
may be either summary or otherwise, in the Declaration of Human Rights applies to
discretion of the court. deportation cases, there is no reason why it cannot
be invoked in extradition cases. After all, both are
Note: The Covid-19 Pandemic does not dispense administrative proceedings where the innocence
with the need for the summary hearing to or guilt of the person detained is not in issue.
determine eligibility and the amount of bail, when
such is a matter of discretion. As the petitioners The right of a prospective extraditee to apply for
are charged with offenses punishable by reclusion bail in this jurisdiction must be viewed in the light
perpetua, bail hearing must still be conducted to of the various treaty obligations of the Philippines
determine whether the evidence of guilt is strong concerning respect for the promotion and
(In the Matter of the Urgent Petition for the protection of human rights. Under these treaties,
Release of Prisoners on Humanitarian Grounds in the presumption lies in favor of human liberty.
the Midst of the COVID-19 Pandemic, Almonte v. Thus, the Philippines should see to it that the right
People, G.R. No. 252117, 2020) to liberty of every individual is not impaired
(Government of Hong Kong v. Olalia, G.R. No.
Right to Bail May Be Waived 153675, 2007).
The right to bail is personal in nature and is
therefore, waivable. (Paderanga v. CA, G.R. No. Notice of hearing required
115407, 1995) Whether bail is a matter of right or of discretion,
reasonable notice of hearing is required to be
Bail in Court-Martial Offenses given to the prosecutor or fiscal or at least he must
The right to bail of an accused military personnel be asked for his recommendation because in fixing
triable by courts-martial does not exist, as an the amount of bail, the judge is required to take
exception to the general rule that an accused is into account a number of factors such as the
entitled to bail (except in a capital offense where applicant’s character and reputation, forfeiture of
the evidence of guilt is strong). other bonds or whether he is a fugitive from justice.
Rationale In any event, whether bail is a matter of right or

The unique structure of the military justifies discretion, a hearing for the petition for bail is
exempting military men from the constitutional required. (Villanueva v. Buoaya, A.M. No. RTJ-08-
coverage on the right to bail. 2131)
The right to bail is not available to military Summary of the evidence for the prosecution
personnel or officer charged with a violation of the The court’s order granting or refusing bail must
Articles of War. (Aswat v. Galido, G.R. No. G.R. contain a summary of the evidence for the
No. 88555, 1991) prosecution, otherwise the order granting or
denying bail may be invalidated because the
Bail in Deportation Proceedings summary of the evidence for the prosecution
Aliens in deportation proceedings have no which contains the judge’s evaluation of the
inherent right to bail. An order of deportation is not evidence may be considered as an aspect of
a punishment for a crime, the right to bail procedural due process for both the prosecution
guaranteed by the Constitution may not be and the defense.(Cortes v. Catral, Adm. Matter
invoked by an alien in said proceedings. No. RTJ-97-1387, 1997).

ATENEO CENTRAL
3. When a matter of discretion present, bail should be denied. (Leviste v.

CA, G.R. No. 189122, 2010)
Trial court may grant bail before appeal is
perfected Bail in Drugs Cases
Whether bail is a matter of right or discretion, the In drug cases, there must be compliance with the
trial court may grant bail and approve the amount rule on the chain of custody. Otherwise, the
of the bail bond before the accused has perfected evidence that guilt is strong is negated, and
his appeal, appeal being perfected upon filing of a therefore, bail becomes a matter of discretion (J.
written notice of appeal and furnishing the adverse Caguioa, People v. Tanes, G.R. No. 240596,
party copy thereof. 2019).
Even if there is no notice of appeal, if the decision HEARING OF APPLICATION FOR BAIL IN
of the TC convicting the accused changed the CAPITAL OFFENSES
nature of the offense from non-bailable to bailable,
the application for bail can only be filed with and Capital Offense
resolved by the appellate court. It is an offense which, under the law existing at the
time of its commission and of the application for
After appeal is perfected, the trial court loses admission to bail may be punished with death
jurisdiction to grant bail and to approve bail bond. (Rule 114, Sec. 6).
However, the accused may apply for bail or
provisional liberty with the appellate court. Note: R.A. No. 9346 entitled ”An Act Prohibiting
the Imposition of Death Penalty in the Philippines”
If the penalty imposed by the trial court is was enacted on June 24, 2006 repealing R.A. No.
imprisonment exceeding 6 years, the accused 8177 and R. A. No. 7659 and abolishing the death
shall be denied bail or his bail be cancelled penalty.
upon a showing by the prosecution of the
following: After conviction by the trial court, the accused
1. Accused is a recidivist, quasi-recidivist or convicted of a capital offense is no longer entitled
habitual delinquent or has committed the to bail as a matter of right, and can only be
crime aggravated by the circumstance of released when the conviction is reversed by the
reiteration; appellate court. (PHIL. CONST. art. III, Sec. 13)
2. That he has previously escaped from legal
confinement, evaded sentence or violated Not entitled to bail
the condition of his bail without valid An accused who has been convicted of an offense
justification which carries a penalty of more than 20 years is
3. That he committed the offense while under not entitled to bail during the pendency of his
probation, parole or conditional pardon; appeal.
4. That the circumstances of his case indicate
the probability of flight if released on bail; or An accused who is convicted of a capital offense
5. That there is undue risk that he may commit is no longer entitled to bail on appeal since his
another crime during the pendency of the conviction imports that the evidence of guilt is
appeal. strong.
Two Scenarios under Rule 112, Section 5: A person charged with a criminal offense will not
1. If the accused is convicted and sentenced by be entitled to bail even before conviction only if the
the RTC to imprisonment exceeding 6 years charge against him is a capital offense and the
but not more than 20 years AND none of the evidence of his guilt for said offense is strong (J.
above circumstances (recidivist, etc.) is Caguioa, Recto v. People, G.R. No. 236461,
present, the grant of bail is a matter of 2018).
discretion. The court may or may not grant
bail. Burden of proof in bail application
2. If the accused is convicted and sentenced by When the offense is punishable by reclusion
the RTC to imprisonment exceeding 6 years perpetua or life imprisonment, the prosecution has
but not more than 20 years AND one or more the burden of showing that evidence of guilt is
of the above circumstances (recidivist, etc.) is strong (Rule 114, Sec. 7).

ATENEO CENTRAL
Regarding Minors Charged with a Capital

“Evidence of Guilt” Offense
It refers to a finding of innocence or culpability, If the person charged with a capital offense, such
regardless of the modifying circumstances. as murder, admittedly a minor, which would entitle
him, if convicted, to a penalty next lower than that
Evidence Presented Automatically prescribed by law, he is entitled to bail regardless
Reproduced at Trial of whether the evidence of guilt is strong. The
The evidence presented during the bail hearing reason for this is that one who faces a probable
shall be considered automatically reproduced at death sentence has a particularly strong
the trial but, upon motion of either party, the court temptation to flee. This reason does not hold
may recall any witness for additional examination where the accused has been established without
unless the latter is dead, outside the Philippines, objection to be minor who by law cannot be
or otherwise unable to testify. (Rule 114, Sec. 8) sentenced to death.(See R.A. No. 9165, Sec. 98)
A.M. No. 12-11-2-SC: Guidelines for Privileged mitigating circumstance of minority shall
Decongesting Holding Jails by Enforcing the be considered for the purposes of recommending
Rights of Accused Persons to Bail and to the amount of bail.(R.A. No. 9344, Sec. 34)
Speedy Trial (“Guidelines”)
Bail hearing in offenses punishable by death, Bail hearing is mandatory
reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment: Although, in theory, the only function of bail is to
1. The hearing of the accused’s motion for bail ensure the appearance of the accused at the time
in offenses punishable by death, reclusion set for the arraignment and trial; and, in practice,
perpetua, or life imprisonment shall be bail serves the further purpose of preventing the
summary, with the prosecution bearing the release of an accused who may be dangerous to
burden of showing that the evidence of guilt society or whom the judge may not want to
is strong. The accused may at his option, if release, a hearing upon notice is mandatory
he wants the court to consider his evidence before the grant of bail, whether bail is a matter of
as well, submit in support of his motion the right or discretion.
affidavits of his witnesses attesting to his
innocence. The fact that the public prosecutor recommended
2. At the hearing of the accused’s motion for bail did not warrant dispensing with the hearing.
bail, the prosecution shall present its The public prosecutors recommendation of bail
witnesses with the option of examining them was not material in deciding whether to conduct
on direct or adopting the affidavits they the mandatory hearing or not. (Gacal v. Judge
executed during the preliminary Infante, A.M. No. RTJ- 04-1845, 2011)
investigation as their direct testimonies.
3. The court shall examine the witnesses on Where the prosecution agrees with the accused’s
their direct testimonies or affidavits to application for bail or forgoes the introduction of
ascertain if the evidence of guilt of the evidence, the court must nonetheless set the
accused is strong. The court’s questions application for hearing. It is mandatory for the
need not follow any particular order and may judge to conduct a hearing and ask searching and
shift from one witness to another. The court clarificatory questions for the purpose of
shall then allow counsels from both sides to determining the existence of strong evidence
examine the witnesses as well. The court against the accused; and the order, after such
shall afterwards hear the oral arguments of hearing, should make a finding that the evidence
the parties on whether or not the evidence of against the accused is strong.
guilt is strong.
4. Within 48 hours after hearing, the court shall Hearing for bail different from determination of
issue an order containing a brief summary of the existence of probable cause
the evidence adduced before it, followed by [The determination of probable cause] takes place
its conclusion of whether or not the evidence prior to all proceedings, so that if the court is not
of guilt is strong. Such conclusion shall not satisfied with the existence of a probable cause, it
be regarded as pre-judgment on the merits may either dismiss the case or deny the issuance
of the case that is to be determined only after of the warrant of arrest or conduct a hearing to
a full-blown trial. (Section 6 of Guidelines) satisfy itself of the existence of probable cause. If
the court finds the existence of probable cause,

ATENEO CENTRAL
the court is mandated to issue a warrant of arrest 7. Probability of the accused appearing at the
or commitment order if the accused is already trial;
under custody, as when he was validly arrested 8. Forfeiture of other bail;
without a warrant. 9. The fact that the accused was a fugitive from
justice when arrested; and
It is only after this proceeding that the court can 10. Pendency of other cases where the accused
entertain a petition for bail where a subsequent is on bail (Rule 114, Sec. 9)
hearing is conducted to determine if the evidence
of guilt is weak or not…xxx… This Court had said It is settled that the amount of bail should be
so in many cases and had imposed sanctions on reasonable at all times. In implementing this
judges who granted applications for bail in capital mandate, regard should be taken of the prisoner’s
offenses and in offenses punishable by reclusion pecuniary circumstances. We point out that what
perpetua, or life imprisonment, without giving the is reasonable bail to a man of wealth may be
prosecution the opportunity to prove that the unreasonable to a poor man charged with a like
evidence of guilt is strong (Jorda v. Bitas, A.M. No. offense. Thus, the right to bail should not be
RTJ-14-2376, 2014). rendered nugatory by requiring a sum that is
relatively excessive. The amount should be high
The grant or denial of bail is not a ground for enough to assure the presence of the defendant
inhibition of the judge. when required, but no higher than is reasonably
calculated to fulfill this purpose. Also, while the
Duties of trial judge in a petition for bail in DOJ Bail Bond Guide is persuasive, it is not
offenses punishable by reclusion perpetua, life binding upon the courts. (Tanog v. Balindong, G.R.
imprisonment, or death No. 187464, 2015)
1. In all cases, whether bail is a matter of right
or of discretion, notify the prosecutor of the Excessive bail shall not be required. (Rule 114,
hearing of the application for bail or require Sec. 9)
him to submit his recommendation
The principal factor considered is the probability of
2. Where bail is a matter of discretion, conduct the appearance of the accused, or of his flight to
a hearing of the application for bail regardless avoid punishment. (Villaseñor v. Abano, G.R. No.
of whether or not the prosecution refuses to L-23599, 1967)
present evidence to show that the guilt of the
accused is strong for the purpose of enabling Whatever the fiscal recommends as the amount of
the court to exercise its sound discretion; bail for the provisional release of an accused is
only recommendatory. The Judge still retains the
3. Decide whether the guilt of the accused is discretion to apply the precedents laid down by the
strong based on the summary of evidence of SC regarding the reasonable nature of the bail to
the prosecution; be required. It is not bound by the Fiscal’s
recommendation. (Amaya v. Ordoñez, G.R. No.
4. If the guilt of the accused is not strong, 80906, 1988)
discharge the accused upon the approval of Note: A clear showing of fragile health justifies
the bailbond (Enrile v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. one’s admission to bail.
No. 213847, 2015).
The court recognizes the country’s responsibility to
GUIDELINES IN FIXING AMOUNT OF BAIL the international community which arises from the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This
The judge shall fix a reasonable amount of bail national commitment to uphold the fundamental
considering primarily, but not limited to the human rights as well as value the worth and dignity
following factors: of every person has authorized the grant of bail not
1. Financial ability of the accused to give bail; only to those charged in criminal proceedings but
2. Nature and circumstances of the offense; also to extraditees upon a clear and convincing
3. Penalty for the offense charged; showing:
4. Character and reputation of the accused; (1) that the detainee will not be a flight risk or a
5. Age and health of the accused; danger to the community; and
6. Weight of the evidence against the accused;

ATENEO CENTRAL
(2) that there exist special, humanitarian and 4. Certificate of compliance with Circular No. 66
compelling circumstances. (Enrile v. dated September 19, 1996;
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 213847, 2015) 5. Authority of the agent; and
6. Current certificate of authority issued by the
Corporate Surety Bail Bond insurance commissioner with a financial
May be provided by any domestic or foreign statement showing the maximum
corporation, licensed as surety in accordance with underwriting capacity of the surety company
law and currently authorized to act as such (Rule 114, Sec. 12).
Subscribed jointly by the accused and an officer of Note: The purpose of requiring the affidavit of
the corporation duly authorized by the board of qualification by the surety before the judge is to
directors. (Rule 114, Section 10) enable the latter to determine whether or not the
surety possesses the qualification to act as such,
Note: The term of the bail bond is not dependent especially his financial worth as required in the
upon faithful payment of the bond premium. previous section.
Property Bond; How Posted Deposit of cash as bail

Property Bond is an undertaking constituted as a The accused or any person acting on his behalf
lien on the real property given as security for the may deposit in cash the amount of bail fixed by the
amount of the bail. (Rule 114, Section 11) court or recommended by the prosecutor who
investigated or filed the case with the:
Within 10 days after the approval of the bond, the 1. Nearest collector of internal revenue;
accused shall annotate the lien: 2. Provincial, city or municipal treasurer; or
1. On the certificate of title with the Registry of 3. Clerk of court where case is pending.
Deeds, if the land is registered
2. in the Registration Book, if the land is Money considered as bail, applied to payment of
unregistered fine and costs while the excess if any, shall be
returned to the accused or whoever made the
Failure to do so shall be sufficient cause for deposit (Rule 114, Sec. 14).
cancellation of the property bond and his re-arrest
and detention. The trial judge has no authority to strictly require
that only cash bond, instead of a surety bond, be
Qualifications of sureties in property bond deposited for the provisional release of the
1. Each must be a resident owner of real accused.
property within the Philippines. Respondent judge is only authorized to receive the
2. Where there is only one surety, his real estate cash bail bond under Section 17 (a), Rule 114 of
must be worth at least the amount of the the Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure which
undertaking. says that the bail bond may be filed either with the
3. If there are two or more sureties, each may court where the case is pending, or with any
justify in an amount less than that expressed Regional Trial Court (RTC) of the place of arrest,
in the undertaking but the aggregate of the or with any judge of the Metropolitan Trial Court or
justified sums be equivalent to the whole the Municipal Trial Court of the place of arrest.
amount of the bail demanded. (Tormis v. Judge Paredes, A.M No. RTJ-13-2366,
4. Every surety must be worth the amount 2015)
specified in his own undertaking over and
above all just debts, obligations and
properties exempt from execution. A judge cannot receive cash for bail nor keep it in
his office or residence. (Lachica v. Judge Tormis,
Note: The order fixing the amount of bail is not A.M. No. MTJ-05-1609, 2005)
appealable. (Section 4 of Guidelines)
Recognizance
Before accepting a surety or bail bond, the It is an obligation of record, entered into before
following requisites must be complied with: some court or officer authorized to take it with a
1. Photographs of the accused; condition to do some particular act, the most usual
2. Affidavit of justification; condition in criminal cases being the appearance
3. Clearance from the supreme court; of the accused for trial. (See R.A. No. 10389)

ATENEO CENTRAL
and for the shortest possible period of time.

The following are cases where the court may Whenever detention is necessary, a child will
order the release on recognizance of any always be detained in youth detention homes
person under detention: established by local governments. (R.A. No. 9344,
1. When the offense charged is for violation of Section 35-36).
an ordinance, a light, or a criminal offense,
the imposable penalty of which does not BAIL WHEN NOT REQUIRED
exceed 6 months imprisonment and/or
P2,000 fine, under the circumstances Bail is not required when the law or rules
provided in R.A. No. 6036. provide:
2. Where a person has been in custody for a 1. Offense charged is violation of an ordinance,
period equal to or more than the minimum of light felony or criminal offense the imposable
the imposable principal penalty, without penalty does not exceed 6 months of
application of the Indeterminate Sentence imprisonment and/or fine of P2,000 where
Law or any modifying circumstance, in which said person has established to the
case the court, in its discretion, may allow his satisfaction of the court or any other
release on his own recognizance. appropriate authority hearing the case that he
3. Where the accused has applied for probation, is unable to post the required cash or bail
pending resolution of the case but no bail was bond (RA 6036, Sec. 1)
filed or the accused is incapable of filing one. 2. One of the rights of a child arrested acting as
4. In case of a youthful offender held for a combatant, spy, carrier, or guide in an
physical and mental examination, trial, or armed conflict is to be released on
appeal, if he is unable to furnish bail and recognizance to the custody of DSWD or
under circumstances envisaged in PD No. responsible member of the community (R.A.
603 as amended. (Espiritu v. Jovellanos, No. 7610);
A.M. No. MTJ-97-1139, 1997) 3. Where the accused applied for probation and
5. In summary procedure, when the accused before the same has been resolved but no
has been arrested for failure to appear when bail was filed or the accused is incapable of
required. His release shall be either on bail or filing one, in which case he may be released
recognizance. on his own recognizance.
4. In case of a youthful offender held for
If it has been determined that the child taken into physical or mental examination, trial or
custody is 15 years old or below, the authority appeal, if unable to furnish bail and under the
which will have an initial contact with the child has circumstances provided by P.D. 603, as
the duty to immediately release the child to the amended.
custody of his/her parents or guardian, or in the 5. A person who has been in custody for a
absence thereof, the child's nearest relative.(R.A. period equal to or more than the possible
No. 9344, Sec. 20) maximum imprisonment prescribed for the
If the parents, guardians or nearest relatives offense charged, without prejudice to the
cannot be located, or if they refuse to take custody, continuation of the trial or the proceedings on
the child may be released to any of the following appeal.
(R.A. No. 9344, Sec. 20): 6. Accused who was arrested for failure to
1. A duly registered nongovernmental or appear when required by the court may be
religious organization; released on recognizance of a responsible
2. A barangay official or a member of the citizen (Sec. 16, Rules on Summary
Barangay Council for the Protection of Procedure)
Children (BCPC); 7. A person accused of an offense with a
3. A local social welfare and development maximum penalty of destierro shall be
officer; or released after 30 days of preventive
4. When and where appropriate, the DSWD. imprisonment.
The court shall not order the detention of a child in Reduced Bail
a jail pending trial or hearing of his/her case. A person in custody for a period equal to or more
Institutionalization or detention of the child pending than the minimum of the principal penalty
trial shall be used only as a measure of last resort prescribed for the offense charged, without

ATENEO CENTRAL
application of the Indeterminate Sentence Law or hearing of the application for bail or require
any modifying circumstance, shall be released on him to submit his recommendation;
a reduced bail or on his own recognizance at the 2. Where bail is a matter of discretion, conduct
discretion of the court (Rule 114, Sec. 16). a hearing of the application for bail
regardless of whether or not the prosecution
Bail, Where Filed refuses to present evidence to show that the
1. May be filed with the court where the case is guilt of the accused is strong for the purpose
pending: (e.g., if a case for homicide is of enabling the court to exercise its sound
pending before Branch 1 of RTC Manila, the discretion;
accused should post/file bail in Branch 1); 3. Decide whether the guilt of the accused is
2. In the absence or unavailability of the judge strong based on the summary of evidence of
thereof, with the regional trial judge or any the prosecution; and
first court judge in the province, city or 4. If the guilt of the accused is not strong,
municipality; discharge the accused upon the approval of
3. If the accused was arrested in a province, city the bail bond. Otherwise the bail should be
or municipality other than where the case is denied. (Te vs. Perez, AM No. MTJ-00-
pending, bail may be filed with the RTC of the 1286, 2002)
said place or if no judge is available, with any
first court judge therein; Release on Bail
4. Where bail is a matter of discretion or the Upon approval of the bail by the judge, the
accused seeks to be released on accused must be discharged (Rule 114, Sec. 19).
recognizance, it may only be filed in the court
where the case is pending, whether on trial or An officer who fails or refuses to release him from
appeal; detention notwithstanding the approval by the
5. Any person not yet charged in court may proper court of his bail bond may be held liable
apply for bail with any court in the province, under Art. 126 if the Revised Penal Code for
city or municipality where he is held; delaying release.
6. If the accused was convicted and the nature
of the offense changed from non-bailable to INCREASE OR REDUCTION OF BAIL
bailable, the application can be made with
and resolved by the appellate court (Rule Court may either increase or reduce the
114, Sec. 17). amount of the bail:
1. After the accused admitted to bail; AND
Note: A judge presiding in one branch has no 2. Upon good cause
power to grant bail to an accused who is being
tried in another branch presided by another judge If the accused does not give the increased amount
who is not absent or unavailable, and his act of of bail within a reasonable time, he will be
releasing him on bail constitutes ignorance of law committed to custody (Rule 114, Sec. 20).
which subjects him to disciplinary sanction.
Accused Released Without Bail May:
Notice of application to prosecutor 1. At any subsequent stage
Court to give reasonable notice of the hearing to 2. Whenever a strong showing of guilt appears
the prosecutor or require him to submit his to the court
recommendation (Rule 114, Sec. 18). 3. Be required to give bail or in lieu thereof,
committed to custody (Rule 114, Sec. 20)
Hearing for application for bail is mandatory.
Whether bail is a matter of right or discretion, there Where the offense is bailable, the mere probability
must be a reasonable notice given to or at least a that the accused will escape or if he had previously
recommendation sought from the prosecutor. escaped while under detention does not deprive
(Mabutas v. Perello, A.M. No. RTJ-03-1817, 2005) him of his right to bail. The remedy is to increase
the amount of bail, provided the amount is not
Duties of a judge in case an application for bail excessive. (Sy Guan v. Amparo, G.R. No. L-1771,
is filed 1947).
1. In all cases, whether bail is a matter of right
or discretion, notify the prosecutor of the FORFEITURE AND CANCELLATION OF BAIL
Bail is Forfeited:

ATENEO CENTRAL
1. Where the presence of the accused is

specifically required by the court or the Rules Bail is Cancelled:
of Court; and 1. Upon application of the bondsmen with due
2. Despite due notice to the bondsmen to notice to the prosecutor, upon surrender of
produce him before the court on a given date, the accused or proof of his death;
the accused fails to appear in person as so 2. Upon acquittal of the accused;
required (Rule 114, Sec. 21). 3. Upon dismissal of the case; or
4. Execution of judgment of conviction.
To justify exemption from liability on a bail
bond or reduction thereof, two requisites must In all instances, without prejudice to any liability on
be satisfied: the bail (Rule 114, Sec. 22).
1. Production or surrender of the person of the
accused within 30 days from notice of the Arrest of Accused Out on Bail
order of the court to produce the body of the The bondsmen who put the bail bond for the
accused or giving reasons for its non- accused become the jailers and they or the police
production; and officer to whom authority is endorsed may arrest
2. Satisfactory explanations for the non- the accused for the purpose of surrendering him to
appearance of the accused when first the court. The accused cannot leave the country
required by the trial court to appear (Rule without the permission of the bondsmen and the
114, Sec. 21). court (Rule 114, Sec. 23).
Failure to PRODUCE the body of the principal or How sureties may be relieved from
give a reason for his non-production and EXPLAIN responsibility over the accused:
why the accused did not appear before the court 1. Arrest the principal and deliver him to the
when first required to do so, the court shall render proper authorities.
a judgment against the bondsmen, jointly and 2. They may cause the arrest of the accused to
severally for the amount of the bail. be made by any police officer or other person
of suitable age or discretion.
The period of 30 days cannot be shortened by the 3. By endorsing the authority to arrest upon a
court but may be extended for good cause shown. certified copy of the undertaking and
delivering it to such officer or person.
Note: When bail is granted, the accused must
appear whenever the court requires his presence; An accused released on bail may be re-arrested
otherwise, his bail shall be forfeited. This without the necessity of a warrant if he attempts to
authorizes the court to cancel the bail bond. Any depart from the Philippines without permission of
motion for bail pending appeal will also be denied the court where the case is pending.
because of violation of the conditions of the
previous bail. Once an accused escapes from No Bail After Judgment; Exception
prison or confinement, jumps bail or flees to a General Rule: No bail shall be allowed after the
foreign country, he loses his standing in court. judgment has become final, as what is left is for
Unless he surrenders or submits to the jurisdiction him to serve the sentence (Rule 114, Sec. 24).
of the court, he is deemed to have waived any right
to seek relief from the court. (People v. Piad, G.R. Exception: When he has applied for probation
No. 213607, 2016) before commencing to serve sentence, the penalty
and the offense being within the purview of the
ORDER OF ORDER OF Probation Law. The application for probation must
FORFEITURE CONFISCATION be filed within the period of perfecting an appeal.
Conditional and Not independent of the Such filing operates as a waiver of the right to
interlocutory. It order of forfeiture. It is a appeal (Rule 114, Sec. 24).
is not judgment ultimately
appealable. determining the liability of Exception to the exception: The accused shall
the surety thereunder not be allowed to be released on bail after he has
and therefore final. commenced to serve his sentence (Rule 114, Sec.
Execution may issue at 23).
once.

ATENEO CENTRAL
Once a child who is under 18 years of age at the

commission of the offense is found guilty of the The accused may be prohibited from leaving the
offense charged, the court shall place the child country during the pendency of his case (Manotoc,
under suspended sentence, without need of Jr. v. CA, G.R. No. L-62100, 1986).
application. The suspension of sentence shall still
be applied even if the juvenile is already 18 years A criminal case is required before a Hold-
of age or more at the time of the pronouncement Departure Order may be issued
of his/her guilt. (R.A. No. 9344, Section 38) Hold-Departure Orders shall be issued only in
criminal cases within the exclusive jurisdiction of
Court Supervision of Detainees the Regional Trial Courts.
The court shall exercise supervision over all
persons in custody for the purpose of eliminating Sandiganbayan may issue Hold Departure
unnecessary detention. The executive judges of Order
RTCs shall conduct monthly personal inspections Sandiganbayan is a special court, of the same
of provincial, city or municipal jails and the level as the Court of Appeals and possessing all
prisoners within their respective jurisdictions. the inherent powers of a court of justice.(R.A.
8249, 1997).
However, an executive judge of the RTC has not
been given any authority to interfere with the
transfer of detainees in cases handled by other
judges nor to grant hold-departure orders in cases
not assigned to her sala. (Mupas v. Español, A.M.
No. RTJ-04-1850, 2005)
APPLICATION NOT A BAR TO OBJECTIONS

IN ILLEGAL ARREST, LACK OF OR
IRREGULAR PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION
Bail is not a bar to objections on illegal arrest,

lack of or irregular preliminary investigation.
An application for admission to bail shall not
bar the accused from:
1. Challenging the validity of his arrest; or
2. The legality of the warrant issued therefore;
or
3. From assailing the regularity or questioning
the absence of a preliminary investigation of
the charge against him.
PROVIDED: That the accused raises them before

entering his plea. (Rule 114, Section 26)
The court shall resolve the matter as early as

practicable, but not later than the start of the trial
of the case.
Other Matters:
Hold-Departure Orders
Supreme Court Circular No. 39-97 dated June
19, 1997 limits the authority to issue hold
departure orders to the RTCs in criminal cases
within their exclusive jurisdiction.
Consequently, MTC judges have no authority to

issue hold-departure orders, following the maxim,
express mention implies the exclusion. Neither
does he have authority to cancel one, which he
issued.

ATENEO CENTRAL
G. ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA (RULE 4. Reading it in a language or dialect known to

116) the accused
5. Asking accused whether he pleads guilty or
HOW MADE not guilty (Rule 116, Sec. 1).
ARRAIGNMENT GR: The procedural steps laid down in Section

It is the formal mode and manner of implementing 1(a) of Rule 116 are not empty rituals that a judge
the constitutional right of an accused to be can take nonchalantly. Each step constitutes an
informed of the nature and cause of the accusation integral part of that crucial stage in criminal
against him. (Taglay v. Daray, G.R. No. 1642258, litigation "where the issues are joined x x x and
2012) without which the proceedings cannot advance
further." Anything less than strict compliance is
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be considered gross ignorance of the law. (Bandoy v.
presumed innocent until the contrary is proved, Jacinto, Jr., A.M. No. RTJ-14-2399, 2014).
and shall enjoy:
a. the right to be heard by himself and XPN: The court, upon personal examination of the
counsel accused, may allow a waiver of the reading of the
b. to be informed of the nature and cause of information upon the full understanding and
the accusation against him express consent of the accused and his or her
c. to have a speedy, impartial, and public counsel (A.M. No. 15-06-10-SC, Sec. II (8) (c)).
trial,
d. to meet the witnesses face to face; and When Arraignment Should Be Held
e. To have compulsory process to secure the 1. IF THE ACCUSED IS DETAINED – it shall be
attendance of witnesses and the set within 10 days from the court’s receipt of
production of evidence in his behalf. the case;
However, after arraignment, trial may proceed 2. IF THE ACCUSED IS NOT DETAINED – it
notwithstanding the absence of the accused shall be set within 30 days from the date the
provided that he has been duly notified and his court acquires jurisdiction over the accused
failure to appear is unjustifiable. (Section 14 (2), (A.M. No. 15-06-10-SC, Sec. II (8) (a)).
Article III 1987 Constitution)
When Arraignment is Held Within a Shorter
Purpose: Period:
It is indispensable in bringing the accused to court 1. When an accused is under preventive
and in notifying him of the nature and cause of the detention, his case should be raffled within 3
accusations against him. Its importance is based days from filing and accused shall be
on the constitutional right of the accused to be arraigned within 10 days from receipt by the
informed. Procedural due process requires that judge of the records of the case (R.A. 8493
the accused be arraigned so that he may be Speedy Trial Act).
informed of the reason for his indictment, the 2. Where the complainant is about to depart
specific charges he is bound to face, and the from the Philippines with no definite date of
corresponding penalty that could be possibly return, the accused should be arraigned
meted against him. It is at this stage that the without delay (R.A. 4908).
accused, for the first time, is given the opportunity 3. Cases under the Dangerous Drugs Act;
to know the precise charge that confronts him. It is
only imperative that he is thus made fully aware of Trial in absentia may be conducted only after valid
the possible loss of freedom, even of his life, arraignment (Article III, Section 14 (2) of the 1987
depending on the nature of the imputed crime Constitution)
(Kummer v. People, G.R. No. 174461, 2013).
Accused must personally appear during
How Arraignment is Made arraignment and enter his plea (counsel cannot
1. In open court where the complaint or enter plea for accused) (Rule 116, Sec. 1 (b)).
information has been filed or assigned for trial
2. By the judge or clerk of court Absence of Arraignment
3. By furnishing the accused with a copy of the GR: Judgment is void if accused has not been
complaint or information validly arraigned.

ATENEO CENTRAL
circumstances (aggravating and/or qualifying)

XPN: If accused went into trial without being alleged in the complaint.
arraigned, subsequent arraignment will cure the No Need for Further Evidence
error provided that the accused was able to Such plea removes the necessity of presenting
present evidence and cross-examine the further evidence and for all intents and purposes
witnesses of the prosecution during trial. the case is deemed tried on its merits and
submitted for decision.
Period of Suspension of Arraignment
Suspension period shall not exceed 60 days Plea of Guilty to a Capital Offense
counted from the filing of the petition for review of If the case involves a capital offense, the reception
the resolution of the prosecutor with either the DOJ of evidence to prove the guilt and degree of
or Office of the President (Section 11 (c), Rule culpability of the accused is mandatory.
116).
Mitigating and Aggravating Circumstances
NOTE: According to A.M. No. 15-6-10-SC on the However, the court may, upon motion, allow the
Guidelines for Continuous Trial of Criminal presentation of evidence to prove aggravating and
Cases in Pilot Courts, the following rules shall be mitigating circumstances.
observed for arraignment:
The trial court may allow an accused to plead
1. Plea Bargaining. - If the accused desires to guilty and at the same time allow him to prove
enter a plea of guilty to a lesser offense, plea other mitigating circumstances. However, if what
bargaining should immediately proceed, the accused would prove is an exempting
provided that the private offended party in circumstance, which would amount to a withdrawal
private crimes or the arresting officer in of his plea of not guilty.
victimless crimes, is present to give his
conformity to the plea bargaining. Thereafter, When Evidence Presented after entering a Plea
judgment shall immediately be rendered in of Guilty to a Non-Capital Offense
the same proceedings. For non-capital offenses, the reception of evidence
2. Plea of Guilty to the Crime Charged in the is merely discretionary on the part of the court. If
Information. – If the accused pleads guilty to the information or complaint is sufficient for the
the crime charged in the Information, judge to render judgment on a non-capital offense,
judgment shall immediately be rendered, I he may do so.
except in those cases involving capital
offenses. If the accused is permitted to present evidence
3. Where No Plea Bargaining or Plea of Guilty after his plea of guilty to a non-capital offense and
Takes Place. - If the accused does not enter such shows that the accused is not guilty of the
a plea of guilty, whether to a lesser offense or crime charged, the accused must be acquitted, for
the offense charged in the Information, the there is no rule which provides that simply
court shall immediately proceed with the because the accused pleaded guilty to the charge
arraignment of the accused and, thereafter, that his conviction automatically follows. Additional
indicate the pre-trial and trial dates in the evidence independent of the plea may be
Order. considered to convince the judge that it was
4. The schedule of the pre-trial and trial dates intelligently made.
for both the prosecution and the defense
should be within the periods provided in the
Regular Rules/Special Rules. The trial dates WHEN SHOULD PLEA OF NOT GUILTY BE
may be shortened depending on the number ENTERED
of witnesses to be presented. In this regard,
a flowchart shall be prepared by the court A plea of “not guilty” will be entered:
which shall serve as the final schedule of 1. When accused so pleaded
hearings. 2. When he refuses to plead
3. When he makes a conditional or qualified
Consequences of Plea of Guilty plea of guilt (i.e. Accused pleads guilty but
As a rule, a plea of guilty is an UNQUALIFIED adds “pero hindi ko sinasadya”)
ADMISSION of the crime and of the attending 4. When the plea is indefinite or ambiguous

ATENEO CENTRAL
5. When he pleads guilty but presents

exculpatory evidence (Ex. Evidence to prove Section 2, Rule 116 of the Rules of Court presents
complete self-defense) (Rule 116, Sec. 1) the basic requisites upon which plea bargaining
may be made, i.e., that it should be with the
Note: If the accused who pleaded guilty presents consent of the offended party and the prosecutor,
exculpatory evidence, his plea of guilty is deemed and that the plea of guilt should be to a lesser
withdrawn. The judge must order the accused to offense which is necessarily included in the
plead again or at least direct that a new plea of “not offense charged. The rules however use word
guilty” be entered for him, otherwise there shall be “may”, denoting an exercise of discretion upon the
no standing plea for the accused. This is trial court on whether to allow the accused to make
significant because if there is no standing plea, the such plea. Trial courts are exhorted to keep in
accused cannot invoke double jeopardy later on. mind that a plea of guilty for a lighter offense than
that actually charged is not supposed to be
Presence of Offended Party allowed as a matter of bargaining or compromise
The private offended party is required to appear in for the convenience of the accused. (Daan v
the arraignment for the purpose of plea bargaining, Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 163972-77, 2008)
determination of civil liability and other matters
requiring his presence. Effect of Plea Bargaining on Civil Liability of
the Accused
In case the offended party fails to appear despite The civil liability is not covered by the plea bargain.
due notice, the trial court may allow the accused To hold otherwise would lead to the possibility that
to plead guilty to a lesser offense necessarily offended parties will hesitate to give their consent
included in the offense charged with the conformity to a plea of guilty to a lesser offense by the
of the trial prosecutor alone (Rule 116, Sec. 1(f)). accused for fear that it would foreclose their
chance to recover the appropriate civil liability.
WHEN MAY ACCUSED ENTER A PLEA OF (Heirs of Mario Gevero v. Guihing Agricultural
GUILTY TO A LESSER OFFENSE Dev’t Corporation, G.R. No. 122619, 2006)
Plea Bargaining Plea to Lesser Offense During Arraignment

It is the process whereby the accused, the During arraignment, the accused may enter a plea
offended party and the prosecution work out a of guilty to a lesser offense PROVIDED there is
mutually satisfactory disposition of the case consent of the offended party AND of the
subject to the court’s approval. (People v. prosecutor to the plea of guilty to a lesser offense
Villarama, G.R. No. 99287 June 23, 1992) that is necessarily included in the offense charged
(Rule 116, Sec. 2).
It usually involves the defendant’s pleading guilty
to a lesser offense or to only one or some of the The accused may also enter a plea of guilty to a
counts of a multi-count indictment in return for a lesser offense if the offended party was notified
lighter sentence than that for the graver charge. and did not appear in the arraignment of the
accused.
Only facts, and not conclusions of law alleged in
the information, are admitted by a plea of guilty. Plea to Lesser Offense After Arraignment But
(People v. De la Cruz, G.R. No. L-2204, 1948). A Before Trial
plea of guilty to an information alleging After arraignment but BEFORE trial, the accused
aggravating or qualifying circumstances will not be may still be allowed to plead guilty to a lesser
considered an admission of said circumstances if offense after withdrawing his previous plea of not
the evidence subsequently presented by the guilty. No amendment to the complaint or
prosecution fails to prove the same. (People v. information is necessary (Rule 116, Sec. 2).
Comendador, G.R. No. L-38756, 1984)
Plea to Lesser Offense after Trial Has Begun
It precludes the filing and prosecution of the After the prosecution has rested its case, a change
offense originally charged in the information, of plea to a lesser offense may be granted by the
except when the plea of guilty to a lesser offense judge, with the approval of the prosecutor and the
is without the consent of the offended party and offended party if the prosecution does not have
the prosecutor. sufficient evidence to establish the guilt of the

ATENEO CENTRAL
accused for the crime charged. The judge cannot 1. Conduct a searching inquiry into the
on its own grant the change of plea (Daan v. voluntariness and full comprehension of the
Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 163972-77, March 28, consequences of the plea.
2008). 2. Require prosecution to present evidence to
prove the guilt and precise degree of
Note: The ruling on the motion must disclose the culpability of the accused.
strength and weaknesses of the prosecution’s 3. Ask the accused if he desires to present
evidence. Absent any finding on the weight of the evidence in his behalf and allow him to do so
evidence on hand, the judge’s acceptance of the if he desires (People v. Gumimba, 517 SCRA
defendant’s change of plea is improper and 25, Feb. 25, 2007).
irregular. (Estipona v. Lobrigo, G.R. No. 226679,
2017) The raison d’etre for the rule is that the courts must
proceed with extreme care where the imposable
Presence and Consent of the Offended Party penalty is death, considering that the execution of
The consent of the offended party is necessary such sentence is irrevocable. Experience has
before the accused may be allowed to plead guilty shown that even innocent persons have at times
to a lesser offense. If the plea of guilty to a lesser pleaded guilty. Improvident pleas of guilty to a
offense is made without the consent of the capital offense on the part of the accused must be
prosecutor and the offended party, the conviction averted since by admitting his guilt before the trial
of the accused shall not be a bar to another court, the accused would forfeit his life and liberty
prosecution for an offense which necessarily without having fully understood the meaning,
includes the offense charged in the former significance and the dire consequences of his
information (No double jeopardy). plea. (People v Ulit, G.R. Nos. 131799-801, 2004)
If the offended party fails to appear during The absence of the transcript of stenographic
arraignment, the court may allow the accused to notes of the proceedings during the arraignment
plead guilty to a lesser offense with the conformity do not make the procedure flawed. The minutes of
of the trial prosecutor alone. the proceedings indubitably show that the judge
read the Informations to the accused-appellant
The issuance by the DOJ of Circular No. 27 s. both in English and Tagalog, asked him questions
2018 which instructs Prosecutors to outrightly as to his understanding of the consequences of his
reject any plea-bargaining in drugs cases that go plea, his educational attainment and occupation.
beyond what is authorized in the Circular does not Accused-appellant could have known of the
violate the rule-making power of the Supreme consequence of his plea having pleaded twice to
Court. Thus, their refusal to consent to the plea- the charges against him (People v Magat, G.R.
bargain should be treated as a continuing No. 130026, 2000).
objection that the Court must resolve. (PP v.
Reafor, G.R. No. 247575, 2020) 1. Searching inquiry (People v.
Pagal, G.R. No. 241257,
The conformity of the prosecutor to the proposed September 29, 2020)
plea bargaining in drugs cases is not optional for
the prosecutor has full control of the prosecution Elements of “Searching Inquiry”
of criminal actions; his duty is to prosecute the 1. Judge must convince himself that accused is
proper offense, not any lesser or graver one, entering the plea voluntarily and intelligently.
based on what the evidence on hand can sustain. 2. Judge must convince himself that there exists
a rational basis for the finding of guilt based
Section 2, Rule 116 is clear, the consent of both on accused’s testimony.
the fiscal and the offended party is a condition 3. Inform the accused of the exact length of
precedent to a valid plea of guilty to a lesser imprisonment and the certainty that he will
offense. (People v. Borras, G.R. No. 250295, 15 serve it in a national penitentiary (People v.
March 2021). Dayot, G.R. No. 88281, July 20, 1990).
ACCUSED PLEAD GUILTY TO CAPITAL Mandatory Nature of Searching Inquiry
OFFENSE, WHAT THE COURT SHOULD DO It is generally mandatory on the RTC to conduct
such especially in a hearing for re-arraignment.
Duty of the Court When Accused Pleads Guilty
This requirement is NOT deemed complied when
to a Capital Offense:

ATENEO CENTRAL
it was the defense who explained the

consequences of the guilty plea. The substitution of a plea of guilty by one of not
guilty is subject to the discretion of the court and
However: [The SC ruled in a case] that the may be granted if the prosecution does not have
accused had already pleaded guilty to a much sufficient evidence to establish the guilt of the
graver offense (multiple murder) based on the accused. (People v. Kayanan, G.R. No. L-30355,
same act relied upon in the multiple frustrated 1978)
murder charge. Prior to the change of plea, the
accused had already made two confessions of Instances of Improvident Plea:
guilt (1) through exclusive media interviews, and 1. Plea of guilty was compelled by violence or
(2) through judicial admission in pre-trial. Under intimidation
these circumstances, it is unnecessary to rule on 2. Accused did not fully understand the
the sufficiency of the "searching inquiry." meaning and consequences of his plea
Remanding for re-arraignment is not needed 3. Insufficient information to sustain conviction
anymore as this plea of guilt is NOT the sole basis of the offense charged
for the judgment. (People v. Baharan, G.R. No. 4. Information does not charge an offense
188314, 2011) 5. Court has no jurisdiction
2. Improvident plea The withdrawal of a plea of guilty is not a matter of

right to the accused but of sound discretion to the
IMPROVIDENT PLEA is a plea without trial court. (People v. Lambino, G.R. No. L-10875,
information as to all the circumstances affecting it; 1958)
based upon a mistaken assumption or misleading
information or advice. There should be a categorical declaration from the
accused that he is withdrawing his plea of guilty
Effects of Improvident Plea and substituting it with a plea of not guilty. There
The conviction will be set aside if the plea of guilty must either be a motion to withdraw his plea of
is the sole basis for the judgment. guilty or any unequivocal manifestation of the
withdrawal of such plea. Convictions based on an
But, the court may validly convict the accused if improvident plea of guilty are set aside only if such
such conviction is supported by adequate plea is the sole basis of the judgment. If the trial
evidence of guilt independent of the plea itself. court relied on sufficient and credible evidence to
convict the accused, the conviction must be
When Remand Necessary in cases of sustained (People v. Solamillo, G.R. No. 123161,
Improvident Plea of Guilty 2003).
Where there is an improvident plea of guilt, but the
prosecution was able to prove beyond reasonable The reason behind the rules is that trial has
doubt the guilt of the accused, no remand is already begun and the withdrawal of the plea will
necessary for so long as there is no procedural change the theory of the case and put all past
unfairness or irregularity. proceedings to waste. Moreover, at this point,
there is a presumption that the plea was made
Where there is an improvident plea of guilt, but the voluntarily.
prosecution was unable to prove beyond
reasonable doubt the guilt of the accused, remand Four-Fold Duty of Court when Accused
for further proceedings is necessary. Appears without Counsel:
EXCEPTION: Where the prosecution was still 1. INFORM the defendant that he has a right to
unable to prove beyond reasonable doubt despite an attorney before being arraigned
multiple chances to do so, no remand is 2. After informing him, court must ASK the
necessary, and acquittal should follow. (PP v. defendant if he desires to have the aid of an
Pagal, G.R. No. 241257, 2020) attorney
Withdrawal of Improvident Plea of Guilty 3. If he desires but is unable to employ one, the
At any time before judgment of conviction court must ASSIGN an attorney de oficio to
becomes final, the court may permit an defend him
IMPROVIDENT PLEA of guilty to be withdrawn 4. If the accused desires to procure an attorney
and be substituted by a plea of not guilty. of his own, the court must grant him

ATENEO CENTRAL
REASONABLE TIME to do so (Gamas v.

Oco, A.M. No. MTJ-99-1231, 2004) The motion for bill of particulars must contain:
1. Alleged defects in the complaint or
Failure to comply with this 4-fold duty amounts to information and
a violation due process 2. Details desired.
COUNSEL DE OFICIO is counsel appointed by Rule 12 on Bill of Particulars applies by analogy to

the court to represent and defend the accused in Bill of Particulars as provided in Section 9 of Rule
case he cannot afford to employ one himself 116.
Who May Be Appointed Counsel De Oficio: The remedy against an information that fails to
1. Members of the bar in good standing who can allege the time of the commission of the crime with
competently defend the accused sufficient definiteness is a bill of particulars, not a
2. In localities where such members of the bar motion to quash.
are not available, any resident of the province
of good repute for probity and ability. It is Not the Office of the Bill of Particulars to:
1. Supply material allegation necessary to the
Duty of the Court to Appoint Counsel During validity of a pleading
Arraignment and During Trial 2. Change a cause of action or defense stated
During arraignment, the court has an affirmative in the pleading, or to state a cause of action
duty to inform the accused of his right to counsel or defense other than the one stated.
and to provide him with one in case he cannot 3. Set forth the pleader’s theory of his cause of
afford it. The court must act on its own volition action or a rule of evidence on which he
unless the right is waived by the accused. intends to rely.
4. Furnish evidentiary information whether such
During trial, it is the accused who must assert his information consists of evidence which the
right to counsel. The court will not act unless the pleader proposes to introduce or of facts
accused invokes his rights. which constitute a defense or offset for the
other party or which will enable the opposite
What Constitutes “Reasonable Time” party to establish an affirmative defense not
It depends on the circumstances surrounding the yet pleaded.
case such as the gravity of the offense, complexity
of the allegations, whether a motion to quash or a The filing of a motion for bill of particulars
bill of particulars has to be filed, etc. suspends the period to file a responsive pleading.
Generally, reasonable time to prepare for trial is If the motion is granted, the moving party has the
between 2-15 days. remaining period or at least 5 days to file his
answer from service of the bill of particulars.
The accused has at least 15 to 30 days from
receipt of pre-trial order to prepare for trial (Rule If the motion is denied, he has the same period to
119, Section 1). file his responsive pleading from receipt of the
order denying the motion.
Generally, reasonably time to prepare for
arraignment is 30 minutes to 1 hour. Right to Modes of Discovery
This is the right of the accused to move for the
Note: Counsel for the accused must expressly production of material evidence in the possession
demand the right to be given reasonable time to of the prosecution. It authorizes the defense to
consult with the accused. Only when so inspect, copy or photograph any evidence of the
demanded does denial thereof constitute prosecution in its possession after obtaining
reversible error and a ground for new trial. permission of the court.
Bill of Particulars The purpose of such right is to prevent surprises

Accused must move for a bill of particulars to the accused and the suppression or alteration
BEFORE arraignment to enable him to properly of evidence.
plead and prepare for trial, otherwise it is deemed
waived.

ATENEO CENTRAL
Such right is available even during preliminary H. MOTION TO QUASH (RULE 117)
investigation when such is necessary to protect
the constitutional right to life, liberty and property Definition
of the accused. It enables the respondent to obtain It is a special pleading filed by the defendant
evidence which he could incorporate in the before entering his plea, which hypothetically
counter-affidavits or to substantiate his allegations admits the truth of the facts spelled out in the
therein. complaint or information at the same time that it
sets up a matter which, if duly proved, would
The rules applicable for the right to modes of preclude further proceedings. By a motion to
discovery in criminal case is Section 12 and 13 of quash, the defendant assumes the facts alleged in
Rule 119. Rules 23 to 29 of the Rules of Court is the information to be true. (People v. Odtuhan,
not applicable. G.R. No. 191566, 2013)
Grounds for Suspension of Arraignment An order denying a motion to quash is interlocutory

1. There exists a prejudicial question in character and absent a clear showing that the
2. Accused appears to be suffering from an judge has committed a grave abuse of discretion
unsound mental condition which renders him or acted in excess of jurisdiction, the order is not
unable to understand the charge against him appealable (Santos v. People, G.R. No. 173176,
and to plead intelligently thereto. August 26, 2008).
3. There is a petition for review pending before
the DOJ or Office of the President, however NOTE: A motion to quash based on double
the period of suspension shall not exceed 60 jeopardy or extinction of the criminal action may,
days counted from the filing of the petition for by their nature, be based on matters outside of the
review. allegation of the information or complaint.
The suspension of the arraignment should always Time to move to quash

be within the limits allowed by law (ABS-CBN v. May be filed only before the accused has entered
GMA, Felipe Gozon, G.R. No. 195956, 2015) his plea to the accusatory pleading (Rule 117, Sec.
1)
While the pendency of a petition for review is a
ground for suspension of the arraignment, the Exceptions
Rules on Criminal Procedure limits the deferment 1. When the same does not charge an offense;
of the arraignment to a period of 60 days reckoned 2. Where the court has no jurisdiction over the
from the filing of the petition with the reviewing case;
office. It follows, therefore, that after the expiration 4. When the offense or penalty had already been
of said period, the trial court is bound to arraign the extinguished; or
accused or to deny the motion to defer 5. When further prosecuting the accused would
arraignment. The trial court has to set the date of thereby place him in double jeopardy.
arraignment even before the lapse of 60 days.
(Aguinaldo vs. Ventus, GR No. 176033, 2015) NOTE: The court is not authorized to motu propio
initiate a motion to quash. The right to file a motion
Note: Other grounds for suspension include to quash belongs only to the accused.
pending incidents like motion to quash, motion for
inhibition, motion for bill of particulars. 1. Grounds
The grounds to quash the information are:

1. Facts charged do not constitute an offense
2. Court has no jurisdiction over offense
charged
3. Court has no jurisdiction over the person of
the accused
4. Officer who filed the information had no
authority to do so
5. Does not conform substantially to the
prescribed form

ATENEO CENTRAL
6. More than one offense is charged except neither a directive from the Secretary of Justice
when a single punishment for various designating him as a special prosecutor nor the
offense is prescribed by law written approval of the information by the city
7. Criminal action or liability has been prosecutor as required under Section 5, Rule 110
extinguished by prescription of the Rules of Court.
8. Contains averments which, if true, would
constitute a legal excuse or justification No complaint or information may be filed or
9. Accused has been previously convicted or dismissed by an investigating prosecutor without
acquitted of offense charged, or case has the prior written authority or approval of the
been dismissed or otherwise terminated provincial or city prosecutor or chief state
without the express consent of the accused prosecutor or the Ombudsman or his deputy.
(double jeopardy) (Rule 117, Sec. 3) (Tolentino vs. Paqueo, Jr., G.R. No. 150606,
2007).
An affidavit of desistance or pardon is not a ground
for the dismissal of an action once it has been Republic Act No. 6770, by conferring upon the
instituted in court. (People v. Salazar, G.R. No. Ombudsman the power to prosecute, likewise
181900, 2010) grants to the Ombudsman the power to authorize
the filing of informations. As to the Special
The absence of probable cause for the issuance Prosecutor, respondent People invokes the
of a warrant of arrest is not a ground for quashal aforesaid authority of the Ombudsman in Section
of the information, but is a ground of the dismissal 15(10) to delegate his powers, and claim that there
of the case (People v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. was a general delegation of the authority to
144159, 2004) approve the filing of informations in Office Order
No. 03-97, series of 2003 (dated 15 September
Matters of defense cannot be raised in a motion to 2003), and Office Order No. 40-05, series of 2005
quash (Antone v. Beronilla, G.R. No. 183824, (dated 4 April 2005).
2010).
The delegation of the power to authorize the filing
Omnibus Motion Rule of informations under Office Order No. 40-05 was
The court shall not consider any other ground only made to Deputy Ombudsmen, and not to the
other than those specifically stated in the motion Special Prosecutor. All that was delegated to the
to quash, except (1) lack of jurisdiction over the Special Prosecutor was the discretional authority
offense charged; and (2) the information does not to review and modify the Deputy Ombudsmen-
charge an offense (Sec. 2, Rule 117). authorized information, but even this is subject to
the condition that such modification must be
Facts Charged Do Not Constitute an Offense “without departing from, or varying in any way, the
The test for the correctness of this ground is the contents of the basic Resolution, Order or
sufficiency of the averments in the information, Decision” (Perez v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No.
that is, whether the facts alleged, if hypothetically 166062, 2006).
admitted, establish the essential elements of the
offense as defined by law without considering The handling prosecutor’s authority, particularly as
matters aliunde (People v. Romuadez, G.R. it does not appear on the face of the information,
166510, 2008). has no connection to the trial court’s power to hear
and decide a case. Hence, Sec. 3(d), Rule 117,
Note: The court, in resolving the motion, cannot requiring a handling prosecutor to secure a prior
consider – written authority or approval from the provincial,
1. Facts contrary to those alleged in the city or chief state prosecutor before filing an
information Information with the courts, may be waived by the
2. Facts which do not appear on the face of the accused through silence, acquiescence, or failure
information to raise such ground during arraignment or before
entering a plea. If at all, such deficiency is merely
Except: Those admitted by the prosecution. formal and can be cured at any stage of the
Officer who Filed the Information Had No proceedings in a criminal case (Gomez v. People,
Authority to Do So G.R. No. 216824, 2020).
It occurs when a state prosecutor lacked the
authority to file the information because there was

ATENEO CENTRAL
Does Not Conform Substantially to the (Choa v. Choa, G.R.

Prescribed Form No. 143376. 2002).
The defects contemplated are defects in form, as
where the requirements for the sufficiency of Notwithstanding the interlocutory character and
information are not complied with. effect of the denial of the demurrers to evidence,
the petitioners-accused could avail themselves of
Prescription the remedy of certiorari when the denial was
The following are the prescriptive periods of the tainted with grave abuse of discretion. (Arroyo v.
criminal liability or penalties: People, G.R. No. 220598, 2016; Aguas v.
1. Death and reclusion perpetua - 20 years Sandiganbayan, G.R. 220953, 2016)
2. Other afflictive penalties - 15 years
3. Other correctional penalties - 10 years; When the accused files such motion to dismiss
however, if penalty is arresto mayor - 5 years without express leave of court, he waives the right
4. Light penalties - 1 year to present evidence and submits the case for
judgment on the basis of the evidence for the
Legal Excuse For Justification prosecution. The RTC did not need to inquire into
The legal excuse or justification referred to are the voluntariness and intelligence of the waiver, for
those provided for in the Revised Penal Code: her opting to file her demurrer to evidence without
1. Justifying circumstances. (Art. 11) first obtaining express leave of court effectively
2. Exempting circumstances. (Art. 12) waived her right to present her evidence. (People
3. Absolutory causes. (Arts. 6 [par.3], 16, 20, v. Cristobal, G.R. No. 159450, 2011)
247 and 332)
Forms and Contents
DISTINGUISH FROM DEMURRER TO 1. In writing
EVIDENCE 2. Signed by the accused or his counsel
3. Distinctly specify the factual and legal
MOTION TO QUASH DEMURRER TO grounds of the motion (Rule 117, Sec. 2)
EVIDENCE
Filed before the Filed after the Motion to Quash in Cases covered by
defendant enters his prosecution has Summary Procedure
plea rested its case General Rule: Filing of a motion to quash is not
Does not require prior May be filed either with allowed in a summary procedure.
leave of court or without leave of
court Exception/s:
Based on matters Predicated upon 1. On the ground of lack of jurisdiction over the
found on the matters outside of the subject matter
complaint or complaint or 2. Failure to comply with the barangay
information information such as conciliation proceedings (Sec. 19 (a),
the evidence or lack of Revised Rules on Summary Procedure).
it
If granted, dismissal If granted, is deemed Effect of Failure to Assert Any Ground of a
of the case will not an acquittal of the Motion To Quash Before Pleading to a
necessarily follow accused and Complaint or Information
[See Sections 5 and 6 subsequent This failure to assert a ground may either be
of this Rule, where prosecution will violate because:
another complaint or the rule on double 1. Accused did not file a motion to quash
information may be jeopardy 2. Accused filed a motion to quash but failed to
filed by order of the allege the ground in said motion
court]
If denied by grave If denied, shall not be General Rule: Failure to assert or timely assert a
abuse of discretion, reviewable by appeal motion to quash shall be deemed a waiver of any
then certiorari or or certiorari before objections (Rule 117, Sec. 9)
prohibition lies judgment but may be
reviewable via Rule 65 When the accused fails, before arraignment, to
move for the quashal of such information and goes

ATENEO CENTRAL
to trial thereunder, he thereby waives the objection

and may be found guilty of as many offenses as Note: The fundamental test in determining
those charged in the information and proved whether a motion to quash may be sustained
during trial. (Escandor v. People, G.R. No. based on this ground is whether the facts alleged,
211962, 2020) if hypothetically admitted, will establish the
essential elements of the offense as defined in the
Where, in a motion to quash an information for law. Extrinsic matters or evidence aliunde are not
libel, the prosecution objected to evidence considered (Herminio Disini v. Sandiganbayan,
showing the privileged nature of the G.R. Nos. 169823-24, 2013).
communication, the court cannot quash the case
as such defense must be raised at the trial. IF COURT ORDERS THAT ANOTHER
(Duque, et al. v. Santiago, etc. et al., G.R. No. L- COMPLAINT OR INFORMATION BE FILED AND
16916, 1962). IS –
NOT ORDERED OR IF
But where the prosecution failed to object and ORDERED AND HAVING ORDERED, NO
such proof of privilege was admitted into the MADE NEW INFORMATION IS
record, quashal was proper. (People v. Balao, FILED
G.R. No. L-22250, 1968) The accused, if in The accused, if in custody,
custody, shall not shall be discharged unless
If the accused had already entered his plea, it is be discharged he is also in custody for
discretionary on the part of the court to permit him unless admitted another charge
to withdraw that plea in order to file a motion to to bail
quash. (Mill v. People, et al., G.R. No. L-10427,
1957) Granting A Motion To Quash Appealable
An order granting a motion to quash is appealable,
EFFECTS OF SUSTAINING THE MOTION TO and the accused cannot claim double jeopardy if
QUASH the dismissal is procured not only with his consent
but at his own instance (Rule 117, Sec. 7).
GROUNDS EFFECT
• Facts charged do not Court may order Denial of a Motion to Quash
constitute an offense that another A petition for certiorari is not the proper remedy
• Officer who filed the information be absent any showing of arbitrariness. The remedy
information had no filed or an is for the movant to go to trial without prejudice to
authority to do so amendment reiterating the defenses invoked in the motion to
• It does not conform thereof be made quash (Acharon v. Purisima, G.R. No. 83754
substantially to the February 18, 1991)
prescribed form
• More than one offense EXCEPTION TO THE RULE THAT SUSTAINING
is charged THE MOTION IS NOT A BAR TO ANOTHER
• Criminal action or Court must state, PROSECUTION
liability has been in its order
extinguished granting the General Rule: When a motion to quash is
• Averments would motion, the sustained, the court may order that another
constitute a legal release of the complaint or information be filed (Rule 117, Sec.
excuse or justification accused if he is in 6).
• Accused has been custody or the
previously convicted or cancellation of his Exception/s: When the ground relied upon is:
acquitted of the offense bond if he is on Extinction of criminal action or liability
charged bail Double Jeopardy
a. Accused has been previously convicted
• Court has no jurisdiction Court should
or acquitted of the offense charged
over the offense remand or forward
b. Case against him was dismissed or
the case to the
otherwise terminated without the
proper court, not
accused’s express consent (Rule 117,
to quash the
Sec. 6).
complaint or
.
information

ATENEO CENTRAL
When Court Shall Order the Amendment of the a. Accused must have been convicted or
Information or Complaint acquitted, or the case against him was
General Rule: If the motion to quash is based on dismissed or terminated WITHOUT HIS
a defect which can be cured (ex. Allegations in the EXPRESS CONSENT
information do not constitute an offense, b. Made by a court of competent jurisdiction
information does not conform substantially to the c. Valid complaint or information
prescribed form), the court shall not immediately d. Accused has been arraigned (People v.
grant the motion but order that an amendment be Obsania, G.R. No. L-24447, June 29,
made. (Rule 117, Sec. 4) 1968)
Exception/s: The motion shall be granted if 2. First jeopardy must have been validly
despite such opportunity, the prosecution: terminated
1. Fails to make an amendment
2. If despite the amendment, the complaint or 3. The second jeopardy must be for the same
information still suffers from the same defect offense or the second offense includes or is
(Rule 117, Sec. 4). necessarily included in the offense charged in
the first information or is an attempt or
Order Denying Motion to Quash versus Order frustration thereof (Rule 117, Sec. 7).
Sustaining Motion to Quash
MOTION TO QUASH MOTION TO QUASH An offense charged necessarily includes the
DENIED GRANTED offense proved when some of the essential
Interlocutory Final Order elements or ingredients of the former, as
Not appealable, alleged in the complaint or information,
except if there is Appealable, but constitute the latter.
grave abuse of subject to rules on
discretion, the double jeopardy An offense charged is necessarily included in
remedy is certiorari the offense proved, when the essential
Does not dispose of Disposes of the case ingredients of the former form part of those
the case on its merits upon its merits constituting the latter (Rule 120, Sec. 5).
Proper remedy is to Proper remedy is to
appeal after trial appeal the order The proscription against double jeopardy
Next step: Next step: amend the presupposes that an accused has been
arraignment information, if possible previously charged with an offense, and the
case against him is terminated either by his
2. Double jeopardy acquittal or conviction, or dismissed in any
other manner without his consent.
As a rule, when an accused has been convicted or
As a general rule, the following requisites must
acquitted, or the case against him dismissed or
be present for double jeopardy to attach: (1) a
otherwise terminated without his express consent,
valid indictment, (2) before a court of
the conviction or acquittal shall be a bar to another
competent jurisdiction, (3) the arraignment of
prosecution for:
the accused, (4) a valid plea entered by him,
1. The offense charged
and (5) the acquittal or conviction of the
2. Any attempt to commit the same or frustration
accused, or the dismissal or termination of the
thereof
case against him without his express consent.
3. Any offense which necessarily includes or is
necessarily included in the offense charged
However, there are two (2) exceptions to the
(Rule 117, Sec. 7).
foregoing rule, and double jeopardy may
attach even if the dismissal of the case was
No double jeopardy attaches as long as there is
with the consent of the accused: first, when
variance between the elements of the two offenses
there is insufficiency of evidence to support
charged (Braza v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No.
the charge against him; and second, where
195302, 2013)
there has been an unreasonable delay in the
proceedings, in violation of the accused's right
Requisites to Raise Double Jeopardy:
1. First jeopardy must have attached

ATENEO CENTRAL
to speedy trial (Saldariega v. Panganiban, Exceptions: Dismissal is equivalent to acquittal

G.R. No. 211933 & 211960, 2015). even with the accused’s consent if grounded on:
1. Speedy trial
When Double Jeopardy Shall Not Apply 2. Demurrer to evidence (People v. Bana, G.R.
Despite a Prior Conviction No. 104147, 8 December 1994)
1. Graver offense developed due to
supervening facts arising from the same act In an appeal by an accused, he waives his right
or omission constituting the former charge not to be subject to double jeopardy.
2. Facts constituting graver charge were An appeal in a criminal case opens the entire case
discovered only after a plea was entered in for review on any question including one not raised
the former complaint or information by the parties. When an accused appeals from the
3. Plea of guilty to a lesser offense was made sentence of the trial court, he waives the
without consent of the prosecutor and of the constitutional safeguard against double jeopardy
offended party except if they fail to appear in and throws the whole case open to the review of
any of these cases, where the accused the appellate court, which is then called upon to
satisfies or serves the whole or in part the render such judgment as law and justice dictate,
judgment, he shall be credited with the same whether favorable or unfavorable to the appellant.
in the event of conviction for the graver (People v. Torres, G.R. No. 189850, 2014).
offense (Rule 117, Sec. 7)
4. Prior conviction was not made by a Rules Regarding State Witnesses
competent court. An order discharging an accused as a state
witness amounts to an acquittal, hence double
In a case, MeTC took cognizance of the jeopardy will apply.
Information for reckless imprudence resulting
in parricide while the criminal case for If the state witness fails or refuses to testify against
parricide was still pending before the RTC. his co-accused in accordance with his sworn
statement, he may be prosecuted again (Rule 119,
As the offense of reckless imprudence Sec. 19).
resulting in parricide was included in the
charge for intentional parricide pending Double Jeopardy in Quasi-Offenses
before the RTC, the MeTC clearly had no Once convicted or acquitted of a specific act of
jurisdiction over the criminal case filed before reckless imprudence the accused may not be
it, the RTC having retained jurisdiction over prosecuted again for the same act.
the offense to the exclusion of all other
courts. The requisite that the judgment be Only the single act of recklessness is punished
rendered by a court of competent jurisdiction and not the effect/s thereof (damage to property,
is therefore absent. (Heirs of Jane Honrales resulting in injury or homicide), for it merely
vs. Honrales, G.R. No. 182651, 2010) determines the penalty.
CA’s order of remanding and reshuffling a case to Ex: Conviction of reckless imprudence resulting in
another RTC branch does not constitute double slight physical injuries shall bar prosecution for
jeopardy because it has not yet attained finality reckless imprudence resulting in homicide and
and still subject of review (Villalon v. Chan, G.R. damage to property. (Ivler v. Modesto-San Pedro,
No. 196508, 2014). G.R. No. 172716, 2010)
Where Double Jeopardy Not Applicable 3. Provisional dismissal

1. Preliminary investigation stage
2. Administrative cases Contemplates that the dismissal of the criminal
3. Civil aspect of the criminal case action is not permanent and can be revived within
the period set by the Rules of Court.
Dismissal Must Be Without the Express Requisites of a Provisional Dismissal
Consent of the Accused 1. Consent of the prosecutor
General Rule: The termination of the case must 2. Consent of the accused;
be without the express consent of the accused so 3. Notice to the offended party; and
that jeopardy will attach (Rule 117, Sec. 7).

ATENEO CENTRAL
4. Public prosecutor is served with a copy of the A motion to withdraw information differs from a
order of provisional dismissal (Rule 117, Sec. motion to dismiss. While both put an end to an
8). action filed in court, their legal effect varies.
Examples on Grounds on Which Provisional ORDER GRANTING

Dismissal May Be Granted ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO
1. Prosecution was not prepared for trial MOTION TO DISMISS WITHDRAW
2. Repeated absences in court INFORMATION
3. Witness did not appear at the trial Attains finality fifteen Attains finality after
(15) days after receipt fifteen (15) days from
When Provisional Dismissal Becomes thereof, with prejudice receipt thereof, without
Permanent (Rule 117, Sec. 6) to the re-filing of the prejudice to the re-
The provisional dismissal shall become same case once such filing of the
permanent if not revived within: order achieves finality. information upon
PERIOD OF NON reinvestigation.
PENALTY
REVIVAL
Penalty is 6 years 1 year after issuance of Motion to Withdraw Information falls within the
and below, or a fine order ambit of Section 8, Rule 117 of the Revised Rules
of any amount, or of Criminal Procedure which provides that the law
both on provisional dismissal becomes operative once
Penalty exceeds 6 2 years after issuance of the judge dismisses, with the express consent of
years order the accused and with notice to the offended party
(Torres, Jr. vs. Aguinaldo, G.R. No. 164268,
One year shall start from the receipt of the 2005).
prosecutor of the order of provisional
dismissal When New Preliminary Investigation if Case is
Rule 117, Sec. 8 provides that, “The provisional Reinstated
dismissal of offenses punishable by imprisonment 1. Original witnesses or some of them recant
not exceeding six (6) years or a fine of any amount, their testimony, are no longer available
or both, shall become permanent one (1) year after (died), or when new witnesses have emerged
issuance of the order without the case having been 2. Other persons are charged under the new
revived.” complaint
3. Original charge has been upgraded
However, the provision should be construed to 4. Criminal liability of the accused has been
mean that the order of dismissal shall become upgraded (ex. accomplice principal) (People
permanent one year after service of the order of v. Lacson, G.R. No. 149453, April 1, 2003).
dismissal on the public prosecutor who has control
of the prosecution without the criminal case having Quashal vs. Provisional Dismissal
been revived. The public prosecutor cannot be If the problem relates to an intrinsic or extrinsic
expected to comply with the timeline unless he is deficiency of the complaint or information, as
served with a copy of the order of dismissal. (Co v. shown on its face, the remedy is a motion to quash
New Prosperity Plastic Products, G.R. No. under the terms of Section 3, Rule 117. All other
183994, 2014). reasons for seeking the dismissal of the complaint
or information, before arraignment and under the
Note: When a criminal case is provisionally circumstances outlined in Section 8, fall under
dismissed with the express consent of the provisional dismissal. (Los Baños v. Pedro, G.R
accused, the case may be revived by the State No. 173588, 2009)
within the time prescribed by the rules. There is no
violation of due process as long as the revival of a Additional Rules on Provisional Dismissal
provisionally dismissed complaint was made (Sec. 10, A.M. No. 12-11-2-SC, 2014)
within the time-bar provided under the law. (a) When the delays are due to the absence of an
(Saldariega v. Panganiban, GR Nos. 211933 & essential witness whose whereabouts are
211960, 2015) unknown or cannot be determined and, therefore,
are subject to exclusion in determining compliance
Time-Bar Rule on Provisional Dismissal with the prescribed time limits which caused the

ATENEO CENTRAL
trial to exceed one hundred eighty (180) days, the I. PRE-TRIAL (RULE 118)
court shall provisionally dismiss the action with the
express consent of the detained accused. Courts where Pre-Trial is Mandatory
1. Sandiganbayan
(b) When the delays are due to the absence of an 2. Regional Trial Court
essential witness whose presence cannot be 3. Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial
obtained by due diligence though his whereabouts Court in Cities, Municipal Trial Court,
are known, the court shall provisionally dismiss the Municipal Circuit Trial Court (Rule 118, Sec.
action with the express consent of the detained 1)
accused provided:
Purpose of Pre-Trial:
(1) the hearing in the case has been Pre-trial is not a mere technicality in court
previously twice postponed due to the non- proceedings for it serves a vital objective: the
appearance of the essential witness and both simplification, abbreviation, and expedition of trial,
the witness and the offended party, if they are if not indeed its dispensation. (Tolentino v. Heirs of
two different persons, have been given notice Laurel-Ascalon, G.R. No. 181368, 2012).
of the setting of the case for third hearing,
which notice contains a warning that the case Period of Pre-trial
would be dismissed if the essential witness GR: It shall be held after arraignment and within
continues to be absent; and 30 days from the date the court acquires
jurisdiction over the person of the accused (Sec.
(2) there is proof of service of the pertinent 1, Rule 118).
notices of hearings or subpoenas upon the
essential witness and the offended party at XPN:
their last known postal or e-mail addresses or 1. A shorter period is provided for in special law
mobile phone numbers. or circulars of the Supreme Courts;
2. If the accused is under preventive detention,
(c) For the above purpose, the public or private it shall be held within 10 days after
prosecutor shall first present during the trial the arraignment, unless a law provides for a
essential witness or witnesses to the case before shorter period (A.M. No. 03-1-09-SC, IB (1))..
anyone else. An essential witness is one whose
testimony dwells on the presence of some or all of MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED DURING PRE-
the elements of the crime and whose testimony is TRIAL
indispensable to the conviction of the accused.
The matters considered in a pre-trial are:
1. Plea bargaining
2. Stipulation of facts
3. Marking for identification of evidence
Note: No evidence shall be allowed to be

presented and offered during the trial other
than those identified and marked during pre-
trial, except when allowed by the court for god
cause shown (I-B (2), A.M. No. 03-1-09-SC).
4. Waiver of objections to admissibility of

evidence
5. Modification of the order of trial if the accused
admits the charge but interposes a lawful
defense
6. Such matters as will promote a fair and
expeditious trial of the criminal and civil
aspects of the case (Rule 118, Sec. 1).
During the pre-trial, the judge shall be the one to

ask questions on issues raised therein and all

ATENEO CENTRAL
questions must be directed to him to avoid

hostilities between parties. (I-B[7], A.M. No. 03-1- Acceptable Plea
Offense Charged
09-SC) Bargain
Section 11, par. 3. Section 12.
All proceedings during the pre-trial shall be Possession of Possession of
recorded, the transcripts prepared and the minutes Dangerous Drugs Equipment,
signed by the parties and/or their counsels. (I-B[9], (Where quantity of Instrument,
A.M. No. 03-1-09-SC) shabu, opium, Apparatus and Other
morphine, heroin, Paraphernalia for
WHAT THE COURT SHOULD DO WHEN cocaine is less than 5 Dangerous Drugs
PROSECUTION AND OFFENDED PARTY grams)
AGREE TO THE PLEA OFFERED BY THE Section 11, par. 3. Section 12.
ACCUSED Possession of Possession of
Dangerous Drugs Equipment,
Plea Bargaining (Where quantity of Instrument,
The process whereby the accused, the offended marijuana is less than Apparatus and Other
party, and the prosecution work out a mutually 300 grams) Paraphernalia for
satisfactory disposition of the case subject to court Dangerous Drugs
approval. Section 11, par. 2. Section 11, par. 3.
Possession of Possession of
Duty of the court when the prosecution and the Dangerous Drugs Dangerous Drug
offended party agree to the plea offered by the (Where quantity of
accused shabu, opium,
1. During the pre-trial, the judge shall consider
morphine, heroin,
plea bargaining arrangements except in cocaine is 5 grams or
cases for violations of the Comprehensive more but not
Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002. exceeding 10 grams)
Section 11, par. 2. Section 11, par. 3.
Note: Section 23 of the Comprehensive
Possession of Possession of
Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002 was declared
Dangerous Drugs Dangerous Drugs
unconstitutional for being contrary to the
(Where the quantity of
rule-making authority of the Supreme Court
marijuana is 300
under Section 5 (5), Article VIII of the 1987
grams or more but not
Constitution. Sec. 23 provides, Any person
exceeding 500 grams
charged under any provision of this Act
Section 12. Section 15. Use of
regardless of the imposable penalty shall
Possession of Dangerous Drugs
not be allowed to avail of the provision on
Equipment,
plea-bargaining.”
Apparatus and Other
Paraphernalia for
2. If a plea bargaining is agreed upon, the court
Dangerous Drugs
shall:
Section 14. Section 15. Use of
a. Issue an order to that effect;
Possession of Dangerous Drugs
b. Proceed to receive evidence on the
civil aspect of the case; and Equipment,
Apparatus and Other
c. Render and promulgate judgment of
Paraphernalia for
conviction, including the civil liability or
Dangerous Drugs
damages duly established by the
during Parties, Social
evidence. (I-B[5], A.M. No. 03-1-09-
Gatherings or
SC)
Meetings
A.M. No. 18-03-16-SC (Adoption of the Plea Section 5. Sale, Section 12.
Bargaining Framework in Drugs Cases) Trading, etc. of Possession of
Only the following acts punished under the Dangerous Drugs Equipment,
Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Acts may be (Methamphetamine Instrument,
the subject of plea-bargaining. hydrochloride or Apparatus and Other
shabu only)

ATENEO CENTRAL
Paraphernalia for counsel. (People v. Tac-an, G.R. No. 148000,

.01 gram to .99 grams Dangerous Drugs 2003)
(methamphetamine
hydrochloride or If the counsel for the accused/prosecutor does
shabu only) NOT appear at the pre-trial conference and does
Section 5. Sale, Section 12. NOT offer an acceptable excuse for his lack of
Trading, etc. of Possession of cooperation, the court may sanction/penalize
Dangerous Drugs Equipment, counsel for the accused if any of the following
(Marijuana only) Instrument, concur:
Apparatus and Other 1. Counsel does NOT appear at the pre-trial
.01 gram to 9.99 Paraphernalia for conference; AND
grams of marijuana Dangerous Drug 2. Counsel does NOT offer an acceptable
only excuse. (Atty. Emelia H. Garayblas and Atty.
Renato G. dela Cruz v. Hon. Gregory Ong,
When plea bargaining fails et al., G.R. No. 174507-30, 2011)
Adopt the minutes of preliminary conference as
part of the pre-trial proceedings, confirm markings In A.M. No. 15-06-10-SC, 2017: Revised
of exhibits or substituted photocopies and Guidelines for Continuous Trial in Criminal Cases,
admissions on the genuineness and due execution 2017 – The court shall proceed with the pre-trial
of documents and list object and testimonial despite the absence of the accused and/or private
evidence. (I-B[6a], A.M. No. 03-1-09-SC) complainant, provided they were duly notified of
the same, and the counsel for the accused, as well
1. Pre-trial agreement as the public prosecutor, are present.
All agreements or admissions made or entered NOTE: IN A.M. NO. 15-06-10-SC (REVISED
during the pre-trial conference shall be: GUIDELINES FOR CONTINUOUS TRIAL IN
1. Reduced in writing; AND CRIMINAL CASES, 2017) – the pre-trial order
2. Signed by the accused AND counsel (Rule shall immediately be served upon the parties and
118, Sec. 1). counsel on the same day after the termination of
the pre-trial.
Otherwise, they cannot be used against the
3. Pre-trial order
accused. The agreements covering matters in a
pre-trial shall be approved by the court.
Issued within 10 days after termination of pre-trial
But admissions during trial binds the accused conference (A.M. No. 03-1-09-SC, Guidelines to
even if it is not in writing or signed. be Observed by Trial Court Judges and Clerks of
Court in the Conduct of Pre-Trial and Use of
2. Non-appearance during pre- Deposition-Discovery Measures as cited in Alviola
v. Avelino, A.M. No. MTJ-P-08-1697, 2008)
trial
Sets forth:
The court may impose proper sanction or
1. Actions taken during the pre-trial conference
penalties, if the counsel or prosecutor absent does
2. Facts stipulated
NOT offer an acceptable excuse (Rule 118, Sec.
3. Admissions made
3).
4. Evidence marked
5. Witnesses to be presented
Note: There is NO similar provision on sanctions
6. Schedule of the trial
and penalties in civil cases.
Note: Nos. 4-6 are added by A.M. No. 03-1-09-
The absence during pre-trial of any witness for the
SC, to the requirements under Sec. 4, Rule 118
prosecution is NOT a valid ground for the
dismissal of a criminal case. The presence of the
Pre-trial order is not necessary to make pre-
private complainant or the complaining witness is
trial stipulations binding. The court’s approval,
not required. Even the presence of the accused is
mentioned in the last sentence of Sec. 2, Rule 118,
NOT required unless directed by the trial court. It
is not needed to make the stipulations binding on
is enough that the accused is represented by his
the parties. Such approval is necessary merely to

ATENEO CENTRAL
emphasize the supervision by the court over the respective pre-trial

case and to enable it to control the flow of the briefs
proceedings. (Bayas v. Sandiganbayan, G.R No. No such stipulation as All agreements or
143689-91, 2002) that indicated in the admissions made or
next box. entered during the pre-
The trial court may properly deny defense trial shall be reduced in
counsel’s motion for substitution of witnesses writing and signed by
since Section 4, Rule 118 of the Revised Rules on the accused and
Criminal Procedure mandates that the matters counsel, otherwise,
agreed upon in the pre-trial conference and as they cannot be used
stated in the pre-trial order shall bind the parties. against the accused
(People v. Guzman, G.R. No. 169246, 2007)
Pre-trial in Civil and Criminal Cases

CIVIL CASE CRIMINAL CASE
No motion ex parte
Set by the court not Ordered by the court
later than 60 days from after arraignment and
the filing of the last within 30 days from the
responsive pleading date the court acquires
jurisdiction over the
person of the accused,
unless a shorter period
is provided for in
special laws
Consider the propriety Does not consider the
of rendering a propriety of rendering a
judgment on the judgment on the
pleadings or a pleadings or a
summary judgment summary judgment
Consider the Does not consider the
possibility of an possibility of an
amicable settlement or amicable settlement or
of a submission to of a submission to
alternative modes of alternative modes of
dispute resolution dispute resolution
If the plaintiff and his Sanction is upon the
counsel fails to appear counsel of the accused
without valid cause, it or the prosecutor
shall result in the
dismissal of the action;
If the defendant and

his counsel fails to
appear without valid
vause, plaintiff shall be
allowed to present
evidence ex parte and
the court shall render
judgment based
thereon.
Parties are required to No mention of
file and serve their submission of pre-trial
briefs

ATENEO CENTRAL
J. TRIAL (RULE 119) above time limits (Section 9, A.M. No. 12-11-2-SC,
2014).
Consolidation of Trials of Related Offenses
Charges for offenses founded on the same facts Exclusions (Rule 119, Sec. 3)
or forming part of a series of offenses of similar The following shall be excluded in computing the
character may be tried jointly at the discretion of 180-day period:
the court (Rule 119, Sec. 22).
A. Delay by reason of the accused
Trial of Several Accused 1. Examination of the physical and medical
General Rule: When two accused are jointly condition
charged with an offense, joint trial is automatic, 2. Proceedings with respect to other criminal
without need of court order. charges
3. Extraordinary remedies and interlocutory
Exception: The court, in its discretion, AND upon orders
motion of the prosecutor or any accused, orders 4. Pre-trial proceedings not exceeding 30
separate trial (Rule 119, Sec. 16). days
5. Orders of inhibition, or proceedings related
A motion for separate trial must be filed before the to change of venue or transfer from other
commencement of trial and cannot be raised for courts
the first time on appeal. 6. Existence of a prejudicial question
7. Reasonably attributable to any period, not
Even if a joint trial is conducted, the accused can exceeding 30 days
always be permitted to present evidence
separately. B. Delay resulting from absence or
unavailability of an essential witness
Periods Relevant to Trial
ACTION FROM DAYS ABSENT UNAVAILABLE
Prepare for Plea of not guilty at least
trial 15 Whereabouts are Whereabouts are
Initiate trial Receipt of pre-trial within unknown or known but his
order 30 whereabouts cannot presence for trial
be determined by due cannot be obtained by
Trial period First day of trial 180*
diligence due diligence
(Rule 119, Secs. 1-2).
Except when: NOTE:

1. Authorized by the SC (a) When the delays are due to the absence of an
2. Exclusions essential witness whose whereabouts are
unknown or cannot be determined and, therefore,
A violation of Section 1, Rule 119 - time to prepare are subject to exclusion in determining compliance
for trial, or the total absence of notice of trial, is a with the prescribed time limits which caused the
denial of due process and a new trial may be trial to exceed one hundred eighty (180) days, the
granted. (People v. Magdang, et al., G.R. No. L- court shall provisionally dismiss the action with the
836, 1950) express consent of the detained accused.
It shall be the duty of the trial court, the public or (b) When the delays are due to the absence of an
private prosecutor, and the defense counsel to essential witness whose presence cannot be
ensure, subject to the excluded delays specified in obtained by due diligence though his whereabouts
Rule 119 of the RoC and the Speedy Trial Act of are known, the court shall provisionally dismiss the
1998, to observe the following the prescribed action with the express consent of the detained
period for the conduct of trial (Section 8, A.M. No. accused provided:
12-11-2-SC, 2014)
(1) the hearing in the case has been
The case against the detained accused may be previously twice postponed due to the non-
dismissed on ground of denial of the right to appearance of the essential witness and both
speedy trial in the event of failure to observe the the witness and the offended party, if they are
two different persons, have been given notice

ATENEO CENTRAL
of the setting of the case for third hearing,

which notice contains a warning that the case Exception/s: Within 180 days if:
would be dismissed if the essential witness 1. Period impractical due to unavailability of
continues to be absent; and witness
2. Other factors (Rule 119, Sec. 5).
(2) there is proof of service of the pertinent
notices of hearings or subpoenas upon the Public Attorney’s Duties Where Accused Is
essential witness and the offended party at Imprisoned
their last known postal or e-mail addresses or If the public attorney assigned to defend a person
mobile phone numbers (Sec. 10, A.M. No. 12- charged with a crime knows that the latter is
11-2-SC, 2014). preventively detained, either because he is
charged with a bailable crime but has NO means
C. Mental incompetence or physical inability to post bail or is charged with a non-bailable crime,
of the accused to stand trial or, is serving a term of imprisonment in any penal
institution, it shall be his duty to do the following:
D. Information dismissed upon motion of the 1. Promptly obtain his presence for trial or give
prosecutor notice to person having custody to advise the
And thereafter a charge is filed against the prisoner of his right to demand trial
accused for the same offense, any period of 2. If the prisoner demands trial, the custodian
delay from the date the charge was dismissed shall notify the lawyer of such demand
to the date the time limitation would 3. Upon receipt of notice, public attorney shall
commence to run as to the subsequent charge obtain presence of the prisoner for trial; and
had there been no previous charge. 4. The custodian shall make the accused
available for trial upon receipt of such notice
E. Accused is joined for trial with a co- (Rule 119, Sec. 7).
accused
When applicable: Grounds and Sanctions
1. Court has not acquired jurisdiction over If the private counsel for the accused, the public
co-accused, or attorney, or the prosecutor:
2. Co-accused’s trial has not run and no Knowingly allows the case to be set for trial
motion for separate trial has been granted without disclosing that a necessary witness
would be unavailable
F. Continuance 2. Files a frivolous motion (and without merit)
Granting of postponement by the court is solely for delay;
discretionary. Factors: 3. Makes a false statement to obtain
continuance; OR
REASONABLE NOT JUSTIFIED BY 4. Willfully fails to proceed to trial without
justification (Rule 119, Sec. 8).
• If failure to grant a • Congestion of
continuance would court’s dockets Then the court may punish such counsel, attorney,
likely make a • Lack of diligent or prosecutor, as follows:
continuation of such preparation PERSON SANCTIONS
proceeding impossible • Failure to obtain Private • Max fine of P20,000
or result to miscarriage witness for defense • Criminal sanctions if any
of justice prosecution counsel
• Case is novel, unusual Counsel de • Max fine of P5,000
and complex, due to oficio, PAO • Criminal sanctions if any
the number of accused or
or nature of the prosecutor
prosecution Defense • Denial of the right to practice
counsel or before the court trying the
Time Limit Following Order for New Trial prosecutor case for a max of 30 days
General Rule: Trial shall commence within 30 • Criminal sanctions if any
days from notice of the new trial order

ATENEO CENTRAL
The Modes of Discovery under Rules 23 to 29 do Exception: In light offenses, when the
not apply to criminal procedure. The applicable accused may appear by counsel or
provision is Sections 12 and 13 of Rule 119. (Go representative. (People v. De Grano, G.R. No.
v. People, G.R. No. 185527, 2014) 167710, June 5, 2009)
Note: The right to counsel attaches upon the start Note: The constitutional right of an accused
of the custodial investigation, i.e., when the against self-incrimination proscribes the use of
investigating officer starts to ask questions to elicit physical or moral compulsion to extort
information and/or confessions or admissions from communications from the accused and not the
the accused. Custodial investigation starts when inclusion of his body in evidence when it may be
the police investigation is no longer a general material. Thus, cases where non-testimonial
inquiry into an unsolved crime but has begun to compulsion has been allowed reveal that the
focus on a particular suspect taken into custody by pieces of evidence obtained must be material to
the police who starts the interrogation and the principal cause of the arrest.
propounds questions to the person to elicit
incriminating statements. Police line-up is not part In one case, since the urine sample for drug
of the custodial investigation; hence, the right to testing is immaterial to the charge of extortion,
counsel guaranteed by the Constitution cannot yet there is a violation against right to self-
be invoked at this stage. (People v. Pepino, G.R. incrimination. The evidence is inadmissible. (Dela
No. 174471, 2016) Cruz v. People, G.R. No. 200748, 2014)
Note: In the case of Ibanez v. People, since the REQUISITE BEFORE TRIAL CAN BE
beginning of the proceedings in the trial court until SUSPENDED ON ACCOUNT OF ABSENCE OF
the filing of the petition before the Supreme Court, WITNESS
three counsel de oficio were appointed to
represent the accused. Their counsel de oficio Requisites before trial can be suspended on
actively participated in the proceedings before the account of absence of witness
trial court including the direct and cross- 1. Witness is essential
examination of the witnesses. The accused were 2. The party who applies has been guilty of no
duly represented by a counsel de oficio all neglect
throughout the proceedings except for one hearing 3. The witnesses can be had at the time to which
when their court appointed lawyer was absent. the trial is deferred and incidentally that no
Going by the records, there was no indication that similar evidence could be obtained
any of the counsel de oficio had been negligent in 4. An affidavit showing the existence of the
protecting the accused's interests. The counsel de above circumstances must be filed.
oficio kept on attending the trial court hearings in
representation of the accused despite the latter's NOTE: This has been qualified by the
unjustified absences. The Court was not aforementioned rules on provisional dismissal.
persuaded that the absence of the counsel de
oficio in one of the hearings of amounts to a denial Bail to Secure Appearance of Material Witness
of right to counsel. Nor does such absence warrant When the court is satisfied, upon proof or oath,
the nullification of the entire trial court proceedings that a material witness will not testify when
and the eventual invalidation of its ruling. (Ibanez required, it may, upon motion of either party:
v. People, G.R. No. 190798, 2016) 1. Order witness to post bail
2. If witness refuses to post bail, court shall
INSTANCES WHEN PRESENCE OF ACCUSED commit him to prison until he complies or
IS REQUIRED BY LAW testifies (Rule 119, Sec. 14).
Accused is required to be present during: Applicability of Judicial Affidavit Rule in

1. At arraignment and plea, whether of Criminal Cases
innocence or of guilt; The Judicial Affidavit Rule shall apply to all
2. During trial, whenever necessary for criminal actions:
identification purposes; 1. Where the maximum of the imposable
3. Whenever required by the court for purposes penalty does not exceed six years;
of identification; and at
4. Promulgation of sentence. NOTE: Under the Revised Guidelines for
Continuous Trial, in criminal cases where the

ATENEO CENTRAL
demeanor of the witness is not essential in In cases under Summary Procedure, affidavits
determining the credibility of said witness, submitted by the parties shall constitute the direct
who will testify on the authenticity, due testimonies of the witnesses who executed it. The
execution and the contents of public witness who testified may be subject to cross-
documents and reports, and in criminal cases examination, redirect, or re-cross-examination.
that are transactional in character, such as Should the affiant fail to testify, his affidavit shall
falsification, malversation, estafa, or other not be considered as competent evidence for the
crimes where the culpability or innocence of party presenting the affidavit, but the adverse party
the accused can be established through may utilize his affidavit for any admissible purpose.
documents, the testimonies of the witnesses (Revised Rule on Summary Procedure, §15)
shall be the duly subscribed written
statements given to law enforcement or Note: When the accused admits the act or
peace officers or the affidavits or counter- omission charged in the complaint or information
affidavits submitted before the investigating but interposes a lawful defense, the order of trial
prosecutor, and if such are not available, may be modified.
testimonies shall be in the form of judicial
affidavits, subject to additional direct and Lack of Formal Offer of Evidence During Trial
cross-examination questions (Sec. 11 (b), Documents which may have been identified and
A.M. No. 15-06-10-SC). marked as exhibits during pre-trial or trial but
which were not formally offered in evidence cannot
2. Where the accused agrees to the use of in any manner be treated as evidence. (Heirs of
judicial affidavits, irrespective of the penalty Pasag v. Parocha, G.R. No. 155483, April 27,
involved; or 2007).
3. With respect to the civil aspect of the actions,
whatever the penalties involved are. (A.M. When Mistake Has Been Made in Charging the
NO. 12-8-8-SC Judicial Affidavit Rule, § 9) Proper Offense
When accused cannot be convicted of the offense
Order of Trial charged or any other offense included therein –
1. Prosecution shall present evidence to prove 1. Accused shall not be discharged if there
the charge and, in the proper case, the civil appears good cause to detain him
liability. 2. Court shall:
2. Accused may present evidence to prove his a. Commit the accused to answer for the
defense and damages, if any, arising from proper offense; and
the issuance of a provisional remedy in the b. Dismiss original case upon filing of
case. proper information (Rule 119, Sec.19).
3. Prosecution and defense may, in that order,
present rebuttal and sur-rebuttal evidence Exclusion of the Public
unless the court, in furtherance of justice, Judge may exclude the public from the
permits them to present additional evidence courtroom/trial:
bearing upon the main issue.
4. Upon admission of the evidence of the MOTU PROPIO MOTION OF THE
parties, the case shall be deemed submitted ACCUSED
for decision unless the court directs them to
argue orally or to submit written memoranda When evidence to be May exclude the public
(Rule 119, Sec.11). produced is offensive except court personnel
to decency or public and the counsel of the
The order of trial MAY be modified if the accused morals parties
admits the acts charged but interposes lawful
defenses. Hence, it is discretionary on the RTC to (Rule 119, Sec.21).
order the modification. Further, a Motion to
Reverse Order of Trial is interlocutory and hence Note: The Rule on Examination of a Child
not appealable (People v. Marcial, G.R. Nos Witness (A.M. NO. 004-07-SC) provides that:
152864-65, 2006). When a child testifies, the court may order the
exclusion from the courtroom of all persons,
including members of the press, who do not have

ATENEO CENTRAL
a direct interest in the case. no means to attend

the same
In making its order, the court shall consider the • Other similar
developmental level of the child, the nature of the circumstances
crime, the nature of his testimony regarding the
crime, his relationship to the accused and to
persons attending the trial, his desires, and the
interests of his parents or legal guardian.
EXAMINATION BEFORE WHOM
1. Trial in absentia • Any judge in the PH
• Any lawyer good
An accused need not always be present in every standing designated • Before the court or
hearing although it is his right to be present if he by the judge judge where the
so desires from arraignment to the rendition of the • An inferior court if case is pending
judgment. ordered by a
superior court
Requisites of a Trial in Absentia
1. Accused has already been arraigned
2. Accused has been duly notified of the trial or Nowhere in the said rule (119) does it permit the
hearings taking of deposition (for the prosecution) outside
3. Absence of the accused is unjustified the Philippines whether the deponent is sick or not.
(Bernardo v. People, G.R. No. 166980 Certainly, to take the deposition of the prosecution
April 4, 2007) witness elsewhere and not before the very same
court where the case is pending would not only
Note: While the right to be present may be waived deprive a detained accused of his right to attend
like any other right, the rule should not be taken to the proceedings but also deprive the trial judge of
mean that the accused may, as a rule, be tried in the opportunity to observe the prosecution
absence (Riano 2016 commentary, no case cited). witness' deportment and properly assess his
credibility, which is especially intolerable when the
Effects of trial in absentia witness' testimony is crucial to the prosecution's
The accused waives the right to present evidence case against the accused. (Go v. People, G.R No.
and cross-examine the witnesses against him. 185527, 2012)
This does not mean, however, that the prosecution
is deprived of the right to require the presence of However Go v. People is not applicable when the
the accused for purposes of identification by the witness of the prosecution is currently imprisoned
witnesses, except where he unqualifiedly admits in in another country, sentenced to death and is only
open court after arraignment that he is the person awaiting execution by firing squad. The
named as defendant in the case. extraordinary factual circumstances surrounding
the case warrant the resort to Rule 23 of the Rules
2. Examination Of Witness For of Court allowing deposition by written
The Prosecution interrogatories. (People v. Sergio, G.R. No.
240053, 2019)
Examination of Witness Before Trial
One-Day Examination of Witness
FOR THE The court shall strictly adhere to the rule that a
FOR THE ACCUSED
PROSECUTION witness has to be fully examined in one (1) day
(A.M. No. 15-06-10-SC, Revised Guidelines for
GROUNDS / WITNESS IS:
Continuous Trial in Criminal Cases)
• Sick, infirm or
• Sick, infirm or
unavailable REMEDY WHEN ACCUSED IS NOT BROUGHT
unavailable
• Resides more than TO TRIAL WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED PERIOD
• About to depart
100km from the
from the PH with no The information may be dismissed on the motion
place where the
definite date of of the accused on the ground of denial of speedy
hearing is to be
return trial (sec. 9, Rule 117).
conducted and has

ATENEO CENTRAL
Note: The dismissal shall be subject to the rules

on double jeopardy. 1. There is absolute necessity for the testimony
of the accused whose discharge is requested
Accused has the burden of proving the motion
BUT the prosecution has the burden of going Note: Absolute necessity exists for the testimony
forward with the evidence to establish the of an accused sought to be discharged when he or
exclusion of time. she alone has knowledge of the crime. In more
concrete terms, necessity is not there when the
Substantial compliance with the time limitation testimony would simply corroborate or otherwise
prescribed by the law for the resolution of the case strengthen the prosecution’s evidence. (Jimenez
by the prosecutor is part of the procedural due v. People, G.R. No. 209195, 2014)
process guaranteed by the Constitution. Not only
under the broad umbrella of the due process 2. No other direct evidence available for the
clause, but under the constitutional guarantee of prosecution
“speedy disposition” of cases as embodied in
Section 16 of the Bill of Rights, the inordinate delay 3. Testimony of said accused can be
is violative of the petitioner's constitutional rights. substantially corroborated in its material points
(Tatad v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 72335-39,
1988) The rules require that the testimony of the accused
sought to be discharged be substantially
Failure of the accused to move for dismissal prior corroborated in its material points, and not on all
to trial is a waiver of the right to dismiss. Accused points. (Jimenez v. People, G.R. No. 209195,
was well aware of the case and proceedings 2014)
against him, and while the conduct of the
investigation and approval of the resolution were 4. Accused does not appear to be the most
already in delay, he remained indifferent with the guilty; AND
passage of time. Thus, accused is deemed to have
waived his right. (Republic v. Sandiganbayan Note: By jurisprudence, "most guilty" refers to the
(Special Second Division) G.R. No. 231144, 2020) highest degree of culpability in terms of
participation in the commission of the offense and
While the issues in the case are simple and does not necessarily mean the severity of the
straightforward, it took the Office of the penalty imposed. While all the accused may be
Ombudsman almost five years from the filing of the given the same penalty by reason of conspiracy,
counter-affidavits to file the information. Given the yet one may be considered to have lesser or the
unusual length of such interval, the prosecution least guilt taking into account his degree of
bears the burden to justify the prolonged conduct participation in the commission of the offense.
of the preliminary investigation, but it did not offer (Jimenez v. People, G.R. No. 209195, 2014)
any suitable explanation. Hence, the petitioners’
right to speedy disposition of cases were violated 5. Accused has never been convicted of a crime
(Catamco v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 243560- involving moral turpitude (Rule 119, Sec. 17).
62, 2020).
Two Types of Immunity
3. Requisites for discharge of TRANSACTIONAL USE-AND-
accused to become a state IMMUNITY DERIVATIVE-USE
witness IMMUNITTY
State Witness Witness can no longer Witness is only

One of two or more persons jointly charged with be prosecuted for any assured that his or
the commission of a crime but who is discharged offense whatsoever her particular
with his consent as such accused so that he may arising out of the act or testimony and
be a witness for the State (PP v. Ferrer, 1996). transaction evidence derived
from it will not be
Requisites used against him or
For an accused to be discharged to be a state her in a subsequent
witness, the following elements must concur: prosecution

ATENEO CENTRAL
(Mapa v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 100295 April When motion is filed: When application is
26, 1994) The prosecution, filed: The person
before resting its case, may apply at any time
4. Effects of discharge of should file a motion to with the DOJ (Sec. 3,
accused as state witness discharge the accused R.A. No. 6981)
as state witness with
General Rule the accused’s consent.
1. Discharge of accused operates as an
acquittal and bar to further prosecution for the The prosecution should
same offense (Sec. 18, Rule 119); present evidence and
2. Evidence adduced in support of the the sworn statement of
discharge shall automatically form part of the the proposed state
trial (Sec. 17, Rule 119); witness.
3. If the court denies the motion to discharge,
his sworn statement shall be inadmissible in Requirements: Requirements:
evidence (Sec. 17, Rule 119). See above discussion The enumeration is
the same as in the
Exception Unlike in R.A. No. Rules of Court, but
1. When the accuse fails or refuses to testify 6981, the Rules of there is an additional
against his co-accused in accordance with Court do not impose a requirement:
his sworn statement constituting the basis of qualification as to the
his discharge (Sec. 18, Rule 119); kind of felonies The offense in which
his testimony will be
Other Modes of Discharging the Accused as used is a grave felony
State Witness under the RPC or its
1. Witness Protection Program (RA 6981); equivalent in special
2. Granted by the Ombudsman (Sec. 17, RA laws
6770);
3. Immunity for givers of bribes and other gifts Effects: Effects:
and to their accomplices in graft cases Unless the accused RA 6891 DOES NOT
against public officers (PD 749); fails or refuses to testify provide for acquittal
4. Immunity for any person who provides against his co-accused as an effect.
information to the Presidential Commission in accordance with his
on Good Governance (PCGG) (EO 14-A); sworn statement Sec. 12 merely states
5. Immunity under the comprehensive constituting the basis that the Court shall
Dangerous Drugs Act (RA 9165); for his discharge, the order the discharge
6. Immunity under the Human Security Act (RA discharge shall operate and exclusion of the
9372). as: said accused from the
1. An acquittal on the information. He is
Distinctions: Discharge as State Witness case; and granted immunity
under Rules of Court versus R.A. No. 6981 2. A bar to future from criminal
prosecution for the prosecution for the
RULES OF COURT R.A. NO. 6981
same offense offense or offenses in
Who may be a State Who may be a State which his testimony
Witness: Only a Witness: Any person will be given or used.
qualified accused may who has participated
be admitted as a State in the commission of 5. Demurrer to evidence
Witness a crime and desires to
be a State Witness. A motion to dismiss filed by the accused after the
He need not be an prosecution has rested its case; the grounds being
accused. insufficiency of the evidence of the prosecution.
Immunity Granted by: Immunity Granted
The Court’s task is to ascertain if there is
Court by: DOJ
competent or sufficient evidence to establish a
prima facie case to sustain the indictment or
support a verdict of guilt. (People v.

ATENEO CENTRAL
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 197953, 2015) Effect of Denial of Demurrer

WITH LEAVE OF WITHOUT LEAVE OF
Denial of Leave of Court Not Appealable COURT COURT
An order denying the motion for leave of court to
file a demurer cannot be reviewed by appeal or by Accused may still Accused waives the right
certiorari before judgment for it is merely an adduce evidence in to present evidence and
interlocutory order. (People v. Laguio, G.R. No. his defense submits the case for
128587, 2007) judgment
Appeal of a denial of demurrer (Rule 119, Sec. 23).

In criminal cases, the grant of a demurrer amounts
to an acquittal, and the dismissal order may not be Demurrer to Evidence in a Civil Case and
appealed as this would place the accused in Demurrer to Evidence in a Criminal Case
double jeopardy. Although the dismissal order is CIVIL CASE CRIMINAL CASE
not subject to appeal, it may be reviewed through Based on plaintiff’s Predicated upon
certiorari under Rule 65. (People v. failure to prove his insufficiency of
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 197953, 2015) entitlement to relief evidence
Requires no prior May be filed with or
It is doctrinal that the situations in which the writ of leave of court without leave of court
certiorari may issue should not be limited. Thus, Defendant may still Accused may adduce
notwithstanding the interlocutory character and adduce evidence if evidence only if the
effect of the denial of the demurrers to evidence, denied demurrer was filed
the petitioners as the accused could avail with leave of court
themselves of the remedy of certiorari when the
Plaintiff may appeal if No appeal if granted
denial was tainted with grave abuse of discretion.
granted, and if
(Arroyo v. People, G.R. No. 220598, 2016; Aguas
reversed, defendant
v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. 220953, 2016)
is deemed to have
waived his right to
When Prosecution Has Rested Its Case
present his evidence
To conclude the case for the prosecution, the rules
It is the defendant The court may, in its
require that there must have been a prior formal
who invokes a own initiative, dismiss
offer of evidence, hence a demurrer filed before
demurrer by moving the action after giving
then is premature. (Valencia v. Sandiganbayan,
for the dismissal of the prosecution an
G.R. No. 165996, 2005)
the case. The court opportunity to be
does not do so in its hear.
The prosecution should complete the presentation
own initiative.
or offer of evidence. To grant a demurrer prior to
the complete presentation of evidence by the
prosecution would be a denial of due process.
Reopening of the Proceedings
The proceedings may be reopened to prevent
Effect of Grant of Demurrer
miscarriage of justice –
It has long been settled that the grant of a
demurrer is tantamount to an acquittal. An WHEN HOW
acquitted defendant is entitled to the right of
repose as a direct consequence of the finality of its Before the finality of Either:
acquittal. (People v. Lagos, G.R. No. 184658, judgment of the 1. Court motu propio,
March 6, 2013) conviction, and the or
following requirements 2. Upon motion
An accused who files a demurrer to evidence has are met:
not yet adduced evidence on either the criminal or
civil aspects of the case. If granted, the accused is 1. Judgment is issued
acquitted and still has the right to submit evidence by the judge on his own
against the civil liability imposed. (Salazar v. initiative or upon
People, et al., G.R. No. 151931, 2003) motion;

ATENEO CENTRAL
2. Order is issued only being meritorious (i.e. credibility, admissibility

after a hearing is of evidence, innocence of accused, lack of
conducted; due process even when notified, etc.)
3. Order intends to
prevent a miscarriage of 4. Motion to quash information when the
justice; grounds stated are not in Sec. 3 Rule 117
4. The presentation of
additional and/or further 5. Motion for bill of particulars that does not
evidence should be conform to Sec. 9, Rule 116
terminated with 30 days
from the issuance of the 6. Motion to suspend the arraignment If motion
order (Cabarles v. is based on grounds not stated in Sec. 11,
Maceda, G.R. 161330, Rule 116
February 20, 2007).
7. Petition to suspend the criminal action on the
ground of prejudicial question and no civil
6. Revised Guidelines on case has been filed pursuant to Sec. 7, Rule
Continuous Trial (A.M. No. 111
15-06-10-SC)
Meritorious Motions
a. Applicability Except those already covered by the Revised
Guidelines, meritorious motions are those that
GR: It shall apply to all newly-filed criminal cases, allege plausible grounds supported by relevant
including those governed by Special Laws and documents and/or competent evidence, such as:
Rules, in the First and Second Level Courts, the
Sandiganbayan and the Court of Tax Appeals as 1. Motion to withdraw information, or to
of effectivity date. The Revised Guidelines shall downgrade the charge in the original
also apply to pending criminal cases with respect information, or to exclude an accused
to the remainder of the proceedings. originally charged therein filed as a result of
reinvestigation, reconsideration, and review;
XPN: Unless otherwise specified, it shall not apply
to criminal cases filed under the Rules on 2. Motion to quash warrant of arrest
Summary Procedure.
3. Motion to suspend arraignment on the
b. Prohibited and Meritorious Motions ground of unsound mental condition under
Sec. 11 (a), Rule 116
Prohibited Motions
It shall be denied outright before arraignment
4. Motion to quash information on the grounds
without need of comment/opposition.
that the facts do not constitute an offense,
The following motions are prohibited:
lack of jurisdiction, extinction of criminal
1. Motions for judicial determination of probable
action or liability, or double jeopardy under
cause
Sec. 3, par. (a), (b), (g), and (i), Rule 117
2. Motion for preliminary investigation if filed
5. Motion to discharge accused if the accused
beyond the five (5)-day reglementary period
is a state witness the motion shall be
in inquest proceedings under Sec. 6, Rule
submitted for resolution from the termination
112, or when required under Sec. 8, Rule
of the hearing, and be resolved within a non-
112, or in inquest proceedings where
extendible period of ten (10) calendar days
accused failed to participate despite due
thereafter under Sec. 17, Rule 119
notice.
6. Motion to quash search warrant under Sec.
3. Motion for reinvestigation of the prosecutor
14, Rule 126, or motion to suppress
when the motion is filed (1) without prior leave
evidence; and
of court; (2) when preliminary investigation is
not required under Sec. 8 Rule 112, and
7. Motion to dismiss on the ground that the
when the preliminary investigation is required
criminal case is a Strategic Law Suit against
and has been conducted, the grounds not

ATENEO CENTRAL
Public Participation (SLAPP) under Rule 6 of The offer of evidence, the comment/objection
the Rules of Procedure for Environmental thereto, and the Court’s ruling shall be made
Cases. orally. A party is required to make the oral offer on
the same day as the presentation of the last
The comments of adverse parties shall be filed witness, and the opposing party is required to
strictly within a non-extendible period of 10 immediately interpose any comment or objection.
calendar days from notice, and resolved by the The Court shall make a ruling on the offer in open
court within a non-extendible period of 10 calendar court.
days after the expiration of the period, with or
without comment. The court, at its discretion, may The counsel shall cite the specific page numbers
set a hearing within 10 calendar days from the in the court record where the exhibits being offered
expiration of period to file comment. The case shall are found. The Court shall ensure the exhibits
be deemed submitted for resolution after offered are submitted to it on the same day as the
termination of the hearing, and resolved within 10 offer. If the exhibits are not attached to the record,
calendar days. Reply and memorandum need not the party making the offer must submit the same
be submitted. during the offer in open court.
In case of a motion to discharge accused as state Demurrer to evidence

witness under Sec. 17, Rule 119, where the 1. Demurrer to Evidence. — After the
prosecution is required to present evidence in prosecution has rested its case, the court
support thereof, such motion shall be submitted for shall inquire from the accused if he/she
resolution from the termination of the hearing, and desires to move for leave of court to file a
shall be resolved within a non-extendible period of demurrer to evidence, or to proceed with the
10 calendar days thereafter. presentation of his/her evidence.
2. If the accused orally moves for leave of court

The Motion for Reconsideration of the resolution of
to file a demurrer to evidence, the court shall
a meritorious motion shall be filed within a non-
orally resolve the same. If the motion for
extendible period of 5 calendar days from the
leave is denied, the court shall issue an order
receipt of resolution, and the adverse party is
for the accused to present and terminate
given 5 calendar days from the receipt of the
his/her evidence on the dates previously
motion to submit comment. The court shall resolve
scheduled and agreed upon, and to orally
the motion for reconsideration within a non-
offer and rest his/her case on the day his/her
extendible period of 5 days from the expiration to
last witness is presented.
submit comment.
3. If despite the denial of the motion for leave,
the accused insists on filing the demurrer to
Motions that do not conform to the above
evidence, the previously scheduled dates for
requirements shall be considered unmeritorious
the accused to present evidence shall be
and shall be denied outright.
cancelled.
c. Trial; Memoranda
4. The demurrer to evidence shall be filed within
The Court shall encourage the following: a non-extendible period of 10 calendar days
1. For the Accused – Avail of Secs. 12 & 13, from the date leave of court is granted, and
Rule 119 on the application for examination the corresponding comment shall be filed
of witness for the accused before trial; within a non-extendible period of 10 calendar
2. For the Prosecution – Sec. 15, Rule 119 on days counted from date of receipt of the
the conditional examination of witness for the demurrer to evidence. The demurrer shall be
prosecution. resolved by the court within a non-extendible
period of 30 calendar days from date of the
Absence of counsel de parte filing of the comment or lapse of the 10-day
The hearing shall proceed upon the appointment period to file the same.
by the Court of a counsel de officio
If the motion for leave of court to file demurrer to
Offer of evidence evidence is granted, and the subsequent demurrer
to evidence is denied, the accused shall likewise

ATENEO CENTRAL
present and terminate his/her evidence (one day the prosecution. The court shall resolve the motion
apart, morning and afternoon) and shall orally offer within 10 days with or without comment of the
and rest his/her case on the day his/her last prosecution.
witness is presented. The court shall rule on the
oral offer of evidence of the accused and the
comment or objection of the prosecution on the
same day of the offer. If the court denies the
motion to present rebuttal evidence because it is
no longer necessary, it shall consider the case
Presentation of Rebuttal and Sur-rebuttal

Evidence
If the motion to present rebuttal evidence is
granted, the prosecution shall immediately
proceed with presentation after the accused rests
his/her case, and orally rest its case in rebuttal
after the presentation of the last rebuttal witness.
The accused shall immediately present sur-
rebuttal evidence, if any, and orally rest case in
sur-rebuttal after the presentation of the last sur-
rebuttal witness. Thereafter, the case will be
One-day examination of witness rule

The Court shall strictly adhere to the rule that a
witness has to be fully examined in 1 day.
Memoranda
The submission of memoranda is discretionary on
the part of the Court, which shall not exceed 25
pages, single spaced on legal size paper in size
14 font. The period to submit shall be non-
extendible and shall not suspend the period of
promulgation of the decision. The promulgation
shall proceed with or without the memoranda.
d. Promulgation
Schedule of promulgation
General Rule: The Court shall announce in open
court the order submitting the case for decision,
including the date of promulgation which shall not
be more than 90 days from the date the case is
Exception: If the case is covered by Special Rules

and other laws which provide for a shorter period.
Resolution of Motion for Reconsideration of

Judgment of Conviction of Motion for New
Trial
A motion for reconsideration of judgment of
conviction or motion for new trial under Rule 121
shall be filed within 15 days from promulgation and
shall be resolved within a non-extendible period of
10 calendar days from submission of comment of

ATENEO CENTRAL
K. JUDGMENT (RULE 120)

2. In either case, judgment shall determine if the
Judgment act or omission from which the civil liability
It is the adjudication by the court that the accused might arise did not exist (Rule 120, Sec. 2).
is guilty or not guilty of the offense charged and the
imposition on him of the proper penalty and civil A verdict of acquittal is immediately final. (People
liability, if any. (Rule 120, Sec. 1) v. Serrano, G.R. No. 135451, 1999)
REQUISITES OF A JUDGMENT Conditional and Alternative Penalties

The penalty imposed in a judgment cannot be
Requisites of a judgment conditional, nor can it be in the alternative as, even
1. Written in official language if the law provides for alternative penalties, the
2. Personally and directly prepared by the judge court must choose and impose either of said
and signed by him alternative penalties (US v. Chong Ting, 1912).
3. Shall contain clearly and distinctly:
a. Statement of the facts Award of Indemnity Despite Acquittal
b. Law upon which it is based (Rule 120, Unless there is a clear showing that the act from
Sec. 1) which the civil liability might arise did not exist, the
judgment must make a finding on the civil liability
The parties to a litigation should be informed of of the accused in favor of the offended party (Sec.
how it was decided, with an explanation of factual 2 (2), Rule 120).
and legal reasons that led to the conclusions of the
trial court. A decision that does not clearly and When Two or More Offenses Contained in a
distinctly state the facts and the law on which it is Single Information or Complaint
based leaves the parties in the dark as to how it Accused may file a motion to quash.
was reached and is precisely prejudicial to the
losing party, who is unable to pinpoint possible If accused fails to object to it before trial, the
errors of the court for review by a higher tribunal. accused is deemed to have waived the defect and
(Lumanog, et al. v. People, G.R. No. 182555, the court may convict him of as many offenses as
2010) charged and proved, and impose a penalty for
each offense. (Rule 120, Section 3)
The jurisdictional requirements before a judgment
may be validly rendered are jurisdiction over the While Sec. 13 of Rule 110 frowns upon multiple
subject matter, the territory, and the person of the offenses being charged in a single information, the
accused. (Antiporda, Jr. v. Garchitorena, G.R. No. failure to raise this issue during arraignment
133289, 1999) amounts to a waiver, and the objection can no
longer be raised on appeal. (Abalos v. People,
CONTENTS OF JUDGMENT G.R. No. 136994, 2002)
Judgment of Conviction Judgment Rendered by Judge Who Did not

1. Legal qualification of the offense constituted Hear the Case
by the acts committed by the accused The fact that the trial judge who rendered
2. Aggravating and mitigating circumstances judgment was not the one who had the occasion
3. Participation of the accused whether as to observe the demeanor of the witnesses during
principal, accomplice or accessory trial, but merely relied in the records of the case,
4. Penalty imposed does not render the judgment erroneous,
5. Civil liability or damages, unless reserved or especially when the evidence on record is
waived (Rule 120, Sec. 2) sufficient to support its conclusion. (People v.
Alfredo, G.R. No. 188560, 2010)
Judgment of Acquittal
1. State whether or not evidence of the Where the judge who penned the decision had
prosecution: ceased to be a member of the judiciary without
a. Absolutely failed to prove guilt said decision having been promulgated, and his
b. Merely failed to prove guilt beyond successor caused its promulgation to be made
reasonable doubt thereafter, such judgment is null and void. A

ATENEO CENTRAL
decision penned by a judge during his incumbency 2. Judgment if accused is confined or detained in
cannot be validly promulgated after his retirement. another province or city
When a judge retired all his authority to decide any a. May be promulgated by the executive
case, i.e., to write, sign and promulgate the judge of the RTC having jurisdiction over
decision thereon also retired with him. (Nazareno the place of confinement or detention
v. CA, et al, G.R. No. 111610, 2002) b. Upon request of the court which rendered
judgment (Rule 120, Sec. 6).
Variance Doctrine
General Rule: The accused can be convicted of Manner of Promulgation
an offense only when it is both charged and Judgment is promulgated by filing the signed copy
proved. thereof with the clerk of court who causes true
copies to be served upon the parties.
Exception: When there is variance between the
crime charged and the crime proved, and the How Accused Is Notified of the Promulgation
offense as charged is included or necessarily Notice shall be given personally by the clerk of
includes offense proved, the accused shall be court to the accused or to his bondsman or warden
convicted of the offense proved which is included and counsel
in the offense charged, or of the offense charged
which is included in the offense proved. (People v. Notice shall be served at the accused’s last known
Chi Chan Liu, GR No. 189272, 2015) address if the latter:
1. Jumped bail; or
An offense charged necessarily includes the 2. Escaped from prison (Rule 120, Sec. 6).
offense proved when some essential elements of
the former, as alleged in the complaint or If Accused Fails to Appear in the Promulgation
information, constitute the latter. FOR FOR CONVICTION
ACQUITTAL
An offense charged is necessarily included in the Promulgation shall be made by:
offense proved when the essential ingredients of 1. Recording the judgment in the criminal
the former constitute the latter. docket; and
2. Serving accused a copy thereof at his last
If there is variance, the accused can only be known address or thru his counsel
convicted of the lesser offense which is included in • If absence without justifiable
the graver offense. (People v. Pareja, G.R. No. cause, accused shall lose all
202122, 2014) remedies against the
judgment and the court shall
The mere fact that the evidence presented would order his arrest
indicate a lesser offense outside the court’s • But within 15 days from
jurisdiction was committed does not deprive the promulgation, accused may
court of its jurisdiction, which had vested in it under surrender and file a motion
the allegations in the information (PP v. Ocaya, for leave of court to avail of
1987). the remedies and prove the
reason of his absence. If
1. Promulgation of judgment justified, he may then avail of
the remedies within 15 days
General Rule: The judgment must be read in the from notice
presence of the accused and any judge of the (Rule 120, Sec. 6)
court in which it was rendered (Rule 120, Sec. 6).
If the accused was duly notified, his absence is not
Exception/s: a ground for the suspension of the promulgation.
1. Judgment in light offenses
a. May be pronounced in the presence of the If the judgment is for conviction and the failure to
accused’s counsel or representative appear was without justifiable cause, the accused
b. May be promulgated by the clerk of court shall lose the remedies available in the Rules of
if the judge is absent or outside the Court against the judgment.
province or city

ATENEO CENTRAL
Thus, it is incumbent upon the accused to appear Exception: when the death penalty is imposed.
on the scheduled date of promulgation, because it
determines the availability of their possible Note: The accused who fails to appear at the
remedies against the judgment of conviction. promulgation of the judgment of conviction loses
When the accused fail to present themselves at the remedies available under the Rules of Court
the promulgation of the judgment of conviction, against the judgment, specifically: (a) the filing of
they lose the remedies of filing a motion for a new a motion for new trial or for reconsideration (Rule
trial or reconsideration (Rule 121) and an appeal 121), and (b) an appeal from the judgment of
from the judgment of conviction (Rule 122). (Jaylo conviction (Rule 122).
v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 183152-54, 2015)
However, the Rules of Court permits him to regain
Absence of some of the accused during his standing in court in order to avail himself of
promulgation of judgment these remedies within 15 days from the date of
If an accused that is part of multiple accused in one promulgation of the judgment conditioned upon:
case is absent at promulgation of judgment, and (a) his surrender; and (b) his filing of a motion for
such judgment is of conviction, he loses his leave of court to avail himself of the remedies,
remedies in law even if an appeal is perfected by stating therein the reason for his absence. Should
his co-accused, who was present, including his the trial court find that his absence was for a
name (People v. De Grano, G.R. No. 167710, justifiable cause, he should be allowed to avail
2009). himself of the remedies within 15 days from notice
of the order finding his absence justified and
Modification of Judgment allowing him the available remedies from the
A judgment of conviction may be modified or set judgment of conviction (Rule 120, Sec. 6).
aside upon motion of the accused, before the (Salvador v. Chua, G.R. No. 212865, 2015)
judgment becomes final or before appeal is
perfected. (Rule 120, Sec. 7). Youthful Offenders
In case of youthful offenders, instead of
General Rule: Judgment should be rendered pronouncing a final judgment of conviction, the
within 90 days from submission court should automatically suspend the sentence
and commit the minor to the DSWD or other
Exceptions: institution until he reaches the age of majority
1. It must be rendered within 30 days in cases (Sec. 38, Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act).
under Summary Procedure
2. It must be rendered within 15 days in drug Exception/s:
cases 1. If the offender has enjoyed a previous
suspension of sentence;
Modification of Judgment vs. New Trial 2. If the offender is convicted by a military
MODIFICATION OF NEW TRIAL tribunal;
JUDGMENT
No new hearings or Irregularities are NOTE:
proceedings of any expunged from the
kind or change in the record and/or new Suspension of sentence can be availed of
record or evidence. A evidence is even if the child is already 18 years old or
simple modification is introduced. more but not above 21 years old, at the time
made on the basis of of the pronouncement of guilt, without
what is on record. prejudice to the availment of other benefits
such as probation, if qualified, or adjustment
WHEN DOES JUDGMENT BECOME FINAL of penalty, in interest of justice.
General Rule: Judgment becomes final after: The benefits of the suspended sentence shall
1. Lapse of period for appeal apply to one who is convicted of an offense
2. Sentence partially or totally served punishable by reclusion perpetua or life
3. Accused waives in writing his right to appeal imprisonment pursuant to the provisions of RA
4. Accused has applied for probation 9346 prohibiting the imposition of the death
penalty and in lieu thereof, reclusion perpetua,

ATENEO CENTRAL
and after application of the privileged effectively by his commitment to an

mitigating circumstance of minority. institution.
2. There is undue risk that during the period or
If the child in conflict with the law reaches 18 probation, the offender will commit another
years of age while under suspended crime.
sentence, the court shall determine whether to 3. Probation will depreciate the seriousness of
discharge the child in accordance with the the crime committed (Sec. 8, Probation Law).
provisions of Republic Act 9344, or to extend
the suspended sentence for a maximum SENTENCE PERIOD OF
period of up to the time the child reaches IMPOSED PROBATION
twenty-one (21) years of age, or to order Not more than 1 year Not more than 2 years
service of sentence (Sec. 48, Rule on
Juveniles in Conflict with the Law; A.M. No. More than 1 year Not more than 6 years
02-1-18-SC).
Fine only, but At least equal to the
Probation offender serves number of days of
Probation is a mere privilege, and the grant is subsidiary subsidiary
discretionary upon the court. imprisonment imprisonment but not
more than twice such
The offender should apply for probation after period
conviction within the period for perfecting an (Sec. 14, Probation Law).
appeal.
An application for probation may no longer be filed

once the defendant has already perfected an
appeal from the judgment of conviction.
Probation does not release civil liability.
A denied application for probation cannot be

appealed.
Appeal and Probation

GR: No application for probation shall be
entertained or granted if the defendant has
perfected the appeal from the judgment of
conviction (Sec. 1, RA 10707).
Appeal and probation are mutually exclusive

remedies. Implicit in an application for probation is
an admission of guilt (Almero v. PP, G.R. No.
188191, 2014).
XPN: When a judgment of conviction imposing a

non-probationable penalty is appealed or
reviewed, and such judgment is modified through
the imposition of a probationable penalty, the
defendant shall be allowed to apply for probation
based on the modified decision before such
decision becomes final (Sec. 1, RA 10707).
When Should the Court Deny the Application

for Probation
1. The offender is in need of correctional
treatment that can be provided most

ATENEO CENTRAL
L. MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL OR affidavits of the witness by whom such

RECONSIDERATION (RULE 121) evidence is expected to be given or duly
authenticated copies of documents which it is
proposed to introduce in evidence. (Sec. 4,
New Trial or Reconsideration
Rule 121).
At any time before a judgment of conviction
becomes final, the court may, on motion of the
Note: The defect of lack of affidavit of merit may
accused or at its own instance but with the consent
be cured by the testimony under oath of the
of the accused, grant a new trial or reconsideration
defendant at the hearing of the motion. (Paredes
(Rule 121, Sec. 1).
v. Borja, 1961).
Period to file MNT or MR
Notice of the MNT or MR shall be given to the
It should be filed within 15 days from notice of
prosecutor, (Sec. 4, Rule 121)
judgment or final order.
GROUNDS FOR NEW TRIAL
If an appeal has already been perfected, a motion
for new trial on the ground of newly discovered A motion for new trial may be filed upon any of
evidence may be filed in the appellate court. the following grounds:
1. Errors of law during trial
Motion for Reconsideration; New Trial; and 2. Irregularities prejudicial to the substantial
Reopening of the Case rights of the accused during trial
MOTION FOR NEW REOPENING OF 3. New and material evidence has been
RECONSI- TRIAL THE CASE discovered (Rule 121, Sec. 2)
DERATION
To reconsider To permit the reception of new The rule does not provide for a motion for new trial
its findings of evidence and extend the by the prosecution as the reopening of the case
law proceedings would result in double jeopardy.
Filed after judgment is Made by the court
rendered but before the before judgment is GROUNDS FOR RECONSIDERATION
finality thereof rendered, in the
exercise of sound A motion for reconsideration may be filed upon
discretion any of the following grounds:
On motion of the accused May be at the 1. Errors of law.
or on motion of the court instance of either 2. Errors of fact in the judgment (Rule 121, Sec.
but with the consent of the party or by the court 3)
accused motu proprio, with a
hearing in either Note: Requires no further proceedings
case, for the
purpose of REQUISITES BEFORE A NEW TRIAL MAY BE
presenting GRANTED ON GROUND OF NEWLY
additional evidence DISCOVERED EVIDENCE
Elements of Newly Discovered Evidence

Effect of Filing of Motion for New Trial or
1. New evidence discovered after trial
Reconsideration
2. It could not have been previously discovered
The filing of either motion interrupts the period for
and produced at the trial even with
perfecting an appeal from the time of its filing until
reasonable diligence
notice of the order overruling the motion shall have
3. It is new and material evidence
been served upon the accused or his attorney.
4. If introduced and admitted, it would probably
change judgment (Ybiernas v. Tanco-
Formal Requirements
Gabaldon, G.R. No. 179825, 2011)
1. In writing;
2. Filed in court;
Note: The Rules do not give an exact definition of
3. States the grounds on which it is based;
due diligence, and whether the movant has
4. If MNT is based on newly discovered
exercised due diligence depends upon the
evidence, it must be supported by the
particular circumstances of each case.

ATENEO CENTRAL
All the proceedings Evidence already

Nonetheless, it has been observed that the phrase and evidence affected adduced shall stand
is often equated with “reasonable promptness to thereby shall be:
avoid prejudice to the defendant.” In other words, 1. Set aside and Newly discovered
the concept of due diligence has both a time taken anew and other evidence
component and a good faith component. (People 2. The court, in the as the court may, in
v. Chua, G.R. No. 196853, 2015) interest of justice, the interest of justice,
may allow allow to be introduced
A new trial may not be had on the basis of additional shall be taken and
evidence which was available during trial but was evidence considered together
not presented due to its negligence. (People v. with evidence already
Senit, G.R. No. 192914, 2016). in record
Requires no further Supported by
When Hearing of the Motion is Required proceeding affidavits of witnesses
A hearing shall be conducted when the motion for or by authenticated
new trial calls for a resolution of a question of fact. copies of documents
Court may hear evidence on the motion by which are proposed
affidavits or otherwise. (Rule 121, Section 5) to be introduced
(Rule 121, Sec. 6)
As correctly stated by the Office of the Special
Prosecutor (OSP), Sec. 2 of Rule 37 and Sec. 4 of Application Of The Neypes Rule In Criminal
Rule 121 should be read in conjunction with Sec. Cases
5 of Rule 15 of the Rules of Court. The Court deems it practical to allow a fresh period
of 15 days within which to file the notice of appeal
Basic is the rule that every motion must be set for in the RTC, counted from receipt of the order
hearing by the movant except for those motions dismissing a motion for a new trial or motion for
which the court may act upon without prejudice to reconsideration. (Yu v. Hon. Tatad, G.R. No.
the rights of the adverse party. The notice of 170979, 2011)
hearing must be addressed to all parties and must
specify the time and date of the hearing, with proof Recantation
of service. (Flores v. People, G.R. No. 181354, The public and formal withdrawal of a witness’
2013) prior statement made under oath, in the presence
of the judge, and with the opportunity to cross-
NOTE: Under the Revised Rules on Civil examine.
Procedure, an MNT or MR shall be resolved its
receipt of the opposition thereto, or the period to General Rule: Recantation is not a ground for new
file such opposition (Rule 15, Sec. 5, A.M. No. 19- trial because it makes a mockery of the court and
10-20-SC). However, the court, in the exercise of would place the investigation of truth at the mercy
its discretion, call for a hearing (Rule 15, Sec. 6, of the unscrupulous witness.
A.M. No. 19-10-20-SC). There is no ruling yet as
to whether or not the same shall apply in criminal Exception: When the testimony is material, its
cases. recantation creates doubt of the guilt of the
accused (De Guzman v. IAC, G.R. No. 69386.
EFFECTS OF GRANTING A NEW TRIAL OR April 4, 1990).
RECONSIDERATION
RECANTATION AFFIDAVIT OF
GROUNDS OF GROUND OF DESISTANTCE
ERRORS OF LAW OR NEWLY- A witness who The complainant states
IRREGULARITIES DISCOVERED previously gave a that he did not really
EVIDENCE testimony subsequently intend to institute the
• Notice shall be given to the prosecutor declares that his case and that he is no
• Judgment shall be set aside and vacated statements were not longer interested in
• New judgment shall be rendered true testifying or prosecuting
accordingly

ATENEO CENTRAL
M. APPEAL (RULE 122) these Rules against the judgment. Within

fifteen (15) days from promulgation of
EFFECT OF AN APPEAL judgment, however, the accused may
surrender and file a motion for leave of court
Subject Matter for Review on Appeal to avail of these remedies, upon showing that
In a criminal case, an appeal throws the whole his absence was for a justifiable cause. (Rule
case open for review, and it becomes the duty of 120, Sec. 6)
the appellate court to correct such errors as may
be found in the judgment appealed from, whether Despite acquittal, however, either the offended
they are made the subject of the assignment of party or the accused may appeal, but only with
errors or not (People v. Michael Lindo y Vergara, respect to the civil aspect of the decision. Or, said
G.R. No. 189818, 2010). judgment of acquittal may be assailed through a
petition for certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of
The Writ of Habeas Corpus is an effective post- Court showing that the lower court, in acquitting
conviction remedy that may be issued despite the the accused, committed not merely reversible
finality of a judgment, any of the following errors of judgment, but also exercised grave abuse
exceptional circumstances is attendant: 1) of discretion amounting to lack or excess of
there has been a deprivation of a constitutional jurisdiction, or a denial of due process, thereby
right resulting in the restraint of a person; 2) rendering the assailed judgment null and void. If
the court had no jurisdiction to impose the there is grave abuse of discretion, granting
sentence; or 3) the imposed penalty has been petitioner’s prayer is not tantamount to putting
excessive, thus voiding the sentence as such private respondents in double jeopardy. (AAA v.
excess (Reyes v. Director or Whoever is In- CA, G.R. No. 183652, 2015)
Charge of Camp Bagong Diwa, Taguig, Metro
Manila, G.R. No. 254838 (Notice), 2023). The doctrine that "double jeopardy may not be
invoked after trial" may apply only when the Court
Note: Accused’s release on parole does not affect finds that the “criminal trial was a sham” because
his appeal. the prosecution representing the sovereign people
in the criminal case was denied due process. The
Not a Natural Right Court in People v. Bocar rationalized that the
The right to appeal is not a natural right nor part of "remand of the criminal case for further hearing
due process but merely a statutory privilege and and/or trial before the lower courts amounts
may be exercised only in the manner and in merely to a continuation of the first jeopardy, and
accordance with the provisions of law. (Estrallado- does not expose the accused to a second
Mainar v. People, G.R. No. 184320, 2015) jeopardy. (People v. Hon. Velasco, G.R. 127444,
2000)
Who May Appeal
General Rule: Any party may appeal from a In the case of the People of the Philippines, only
judgment or final order. the state, through its appellate counsel, the Office
of the Solicitor General, has the sole right and
Exceptions authority to institute proceedings before the CA or
1. A party may not appeal if the accused will be SC. (Carino v. De Castro, G.R. No. 176084, 2008)
placed in double jeopardy (Rule 122, Sec. 1)
Permissible appeal by the People
HENCE, the prosecution cannot appeal from 1. When the right of the offended parties to
a judgment of acquittal because a verdict of appeal an order of the trial court which
that nature is immediately final and to try him deprives them of due process;
on the merits, even in an appellate court, is to
put him a second time in jeopardy for the 2. Where the information was quashed prior to
same offense. (Central Bank of the Phils. v. arraignment, the prosecution may appeal the
CA, G.R. No. 41859, 1989) order sustaining the motion to quash
because before a plea is entered, no
2. If the judgment is for conviction and the jeopardy attaches;
accused fails to appear without justifiable
cause, he shall lose the remedies available in

ATENEO CENTRAL
3. When the case was provisionally dismissed may also be predicated on a source of obligation
with the express consent of the accused, the other than delict.
same may be refilled by the fiscal without a. Law;
violating the right against double jeopardy; or b. Contracts;
c. Quasi-contracts; and
4. When the trial court gravely abused its d. Quasi-delicts. (Rule 111, Sec. 4)
discretion, as when it dismissed the case due
to non-appearance of a vital witness who was Where the civil liability survives, as explained in
not properly notified of the date of trial, Number 2 above, an action for recovery therefor
certiorari will lie because such a grave abuse may be pursued but only by way of filing a
of discretion is tantamount to lack or excess separate civil action and subject to Rule 111, Sec.
of jurisdiction. 1.
Effect of Appeal by the Accused This separate civil action may be enforced either
If the accused appeals his conviction, he waive the against the executor/administrator or the estate of
protection on the prohibition against double the accused, depending on the source of
jeopardy and runs the risk of being sentenced to a obligation upon which the same is based as
penalty higher than that imposed by the trial court explained above.
(Philippine Rabbit Bus Lines v. PP, G.R. No.
147703, 2004). Finally, the private offended party need not fear a
forfeiture of his right to file this separate civil action
Change of Theory on Appeal by prescription, in cases where during the
Points of law, theories, issues and arguments not prosecution of the criminal action and prior to its
adequately brought to the attention of the trial extinction, the private offended party instituted
court ordinarily will not be considered by a together therewith the civil action. In such case,
reviewing court as they cannot be raised for the the statute of limitations on the civil liability is
first time on appeal because this would be deemed interrupted during the pendency of the
offensive to the basic rules of fair play, justice and criminal case, conformably with provisions of
due process. (People v. Mamaril, G.R. No. Article 1155 of the Civil Code, that should thereby
171980, 2010) avoid any apprehension on a possible deprivation
of right by prescription. (People v. Lipata, G.R. No.
When Appeal is to be Taken 200302, 2016)
APPEAL OF A APPEAL OF AN
JUDGMENT ORDER Period Suspended
Must be perfected Must be perfected The period for appeal is suspended from the time
within 15 days from within 15 days from the motion for new trial or reconsideration is filed
promulgation of the final notice of the final order up to the service to the accused or his counsel of
judgment the notice of the order overruling the motion.
Modes of Review
Note: A party shall have a fresh period of 15 days
The Rules of Court recognizes 4 modes by which
to file a notice of appeal to the RTC from receipt of
the decision of the final order of the court may be
the order denying a motion for new trial or motion
reviewed by a higher tribunal:
for reconsideration. (Neypes v. CA, G.R. No.
1. Ordinary appeal
141524, 2005)
2. Petition for review under Rule 43
3. Petition for review on certiorari (Rule 45)
This applies in criminal cases under Rule 122,
Sec. 6 (Yu v. Tatad, G.R. No. 170979, 2011)
Rules on Criminal and Civil Liability When

Accused Dies
Death of the accused pending appeal of his
conviction extinguishes his criminal liability as well
as the civil liability based solely thereon.
Corollarily, the claim for civil liability survives

notwithstanding the death of accused, if the same

ATENEO CENTRAL
APPEAL FROM APPEAL TO HOW

DECISION OF
1. Appeals from Filing notice of appeal
the Municipal with the MTC and
MTC RTC
Trial Courts serving copy of notice
to the adverse party
2. Appeals from Filing a notice of
the Regional appeal with the RTC
Trial Courts RTC (original jurisdiction) CA and serving copy of
notice to the adverse
party
RTC (appellate Petition for review
CA
jurisdiction) under Rule 42
RTC (penalty imposed is
reclusion perpetua or life
imprisonment or where a
lesser penalty is imposed
but for offenses Filing a notice of
committed on the same appeal with the RTC
occasion or which arose CA and serving copy of
out of the same notice to the adverse
occurrence that gave rise party
to the more serious
offense for which death,
reclusion perpetua, or life
imprisonment is imposed)
Automatic review (no
RTC (death penalty
CA need for notice of
imposed)
appeal)
3. Appeals from CA (imposes penalty
Petition for review on
the Court of other than death,
SC certiorari under Rule
Appeals reclusion perpetua, or life
45
imprisonment)
CA (penalty imposed is
Filing a notice of
reclusion perpetua, or life SC
appeal with the CA
imprisonment)
4. Appeals Sandiganbayan
Sandiganbayan (appellate jurisdiction for
offenses where the
SC File a notice of appeal
imposable penalty is
reclusion perpetua or life
imprisonment)
5. Section 13, Sandiganbayan (original
Rule 124 jurisdiction for offenses File a notice of appeal
were where the (Sec. 13, Rule 124;
SC
imposable penalty is Sec. 5, P.D. 1606 as
reclusion perpetua or life amended by RA 8429).
imprisonment)
Petition for review on
Sandiganbayan (in all
SC certiorari under Rule
other cases)
45.

ATENEO CENTRAL
WHERE TO APPEAL of totally extinguishing criminal liability under

Article 89 of the RPC. (People v. Abesamis, G.R.
Regional Trial Court – in cases decided by the No. 140985, 2007).
Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial Court in
Cities, Municipal Trial Court, or Municipal Circuit EFFECT OF APPEAL BY ANY OF SEVERAL
Trial Court ACCUSED
Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court in the An appeal taken by one or more of several
proper cases provided by law - in cases accused shall not affect those who did not appeal,
decided by the Regional Trial Court except insofar as the judgment of the appellate
court is favorable and applicable to him.
Supreme Court - in cases decided by the Court
of Appeals, CTA En Banc, and the Appeal of the offended party of the civil aspect
Sandiganbayan. shall not affect the criminal aspect of the
judgment or order appealed from.
HOW APPEAL TAKEN
Upon perfection of appeal, the execution of
Service of Notice of Appeal judgment or final order appealed from shall be
GR: It should be served upon the adverse party stayed as to the appealing party (Rule 122, Sec.
or his counsel by personal service. 11)
XPN: If personal service of the copy of notice of NOTE: In People v. Olivo (G.R. No. 177768,
appeal cannot be made upon the adverse party 2009), an accused has benefitted from the
or his counsel, service may be done by registered acquittal of his co-accused despite the former’s
mail or substituted service (Rule 122, Sec. 4). failure to appeal from the judgment.
The appellate court may, in its discretion, GROUNDS FOR DISMISSAL OF APPEAL
entertain an appeal notwithstanding failure to give
such notice if the interests of justice so require 1. Failure to serve and file the required number
(Rule 122, Sec. 5). of copies of his brief or within the time
provided by these Rules
The fact that no copy of the notice of appeal is 2. Appellant escapes from prison or
served upon the adverse party is not fatal to the confinement, jumps bail, or flees to a foreign
perfection of the appeal as long as the notice of country during the pendency of the appeal;
appeal had been filed on time. (People v. 3. Failure of the record on appeal to show on
Villanueva, G.R. No. L-1876, 1966) its face that the appeal was taken within the
period fixed by the Riles
Withdrawal of Appeal in RTC (Rule 122, Sec. 4. Failure to file the notice of appeal or the
12) record on appeal within the period
The appellant may withdraw his appeal filed in prescribed by the Rules;
MTC before the record has been forwarded to the 5. Failure of the appellant to pay docket and
RTC other lawful fees;
6. Unauthorized alterations, omissions, or
If the record has been forwarded, withdrawal may additions in the approved record on appeal
only be allowed if: 7. Absence of specific assignment of error in
1. A motion to withdraw is filed the appellant’s brief, or of page references
2. Motion is filed before the RTC renders to the record as required; and
judgment 8. Failure of the appellant to take the
necessary steps for the correction or
Appeal Not Mooted by Accused’s Release on completion of the record within the time
Parole limited by the court in its order
Appeal not mooted by accused-appellant’s
release on parole. Parole refers to the conditional Motion for Extension of Time
release of an offender from a correctional GR: In the CA and in the SC, it is generally
institution after he serves the minimum term of his prohibited.
prison sentence. Parole is not one of the modes XPN: For good and sufficient cause

ATENEO CENTRAL
Certification or Appeal of Case to the SC A person desiring to appeal by certiorari (Rule 45)
1. If the CA finds that the death penalty should from a judgment or final order or resolution of the
be imposed, it shall render judgment but Court of Appeals, the Sandiganbayan, the
refrain from making an entry of judgment and Regional Trial Court or other courts whenever
forthwith certify the case and elevate its entire authorized by law, may file with the Supreme
record to the SC for review; Court a verified petition for review on certiorari.
2. Where the judgment also imposes a lesser
penalty for offenses committed on the same However, appeals from judgments and final
occasion or which arose out of the same orders of quasi-judicial agencies (such as the
occurrence that gave rise to the more severe Office of the Ombudsman in this case) are now
offense for which the penalty of death is required to be brought to the Court of Appeals on
imposed, and the accused appeals, the a verified petition for review, under the
appeal shall be included in the case certified requirements and conditions in Rule 43 which
for review to the SC; was precisely formulated and adopted to provide
3. In cases where the Court of Appeals imposes for a uniform rule of appellate procedure for
reclusion perpetua, life imprisonment or a quasi- judicial agencies (Fabian v. Desierto, G.R.
lesser penalty, it shall render and enter No. 129742, 1988).
judgment imposing such penalty. The
judgment may be appealed to the Supreme The Court of Appeals has jurisdiction over orders,
Court by notice of appeal filed with the Court directives and decisions of the Office of the
of Appeals (Rule 124, Sec.13; People v. Ombudsman in administrative disciplinary cases
Abon, G.R. No. 169245, Feb. 15, 2008). only. It cannot, therefore, review the orders,
directives or decisions of the Office of the
Appeal as Relief vs. Order Granting Motion to Ombudsman in criminal or non-administrative
Withdraw Information cases. The appellate court’s jurisdiction extends
In a case where a motion is filed by the only to decisions of the Office of the Ombudsman
Prosecution for leave to withdraw the Information in administrative cases. Petitions for certiorari
on the ground that, after a reinvestigation under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court, when
previously authorized by the court, no probable resorted to as a remedy for judicial review, must
cause exists as against the accused, the court be filed in the Supreme Court. Since the Court of
may deny or grant the motion based on its own Appeals has no jurisdiction over decisions and
independent assessment of the result of the orders of the Ombudsman in criminal cases, its
reinvestigation submitted by the Prosecution to ruling on the same is void (Kuizon v. Desierto,
the trial court. The court may deny or grant such G.R. No. 140619-24, 2001).
motion, not out of subservience to the Special
Prosecutor, but in the faithful exercise of judicial
discretion and prerogative (Fuentes v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 164664, 2006).
An order granting a motion to withdraw and

dismissing a criminal case is final and the remedy
to question this final order is an appeal. In this
case, when the Office of the City Prosecution filed
an Urgent Motion to Withdraw the Informations
and the lower court dismissed the case for lack of
probable cause, respondent had already been
arraigned under valid Informations for violation of
R.A. No. 9994. Thus, the constitutional prohibition
against double jeopardy applies (Zialcita v. Tan,
UDK 162503-03, 05 December 2019).
Appeal to CA of Ombudsman Administrative
Cases v. Review by SC of Ombudsman
Resolution Finding Probable Cause of
Criminal Liability

ATENEO CENTRAL
N. SEARCHES AND SEIZURE (RULE place to be searched and the persons or things to
126) be seized.
NATURE OF SEARCH WARRANT Requisites of a Search Warrant (Rule 126, Sec.

1)
An application for a search warrant is not a 1. Order in writing
criminal action; and not of the same form as that 2. Issued in the name of the People of the
of a criminal action. It is not similar to a criminal Philippines
action but is rather a legal process that may be 3. Signed by a judge
likened to a writ of discovery employed by no less 4. Directed to a peace officer
than the State to procure relevant evidence of a 5. Commanding him to search for personal
crime. It is an instrument or tool, issued under the property described therein
State’s police power and this is the reason why it 6. To bring the property before the court
must issue in the name of the People of the
Philippines. (Te v. Breva, G.R. No. 164974, 2015) Where must an application for a search
warrant be filed?
It is not a proceeding against a person but is General Rule: Before any court within whose
solely for the discovery and to get possession of territorial jurisdiction a crime was committed.
personal property (Worldwide Web Corporation v. (Sps. Marimla v. People, G.R. No. 158467, 2009)
PP, G.R. 161106, 2014).
Exception/s:
The power to issue search warrants is exclusively 1. Before any court within the judicial region
vested with trial judges (Skechers USA v. Inter where the crime was committed if the place
Pacific, G.R. 164321, 2006). of the crime is known. (A.M. No. 00-5-03-SC
as cited in Sps. Marimla v. People, G.R. No.
Note: It cannot be validly issued against chattels 158467, 2009)
and effects of persons enjoying diplomatic
immunity pursuant to RA 75. 2. Before any court within the judicial region
where the warrant shall be enforced. (A.M.
Note: The rule that venue is jurisdictional does No. 00-5-03-SC as cited in Sps. Marimla v.
NOT strictly apply in proceedings for the People, G.R. No. 158467, 2009)
application of search warrants. A warrant, such
as a warrant of arrest or a search warrant, merely Note: In both exceptions, filing in such
constitutes process. It is a special criminal courts requires compelling reasons stated in
process. A search warrant is in the nature of a the application.
criminal process akin to a writ of discovery. It is a
special and peculiar remedy, drastic in its nature, Confidentiality of the operations and desire
and made necessary because of a public to prevent leakage are compelling reasons
necessity (Pilipinas Shell Petroleum Corporation within the contemplation of Rule 126, Sec.
and Petron Corporation v. Romars International 2(b) (People v. Kelley, G.R. No. 243653,
Gases Corporation, G.R. No. 189669, 2015). 2020)
APPLICATION FOR SEARCH WARRANT, 3. IF the criminal action has already been filed,
WHERE FILED the application shall be made only in the
court where the criminal action is pending
Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 2: The right of the (Sec. 2, Rule 126).
people to be secure in their persons, houses,
papers, and effects against unreasonable Note: The wordings of the provision is of a
searches and seizures of whatever nature and for mandatory nature, requiring a statement of
any purpose shall be inviolable, and no search compelling reasons if the application is filed
warrant or warrant of arrest shall issue except in a court which does not have territorial
upon probable cause to be determined personally jurisdiction over the place of commission of
by the judge after examination under oath or the crime. Section 2, Rule 126 of the
affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure should
he may produce, and particularly describing the be construed strictly against state
authorities who would be enforcing the

ATENEO CENTRAL
search warrants. (Pilipinas Shell Petroleum REMEDIES FROM UNLAWFUL SEARCH AND
Corporation and Petron Corporation v. SEIZURE
Romars International Gases Corporation,
G.R. No. 189669, 2015). Remedies
1. Motion to Quash the Search Warrant
However: Nothing in the rule does it say that the 2. Motion to Suppress Evidence the object
court issuing a search warrant must also have illegally taken
jurisdiction over the offense. A search warrant 3. Replevin, if the objects are legally possessed
may be issued by any court pursuant to Sec. 2, 4. Certiorari, where the search warrant is a
Rule 126 and the resultant case may be filed in patent nullity.
another court that has jurisdiction over the 5. File a complaint for damages under Art. 32,
offense committed. What controls here is that a in relation to Art. 2219 (6) and (10) of the Civil
search warrant is merely a process, generally Code;
issued by a court in the exercise of its ancillary 6. File an administrative case under Section 41
jurisdiction, and not a criminal action to be of R.A. No. 6975
entertained by a court pursuant to its original
jurisdiction. Motion to Quash a Search Warrant and Motion
to Suppress Evidence
Thus, in certain cases when no criminal action MOTION TO QUASH MOTION TO
has yet been filed, any court may issue a search A SEARCH SUPPRESS
warrant even though it has no jurisdiction over the WARRANT EVIDENCE
offense allegedly committed, provided that all the Filed before service of Filed after the search
requirements for the issuance of such warrant are the search warrant warrant has been
present. (People v. Castillo, Jr., G.R. No. 204419, served
2016) Where to file:
• Court where case is pending
Authority of the Executive Judge and Vice- • If no case is pending, the court which issued
Executive Judge Re: Search Warrants in the warrant
Manila and Quezon City • If a case is filed subsequently, the motion
Executive Judges of the RTC’s of Manila and shall be resolved by the court where the
Quezon City may issue search warrants outside case has been filed.
their territorial jurisdiction for the following crimes:
1. Heinous crimes; Where the search warrant is issued as an incident
2. Illegal gambling; in a pending criminal case, the quashal of a
3. Dangerous drugs; search warrant is merely interlocutory. There is
4. Illegal possession of firearms; still something more to be done in the said
5. Anti-Money Laundering Act; criminal case, i.e., the determination of the guilt of
6. Violation of Tariff and Customs Code the accused. Thus, the remedy against
(Marimla v. People, G.R. No. 158467, interlocutory orders is Rule 65.
2009, citing A.M. 99-10-09-SC and A.M.
No. 03-8-02-SC entitled Guidelines On The Where a search warrant is applied for and issued
Selection And Designation Of Executive in anticipation of a criminal case yet to be filed,
Judges And Defining Their Powers, the order quashing the warrant (and denial of a
Prerogatives And Duties) motion for reconsideration) ends the judicial
process. Thus, an appeal under Rule 41 may be
Searches and Seizure for Violation of the availed of (World Wide Web Corp v. People, G.R.
Intellectual Property Code No. 161106 & 161266, 2014).
Special Commercial Courts in Quezon City,
Manila, Makati, and Pasig shall have authority to Transitory and Continuing Crimes
act on applications for the issuance of writs of If the nature of the violation would constitute a
search and seizure in civil actions for violations of transitory or continuing offense, application
the Intellectual Property Code, which writs shall for search warrant may be filed in any court where
be enforceable nationwide (Rule 1, Sec. 2, A.M. any element of the alleged offense was
No. 10-3-10-SC). committed. (Sony Computer v. Supergreen, Inc.,
G.R. No. 161823, 2007)

ATENEO CENTRAL
Note: The omission of the People of the Nature of Personal Property

Philippines from the petition was fatal. A search "Personal property" in the foregoing context
warrant is not similar to a criminal action but is actually refers to the thing’s mobility, and not to
rather a legal process that may be likened to a its capacity to be owned or alienated by a
writ of discovery employed by no less than the particular person. Article 416 of the Civil Code
State to procure relevant evidence of a crime. states that in general, all things which can be
transported from place to place are deemed to be
In that respect, it is an instrument or tool, issued personal property.
under the State’s police power, and this is the
reason why it must issue in the name of the Ownership of Property Seized Not Required
People of the Philippines. If one wishes to contest It is sufficient that the person against whom the
the finding of probable cause or any other aspect warrant is directed has control and possession of
of the issuance of the search warrant, then he the property sought to be seized.
must implead the entity who in legal
contemplation made the finding and in whose One Search Warrant per Offense
name the finding was made; otherwise, there can No search warrant shall issue for more than one
be no final determination of the case because the specific offense. (Rule 126, Sec. 4).
party indispensable to its resolution had been
omitted. (Te v. Breva, G.R. No. 164974, 2015) Thus, when a search warrant was issued for
robbery but the information however was
Requisites for the Issuance of a Search quashed, the things seized on the basis of such
Warrant: (Rule 126, Sec. 4) search warrant cannot be used for re-filing of an
1. There must be probable cause; information for qualified theft on the same case.
2. Probable cause is to be determined (Sy Tan v. SyTion, G.R. No. 174570, 2010)
personally;
3. The judge must personally examine in the PERSONAL EXAMINATION BY JUDGE OF
form of searching questions and answers, in THE APPLICANT AND WITNESS
writing and under oath, the complainant and
any witness he may produce, on facts Personal examination by judge of the
personally known to them applicant and witnesses
4. The search warrant must particularly describe 1. Examination must be personally conducted
the place to be searched and the persons or by the judge
things to be seized; 2. Examination must be in the form if searching
5. The probable cause must be in connection questions and answers
with one specific offense 3. Complainant and witnesses shall be
6. The sworn statements together with the examined on those facts personally known to
affidavits submitted by the complainant and them
witnesses must be attached to the record. 4. Statements must be in writing and under oath
(Prudente v. Dayrit, G.R. No. 82870, 1989). 5. Sworn statements of the complainant and the
witnesses, together with the affidavits
PERSONAL PROPERTY TO BE SEIZED submitted, shall be attached to the record
(Rule 126, Sec. 5; People v. Mamaril, G.R.
Personal Property to be seized No. 147607, January 22, 2004)
1. Subject of the offense (i.e., the gun in a case
for illegal possession of firearms, the drugs in Failure to attach to the records the depositions of
a case for violation of the Dangerous Drugs the complainant and his witnesses and/or the
Act.) transcript of the judge's examination, though
2. Stolen or embezzled and other proceeds, or contrary to the Rules, does not by itself nullify the
fruits of the offense (i.e., the stolen watch in a warrant. The requirement to attach is merely a
case for theft) procedural rule and not a component of the right.
3. Instruments of the offense (i.e. the hammer Rules of procedure or statutory requirements,
used by accused to break the glass window however salutary they may be, cannot provide
in a case for robbery). (Rule 126, Sec. 3) new constitutional requirements (Ogayon v.
People, G.R. No. 188794, 2015).

ATENEO CENTRAL
Note: Examination must be probing and issued. (Chan v. Honda Motors,

exhaustive, not merely routinary or pro forma. G.R. No. 172775, 2007). [Note:
The judge must not simply rehash the contents of The SC allowed the seizure of
the affidavit but make his own inquiry on the intent “Wave 110 S” and “Wave 125 S”
and justification of the application. motorcycles where the search
warrant was for “Wave”
Objection to Issuance or Service of a Warrant motorcycles.]
Any objection concerning the issuance or service PERSON TO It may be said that the person to
of a warrant or a procedure in the acquisition by BE be searched is “particularly
the court of jurisdiction over the person of the SEARCHED described” in the search warrant
accused must be made before he enters his plea; when his name is stated in the
otherwise, the objection is deemed waived search warrant, or if the name is
(People v. Tan, G.R. No. 191069, November 15, unknown, he is designated by
2010). words sufficient to enable the
officer to identify him without
The requirement to raise objections against difficulty
search warrants during trial is a procedural rule
established by jurisprudence. Compliance or Right to Break Door or Window
noncompliance with this requirement cannot in The searching officer may break any door or
any way diminish the constitutional guarantee window, or any part of the house if refused
that a search warrant should be issued upon a admittance (Rule 126, Sec. 7)
finding of probable cause. The failure to make a
timely objection cannot serve to cure the inherent The use of a bolt cutter to gain access to the
defect of the warrant. To uphold the validity of the premises was, under the circumstances, is
void warrant would be to disregard one of the reasonable, for after the members of the
most fundamental rights guaranteed in our searching team introduced themselves to the
Constitution (Ogayon v. People, G.R. No. security guards and showed them the search
188794, 2015). warrants, the guards refused to receive the
warrants and to open the premises, they claiming
PARTICULARITY OF PLACE TO BE that "they are not in control of the case” (Sony
SEARCHED AND THINGS TO BE SEIZED Computer Entertainment v. Bright Future
Technologies, G.R. No. 169156, 2007).
PLACE TO A description of the place to be
BE searched is sufficient if the officer Search of Premises to be Made in Presence of
SEARCHED with the warrant can, with Two Witnesses
reasonable effort, ascertain and The following should at least be present during
identify the place intended and the search:
distinguish it from other places in 1. Lawful occupant or any family member, or
the community. (People v. 2. In the absence of any family member, two
Posada, GR. No. 196052, 2015) witnesses of sufficient age and discretion
residing in the same locality
The failure to name the owner or
occupant of a property in the The absence of the lawful occupant does not taint
affidavit and search warrant does the regularity of the search provided that two
not invalidate the warrant. witnesses are present (Rule 126, Sec. 8; Lucito v.
PROPERTY Description must be so particular People, G.R. No. 192050, 2013).
TO BE that the officer charged with the
SEIZED execution of the warrant will be Even if the barangay officials were not present
left with no discretion respecting during the initial search, the search was
the property to be taken witnessed by accused-appellants themselves,
hence, the search was valid since the rule that
Test: whether the things "two witnesses of sufficient age and discretion
described are limited to those residing in the same locality" must be present
which bear direct relation to the applies only in the absence of either the lawful
offense for which the warrant is occupant of the premises or any member of his

ATENEO CENTRAL
family. (People v. Punzalan, G.R. No. 199087, 2. The integrity and evidentiary value of the
2015) items are properly preserved (R.A. No.
9165, Sec. 21; People v. Dela Cruz, G.R.
Time of serving a search warrant No. 205414, 2016).
GR: It must only be served during day time Procedure in R.A. No. 9165, Sec. 21
1. Inventory and Photograph by the
XPN: It may be served at night if it is positively Apprehending Team
asserted in the affidavit that the property is on the a. In the presence of the accused and
person or in the place ordered to be searched. counsel or his representative
The affidavit making such assertion must itself be b. In the presence of a representative from
sufficient as to the fact so asserted, for if the same the media and the Department of Justice
is based upon hearsay, the general rule shall (DOJ)
apply. c. In the presence of the an elected public
official, who shall sign the copies of the
Where a search is to be made during the night inventory and shall be given a copy
time, the authority for executing the same at that thereof.
time should appear in the directive on the face of d. If there was a SEARCH WARRANT – this
the warrant (Asian Surety v. Herrera, G.R. L- shall be done in the place where the
25232,1973). warrant was presented
e. If it is a WARRANTLESS SEIZURE – it
Duration of Validity of a Search Warrant must be done in:
It is valid for 10 days from the date of its issue. i. The nearest police station; or
After such time, it is void (Rule 126, Sec. 10). ii. The office of the apprehending
team, whichever is more practicable
GR: It can only be used once, thereafter it iii. Note: Failure to comply with these
becomes functus officio. requirements shall make the
seizure void, unless there is a
XPN: When the search conducted was justifiable reason and the integrity
interrupted, in which case the same may be and evidentiary value of the seized
continued under the same warrant the following materials are preserved.
day if not beyond the 10-day period.
2. Submission to PDEA Forensic Laboratory
Receipt for Property Seized within 24 hours after receipt of the subject
The searching officer must give a detailed receipt items
to the lawful occupant.
3. Within 24 hours, the PDEA Forensic
In the absence of such occupant, must, in the Laboratory shall issue a Certification as to the
presence of at least two witnesses of sufficient quality and quantity of the subject items.
age and discretion residing in the same locality, a. If the quantity of the items does not allow
leave the receipt in the premises (Rule 126, Sec. the completion of testing within the said
11). period a partial laboratory examination
report shall be provisionally issued, and
In Dangerous Drugs Act cases, the two-witness a final certification shall be issued within
rule shall not apply and shall instead follow the next 24 hours.
Section 21 of DDA. (Chain of Custody)
4. Filing of the criminal case in court
Non-Compliance with the Doctrine of Chain of
Custody 5. Within 72 hours from filing, the court shall
General Rule: Non-compliance is fatal; the conduct an ocular inspection
accused’s arrest becomes illegal and the items
seized are inadmissible in evidence. 6. Within 24 hours from ocular inspection, the
PDEA shall burn or destroy the seized items
Exception: Non-compliance is not fatal and will a. In the presence of the accuse or his
not make the accused’s arrest illegal nor render representative or his counsel
the items seized as inadmissible, provided: i. Note: If the accused refuses or fails
1. There is justifiable ground; and to appoint a representative after due

ATENEO CENTRAL
notice in writing within 72 hours 4. If the investigating fiscal filed the case despite
before the actual destruction of the such absence, the court may exercise its
evidence in question, the Secretary discretion to either refuse to issue a
of Justice shall appoint a member of commitment order (or warrant of arrest) or
the PAO office to represent the dismiss the case outright for lack of probable
former cause in accordance with Section 5, Rule
b. In the presence of a representative of 112, Rules of Court.
the media, the DOJ, and a civil society
group DISTINGUISH FROM WARRANT OF ARREST
c. In the presence of an elected official
d. Note: A representative sample must be SEARCH WARRANT WARRANT OF
retained ARREST
Concerned with the Concerned with the
7. Dangerous Drugs Board shall issue a sworn seizure of personal seizure of a person so
certification as to the fact or destruction or property subject of the he may be made to
burning which it must submit to the court offense, stolen or answer for the
together with the representative samples embezzled property, commission of an
fruits of the offense, or offense – involves
8. Promulgation and Judgment those intended to be taking of a person into
used to commit an custody
9. Trial Prosecutor must inform the Dangerous offense
Drugs Board of the judgment and request the Applicant must show Applicant must show:
court for leave to turn over the said that the items sought 2. Probable cause
representative sample/s to the PDEA for are in fact: that an offense has
proper disposition and destruction. 1. Seizable by virtue been committed
of being and
10. Within 24 hours, the seized items must be connected with 3. The person to be
properly disposed or destroyed. criminal activity arrested has
2. Will be found in the committed it
Note: The following has been adopted as a place to be
mandatory policy in drug-related cases (People v. searched
Romy Lim, G.R. No. 231989, Sept. 4, 2018): Personal examination Judge not required to
of the complaint and the make a personal
1. In the sworn statements/affidavits, the witness is required from examination but the
apprehending/seizing officers must state the judge judge must make an
their compliance with the requirements of independent
Section 21(1) of RA No. 9165, as amended evaluation of the
and its IRR. records forwarded to
him/her after
2. In case of non-observance of the provision, preliminary
the apprehending/ seizing officers must state investigation.
the justification or explanation therefor as well
as the steps they have taken in order to Note: In cases where
preserve the integrity and evidentiary value of no preliminary
the seized/ confiscated items. investigation is required
(offense is less than 4
3. If there is no justification or explanation years, 2 months and 1
expressly declared in the sworn statements day), the complaint or
or affidavits, the investigation fiscal must not information may be filed
immediately file the case before the court. directly with the
Instead, he or she must refer the case for MeTC/MTC without a
further preliminary investigation in order to preliminary
determine the (non) existence of probable investigation. The
cause. MeTC/MTC judge
should conduct a

ATENEO CENTRAL
personal examination a. Search incidental to lawful arrest

before issuing a warrant
of arrest. The arrest must precede the lawful search
Generally served at day May be made at any
time, unless there be a time of the day or night Nevertheless, a search substantially
direction in the warrant contemporaneous with an arrest is permissible if
that it may be served at the police have probable cause to make the arrest
any time of the day or at the outset of the search
night
The search is limited to the following:
Prescribes in 10 days Until served 1. For dangerous weapons
from date of issue 2. Anything which may have been used in the
Search warrant does Issuance of a warrant of commission of an offense
not require the arrest presupposes the 3. Anything which constitute proof in the
existence of a criminal existence of a pending commission of the crime
case, it may be issued criminal case that gave
prior to the filing of the rise to the warrant When a policeman has made a lawful custodial
case arrest of the occupant of an automobile, he may,
as a contemporaneous incident of that arrest,
PROBABLE CAUSE FOR ISSUANCE OF search the passenger compartment of that
SEARCH WARRANT automobile and that the police may also examine
the contents of any containers found within the
It refers to such facts and circumstances, which compartment (New York v. Belton, 453 US 454,
would lead a reasonably discreet and prudent 101 S.Ct 2860, 69 L.Ed.2d 768 (1981)).
man to believe that objects sought in connection
with an offense are in the place to be searched Booking Arrests
(MHP Garments v. CA, G.R. No. 86720, Sept. 2, It is the fact of the lawful arrest which establishes
1994) the authority to search, and we hold that, in the
case of a lawful custodial arrest, a full search of
The probable cause must be shown to be within the person is not only an exception to the warrant
the personal knowledge of the complainant or the requirement of the Fourth Amendment, but is also
witnesses and not based on mere hearsay. a 'reasonable' search under that Amendment
(Illinois v. Lafayette, 462 US 640 (1983)).
No exact test exists as to what acts constitute
probable cause but the requirement is less than The Fourth Amendment, made applicable to the
certainty of proof, but more than suspicion or States by the Fourteenth Amendment, prohibits
possibility. the police from making a warrantless and
nonconsensual entry into a suspect's home in
EXCEPTIONS TO SEARCH WARRANT order to make a routine felony arrest (Payton v.
REQUIREMENT New York, 445 US 573, 600 S.Ct. 1371, 63
L.Ed.2d 639 (1980)).
Search warrant is not required in the following
instances: Immediate possession and control rule
1. Search incidental to lawful arrest 1. Search may be done not only on the person
2. Seizure of evidence in “plain view” of the suspect but also within the permissible
3. Search of a moving vehicle area within the latter’s reach
4. Consented warrantless search 2. The area from which he might gain
5. Customs search possession of a weapon or destroy evidence
6. Stop and frisk (Terry searches) is covered by a search incident to a lawful
7. Checkpoints arrest (People v. Calantiao, G.R. No.
8. Exigent and emergency circumstances 203984, 2014).
9. Search of vessels and aircraft
10. Inspection of buildings and other premises Accused was caught in flagrante delicto. The
for the enforcement of fire, sanitary and arrest was valid, therefore, and the arresting
building regulations policemen thereby became cloaked with the
authority to validly search his person and effects

ATENEO CENTRAL
for weapons or any other article he might use in c. Search of moving vehicle
the commission of the crime or was the fruit of the
crime or might be used as evidence in the trial of Justified on the ground that it is not practicable to
the case, and to seize from him and the area secure a search warrant because the vehicle can
within his reach or under his control, like the jeep be quickly moved out of the locality or jurisdiction
he was driving, such weapon or other article in which the warrant must be sought (California v.
(People v. Belocura, G.R. No. 173474, 2012). Carney, 471 US 386, 105 S.Ct. 2006, 85 L.Ed.2d
408 (1985)).
b. Consented search
When a vehicle is flagged down and subjected to
The consent to a warrantless search must be an extensive search, such warrantless search
voluntary, that is, it must be unequivocal, specific, has been held to be valid as long as the officers
and intelligently given, uncontaminated by any conducting the search have reasonable or
duress or coercion. Consent to a search is not to probable cause to believe prior to the search that
be lightly inferred, but must be shown by clear they would find the instrumentality or evidence
and convincing evidence. It is the State which has pertaining to a crime, in the vehicle to be
the burden of proving, by clear and positive searched. (People v Tuazon, G.R. No. 175783,
testimony, that the necessary consent was 2007).
obtained and that it was freely and voluntary
given. (Valdez v. People, G.R. No. 170180, 2007) The scope of a warrantless search of an
automobile is not defined by the nature of the
A peaceful submission to a search and seizure is container in which the contraband is secreted.
not a consent or invitation thereto, but is merely Rather, it is defined by the object of the search
demonstration of regard for the supremacy of the and the places in which there is probable cause
law. (People v. Nuevas, G.R. No. 170233, 2007) to believe that it may be found. The police may
search an automobile and the containers within it
Factors to determine in voluntariness of where they have probable cause to believe
consent contraband or evidence is contained (Califiornia
v. Acevedo, 500 US 565 (1991)).
(1) The age of the defendant;
(2) Whether the defendant was in a public or a Search and Seizure based on Tipped
secluded location; Information
(3) Whether the defendant objected to the Exclusive reliance on an unverified, anonymous
search or passively looked on; tip cannot engender probable cause that permits
(4) The education and intelligence of the a warrantless search of a moving vehicle that
defendant; goes beyond a visual search (People v. Sapla,
(5) The presence of coercive police G.R. No. 244045, 2020).
procedures;
(6) The defendants belief that no incriminating d. Plain view situation
evidence would be found;
(7) The nature of the police questioning; Under the "plain view doctrine," unlawful objects
(8) The environment in which the questioning within the "plain view" of an officer who has the
took place; and right to be in the position to have that view are
(9) The possibly vulnerable subjective state of subject to seizure and may be presented in
the person consenting. evidence.
(Luz v. People, G.R. No. 197788, 2012)
Requisites
Note: A search conducted in reliance upon a 1. A prior valid intrusion.
warrant cannot later be justified on the basis of
consent if it turns out that (1) the warrant was 2. Evidence was inadvertently discovered by
invalid, (2) when it turns out that the State does the police.
not even attempt to rely upon the validity of the
warrant, or (3) fails to show that there was, in fact, The inadvertence requirement means that
any warrant at all (Bumper v. State of North the officer must not have known in advance
Carolina, 791 U.S. 543, 88 S.Ct. 1788, 20 L.Ed.2d of the location of the evidence and discovery
797 (1968)). is not anticipated

ATENEO CENTRAL
Inventory search may be "reasonable" under the

3. The evidence must be immediately Fourth Amendment even though it is not
apparent. conducted pursuant to a warrant based upon
probable cause (Colorado v. Bertine, 479 US
The incriminating nature of the evidence 367).
becomes apparent if the officer, at the
moment of seizure, had probable cause to f. Checkpoints; Body Checks in airport; Stop
connect it to a crime without the benefit of an & Frisk
unlawful search or seizure – it requires
merely that the seizure be presumptively Checkpoints
reasonable assuming that there is probable Requisites
cause to associate the property with criminal 1. Passengers not subjected to body search
activity; that a nexus exists between a 2. Limited to visual search
viewed object and criminal activity 3. Under exceptional circumstances, as where:
i. Survival of the government is on the
4. Plain view is justified seizure of evidence balance, or
without further search. ii. Lives and safety of the people are in
peril
4. Vehicle not searched
d. Regulatory Searches; Enforcement of
Custom Laws Searches conducted in checkpoints are valid for
as long as they are warranted by exigencies of
1. In the context of a regulatory system of public order and are conducted in a way least
business premises that is carefully intrusive to motorists. For as long as the vehicle
limited in time, place, and scope, the is neither searched nor its occupants subjected to
legality of the search depends not on a body search, and the inspection of a vehicle is
consent but on the authority of a valid limited to a visual search, said routine checks
statute. When an individual chooses to cannot be regarded as violative of an individual’s
engage in such a business, and accept a right against unreasonable searches (People v
license to do so, the licensee is made Vinecario, G.R. No. 141137, 2004).
aware of the possibility of such
inspections (U.S. v. Biswell, 406 US 311, Stop and Frisk
92 S.Ct. 1593, 32 L.Ed.2d 87 (1972)). Requisites
1. Police officer observes unusual conduct.
3 Criteria necessary to make reasonable 2. Reasonable suspicion that person is
warrantless inspections: engaged in some type of criminal activity.
Substantial government interest that informs 3. Identifies himself as a policeman upon
the regulatory scheme pursuant to which the approach.
inspection is made. 4. Makes reasonable inquiries.
Warrantless inspections must be necessary 5. There is reasonable fear for his own or
to further the regulatory scheme. other’s safety thus he is entitled to conduct
The statute’s inspection program, in terms of limited search of the outer clothing of such
the certainty and regularity of its application, persons in an attempt to discover weapons
must provide a constitutionally adequate that might be used for assault.
substitute for a warrant. (Terry v. Ohio, 392 US 1, 88 S.Ct. 1868, 20
It must advise the owner of the L.Ed.2d 889 (1968); Posadas v. Court of
commercial premises that the search is Appeals, GR No. 89139, 1990)
being made pursuant to the law and has
a properly defined scope. g. Doctrine of “Exigent Circumstances”
It must limit the discretion of the
inspecting officers. Definition
(New York v. Burger, 482 US 691(1987)) An unusual and time-sensitive circumstance that
justifies conduct that might not be permissible or
e. Inventory Searches lawful in other circumstances.

ATENEO CENTRAL
When policemen, firemen or other public officers capacity (Nasiad v. Court of Tax Appeals, G.R.
are confronted with evidence which would lead a No. L-29318, 1974).
prudent and reasonable official to see a need to
act to protect life or property, they are authorized
to act on that information, even if ultimately found
erroneous. Police should not be required to lay
siege to an apartment to await a search warrant
while a life may be at stake (Wayne v. United
States, 318 F.2d 205 (D.C. Cir., 1963)).
CONSEQUENCES / REMEDIES IN CASE OF

UNLAWFUL SEARCH AND SEIZURE
A motion to quash a search warrant and/or to

suppress evidence obtained thereby may be filed
in and acted upon only by the court where the
action has been instituted.
If no criminal action has been instituted, the

motion may be filed in and resolved by the court
that issued the search warrant.
However, if such court failed to resolve the

motion and a criminal case is subsequently filed
in another court, the motion shall be resolved by
the latter court.
(Rule 126, Sec. 14)
The complaint for warrantless search charges

no criminal offense. The conduct of a warrantless
search is not a criminal act for it is not penalized
under the Revised Penal Code (RPC) or any
other special law. The remedy of petitioner
against the warrantless search conducted on his
vehicle is civil, under Article 32, in relation to
Article 2219 (6) and (10) of the Civil Code
(Galvante v. Casimiro, GR No. 162808, 2008).
Standing to Challenge Unlawful Search and

Seizure
The legality of a seizure can be contested only by
the party whose rights have been impaired
thereby, and that the objection to an unlawful
search and seizure is purely personal and cannot
be availed of by third parties. Consequently,
petitioners herein may not validly object to the use
in evidence against them of the documents,
papers and things seized from the offices and
premises of the corporations adverted to above,
since the right to object to the admission of said
papers in evidence belongs exclusively to the
corporations, to whom the seized effects belong,
and may not be invoked by the corporate officers
in proceedings against them in their individual

ATENEO CENTRAL
O. PROVISIONAL REMEDIES IN P. THE RULE ON Cybercrime

CRIMINAL CASES (RULE 127) Warrants (A.M. NO. 17-11-03-SC)
Nature a. Scope and Applicability

The provisional remedies in civil actions, in so far
as they are applicable, may be availed of in This Rule sets forth the procedure for the
connection with the civil action deemed instituted application and grant of warrants and related
with the criminal action. orders involving the preservation, disclosure,
interception, search, seizure, and/or examination,
HENCE, If the civil action has been waived, as well as the custody, and destruction of
reserved, or instituted separately, a provisional computer data, as provided under RA 10175 or
remedy may not be availed of in the criminal the "Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012” (Sec.
action. Instead, the provisonal remedy should be 1.2).
applied for in the sep arate civil action instituted.
b. General Provisions
Note: The requisites and procedure for availing
Definition of Terms (Sec. 1.4):
of these provisional remedies shall be the same
a. Computer data – refers to any representation
as those for civil cases.
of facts, information, or concepts in a form
suitable for processing in a computer system,
Kinds of Provisional Remedies
including a program suitable to cause a
1. Attachment (Rule 57)
computer system to perform a function, and
2. Injunction (Rule 58)
includes electronic documents and/or
3. Receivership (Rule 59)
electronic data messages whether stored in
4. Replevin (Rule 60)
local computer systems or online;
5. Support pendent lite (Rule 61)
b. Content data – refers to the content of the
Attachment, When Proper
communication, the meaning or purported
1. Accused is about to abscond from the
meaning of the communication, or the
Philippines;
message or information being conveyed by
2. Criminal action is based on a claim of money
the communication, other than traffic data;
or property embezzled or fraudulently
misapplied or converted;
c. Forensic image – also known as a forensic
3. When the accused has concealed, removed,
copy, refers to an exact bit-by-bit copy of a
or disposed of his property, or is about to do
data carrier, including slack, unallocated
so; and
space, and unused space;
4. When the accused resides outside the
Philippines (Rule 127, Sec. 2).
d. Interception – refers to listening to, recording,
monitoring or surveillance of the content of
Note: Under R.A. 9208, in cases of trafficking in
communications, including procuring of the
persons, the court may motu propio issue
content data, either directly, through access
attachment and injunction.
and use of a computer system, or indirectly
through the use of electronic eavesdropping
Support pendente lite can be claimed for by the
or tapping devices, at the same time that the
victim of rape or seduction to support the
communication is occurring;
offspring.
e. Off-site search – refers to the process
whereby law enforcement authorities, by
virtue of a warrant to search, seize, and
examine, are allowed to bring the computer
device/s and/or parts of the computer system
outside the place to be searched in order to
conduct the forensic examination of the
computer data subject of the warrant;

ATENEO CENTRAL
f. On-site search – refers to the process Criminal actions for violation of RA10175 shall be
whereby law enforcement authorities, by filed before a cybercrime court of the province or
virtue of a warrant to search, seize, and city where –
examine, obtains the computer data subject (i) The offense or any of its elements is
thereof for forensic examination, without the committed
need of bringing the related computer (ii) Any part of the computer system used is
device/sand/or parts of the computer system situated
outside the place to be searched; (iii) Any of the damage caused to a natural or
juridical person took place (Section 2.1).
g. Service provider – refers to:
(a) any public or private entity that provides Note: All other crimes committed by, through, and
users of its service the ability to with the use of ICT shall be filed before the
communicate by means of a computer regular or other specialized regional trial courts.
system; and
(b) any other entity that processes or stores Where to file an application for a Warrant
computer data on behalf of such The same rules for venue applies. However, the
communication service or users of such cybercrime courts in Quezon City, the City of
service; Manila, Makati City, Pasig City, Cebu City, Iloilo
The term service provider as used in this Rule City, Davao City and Cagayan De Oro City shall
is understood to include any service provider have the special authority to act on applications
offering its services within the territory of the and issue warrants which shall be enforceable
Philippines, regardless of its principal place of nationwide and outside the Philippines. (Sec.
business; 2.2).
h. Subscriber's information – refers to any Who may apply

information contained in the form of computer Law enforcement authorities who must be
data or any other form that is held by a personally examined by the judge in the form of
service provider, relating to subscribers of its searching questions and answers, in writing and
services, other than traffic or content data, under oath; the applicant and the witnesses he
and by which any of the following can be may produce, on facts personally known to them
established: and attach to the record their sworn statements,
1. The type of communication service used, together with the judicial affidavits submitted.
the technical provisions taken therewith, (Sec. 2.4).
and the period of service;
2. The subscriber's identity, postal or Validity of Warrants: For the period determined
geographic address, telephone and other by the court, which shall not exceed 10 days from
access number, any assigned network its issuance, extendible up to 10 days upon the
address, billing and payment information filing of a motion upon the finding of justifiable
that are available on the basis of the reasons (Sec. 2.5).
service agreement or arrangement; or
3. Any other available information on the Extraterritorial Service of Warrants: For
site of the installation of communication persons or service providers situated outside of
equipment that is available on the basis the Philippines, service of warrants and/or other
of the service agreement or court processes shall be coursed through the
arrangement; and Department of Justice - Office of Cybercrime, in
line with all relevant international instruments
i. Traffic data – refers to any computer data and/or agreements on the matter. (Sec. 2.6)
other than the content of the communication,
including, but not limited to, the c. Cybercrime Warrants
communication's origin, destination, route,
time, date, size, duration, or type of Kinds of Cybercrime Warrants
underlying service. 1. Disclosure of Computer Data – Law
enforcement authorities, upon securing a
Venue: Warrant to Disclose Computer Data
(WDCD), shall issue an order requiring any

ATENEO CENTRAL
person or service provider to disclose or

submit subscriber’s information, traffic data
or relevant data in his/her or its possession
or control within seventy-two (72) hours from
receipt of the order in relation to a valid
complaint officially docketed and assigned
for investigation and the disclosure is
necessary and relevant for the purpose of
investigation.
2. Interception of Computer Data – Law
enforcement authorities, upon securing a
Warrant to Intercept Computer Data
(WICD), may be authorized to carry out any
or all of the following activities: (a) listening
to, (b) recording, (c) monitoring, or (d)
surveillance of the content of
communications, including procuring of the
content of computer data, either directly,
through access and use of a computer
system or indirectly, through the use of
electronic eavesdropping or tapping
devices, at the same time that the
communication is occurring.
3. Search, Seizure and Examination of
Computer Data – Law enforcement
authorities, upon securing a Warrant to
Search, Seize and Examine Computer
Data (WSSECD), may be authorized to
search the particular place for items to be
seized and/ or examined.
a. Warrant to Examine Computer Data
(WECD) – Upon acquiring possession
of a computer device or computer
system via a lawful warrantless arrest,
or by any other lawful method, law
enforcement authorities shall first apply
for a warrant before searching the said
computer device or computer system
for the purpose of obtaining for forensic
examination the computer data
contained therein.
———— end of topic ————

ATENEO CENTRAL

ATENEO CENTRAL
7. Hearsay Rule and exceptions to the

VIII. EVIDENCE
Hearsay Rule
TOPIC OUTLINE UNDER THE SYLLABUS: 8. Opinion Rule
9. Character evidence
A. GENERAL CONCEPTS
1. Proof vs. Evidence
G. BURDEN OF PROOF, BURDEN OF
2. Burden of Proof vs. Burden of
EVIDENCE, AND PRESUMPTIONS
Evidence
(RULE 131)
3. Equipoise Rule
H. PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE (RULE
B. ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE (RULE
132)
128)
1. Examination of witnesses
1. Requisites for admissibility of
a. Rights and obligations of a
evidence
witness
2. Relevance of evidence and collateral
b. Leading and misleading questions
matters
c. Impeachment of a witness
3. Multiple admissibility
2. Authentication and proof of
4. Conditional admissibility
documents
5. Curative admissibility
a. Meaning of authentication
6. Direct and circumstantial evidence
b. Classes of documents
7. Positive and negative evidence
c. Authentication of a private writing
8. Competent and credible evidence
d. Public documents as evidence;
proof of official record
C. JUDICIAL NOTICE AND JUDICIAL
3. Offer and Objection
ADMISSIONS (RULE 129)
a. When to make an offer
b. When to make an objection
D. OBJECT (REAL) EVIDENCE (RULE 130,
c. Tender of excluded evidence
A)
a. Requisites
I. JUDICIAL AFFIDAVIT RULE (A.M.
b. Exclusionary Rules
NO. 12-8-8-SC)
E. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE (RULE 130,
J. WEIGHT AND SUFFICIENCY OF
B)
EVIDENCE (RULE 133)
1. Meaning of documentary evidence
2. Original Document Rule
K. RULES ON ELECTRONIC
3. Secondary evidence; summaries
EVIDENCE (A.M. NO. 01-7-01-SC)
4. Parol Evidence Rule
F. TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE (RULE 130,

C)
1. Qualification of witnesses
2. Disqualifications of witnesses
a. Disqualification by reason of
marriage
b. Disqualification by reason of
privileged communications; rule
on third parties
c. Parental and filial privilege rule
d. Privilege relating to trade secrets
3. Testimonial privileges
4. Admissions and confessions
5. Previous conduct as evidence
6. Testimonial knowledge

ATENEO CENTRAL
A. GENERAL CONCEPTS BURDEN OF BURDEN OF

PROOF EVIDENCE
1. PROOF VS. EVIDENCE
Does not shift in the May shift from one
Proof vs. Evidence course of the trial. side to the other as
trial unfolds.
PROOF EVIDENCE
3. EQUIPOISE RULE
The result or the The medium or
probative effect of means by which a This rule refers to a situation where the evidence
evidence. When the fact is proved or of the parties is evenly balanced, or there is doubt
requisite quantum of disproved.
on which side the evidence preponderates or
evidence of a particular
fact has been duly weighs more heavily. In this case the decision
admitted and given should be against the party with the burden of
weight, the result is proof. Hence, where the burden of proof is on the
called the proof of such plaintiff and the evidence does not suggest that
fact. the scale of justice should weigh in his favor, the
court should render a verdict for the defendant
2. BURDEN OF PROOF VS. BURDEN (Rivera v. CA, G.R. No. 115625, 1998)
OF EVIDENCE
Also known as the Equiponderance Doctrine, it
Burden of Proof provides that where the evidence in a criminal
Burden of proof is the duty of a party to present case is evenly balanced, the constitutional
evidence on the facts in issue necessary to presumption of innocence tilts the scales in
establish his or her claim or defense by the favor of the accused (People v. Lagmay, G.R. No.
amount of evidence required by law. Burden of
proof never shifts. (Rule 131, Sec. 1) 125310, 1999)
Burden of Evidence B. ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE (RULE

Burden of evidence is the duty of a party to 128)
present evidence sufficient to establish or rebut a
fact in issue to establish a prima facie case. 1. REQUISITES FOR ADMISSIBILITY
Burden of evidence may shift from one party to OF EVIDENCE
the other in the course of the proceedings,
depending on the exigencies of the case. (Rule
REQUISITES (RULE 128)
131, Sec. 1)
The Evidence MUST Be:
BURDEN OF BURDEN OF 1. Relevant – Must have such a relation to
PROOF EVIDENCE the fact in issue as to induce belief in its
existence or non-existence.
Duty of a party to Duty of a party – 2. Competent – Not excluded by the
present evidence on - to present evidence Constitution, the law or the Rules on
the facts in issue sufficient to establish
Evidence
necessary to or rebut a fact in issue
establish his claim or to establish a prima
defense by the facie case These two elements correspond to the Two
amount of evidence - to go forward with the Axioms of Admissibility:
required by law evidence to overthrow 4. Axiom of Relevancy – That none but
any prima facie facts having rational probative value are
presumption against admissible.
him

ATENEO CENTRAL
5. Axiom of Competency – All facts having

Rule 133 and
rational probative value are admissible jurisprudence
unless some specific rule forbids their
admission. (Riano, p. 21, citing I The admissibility of the evidence depends on its
Wigmore, §§9-10, 289-295). relevance and competency, while the weight of
evidence pertains to its tendency to convince and
If in doubt as to admissibility of the testimony persuade. (Tating v. Marcella, G.R. No. 15508,
given in the court, the court should favor 2007)
admissibility. Otherwise, if the trial court judge
erred in ruling and excluded the same, the While evidence may be admissible, it may be
appeals court would be precluded from reversing entitled to little or no weight at all. Conversely,
the ruling and taking such testimony. evidence which may have evidentiary weight may
As a matter of general practice, it is deemed best be inadmissible because a special rule forbids its
to resolve doubts in favor of the admission of reception. (People v. Turco, G.R. No. 137757,
the contested evidence, without prejudice to 2000)
such action as the court may deem fit to take in Evidence is admissible when it is relevant to the
deciding the case on the merits. issue and is not excluded by the Constitution, the
law or the rules (Rule 128, Sec. 3) or is
This practice has added importance as regards
competent. Since admissibility of evidence is
the evidence for the prosecution in criminal
cases, for, once the accused has been acquitted, determined by its relevance and competence,
there is no means to secure a review by appeal, admissibility is, therefore, an affair of logic and
no matter how erroneous the action of the lower law. On the other hand, the weight to be given to
court may have been. (People v. Abalos, G.R. L- such evidence, once admitted, depends on
29039, 1969) judicial evaluation within the guidelines provided
in Rule 133 and the jurisprudence laid down by
Importance of Admissibility in relation to the Court. (People v. Turco, G.R. No. 137757,
Offer and Objection 2000)
Any objection to the admissibility of evidence
should be made at the time such evidence is While the terms and provisions of a void contract
offered or as soon thereafter as the objection to cannot be enforced since it is deemed inexistent,
its admissibility becomes apparent, otherwise the it does not preclude the admissibility of the
objection will be considered waived and such contract as evidence to prove matters that
evidence will form part of the records of the case occurred in the course of executing the contract,
as competent and admissible evidence. (Chua v. i.e., what each party has given in the execution of
CA, G.R. No. 109840, 1999) the contract.
Admissibility Distinguished from Weight of
Evidence There is no provision in the Rules of Evidence
which excludes the admissibility of a void
ADMISSIBILITY WEIGHT document. The Rules only require that the
evidence is relevant and not excluded by the
Rules for its admissibility. Hence, a void
Refers to the question Refers to the question document is admissible as evidence because the
of whether or not the of whether or not the purpose of introducing it as evidence is to
evidence is to be evidence proves a fact ascertain the truth respecting a matter of fact, not
considered at all in issue
to enforce the terms of the document itself.
Pertains to its Pertains to its tendency (Tomas P. Tan, Jr. v. Jose G. Hosana, G.R. No.
relevance and to convince and 190846, February 3, 2016)
competence persuade
2. RELEVANCE OF EVIDENCE AND
Depends on logic and Depends on the COLLATERAL MATTERS
the law guidelines provided in

ATENEO CENTRAL
RELEVANCY – Evidence is relevant if it has such When proffered evidence is admissible for two or
a relation to the fact in issue as to induce belief in more purposes. It may be admissible for one
its existence or non-existence (Rule 128, Sec. 4). purpose but inadmissible for another or vice
What constitutes RELEVANT Evidence: versa. It may also mean that it may be admissible
1. Material – evidence offered upon a against one party but not against another.
matter properly in issue. It is directed Example: Admissions are admissible against the
towards a fact within the range of declarant but not against his co-accused under
allowable controversy. the res inter alios acta rule.
2. Probative – tendency of evidence to The extrajudicial confession of the accused was
establish the proposition that it is offered not competent as against his co-accused for
to prove. being hearsay. However, the confession of the
accused may still be admissible as evidence of
Competency – Facts having rational probative his own guilt. (People v. Yatco, G.R. No. L-9181,
value are admissible unless some rule or law 1955)
forbids their admission. If a rule or law excludes
the evidence, it is incompetent. NOTE: An extrajudicial confession of an accused
may be competent as against his co-accused
COLLATERAL MATTERS – refers to matters under the rule on admission by co-conspirators,
other than the fact in issue. These are matters where the act or declaration of the conspirator is
“in furtherance of the conspiracy and during its
outside the controversy or are not directly
existence”. (Rule 130, Sec. 31)
connected with the principal matter or issue in
dispute, as indicated in the pleadings of the 4. CONDITIONAL ADMISSIBILITY
parties.
When a piece of evidence appears to be relevant
General Rule: Evidence on collateral matters is as it is connected with other pieces of evidence
not allowed. not yet offered or proved, such piece of evidence
may be conditionally admitted subject to the
Exception: Evidence on collateral matters may condition that its relevancy and competency be
be admitted if it tends in any reasonable degree established at a later time. If the condition is not
to establish the probability or improbability of the met, the evidence should be rejected.
fact in issue (Rule 128, Sec. 4).
Example: In an action by A against B for recovery
of a real property, plaintiff offered a document
For instance, when a witness testifies having
showing that the property belonged to X. On
seen the killing of the victim by the accused, his
objection of the defendant upon the ground of
testimony is direct evidence for it tends to prove
irrelevancy, plaintiff stated that he would prove
the fact in issue without the aid of inference or
later by other evidence that X, the original owner
presumption; but when he testifies to the conduct
sold the property to Y and the latter sold it to Z
of the accused prior to the commission of the
from whom plaintiff acquired title by purchase.
crime or immediately thereafter from which an
The Court may admit the evidence conditionally
inference may be made as to the probability or
until the other facts mentioned by plaintiff are
improbability of the fact in issue, his testimony is
proved. (Herrera, Remedial Law, Vol V, 29)
circumstantial evidence for it tends to prove
collateral matters which with the aid of inference
In a case of any intricacy it is impossible for a
may tend to establish that probability or
judge of first instance to know with any certainty
improbability of the fact in issue. (Herrera, whether testimony is relevant or not; and where
Remedial Law Vol V, 63 – 64) there is no indication of bad faith on the part of
the attorney offering the evidence, the court may
3. MULTIPLE ADMISSIBILITY as a rule safely accept the testimony upon the
statement of the attorney that the proof offered

ATENEO CENTRAL
will be connected later. (Prats Co. v. Phoenix caused by its

Insurance, G.R. No. L-28607, 1929) admission.
The purpose The proponent Principle of
5. CURATIVE ADMISSIBILITY for which the of the evidence curative
evidence is may ask the admissibility
When a party is allowed to present inadmissible offered must court that the should not be
evidence over the objection of the opposing party, be specified evidence be made to apply
such opposing party may be allowed to introduce because conditionally where the
otherwise inadmissible evidence to contradict the such admitted in the evidence was
evidence meantime, admitted
previously admitted inadmissible evidence and to
may be subject to the without
remove any prejudice caused by its admission. admissible condition that he objection
Example: At the trial, plaintiff testified that for several is going to because the
defendant is a man who never pays his debts as purposes establish its failure to
shown by his refusal to pay his debts to other under the relevancy and object
persons. This evidence is inadmissible but was doctrine of competency at a constitutes a
admitted by mistake. In such case, in fairness to multiple later time. waiver of the
the defendant, the Court may allow him to explain admissibility, inadmissibility
his dealings with such other persons. (Herrera, or may be of the
Remedial Law Vol V, 26) admissible evidence
for one
In our jurisdiction, the principle of curative
purpose but
admissibility should not be made to apply where not for
the evidence was admitted without objection another.
because the failure to object constitutes a waiver
of the inadmissibility of the evidence. 6. DIRECT AND CIRCUMSTANTIAL
Inadmissible evidence not objected to EVIDENCE
becomes admissible. (Riano, Evidence, 33)
MULTIPLE CONDITIONAL CURATIVE DIRECT EVIDENCE CIRCUMSTANTIAL

EVIDENCE
When It happens When a party
proffered frequently is allowed to That which proves the Evidence that indirectly
evidence is enough that the present fact in dispute without proves a fact in issue
admissible relevance of a inadmissible the aid of any through an inference
for two or piece of evidence over inference or which the fact finder
more evidence is not the objection presumption. draws from the evidence
purposes. It apparent at the of the established.
may be time it is offered, opposing
admissible but its relevance party, such Example: Witness Example: Witness
for one will readily be opposing saw the accused testified that he saw the
purpose but seen when party may be inflict a blow which accused with blood on
inadmissible connected to allowed to caused the victim’s his shirt and hands and
for another or other pieces of introduce death running from the scene
vice versa. evidence not yet otherwise of the crime where the
offered. inadmissible victim was lying dead.
It may also evidence to The next day, the
mean that it contradict the accused was nowhere to
may be previously be found in his place of
admissible admitted residence. Taken
against one inadmissible altogether, inference of
party but not evidence and guilt can be drawn that
against to remove any the accused killed the
another prejudice victim.

ATENEO CENTRAL
7. POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE birth records, but nowhere does it state that
EVIDENCE procurement of birth records in violation of said
rule would render said records inadmissible in
evidence. On the other hand, the Revised Rules
POSITIVE NEGATIVE of Evidence only provides for the exclusion of
EVIDENCE EVIDENCE evidence if it is obtained as a result of illegal
searches and seizures. It should be emphasized,
When the witness When the witness however, that said rule against unreasonable
affirms that a fact did states that an event did searches and seizures is meant only to protect a
occur. Such evidence not occur or that the person from interference by the government or
is entitled to greater state of facts alleged to the state.
weight since the exist does not actually
witness represents of exist. Since both Rule 24, Administrative Order No. 1,
his or her personal series of 1993 and the Revised Rules on
knowledge the Evidence do not provide for the exclusion from
presence or absence evidence of the birth certificates in question, said
of a fact. public documents are, therefore, admissible and
should be properly taken into consideration in the
Example: The Example: Testimony of
resolution of this administrative case against
testimony of W that he W that he could not
respondent. (Tolentino v. Mendoza, A.C. No.
saw P fire a gun at the have fired the gun
5151 (Resolution), 2004).
victim is positive because he was not
evidence armed during the
incident is negative
C. JUDICIAL NOTICE AND JUDICIAL
evidence ADMISSIONS (RULE 129)
8. COMPETENT AND CREDIBLE 1. WHAT NEED NOT BE PROVED

EVIDENCE
What Need Not be Proved
1. Facts which are presumed (Rule 131)
COMPETENT CREDIBLE EVIDENCE 2. Facts of judicial notice (Rule 129)
EVIDENCE 3. Facts which are judicially admitted (Rule
129)
Evidence that is not When evidence is not 4. Matters of law
excluded by the only admissible • Except: Foreign law which needs to
Constitution, evidence but is be proved in accordance with Sec.
statutes or Rules. believable and used by 24 of Rule 132.
the court in deciding a
case. In the case of presumptions, the proponent still
has to introduce evidence of the basis of the
“A witness who testifies
in a categorical, presumption, that is, he has to introduce evidence
straightforward, of the existence or non-existence of the facts from
spontaneous and frank which the court can draw the inference of the fact
manner and remains in issue.
consistent is a credible
witness” (Vda. De Arago In the case of judicial notice and judicial
v. Alvarez, March 25, admissions, as a rule, the proponent does not
1997, 337 PHIL 108- have to introduce any evidence. (Regalado, p.
121)
819)
NOTE: Rule 24, Administrative Order No. 1, 2. JUDICIAL NOTICE

series of 1993 only provides for sanctions against
persons violating the rule on confidentiality of

ATENEO CENTRAL
JUDICIAL NOTICE– cognizance of certain facts notoriety. Hence the courts do not require
which judges may properly take and act on proof of such facts. (Herrera, Remedial Law
without proof because they already know them. Vol V, 78-79)
Object of Judicial Notice 2. Their political history, forms of

Judicial notice is based on convenience and government and symbols of nationality
expediency. It would certainly be superfluous,
inconvenient, and expensive both to parties and 3. The law of nations
the court to require proof, in the ordinary way, of The law of nations, as distinguished from
facts which are already known to the courts. foreign law, is subject to mandatory judicial
notice as the Philippines adopts the generally
Direct Effect of Judicial Notice accepted principles of international law as
Judicial notice relieves the parties from the part of the law of the land.
necessity of introducing evidence to prove the
fact noticed. It makes evidence unnecessary. 4. The admiralty and maritime courts of the
world and their seals
Judge’s Personal Knowledge of the Facts
Judicial notice is not judicial knowledge. The 5. The political constitution and history of
mere personal knowledge of the judge is not the the Philippines
judicial knowledge of the court, and he is not
authorized to make his individual knowledge of a 6. The official acts of the legislative,
fact, not generally or professionally known, the executive and judicial departments of the
basis of his action. Judicial cognizance is taken National Government of the Philippines
only of those matters which are “commonly”
known. (Spouses Latip v. Chua, G.R. No. The lower courts should take judicial notice of
177809, 2009) the fact that Congress and the Supreme
Court have both officially recognized the
University of the Philippines’ indefeasible title
a. Mandatory to its landholdings. (Republic v. Rosario, G.R.
No. 186635, 2016)
MANDATORY- takes place at the court’s own
initiative and it needs no hearing. The Senate Report, an official act of the
legislative department, may be taken judicial
Section 1. Judicial notice, when mandatory. — A notice of. (CLT Realty Development Corp. v.
court shall take judicial notice, without the Hi-Grade Feeds Corporation, G.R. No.
introduction of evidence, of the existence and 160684, 2015)
territorial extent of states, their political history,
forms of government and symbols of nationality, 7. The laws of nature
the law of nations, the admiralty and maritime Example: The recurrence of seasons
courts of the world and their seals, the political
constitution and history of the Philippines, the 8. The measure of time
official acts of legislative, executive and judicial Example: There are 24 hours in a day
departments of the National Government of the
Philippines, the laws of nature, the measure of 9. The geographical divisions
time, and the geographical divisions. (Rule 129, Example: Certain cities are divided into lots,
Sec. 1) blocks and streets.
When Judicial Notice is Mandatory (Rule 129,

Sec. 1) b. Discretionary
1. Existence and territorial extent of states DISCRETIONARY - may be at the court’s own
The territorial extent of the nation and of the initiative or on request of a party.
several states and the division of states into
towns, countries and other political A hearing is necessary:
subdivisions are generally regulated by 1. During pre-trial and the trial, the court, motu
public laws and also matters of general proprio or upon motion, shall hear the parties

ATENEO CENTRAL
on the propriety of taking judicial notice of judicially noticed fact must be one NOT subject to
any matter. (Rule 129, Sec. 3, par. 1) a reasonable dispute. Thus, a court cannot take
judicial notice of a factual matter in controversy.
2. Before judgment or on appeal, the court,
motu proprio or upon motion, may take When Judicial Notice is Discretionary (Rule
judicial notice of any matter and shall hear 129, Sec. 2)
the parties thereon if such matter is decisive
of a material issue in the case. (Rule 129, a) The matter is one of public or common
Sec. 3, par. 2) knowledge
Purpose of hearing - not for the presentation of “Commonly Known”

evidence but to afford the parties reasonable Things of “common knowledge,” of which courts
opportunity to present information relevant to the take judicial notice, may be matters coming to the
propriety of taking such judicial notice or to the knowledge of men generally in the course of the
tenor of the matter to be noticed. ordinary experiences of life, or they may be
matters which are generally accepted by mankind
Test of Notoriety as true and are capable of ready and
The doctrine of judicial notice rests on the wisdom unquestioned demonstration. Thus, facts which
and discretion of the courts. The power to take are universally known, and which may be found
judicial notice is to be exercised by the courts with in encyclopedias, dictionaries or other
caution; care must be taken that the requisite publications, are judicially noticed, provided they
notoriety exists; and every reasonable doubt are of such universal notoriety and so generally
upon the subject should be promptly resolved in understood that they may be regarded as forming
the negative. part of the common knowledge of every person.
(Spouses Omar and Moshiera Latip v. Chua,
For a matter to be taken judicial notice of by the G.R. No. 177809, 2009)
courts of law, it must be a subject of common and
general knowledge. In other words, judicial notice Judicial notice is not the judge’s personal
of facts is measured by general knowledge of the knowledge
same facts. A fact is said to be generally The mere personal knowledge of the judge is not
recognized or known when its existence or the judicial knowledge of the court, and he is not
operation is accepted by the public without authorized to make his individual knowledge of a
qualification or contention. fact, not generally or professionally known, the
basis of his action. Judicial cognizance is taken
The test is whether the act involved is so only of those matters which are "commonly"
notoriously known as to make it proper to assume known. (Land Bank v. Wycoco, G.R. No. 140160,
its existence without proof. The fact that a belief 2004)
is not universal, however, is not controlling for it
is very seldom that any belief is accepted by
everyone. It is enough that the matters are b) The matter must be capable of
familiarly known to the majority of mankind or unquestionable demonstration
those persons with the particular matter in
question. (20 Am Jur 49-50; Martin, Rules of Matters which are capable of unquestionable
Court 37, Second Edition). demonstration pertain to fields of professional
and scientific knowledge. Thus, facts which are
Furthermore, a matter may be personally known universally known, and which may be found in
to the judge and yet not be a matter of judicial encyclopedias, dictionaries or other publications,
knowledge and vice versa, a matter may not be are judicially noticed, provided, they are of such
actually known to an individual judge, and universal notoriety and so generally understood
nevertheless be a proper subject of judicial that they may be regarded as forming part of the
cognizance. (Republic v. Court of Appeals, G.R. common knowledge of every person.
No. L-54886, 1981) (Expertravel & Tours, Inc. v. CA, G.R. No.
152392, 2005)
Judicial notice is limited to facts evidenced by
public records and facts of general notoriety. A

ATENEO CENTRAL
c) The matter is one that ought to be known

Kind of Any matter Matter is decisive of a
to judges because of their judicial
matter material issue in the
functions.
case
An example would be facts which are
ascertainable from the record of court Judicial Notice of Records of Other Cases
proceedings, e.g., as to when court notices were General Rule: Courts are not authorized to take
received by a party. judicial notice of the contents of the records of
other cases, even when such have been tried or
This only applies to the records and events in the are pending in the same court and with the same
same case pending before the court. Courts are judge.
not authorized to take judicial notice of the
contents of the records of other cases, even when Exceptions:
such cases have been tried or are pending in the They may, however, take judicial notice of a
same court and pending before the same judge. decision or the facts prevailing in another case
(People v. Hernandez, G.R. No. 108028, 1996) sitting in the same court if:
1. The parties present them in evidence,
The taking of judicial notice is a matter of absent any opposition from the other
expediency and convenience for it fulfills the party.
purpose that the evidence is intended to achieve, 2. The court, in its discretion, resolves to do
and in this sense, it is equivalent to proof. (Land so. (Land Bank of the Philippines v. Yatco
Bank of the Philippines v. Yatco Agricultural Agricultural Enterprises, G.R. No.
Enterprises, G.R. No. 172551, 2014.) 172251, 2014)
When Hearing is NECESSARY In the absence of objection, and as a matter of

convenience to all parties, a court may properly
Purpose - not for the presentation of evidence treat all or any part of the original record of a case
but to afford the parties reasonable opportunity to filed in its archives as read into the record of a
present information relevant to the propriety of case pending before it when:
taking such judicial notice or to the tenor of the 1. In the absence of objection;
matter to be noticed. 2. With the knowledge of the opposing party
OR at the request or with the consent of
Stages Where the Court May Take Judicial the parties; and
Notice of a Fact 3. The case is clearly referred to OR the
a) Pre-trial original or part of the records of the case
b) During trial are actually withdrawn from the archives
c) After trial and before judgment AND admitted as part of the record of the
d) Appeal case then pending.
These conditions must be established.
NOTE: The court may do this motu proprio or (Tabuena v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No.
upon motion of the parties. 85423, 1991)
Distinction Between Judicial Notice Taken Other Jurisprudence on Judicial Notice

During Trial and That Taken After Trial but Judicial notice signifies that there are certain
Before Judgment or on Appeal: “facta probanda” or propositions in a party’s case,
as to which he will not be required to offer
STAGE DURING AFTER THE TRIAL
evidence; these will be taken for true by the
TRIAL AND BEFORE
tribunal without the need of evidence. (People v.
JUDGMENT, OR ON
Rullepa, G.R. No. 131516, 2003)
APPEAL
This Court takes judicial notice that the validity of
How to The court, on its own initiative, OR on
the RTC Orders has been upheld in a separate
take the request of a party
judicial petition before this Court, under G.R. SP No.
notice? 171429 entitled Antonio Dela Cruz v. Regulus
Development, Inc. (Regulus Development, Inc. v.

ATENEO CENTRAL
Antonio Dela Cruz, G.R. No. 198172, January 25, presumed to know only domestic or forum law.
2016) Where a foreign law is not pleaded or, even if
pleaded, is not proved, the doctrine of
The mere personal knowledge of the judge is not processual presumption applies and the
the judicial knowledge of the court, and he is not presumption is that foreign law is the same as
authorized to make his individual knowledge of a ours. (ATCI Overseas Corp. v. Echin, G.R. No.
fact, not generally or professionally known, the 178551, 2010)
basis of his action.
Distinction between Mandatory Judicial
In this case, judicial notice of the age of the victim Notice and Discretionary Judicial Notice
is improper, despite the defense counsel’s
MANDATORY DISCRETIONARY
admission thereof acceding to the prosecution's
JUDICIAL NOTICE JUDICIAL NOTICE
motion. As required by Section 3 of Rule 129, as
to any other matters such as age, a hearing is
Court is compelled to Court not compelled
required before courts can take judicial notice of
take judicial notice
such fact. Generally, the age of the victim may be
proven by the birth or baptismal certificate of the By own initiative of the At the court’s own
victim, or in the absence thereof, upon showing court initiative or on request of
that said documents were lost or destroyed, by any of the parties
other documentary or oral evidence sufficient for
the purpose. (People v. Tundag, G.R. Nos. No hearing Hearing required
135695-96. October 12, 2000) • During pre- trial
and trial – on the
A management contract entered into by a GOCC propriety of
such as that involving the Philippine Ports taking judicial
Authority is not something the courts can take notice of any
judicial notice of, because it was entered into matter
while performing a proprietary function (Asian
• Before judgment
Terminals v. Malayan Insurance, G.R. No.
or on appeal – if
171406, 2011)
such matter is
decisive of a
Judicial notice may be taken of the fact that
material issue in
contractual transactions with government or any
the case.
of its instrumentalities are invariably in writing.
(Board of Liquidators v. Ricma, G.R. No. L-
24318, 1969) JUDICIAL NOTICE OF FOREIGN LAWS, LAW
OF NATIONS AND MUNICIPAL ORDINANCE
We point out in this respect that courts cannot
take judicial notice that vehicular accidents cause Rule on Foreign Laws
whiplash injuries. This proposition is not public
knowledge, or capable of unquestionable General Rule: Courts cannot take judicial notice
demonstration, or ought to be known to judges of foreign laws. Foreign laws have to be proved
because of their judicial functions. We have no like any other fact. (Del Socorro v. Van Wilsem,
expertise in the field of medicine. Justices and G.R. 193707, 2014)
judges are only tasked to apply and interpret the
law on the basis of the parties’ pieces of evidence Exceptions:
and their corresponding legal arguments. (Dela
Llana v. Biong, G.R. No. 182356, 2013) 1. In instances when the said laws are already
within the actual knowledge of the court, such as
In international law, the party who wants to have when they are well and generally known or they
a foreign law applied to a dispute or case has the have been actually ruled upon in other cases
burden of proving the foreign law. The foreign law before it and none of the parties concerned do not
is treated as a question of fact to be properly (sic) claim otherwise (PCIB v. Escolin, G.R. Nos.
pleaded and proved as the judge or labor arbiter L-27860 and L-27896, 1974)
cannot take judicial notice of a foreign law. He is

ATENEO CENTRAL
2. A published treatise, periodical or pamphlet on without further proof, the certificate or its
a subject of history, law, science, or art is equivalent being prima facie evidence of the due
admissible as tending to prove the truth of a execution and genuineness of the document
matter stated therein if the court takes judicial involved. The certificate shall not be required
notice, or a witness expert in the subject when a treaty or convention between a foreign
testifies, that the writer of the statement in the country and the Philippines has abolished the
treatise, periodical or pamphlet is recognized requirement, or has exempted the document itself
in his or her profession or calling as expert in from this formality. (Rule 132, Sec. 24, fourth par.)
the subject. (Rule 130, Sec. 48) For example,
courts can cite the treatise of Wigmore on NOTE: This does NOT PRECLUDE presentation
Evidence without need of testimony from a of other competent evidence such as testimony of
witness. witnesses skilled in that foreign law (CIR v.
Fisher, G.R. No. L-11622, 1961).
Stipulation by the parties – If the parties in a given
case do not have any controversy or are more or A published treatise, periodical or pamphlet on a
less in agreement, the Court may take it for subject of history, law, science, or art is
granted for the purposes of the particular case admissible as tending to prove the truth of a
before it that the said laws are as such virtual matter stated therein if the court takes judicial
agreement indicates, without the need of notice, or a witness expert in the subject testifies,
requiring the presentation of what otherwise that the writer of the statement in the treatise,
would be the competent evidence on the point. periodical or pamphlet is recognized in his or her
(PCIB v. Escolin, G.R. Nos. L-27860 and L- profession or calling as expert in the subject. (See
27896, 1974) Rule 130, Sec. 48)
How foreign laws are proved Doctrine of Processual Presumption– If the

A written foreign law maybe proved by: foreign law is not properly proved, the foreign law
• An official publication; or is presumed to be the same as the law in the
• A copy attested by the officer having Philippines (Northwest Orient Airlines v. Court of
legal custody of the record, or by his Appeals, G.R. No. 112573, 1995)
deputy.
Rule on Court Records
If the office in which the record is kept is in a
foreign country which is a contracting party to a a) Court’s Own Acts and Records
treaty or convention to which the Philippines is A court shall take judicial notice, without the
also a party, or considered a public document introduction of evidence, of the official acts of
under such treaty or convention pursuant to the legislative, executive and judicial
paragraph (c) of Sec. 19 hereof: the certificate or departments of the National Government of
its equivalent shall be in the form prescribed by the Philippines. (Rule 129, Section 1)
such treaty or convention subject to reciprocity
granted to public documents originating from the A court will take judicial notice of its own acts
Philippines. (Rule 132, Sec. 24, second par.) and records in the same case, of facts
established in prior proceedings in the same
For documents originating from a foreign country case, of the authenticity of its own records of
which is not a contracting party to a treaty or another case between the same parties, of
convention referred to in the next preceding the files of related cases in the same court,
sentence: the certificate may be made by a and of public records on file in the same
secretary of the embassy or legation, consul- court. (Degayo v. Magbanua-Dinglasan, G.R.
general, consul, vice-consul or consular agent or No. 173148, April 6, 2015)
by any officer in the foreign service of the
Philippines stationed in the foreign country in b) Records of Other Cases
which the record is kept, and authenticated by the
seal of his or her office. (Rule 132, Sec. 24, third General Rule - Courts are not authorized to
par.) take judicial notice of the contents of the
records of other cases, even when such have
A document that is accompanied by a certificate been tried or are pending in the same court
or its equivalent may be presented in evidence and with the same judge.

ATENEO CENTRAL
Exceptions: Examples:
a. A party clearly makes reference to • Verbal waiver of proof made in open
the records of another case and court
there is no objection by the other • Admission made by a party in the
party; course of his testimony or deposition
b. Judicial notice is at the request or
with the consent of the parties; or b) May be written
c. The original or part of the records of
the case are actually withdrawn from Examples:
the archives and are admitted as part • Pleading
of the record of the case pending. • Bill of Particulars
(Tabuena v. CA, G.R. No. 85423, • Stipulation of Facts (People v.
1991) Hernandez, G.R. No. 108028, 1996)
• Sworn Response to a Request for
Judicial Notice of Other Matters Admission
1. A court can take judicial notice of banking • Affidavit used in the case
practices. (Solidbank Corp. v. Mindanao
• Depositions
Ferroalloy Corp., G.R. No. 153535, July
• Written Interrogatories
28, 2005)
2. A court cannot take judicial notice of an • Motions (Republic v. de Guzman,
administrative regulation or of a statute G.R. No. 175021, 2011)
that is not yet effective. (State
Prosecutors v. Muro, A.M. No. RTJ-92- Judicial admissions may be made by either a
876, September 19, 1994) party or his counsel.
3. A court cannot take judicial notice of the
age of the victim without hearing and When a defendant is declared in default for
presentation of proof. (People v. Liban, having failed to answer the complaint, such a
G.R. Nos. 136247 & 138330, November failure does not amount to an admission of the
22, 2000) facts alleged in the complaint.
The Court has taken judicial notice of the To be considered a judicial admission, the
practices of banks and other financial institutions. admission must be made in the course of the
Precisely, it has noted that it is their uniform proceedings in the same case; otherwise, it is an
practice, before approving a loan, to investigate, extrajudicial admission.
examine and assess would-be borrowers' credit
standing or real estate offered as security for the Extra-Judicial Admissions– are those made out
loan applied for. (Solidbank Corp. v. Mindanao of court, or in a judicial proceeding other than the
Ferroalloy Corp., G.R. No. 153535, July 28, 2005) one under consideration.
3. JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS Distinction between Judicial Admission and

Extra-Judicial Admission
Admissions, oral or written, made by a party in the JUDICIAL EXTRA-JUDICIAL
course of the proceedings in the same case do ADMISSIONS ADMISSION
not require proof. (Rule 129, Sec. 4) (Rule 129, Sec. 4) (Rule 130, Sec. 27)
Elements of Judicial Admissions Admission must be Out-of-court-

• Must be made by a party to a case; and made in the course of declarations, or
• Must be made in the course of the the proceedings in the declarations in a
proceedings in the same case. same case judicial proceeding
• No particular form is required; thus, a other than the one
judicial admission may be oral or written. under consideration
Forms of Judicial Admission

a) May be oral

ATENEO CENTRAL
b. How judicial admissions may be

JUDICIAL EXTRA-JUDICIAL
contradicted
ADMISSIONS ADMISSION
(Rule 129, Sec. 4) (Rule 130, Sec. 27)
General Rule: A judicial admission is conclusive
Conclusive upon the Rebuttable upon the party making it and does not require
admitter subject to some proof
exceptions
Exceptions: Judicial admissions may be
Does not require proof Requires proof that the contradicted only by showing:
admission was made 1. That the admission was made through
palpable mistake; or
2. That the imputed admission was not, in
a. Effect of judicial admissions fact, made. (Rule 129, Sec. 4)
An admission, oral or written, made by the party This may be invoked when the statement of a
in the course of the proceedings in the same party is taken out of context or his statement was
case, does not require proof. (Rule 129, Sec. 4) made not in the sense it is made to appear by the
other party. (Phil. Health Care Providers v.
Considering that an admission does not require Estrada, G.R. No. 171052, 2008)
proof, the admission of the petitioners would
actually be sufficient to prove the partition even When Pleading Superseded or Amended
without the documents presented by the Pleadings that are superseded or amended
respondent spouses. If anything, the additional “disappear” from the record and any admissions
evidence they presented only served to made in such pleadings cease to be judicial
corroborate the petitioners' admission. admissions. In order that any statement
(Dimaguila v. Sps. Monteiro, G.R. No. 201011, contained therein may be considered as
2014) evidence, a party should formally offer the
superseded or amended pleading in evidence.
Judicial admissions are legally binding on the (Ching v. CA, G.R. No. 110844, 2000)
party making the admissions. (Sps. Noynay v.
Citihomes Builder & Development, Inc., G.R. No. Other Judicial Admissions
204160, 2014)
Hypothetical Admissions
A judicial admission binds the person who makes Not all allegations or admissions in civil cases
the same, and absent any showing that this was may be considered as judicial admissions
made through palpable mistake, no amount of because the Rules on Civil Procedure allow a
rationalization can offset it. (CIR v. MERALCO, litigant to make hypothetical admissions in his
G.R. No. 181459, 2014) pleading.
Though the title to the property was initially filed Examples:

in court through the Joint Answer, however, 1. When a defendant sets up affirmative
petitioner Republic failed to refute the same, and defenses in his or her answer (Rule 6,
even marked it during pre-trial. Hence, petitioner Sec. 5[b])
Republic already admitted its genuineness and 2. When a defendant files a motion to
due execution. Such judicial admission was dismiss based on lack of jurisdiction over
correctly considered by public respondent the subject matter of the claim.
Sandiganbayan in resolving the demurrer to
evidence. When the due execution and c. Pre-trial admissions
genuineness of an instrument are deemed
admitted because of the adverse party's failure to Admissions in the Pre-Trial of Civil Cases
make a specific verified denial thereof, the In civil cases, pre-trial is mandatory. Therefore,
instrument need not be presented formally in admissions in pre-trial, as well as those made
evidence for it may be considered an admitted during the depositions, or in sworn responses to
fact. (Republic v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. interrogatories or requests for admission are all
189590, 2018) deemed judicial admissions because they are

ATENEO CENTRAL
made in the course of the proceedings in the 3. When the interests of justice so require:
same case.
Relief is accorded the client who suffered by
Admissions in the Pre-Trial of Criminal Cases reason of the lawyer’s gross or palpable
All agreements or admissions made or entered mistake or negligence. (Villanueva v. People,
during the pre-trial conference shall be reduced in G.R. No. 188630, 2011)
writing and signed by the accused and counsel,
otherwise, they cannot be used against the Adoptive Admissions
accused. (Rule 118, Sec. 2) An adoptive admission is a party’s reaction to a
statement or action by another person when it is
Distinction: Admissions in Pre-Trial reasonable to treat the party’s reaction as an
admission of something stated or implied by the
PRE-TRIAL IN CIVIL PRE-TRIAL IN
other person. The basis for admissibility of
CASES CRIMINAL CASES
admissions made vicariously is that arising from
the ratification or adoption by the party of the
Admissions in pre-trial, The admission must
statements which the other person had made. In
as well as those made be:
the Angara Diary, Estrada’s options started to
during the depositions, or (1) reduced to writing
dwindle when the armed forces withdrew its
in sworn responses to and
support. Thus, Executive Secretary Angara had
interrogatories or (2) signed by both the
to ask Senate President Pimentel to advise
requests for admission accused and counsel
petitioner to consider the option of dignified exit
are deemed judicial
or resignation. Estrada did not object to the
admissions since they
suggested option but simply said he could never
are made in the course of
leave the country. His silence on this and other
the proceedings in the
related suggestions can be taken as an
same case
admission by him. (Estrada v. Desierto, G.R. Nos.
146710-15, 2001)
Admissions in Amended Pleadings
When a pleading is amended, the amended D. OBJECT (REAL) EVIDENCE (RULE
pleading supersedes the pleading that it amends 130, A)
and the admissions in the superseded pleading
may be received in evidence against the pleader Objects as evidence are those addressed to the
only as extrajudicial admissions which must be senses of the court. When an object is relevant to
proven. the fact in issue, it may be exhibited to, examined
or viewed by the court. (Rule 130, Sec. 1)
Having been amended, the original complaint
loses its character as a judicial admission which It refers to the real thing itself and it consists of
would require no proof. It is now an extrajudicial tangible things, not merely perceptions of the
admission which requires proof (Torres v. Court witness and a recollection of those perceptions.
of Appeals, G.R. No. L-37420, July 31, 1984)
Object evidence is not visual alone. It covers the
Admissions by Counsel entire range of human senses: hearing, taste,
General Rule: Admissions by a counsel are smell, and touch. (Riano, p. 116)
generally conclusive upon his client.
Limitations on the Use of Object Evidence
Negligence of counsel binds the client (Sarraga v. The court MAY refuse the introduction of object
Banco Filipino Savings & Mortgage Bank, G.R. evidence and rely on testimonial evidence alone
No. 143783). if:
Exception: In cases where: a) The exhibition of such object is contrary
1. Reckless or gross negligence of counsel to morals or decency; (Regalado, p. 716
deprives the client of due process of law;
citing 5 Moran, op. cit., p. 72)
2. When its application will result in outright
deprivation of the client’s liberty or b) To require its being viewed in court or in
property; or an ocular inspection would result in

ATENEO CENTRAL
delays, inconvenience, unnecessary Nothing in the Rules on Evidence deals with the
expenses out of proportion to the authentication of object evidence during trial.
evidentiary value of such object; Apart from the requirement of formal offer,
however, such practice is part and parcel of
(Regalado, p. 716 citing People v.
having an object evidence admitted, because
Moreno 83 Phil. 286) authenticity is an inherent attribute of relevance –
c) The testimonial or documentary evidence a component of admissibility. (People v. Olarte,
already presented clearly portrays the G.R. No. 233209, March 11, 2019)
object in question as to render a view
thereof unnecessary (Regalado, p. 716, The obvious reason is that an object offered in
citing Sec. 7, Rule 133). court as evidence but without having any part in
the fact or event sought to be proven by the
Even if the object is repulsive or indecent, if a proponent is irrelevant because it has no “relation
view of the same is necessary in the interest of to the fact in issue as to induce a belief in its
justice, such evidence may still be exhibited but existence or nonexistence.” (People v. Olarte,
the court may exclude the public from such view. G.R. No. 233209, March 11, 2019)
1. REQUISITES OF ADMISSIBILITY NOTE: Under the Judicial Affidavit Rule, object

evidence now requires authentication or
Requisites testimonial sponsorship before it may be admitted
a) The object must be relevant to the fact in or considered by the court. (People v. Olarte,
G.R. No. 233209, March 11, 2019; please see
issue;
Secs. 2 and 8(c) of the Judicial Affidavit Rule)
b) The object must be authenticated before
it is admitted;
c) The authentication must be made by a Standard of Proper Foundation
competent witness; If the proffered evidence is unique, readily
d) The object must be formally offered in identifiable, and relatively resistant to change,
evidence. (Riano) that foundation need only consist of testimony by
a witness with knowledge that the evidence is
what the proponent claims.
Reason for Admissibility
The evidence of one’s own senses furnishes the
Otherwise, the chain of custody rule has to be
strongest probability of the existence of any
resorted to and complied with by the proponent to
sensible fact.
satisfy the evidentiary requirement of relevancy.
(People v. Olarte, G.R. No. 233209, March 11,
AUTHENTICATION
2019)
To be admissible in evidence, the object sought
to be offered must be shown to have been the
Object Evidence and the Right Against Self-
very thing that is the subject matter of the lawsuit
incrimination
or the very one involved to prove an issue in the
The right against self-incrimination cannot be
case.
invoked against object evidence. Thus, an
accused may be compelled to submit himself to
Authentication by a competent witness is
bodily inspection and whatever object is retrieved
essential to the admissibility of the object
on his person would be admissible even though it
evidence. After authentication, the object needs
would incriminate such accused. Also, on cross-
to be formally offered in evidence.
examination, an accused may be compelled to
write so his handwriting may be used as object
The authentication of the object by a competent
evidence to compare with the one in question.
witness is to comply with the element of
competence as an essential ingredient of
The right against self-incrimination guaranteed
admissibility. (Riano, p. 119)
under the fundamental law had no application in
this case because no testimonial compulsion was
Testimonial evidence provides the foundation for
involved. (People v. Malimit, G.R. No. 109775,
all types of evidence. (Riano, p. 118)
1996)

ATENEO CENTRAL
Admissibility of Tape Recordings place to be searched and the persons or

Before a tape recording is admissible in evidence things to be seized.
and given probative value, the following ● Section 3 (1) The privacy of
requisites must first be established: communication and correspondence
1. A showing that the recording device was shall be inviolable except upon lawful
capable of taking testimony; order of the court, or when public safety
2. A showing that the operator of the device or order requires otherwise, as
was competent; prescribed by law. (2) Any evidence
3. Establishment of the authenticity and obtained in violation of this or the
correctness of the recording; preceding section shall be inadmissible
4. A showing that changes, additions, or for any purpose in any proceeding.
deletions have not been made; ● Section 12 (1) Any person under
5. A showing of the manner of the investigation for the commission of an
preservation of the recording; offense shall have the right to be
6. Identification of the speakers; and informed of his right to remain silent and
7. A showing that the testimony elicited was to have competent and independent
voluntarily made without any kind of counsel preferably of his own choice. If
inducement. (Torralba v. People, G.R. the person cannot afford the services of
No. 153699, 2005) counsel, he must be provided with one.
These rights cannot be waived except in
writing and in the presence of counsel.
NOTE: Recordings may also fall under the (2) No torture, force, violence, threat,
category of documentary evidence for intimidation, or any other means which
documentary evidence now covers “recordings” vitiate the free will shall be used against
or any material which contains “sounds” as long him. Secret detention places, solitary,
as offered as proof of their contents. incommunicado, or other similar forms of
detention are prohibited. (3) Any
2. EXCLUSIONARY RULE
confession or admission obtained in
EXCLUSIONS UNDER THE CONSTITUTION, violation of this or Section 17 hereof shall
LAWS, AND RULES OF COURT be inadmissible in evidence against him.
(4) The law shall provide for penal and
civil sanctions for violations of this
Rules of Exclusion – governed by the Rules or section as well as compensation to and
by Statute and Constitution. rehabilitation of victims of torture or
similar practices, and their families.
Some Exclusionary Rules: ● Section 17 No person shall be
compelled to be a witness against
1. 1987 Constitution, Article III himself.
● Section 2 The right of the people to be

2. Section 201, Tax Reform Act of 1997 – A
secure in their persons, houses, papers, document required by law to be stamped
and effects against unreasonable shall not be admitted or used in evidence in
searches and seizures of whatever any court until the requisite stamps are
nature and for any purpose shall be affixed thereto.
inviolable, and no search warrant or
warrant of arrest shall issue except upon 3. R.A. 1405, Law on Secrecy of Bank
probable cause to be determined
Deposits, Sec. 2 – All deposits of whatever
personally by the judge after examination nature are absolutely confidential and may
under oath or affirmation of the not be examined, inquired, looked into except
complainant and the witnesses he may upon written permission of the depositor, or
produce, and particularly describing the

ATENEO CENTRAL
in cases of impeachment, or upon order of a subject to the following principles and

competent court in cases of bribery or guidelines:
dereliction of duty of public officials or in
cases where the money is the subject matter (b) Information obtained through mediation
of litigation. shall be privileged and confidential.
4. R.A. 4200, Wire-Tapping Act, Sec. 4 – Any (c) A party, a mediator, or a nonparty
communication or spoken word or the participant may refuse to disclose and
existence, contents, substance or any may prevent any other person from
information contained therein secured in disclosing a mediation communication.
violation of the Act shall not be admissible in
evidence in any judicial, quasi-judicial, (d) Confidential Information shall not be
legislative or administrative hearing or subject to discovery and shall be
investigation. inadmissible in any adversarial
proceeding, whether judicial or quasi-
5. R.A. 11479, Anti-Terrorism Act, Sec. 23 – judicial, However, evidence or
Any listened to, intercepted, and recorded information that is otherwise admissible
communications, messages, conversations, or subject to discovery does not become
discussions, or spoken or written words, or inadmissible or protected from discovery
any part or parts thereof, or any information solely by reason of its use in a mediation.
or fact contained therein, including their
existence, content, substance, purport, (e) In such an adversarial proceeding, the
effect, or meaning, which have been secured following persons involved or previously
in violation of the pertinent provisions of this involved in a mediation may not be
Act, shall be inadmissible and cannot be used compelled to disclose confidential
as evidence against anybody in any judicial, information obtained during mediation:
quasi-judicial, legislative, or administrative (1) the parties to the dispute; (2) the
investigation, inquiry, proceeding, or hearing. mediator or mediators; (3) the counsel for
the parties; (4) the nonparty participants;
6. R.A. 9745, Anti-Torture Act, Sec. 8 – Any (5) any persons hired or engaged in
confession, admission or statement obtained connection with the mediation as
as a result of torture shall be inadmissible in secretary, stenographer, clerk or
evidence in any proceedings, except if the assistant; and (6) any other person who
same is used as evidence against a person obtains or possesses confidential
or persons accused of committing torture. information by reason of his/her
profession.
7. A.M. 02-6-02-SC, Confidentiality Rule in
Adoption Cases, Sec. 18 – All hearings in (f) The protections of this Act shall continue
adoption cases, after compliance with the to apply even if a mediator is found to
jurisdictional requirements shall be have failed to act impartially.
confidential and shall not be open to the
public. All records, books and papers relating (g) A mediator may not be called to testify to
to the adoption cases in the files of the court, provide information gathered in
the Department, or any other agency or mediation. A mediator who is wrongfully
institution participating in the adoption subpoenaed shall be reimbursed the full
proceedings shall be kept strictly confidential. cost of his attorney’s fees and related
expenses.
8. R.A. 9285, Alternative Dispute Resolution
Act of 2004, Sec. 9 – Information obtained 9. R.A. 8505, Rape Victim Assistance and
through mediation proceedings shall be Protection Act of 1998 – In prosecutions for
rape, evidence of complainant’s past sexual

ATENEO CENTRAL
conduct, opinion thereof or of his/her clear showing that both parties to the telephone
reputation shall not be admitted unless, and conversations allowed the recording of the same,
only to the extent that the court finds, that the inadmissibility of the subject tapes is
such evidence is material and relevant to the mandatory under Rep. Act No. 4200. (Salcedo-
case. (Section 6) Ortañez v. CA, G.R. No. 110662, 1994)
Personal information controllers may invoke the
The Exclusionary Rule – Commonly used for principle of privileged communication over
evidence excluded by the Constitution. It is privileged information that they lawfully control or
applied to cases where the challenged evidence process. Subject to existing laws and regulations,
is quite clearly direct or primary in its relationship any evidence gathered on privileged information
to the prior arrest or search. (Herrera, Remedial is inadmissible. (Sec. 15, Data Privacy Act of
Law Vol V, 37) 2012)
What the Constitution prohibits is the use of Written offer of evidence which includes the
physical or moral compulsion to extort statement of the accused containing his
communication from the accused, but not an handwritten admission obtained during company
inclusion of his body in evidence, when it may be investigation proceedings are not covered by the
material. This was a mechanical act the accused exclusionary rule. The admission of the accused
was made to undergo which was not meant to is not excluded due to the violation of his rights
unearth undisclosed facts but to ascertain during custodial investigation as the admission
physical attributes determinable by simple was not obtained during custodial investigation.
The investigation by the company is not
observation. (Gutang v. People, G.R. No.
considered as custodial investigation because at
135406, 2000)
that time, the employee is not a “suspect” under
The extrajudicial confession to the “bantay investigation by the police.
bayan” which was taken without counsel is
inadmissible in evidence as the “bantay bayan” An employee during a company investigation is
may be deemed to be a law enforcement officer still required to be accorded due process. The
within the contemplation of Article III, Section 12 law requires that in the making of statements
of the Constitution. Any inquiry the “bantay under the investigation for his defense, the
bayan” makes has the color of a state-related employee must be given the opportunity to solicit
function and objective insofar as the entitlement the assistance of counsel, colleagues and
friends. The employee may also refuse to submit
of a suspect to his constitutional rights provided
any statement at the investigation. But if he
for under Article III, Section 12 of the Constitution,
rejects to do so, his statements are still not
otherwise known as the Miranda Rights, is obtained in violation of his “Miranda Rights” (to
concerned. (People v. Lauga, G.R. No. 186228, silence, to counsel and to be informed) and
2010) therefore, his statements are not excluded
The phrase “device or arrangement” in section 1 evidence in a subsequent criminal action brought
of RA No. 4200, although not exclusive to that against him. (People v. Ayson, G.R. No. 85215
enumerated therein, should be construed to July 7, 1989, where employee’s statements
comprehend instruments of the same or similar during company investigation were ruled to be not
nature, that is, instruments the use of which would excluded under the Constitution)
be tantamount to tapping the main line of a
telephone. It refers to instruments whose 3. CATEGORIES OF OBJECT EVIDENCE
installation or presence cannot be presumed by
the party or parties being overheard. (Ganaan v. a) UNIQUE OBJECTS – Objects that have
IAC, G.R. No. L-69809, 1986) readily identifiable marks, e.g., a gun with
Rep. Act No. 4200 entitled “An Act to Prohibit and a serial number.
Penalize Wire Tapping and Other Related
Violations of the Privacy of Communication, and b) OBJECTS MADE UNIQUE – Objects
for other purposes” expressly makes such tape with no unique characteristics but are
recordings inadmissible in evidence. Absent a made readily identifiable, e.g., a typical

ATENEO CENTRAL
kitchen knife with identifying marks person who made it or by other competent
placed on it by the witness. witnesses, after which the court can admit it
subject to impeachment as to its accuracy. (Sison
v. People, G.R. Nos. 108280-83, 1995)
c) NON-UNIQUE OBJECTS – Objects with
no identifying marks and cannot be The rule is well-settled that a photograph may be
marked, e.g. narcotic substances. A put in evidence if relevant to the issue and if
proponent offering evidence which falls verified. It does not have to be verified by the
under the third category must establish a taker. Its verification depends on the competency
chain of custody. (Riano p. 125 citing 29A of the verifying witness and as to that the trial
Am Jur §§ 945-947) judge must in the first instance decide, subject to
reversal for substantial error. (Adamczuk v.
Holloway, 13 A.2d 2, 1940)
PHYSICAL EVIDENCE
A map or photograph must first, to be admissible,
A mute but eloquent manifestation of truth and it
be made a part of some qualified person's
ranks high in the hierarchy of trustworthy
testimony. Someone must stand forth as its
evidence – where the physical evidence on
testimonial sponsor; in other words, it must be
record runs counter to the testimonial evidence,
verified. (Adamczuk v. Holloway, 13 A.2d 2,
the physical evidence should prevail. (BPI v.
1940)
Reyes, G.R. No. 157177, 2008)
For a photograph to be admissible in evidence,
DEMONSTRATIVE EVIDENCE
the authentication required by courts is that some
Demonstrative evidence is not the actual thing
witness (not necessarily the photographer) be
but represents or demonstrates the real thing. It
able to give some indication as to when, where,
is not strictly “real” evidence because it is not the
and under what circumstances the photograph
very thing involved in the case. Diagrams, maps,
was taken, and that the photograph accurately
models and the like fall under this category
portray the subject or subjects illustrated. (State
(Riano, p. 120)
v. Tatum, 360 P.2d 754, 1961)
The admissibility of this type of evidence largely
NOTE: Photographs may also fall under the
depends on the laying of the proper foundation for
category of documentary evidence for
evidence: Does the evidence sufficiently and
documentary evidence now covers “photographs”
accurately represent the object it seeks to
as long as offered as proof of their contents.
demonstrate and represent? If it does, the
evidence would be admissible (Riano, p. 121)
VIEW OF AN OBJECT OR SCENE
When an object is relevant to the fact in issue, it
Under the Rules on Electronic Evidence,
may be exhibited to, examined or viewed by the
photographic evidence of events, acts, or
court. (Rule 130, Sec. 1)
transactions shall be admissible in evidence,
provided that it shall be presented, displayed, and
A place or scene can fall under the classification
shown to the court, and it shall be identified,
of object evidence. The court has to go to the
explained or authenticated by either: the person
object if the object cannot be produced in court
who made the recording; or some other person
due to its immovability or the difficulty or
competent to testify on the accuracy thereof (Rule
inconvenience in removing it and producing it in
11, Sec. 1, Rules on Electronic Evidence)
court.
Some courts insist on requiring the photographer
Granted Only If View Is Of Substantial Aid
to testify but this view has been eroded by the
As a general rule, a view or inspection should be
tendency of modern courts to admit as a witness
granted only where it is reasonably certain that it
one who has familiarity with the scene portrayed.
will be of substantial aid to the court in reaching a
(Sison v. People, G.R. No. 108280-83, 1995)
correct verdict.
The correctness of a photograph as a faithful
When Changes to the Object or Scene Have
representation of the object portrayed can be
Taken Place
proved prima facie, either by the testimony of the

ATENEO CENTRAL
A court may refuse to make the inspection where The chain of custody rule is but a variation of the
changes have taken place since the time to which principle that real evidence must be authenticated
the action relates or where it is not shown that the prior to its admission into evidence. To establish
conditions are the same. a chain of custody sufficient to make evidence
admissible, the proponent needs only to prove
However, view may be granted If: a rational basis from which to conclude that the
1. The change is not material. evidence is what the party claims it to be. In other
2. The character and extent of the change words, in a criminal case, the prosecution must
are properly brought out in evidence. offer sufficient evidence from which the trier of
fact could reasonably believe that an item still is
Notice to parties what the government claims it to be. Specifically
The inspection or view is part of the trial and thus in the prosecution of illegal drugs, the well-
should be made in the presence of the parties or established federal evidentiary rule in the United
at least with previous notice to them of the time States is that when the evidence is not readily
and place set for the view. (Phil. Movie Pictures identifiable and is susceptible to alteration by
Workers Ass’n v. Premiere Productions, G.R. No. tampering or contamination, courts require a
L-5621, 1953) more stringent foundation entailing a chain of
custody of the item with sufficient
completeness to render it improbable that the
4. CHAIN OF CUSTODY IN RELATION TO original item has either been exchanged with
SEC. 21 OF THE COMPREHENSIVE another or been contaminated or tampered with.
DANGEROUS DRUGS ACT OF 2002
It must be alleged and proved that the presence
Persons who actually handled or had custody of of the three witnesses to the physical inventory
the object must show through testimony that and photograph of the illegal drug seized was not
there is no possibility that the evidence was obtained due to reason/s such as:
tampered with and that the integrity of the
evidence was preserved throughout the course of 1) Their attendance was impossible
gathering, collecting and storing the evidence. because the place of arrest was a remote
This is done to ensure that the evidence area;
presented in court is the same evidence seized 2) Their safety during the inventory and
from the defendant or recovered from the crime photograph of the seized drugs was
scene or elsewhere. threatened by an immediate retaliatory
action of the accused or any person/s
Non-Compliance with the Doctrine of Chain of acting for and in his/her behalf;
Custody 3) The elected official themselves were
involved in the punishable acts sought to
General Rule: Non-compliance renders the be apprehended;
seizure and custody over the illegal drugs as void 4) Earnest efforts to secure the presence of
and invalid. (People v. Del Rosario y Niebres, a DOJ or media representative and an
G.R. No. 235658, June 22, 2020) elected public official within the period
required under Article 125 of the Revised
Exception: Non-compliance is not fatal and will Penal Code prove futile through no fault
not make the accused’s arrest illegal nor render of the arresting officers, who face the
the items seized as inadmissible, provided: threat of being charged with arbitrary
1. There is justifiable ground; and detention; or
2. The integrity and evidentiary value of the 5) Time constraints and urgency of the anti-
drug operations, which often rely on tips
items are properly preserved (R.A. No.
of confidential assets, prevented the law
9165, Sec. 21; People v. Dela Cruz, G.R. enforcers from obtaining the presence of
No. 205414, 2016; People v. Del Rosario the required witnesses even before the
y Niebres, G.R. No. 235658, June 22, offenders could escape. (People v. Romy
2020) Lim, G.R. No. 231989, 2018)
Case Law: Chain of Custody

ATENEO CENTRAL
Each custodian of the evidence is not required to drug substances in order to determine its
testify as long as sufficient testimony is given by admissibility.
some of the persons who have come into contact
with the evidence to negate the possibility of However, such rule has not yet been extended to
tampering. (People v. Climaco, G.R. No. 199403, other substances or objects for it is only a
June 13, 2012) variation of the principle that real evidence must
be authenticated prior to its admission into
As a method of authenticating evidence, the evidence.
chain of custody rule requires that the admission
of an exhibit be preceded by evidence sufficient At this point, it becomes necessary to point out
to support a finding that the matter in question is that the degree of fungibility of amorphous
what the proponent claims to be. objects without an inherent unique characteristic
capable of scientific determination, i.e., DNA
While testimony about a perfect chain is not testing, is higher than stably structured objects or
always the standard because it is almost always those which retain their form because the
impossible to obtain, an unbroken chain of likelihood of tracing the former objects' source is
custody becomes indispensable and essential more difficult, if not impossible.
when the item of real evidence is not distinctive
and is not readily identifiable, or when its Narcotic substances, for example, are relatively
condition at the time of testing or trial is critical, or easy to source because they are readily available
when a witness has failed to observe its in small quantities thereby allowing the buyer to
uniqueness. obtain them at lower cost or minimal effort. It
makes these substances highly susceptible to
While the SC in certain cases has tempered the being used by corrupt law enforcers to plant
mandate of strict compliance with the requisite evidence on the person of a hapless and innocent
under Sec. 21 of RA 9165, such liberality, as victim for the purpose of extortion. Such is the
stated in the IRR can be applied only when the reason why narcotic substances should undergo
evidentiary value and integrity of the illegal drug the tedious process of being authenticated in
are properly preserved. In the case at bar, the accordance with the chain of custody rule.
evidentiary value and integrity of the alleged
illegal drug had been thoroughly compromised. In this regard, the Court emphasizes that if the
Serious uncertainty is generated on the identity of proffered evidence is unique, readily identifiable,
the item in view of the broken linkages in the and relatively resistant to change, that foundation
chain of custody. In this light, the presumption of need only consist of testimony by a witness with
regularity in the performance of official duty knowledge that the evidence is what the
accorded the buy-bust team by the courts below proponent claims; otherwise, the chain of custody
cannot arise. (People of the Philippines v. rule has to be resorted to and complied with by
Fernando Ranche Havana a.k.a. Fernando the proponent to satisfy the evidentiary
Ranche Abana, G.R. No. 198450, 2016) requirement of relevancy.
Generally, the authenticity of the seized items will In the case at hand, the chain of custody rule
be put into doubt, and the state cannot establish does not apply to an undetonated grenade (an
the corpus delicti when the prohibited substance object made unique), for it is not amorphous and
subject of the prosecution is missing or when its form is relatively resistant to change. A witness
there are substantial gaps in the chain of custody. of the prosecution need only identify the hand
(People v. Relato, G.R. No. 173794, 2012) grenade, a structured object, based on personal
knowledge that the same contraband or article is
However, a conviction based on the seized items what it purports to be — that it came from the
may still be possible as long as there is justifiable person of accused-appellant. (People vs. Olarte,
ground for noncompliance and there is G.R. No. 233209, 2019)
preservation of the integrity and the evidentiary
value of the seized items. (Cerbo v. People, G.R. 5. DNA EVIDENCE
No. 176077, 2011)
a. Meaning of DNA
Historically, the Court has applied the "chain of
custody" rule as a mode of authenticating illegal

ATENEO CENTRAL
Deoxyribonucleic Acid, or DNA, is a molecule that is relevant to the proper resolution of the
encodes the genetic information in all living case; and
organisms. A person’s DNA is the same in each e) The existence of other factors, if any,
cell and it does not change throughout a person’s which the court may consider as
lifetime; the DNA in a person’s blood is the same potentially affecting the accuracy of
as the DNA found in his saliva, sweat, bone, the integrity of the DNA testing. (Rule on
root and shaft of hair, earwax, mucus, urine, skin DNA Evidence, Sec. 4)
tissue, and vaginal and rectal cells. Most f) There must be a prima facie showing of
importantly, because of polymorphisms in human relationship or paternity (Lucas v. Lucas,
genetic structure, no two individuals have the G.R. No. 190710, June 6, 2011)
same DNA, with the notable exception of identical
twins. (Agustin vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. NOTE: The Court may motu proprio order a DNA
162571, 2005) testing (Rule on DNA Evidence, Sec. 4)
“Biological sample” means any organic material If the court finds that the requirements in Sec. 4
originating from a person’s body, even if found in have been complied with, the court shall:
inanimate objects, that is susceptible to DNA a) Order, where appropriate, that biological
testing. This includes blood, saliva and other samples be taken from any person or
body fluids, tissues, hairs and bones (Rule on crime scene evidence;
DNA Evidence, Sec. 3a) b) Impose reasonable conditions on DNA
testing designed to protect the integrity of
“DNA evidence” constitutes the totality of the the biological sample, the testing process
DNA profiles, results and other genetic and the reliability of the test results,
information directly generated from DNA testing including the condition that the DNA test
of biological samples (Rule on DNA Evidence, results shall be simultaneously disclosed
Sec. 3c) to the parties involved in the case; and
c) If the biological sample taken is of such
b. Application for DNA testing amount that prevents the conduct of
order confirmatory testing by the other or the
adverse party and where additional
A person who has a legal interest in the litigation biological samples of the same kind can
may file an application for DNA testing order no longer be obtained, issue an order
before the appropriate court, at any time (Rule on requiring all parties to the case or
DNA Evidence, Sec. 4) proceedings to witness the DNA testing
to be conducted (Rule on DNA Evidence,
The order for a DNA testing shall not, however, Sec. 5)
be issued as a matter of course and from the
mere fact that the person requesting for the A court order is not always required before
testing has a legal interest in the litigation. For the undertaking a DNA testing. The last paragraph of
order to be issued, there must be a showing of Sec. 4 of the Rule on DNA Evidence allows a
the following: testing without a prior court order if done before a
suit or proceeding is commenced at the request
a) A biological sample exists that is relevant of any party, including law enforcement agencies.
to the case; This also means that a litigation need not exist
b) The biological sample: (i) was not prior to DNA testing. Thus, a court order shall be
previously subjected to the type of DNA required only if there is a pending litigation, but
testing now requested; or (ii) was not before the litigation (Riano, p.145)
previously subjected to DNA testing, but
the results may require confirmation for A court order granting a DNA testing is not
good reasons; appealable and is immediately executory as Sec.
c) The DNA testing uses a scientifically 5 of the Rule on DNA Evidence provides. The
valid technique; remedy would be to file a petition for certiorari
d) The DNA testing has the scientific under Rule 65, but this shall not, in any way, stay
potential to produce new information that the implementation thereof, unless a higher court
issues an injunctive order (Riano, p.145)

ATENEO CENTRAL
c. Post-conviction DNA testing; In assessing the probative value of DNA

remedy evidence, courts should consider the following
data:
A person convicted under a final and executory
1. How the samples were collected,
judgement may still avail himself of DNA testing.
2. How they were handled,
The test after his conviction is termed “post-
3. Possibility of contamination,
conviction” DNA testing. Significantly, Sec. 6 of 4. Procedure followed in analyzing the
the Rule allows post-conviction DNA testing. It samples,
may be available to (a) the prosecution, or (b) the 5. Whether proper standards of procedure
person convicted by a final and executory were followed in conducting the tests,
judgement, provided that the following 6. Qualification of the analyst who
requirements are met: conducted the test. (People v. Vallejo
G.R. No. 144656, 2002)
1. A biological sample exists
By the terms of Sec. 5 of the Rule on DNA
2. Such sample is relevant to the case; and
Evidence, the grant of a DNA testing application
3. The testing would probably result in the
shall not be construed as an automatic admission
reversal or modification of the judgement into evidence of any component of the DNA
of conviction (Riano, page 147 citing Sec. evidence that may be obtained as a result of the
6 of the Rule on DNA Evidence) testing. This necessarily means that the court will
still have to evaluate the probative value of the
NOTE: There is no requirement of a prior court proposed evidence before its admission.
order to avail oneself of this.
The determination of the probative value of the
If the results of the DNA testing are favorable to DNA evidence rests upon sound judicial
assessment taking into consideration the
the convict, he may file a petition for a writ of
following matters:
habeas corpus with the court of origin. The court
1. The chain of custody, including how the
shall then conduct a hearing and in case the court biological samples were collected, how
finds, after due hearing, that the petition is they were handled, and the possibility of
meritorious, it shall reverse or modify the contamination of the samples;
judgement of conviction and order the release of 2. The DNA testing methodology, including
the convict, unless his detention is justified for a the procedure followed in analyzing the
lawful cause. samples, the advantages and
disadvantages of the procedure, and
The petition shall be filed with the court of origin compliance with the scientifically valid
standards in conducting the tests;
as a rule. However, the rule also allows the
3. The forensic DNA laboratory, including
petition to be filed either with the Court of Appeals
accreditation by any reputable
or with the Supreme Court, or with any member standards-setting institution and the
of said courts. A hearing may be conducted by qualification of the analyst who
the latter courts or by any member thereof or conducted the tests. If the laboratory is
instead of conducting a hearing, may instead not accredited, the relevant experience of
remand the petition to the court of origin and issue the laboratory in forensic casework and
the appropriate orders. (Riano, page 147 citing credibility shall be properly established;
Sec. 10, Rule on DNA evidence) and
4. The reliability of the testing result, as
hereinafter provided. (Riano, page 146
NOTE: The petition for a writ of habeas corpus
citing Sec. 7, Rule on DNA Evidence)
may also be filed by the prosecution.
e. Rules on evaluation of reliability
d. Assessment of probative value
of the DNA testing methodology
of DNA evidence and
admissibility

ATENEO CENTRAL
In evaluating whether the DNA testing

methodology is reliable, the court shall consider a. Meaning of the rule
the following:
The original document rule applies only when the
1. The falsifiability of the principles or subject of the inquiry is the contents of a
methods used, that is, whether the theory document. The rule requires that the original of
or technique can be and has been tested; the writing must be produced. It is also known as
2. The subjection to peer review and the “original document rule” or the “primary
publication of the principles or methods; evidence” rule. (National Power Corporation v.
3. The general acceptance of the principles Codilla, G.R. No. 170491, 2007)
or methods by the relevant scientific
community; The original document rule as a rule of exclusion,
4. The existence and maintenance of that is, secondary evidence cannot be introduced
standards and controls to ensure the as the original writing itself must be produced in
correctness of data generated; court, subject to exceptions.
5. The existence of an appropriate
reference population database; and NOTE: The rule now also applies if the contents
6. The general degree of confidence of a writing, recording, photograph or other record
attributed to mathematical calculations is the subject of inquiry.
used in comparing DNA profiles and the
significance and limitation of statistical Purpose: The prevention of fraud, because it is
calculations used in comparing DNA easy for a person to fabricate the alleged contents
profiles. (Sec. 8, Rule on DNA evidence) of a document. Also, the rule ensures accuracy.
A person, even if acting in good faith, may most
E. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE likely not be able to recall all the details of a
document, especially a lengthy one.
1. DEFINITION
The original document rule cannot be invoked
Documents as evidence consists of writings, unless the contents of the writing are the subject
recordings, photographs, or any material of the judicial inquiry.
containing letters, words, sounds, numbers,
figures, symbols or their equivalent, or other If the subject of the inquiry is not the contents of
modes of written expression offered as proof of a document, then the Original Document Rule
their contents. Photographs include still does not apply.
pictures, drawings, stored images, x-ray films,
motion pictures or videos. (Rule 130, Sec. 2) For example, accused is charged with perjury for
lying under oath in a Senate hearing. The
Documentary evidence is evidence supplied by prosecution need not present the transcript of the
written instruments, or derived from conventional testimony given at the hearing. The prosecution
symbols, such as letters, by which ideas are can present a witness who heard what Accused
represented on material substances. testified to in the Senate because, here, the
subject of the inquiry is not the contents of the
For written material to qualify as documentary transcript but whether accused uttered a
evidence, the purpose of offering the written falsehood while under oath at the hearing. In this
material should be to prove its contents. instance, while the transcript is the “better” or
“best” evidence in the sense that it is presumably
If offered for some other purpose (e.g., existence more reliable, the testimony of the witness who
or condition), the writings would not be deemed heard the utterance of the Accused at the Senate
as documentary evidence but as object evidence. is nonetheless admissible even without
(The Original Document Rule and the Parol accounting for the loss of the transcript. The
Evidence Rule do not apply to object evidence, original document rule applies only when the
but only to documentary evidence.) contents of the documents are the subject of
inquiry. Since in this case the prosecution
2. ORIGINAL DOCUMENT RULE presented the marked money solely for the
[formerly the Best Evidence Rule] purpose of establishing its existence and not its

ATENEO CENTRAL
contents, other substitutionary evidence like a

Xerox copy is admissible without the need of b. When not applicable
accounting for the original. (People v. Tandoy,
G.R. No. 80505, 1990) General Rule: The original document must be
produced.
Only a photocopy of the Employee Clearance
was presented in evidence. The Court held that Exceptions:
the photocopy is admissible as evidence since an 1. When the original is lost or destroyed, or
exception to the original document rule is when cannot be produced in court, without bad faith
the document sought to be presented is in the on the part of the offeror;
possession of the person against whom it is to be 2. When the original is in the custody or under
offered and such party fails to present it even after the control of the party against whom the
reasonable notice. (Pacasum v. People, G.R. No. evidence is offered, and the latter fails to
180314, 2009) produce it after reasonable notice, or the
original cannot be obtained by local judicial
The general rules regarding the admissibility of processes or procedures;
evidence are applicable to cases of libel or 3. When the original consists of numerous
slander. When such libel or slander was accounts or other documents which cannot be
committed through a published article, copies of examined in court without great loss of time
such article constitute the best evidence. (Fiscal and the fact sought to be established from
of Pampanga v. Reyes, G.R. No. L-35366, 1931) them is only the general result of the whole;
and
The original document rule may not be used to 4. When the original is a public record in the
prohibit a litigant from proving the existence of a custody of a public officer or is recorded in a
disputed deed of sale through secondary public office.
evidence. The Rule applies only when the terms 5. When the original is not closely-related to a
of a writing are in issue. When the evidence controlling issue (Rule 130, Sec. 3)
sought to be introduced concerns external facts,
such as the existence, execution, or delivery of Application of Rule 130, Sec. 3
the writing, without reference to its terms, the Best One of the exceptions to this rule is provided in
Evidence Rule cannot be invoked. (Heirs of the Rule 130, Sec. 3(e), which provides that
Margarita Prodon v. Heirs of Maximo Alvarez, documents other than the original may be
G.R. No. 170604, 2013) admissible “when the original is not closely-
related to a controlling issue”. Hence, the Court
The Republic seeks exception to the application held that the Best Evidence Rule does not apply
of the original document rule by arguing that said to proof of facts collateral to the issues or when a
documents were presented to prove their party uses a document to prove the existence of
existence and execution, and not their contents. an independent fact.
The Court is hard-pressed to give credence to
such argument in the light of the purposes for In this case, the issue was not the content of the
which these excluded documents were sought to documents. Rather, the documents were to prove
be admitted, i.e., to show that Rodolfo M. Cuenca that falsification was a necessary means and an
secured loans from government financial essential part of the criminal scheme in
institutions without sufficient collateral; to show committing estafa. Thus, the Sandiganbayan did
that Rodolfo M. Cuenca obtained favorable not commit reversible error in giving due course
rescue arrangement at the behest of Ferdinand to the prosecution's exhibits. (Conchita Dela Cruz
E. Marcos; to show that the sequestered v. People, GR No. 236807, Jan. 12, 2021)
properties are part of the ill-gotten wealth; to show
that respondents are dummies of Ferdinand E. c. Meaning of original document
Marcos; and to show the complicity between and duplicate
respondents in amassing ill-gotten wealth.
Clearly, no amount of legal hermeneutics could
Original of a document — an “original” of a
betray that what should be proven are the
document is the document itself or any
contents, and not the mere existence, of the
counterpart intended to have the same effect by
documents themselves. (Republic v. Cuenca,
a person executing or issuing it
G.R. No. 198393, 2018)

ATENEO CENTRAL
The original document rule was applied in a

Original of a photograph — includes the copyright infringement case, where plaintiff
negative or any print therefrom possessed no originals of any work he contended
was copied; accordingly, before subsequent
Original of data stored in a computer or reconstructions were admissible, plaintiff had to
similar device — any printout or other output establish that the originals were lost or destroyed
readable by sight or other means, shown to reflect through no fault of his own. Thus, copyrighted
the data accurately drawings offered as evidence are considered as
documentary evidence and when subject of
Duplicate — is a counterpart produced: inquiry is the content of the creation the original
by the same impression as the original, or must be presented. (Seiler v. Lucas Film, Ltd.,
from the same matrix, or 797 F.2d 1504, 1986)
by means of photography, including
enlargements and miniatures, or The evidence offered by NAPOCOR were
by mechanical or electronic re-recording or photocopies. The Court held that the photocopies
by chemical reproduction, or were not equivalent to the original documents
by other equivalent techniques which accurately based on the Rules on Electronic Evidence. The
reproduce the original information contained in the photocopies
submitted by NAPOCOR will reveal that not all of
A duplicate is admissible to the same extent as the contents therein, such as the signatures of the
an original unless: persons who purportedly signed the documents,
A genuine question is raised as to the authenticity may be recorded or produced electronically.
of the original or (National Power Corporation v. Codilla, G.R. No.
In the circumstances, it is unjust or inequitable to 170491, 2007)
admit the duplicate in lieu of the original (Rule
130, Sec. 4) The Court held that the print-out and/or
photocopies of facsimile transmissions are not
NOTE: electronic evidence. Thus, it is consequential that
A carbon copy of a letter is a duplicate original the same may not be considered as the functional
and admissible. Photographic copies of writings equivalent of their original as decreed in the law.
or photocopies are not duplicate originals as they (MCC Industrial Sales Corporation v. Ssangyong
are produced at a later time. They are considered Corporation, G.R. No. 170633, 2007)
secondary evidence.
Considering that the annotation of the disputed
When carbon sheets are inserted between two or Deed of Sale in a tax declaration is not sufficient
more sheets of writing paper so that the writing of proof of the transfer of property and inasmuch as
a contract upon the outside sheet, including the the subject of inquiry is the Deed of Sale, it was
signature of the party to be charged thereby, incumbent on the petitioners to adduce in
produces facsimile upon the sheets beneath, evidence the original. In the absence of the said
such signature being thus reproduced by the document, the exhortations of petitioners
same stroke of the pen which made the surface regarding the existence of said deed of sale must
or exposed impression, all of the sheets so written fail. (Ebreo v. Ebreo, G.R. No. 160065, 2006)
on are regarded as duplicate originals and either
of them may be introduced in evidence as such In criminal proceedings for the falsification of a
without accounting for the nonproduction of the document, it is indispensable that the judges and
others. (People v. Tan, G.R. No. L-14257, 1959) courts have before them the document alleged to
have been simulated, counterfeited, or falsified, in
There can be no proof of "substantial similarity" order that they may find, pursuant to the evidence
and thus of copyright infringement unless Seiler's produced in the cause, whether or not the crime
works are juxtaposed with Lucas' and their of falsification was committed, and also, at the
contents compared. Since the contents are same time, to enable them to determine the
material and must be proved, Seiler must either degree of each of defendant’s liability in the
produce the original or show that it is unavailable falsification under prosecution. Through the lack
through no fault of his own. of the original document containing the
memorandum alleged to be false, it is improper to

ATENEO CENTRAL
hold, with only a copy of the said original in view, b. Proof of cause of its unavailability without bad
that the crime prosecuted was committed; and faith on the offeror’s part (Rule 130, Sec. 5)
although, judging from the testimony of the
witnesses who were examined in the two Laying the basis
consolidated causes, there is reason to entertain Secondary evidence may be admitted only by
much doubt as to the defendants’ innocence, yet, laying the basis for its production. Laying such
withal, this case does not furnish decisive and basis requires compliance with the following:
conclusive proof of their respective guilt as co- . The offeror must prove the existence and
principals of the crime charged. (U.S. v. Gregorio, execution of the original document;
G.R. No. L-5791, 1910) a. The offeror must show the cause of its
unavailability such as the loss or destruction
The best evidence of the cost of the said of the original;
equipment disputed in the case would have been b. The offeror must show that the unavailability
the sales invoices instead of the oral testimony of was not due to his bad faith. (Republic v.
Teves. He did not produce the sales invoices. Mupas, G.R. No. 191892, 2015)
c. It must be shown that a diligent and bona fide
Even if the presentation of the records but unsuccessful search has been made for
themselves as exhibits should have been the document in the proper place or places.
dispensed with, yet the complainant to show good (Lee v. People, G.R. No. 159288, 2004)
faith and fair dealing, could have brought the
records in court (manifests, bills of lading, The proponent must prove by a fair
receipts for freights, if any, etc.) and enabled the preponderance of evidence as to raise a
court and the union’s counsel and its expert reasonable inference of the loss or destruction of
accountant to verify the accuracy of Jayme’s the original copy. (Lee v. People, G.R. No.
summaries. (Compania Maritima v. Allied Free 159288, 2004)
Workers, G.R. No. L-289999, 1977)
When More than One Original Exists
However, based on People v. Pruna, the Court When more than one original exists, it must
established the guidelines in appreciating age, appear that all of them have been lost, destroyed,
either as an element of the crime or as a or cannot be produced in court before secondary
qualifying circumstance: evidence can be given of anyone. A photocopy
• The best evidence to prove the age of the may not be used without accounting for the other
offended party is an original or certified originals.
true copy of the certificate of live birth of
such party, Order of proof
• In absence of such, similar authentic Accordingly, the correct order of proof is as
documents such as baptismal certificates follows: existence, execution, loss, and contents;
and school records. although, at the sound discretion of the court, this
• In the absence of a certificate of live birth, order may be changed if necessary. (Citibank v.
authentic document, or testimony of the Teodoro, G.R. No. 150905, 2003)
victim’s mother or relatives concerning
the victim’s age, the complainant’s Before secondary evidence can be presented, it
testimony will suffice provided that it is is imperative that all the originals, duplicates or
expressly and clearly admitted by the counterparts must be accounted for. The loss,
accused. (People v. Arpon, G.R. No. destruction, or inaccessibility of all the originals
183563, December 14, 2011) must be shown in order to admit secondary
evidence. (De Vera v. Aguilar, G.R. No. 83377,
3. SECONDARY EVIDENCE; 1993)
SUMMARIES
When the original is outside the jurisdiction of the
REQUISITES FOR INTRODUCTION OF court, as when it is in a foreign country, secondary
SECONDARY EVIDENCE evidence is admissible. (Regalado, p. 725 citing
PNB v. Olila, 98 Phil. 1002)
When Original Document is Unavailable Due Execution May be Proven Through the
a. Proof of the execution or existence of the Testimony of Either:
original; 1. The person who executed it;

ATENEO CENTRAL
2. The person before whom its execution Rule on Testimony Regarding Original
was acknowledged; or Document
3. Any person who was present and saw it The fact that a writing is really a true copy of the
executed and delivered or who thereafter original may be shown by the testimony of a
saw it and recognized the signatures, or person who has had the opportunity to compare
4. One to whom the parties thereto had the copy with the original and found it to be
previously confessed the execution correct.
thereof (Michael v. Enriquez, G.R. No. L-
10824, 1915). When contents may be proven by Oral
Evidence
Rules on Loss After proper proof of the due execution and
It is not necessary to prove the loss beyond all delivery of the instrument and its loss or
possibility of mistake. A reasonable probability of destruction, oral evidence may be given of its
its loss is sufficient, and this may be shown by a contents by:
bona fide and diligent search for it in a place Any person who signed the document;
where it is likely to be found. (Paylago v. Jarabe, Any person who read it;
G.R. No. L-20046, 1968) Any person who heard it read knowing, or
it being proved from the other sources,
The document conveying the land was lost so the that the document so read was the one in
petitioner tried to present oral, secondary question;
evidence. The Court held that the secondary Any person who was present when the
evidence is admissible. The loss or destruction of contents of the document were talked
the instrument, meanwhile, may be proved by any over between the parties thereto to such
person aware of the fact, or by anyone who has an extent as to give him reasonably full
made, in the judgment of the court, a sufficient information as to its contents;
examination in the place or places where the Any person to whom the parties to the
document or papers of similar character are instrument have confessed or stated the
usually kept by the person in whose custody the contents thereof. (Francisco, p. 364 citing
document was kept, and has been unable to find Michael & Co. v. Enriquez, G.R. No.
it; or who has made any other investigation 10824, 1915)
sufficient to satisfy the Court that the document
was indeed lost. (Michael & Co. v. Enriquez, G.R. BUT NOTE: Hearsay Rule and Witness’s
No. 10824, 1915) testimonial qualification of personal
knowledge
Proof of loss of the original document may be
dispensed with where both parties admit that an Authentic Document
instrument has been lost. The contents of an Authentic means that the document should be
instrument may be proved against a party by his genuine. It need not be a public document.
admission in writing without accounting for non-
production of the original document (Tria v. Ortiz, In proving the contents of the original in some
G.R. No. 5244, 1909) authentic document, it is sufficient if it appears in
a private document which is proved to be
Order by which contents of document may be authentic.
proved by secondary evidence of lost,
destroyed or unavailable originals (CRT): When Original Document is in adverse party’s
A copy of the document; custody or control
Recital of its contents in some authentic The following facts must be shown to allow
document; introduction of secondary evidence:
The testimony of witnesses. (Rule 130, 1. The document is in the custody or under
Sec. 5) the control of the adverse party;
2. That reasonable notice was given to the
The hierarchy of preferred secondary evidence adverse party who has the custody or
must be strictly followed. control of the document;
3. Satisfactory proof of its existence;

ATENEO CENTRAL
4. Failure by the adverse party to produce it are desired. Even an oral demand in open court
in court. (Rule 130, Sec. 6) for production within a reasonable period will
suffice.
If the refusal or failure of the adverse party to
produce the document is justified, it does not give Notice must be given to the adverse party, or his
rise to the presumption of suppression of attorney, even if the document is in the actual
evidence or create an unfavorable inference possession of a third party.
against him. It, however, authorizes the
introduction of secondary evidence. Notice is a condition for the subsequent
introduction of secondary evidence by the
It is not necessary for a party seeking to introduce proponent.
secondary evidence to show that the original is in
the actual possession of his adversary. It is Where the nature of the action is in itself a notice,
enough that the circumstances are such as to as where it is for the recovery or annulment of
indicate that the writing is in his possession or documents wrongfully obtained or withheld by the
under his control. other party, no notice to produce said document
is required.
Neither is it required that the party entitled to the
custody of the instrument should, on being Evidence admissible when original document
notified to produce it, admit having it in his is a public record
possession. (Villa Rey Transit v. Ferrer, G.R. No. The contents of the original may be proved by a
L-23893, 1968) certified copy issued by the public officer in
custody thereof. (Rule 130, Sec. 8)
Only a photocopy of the Employee Clearance
was presented in evidence. The Court held that When the original is outside of the jurisdiction of
the photocopy is admissible as evidence since an the court, as when it is in a foreign country,
exception to the best evidence rule is when the secondary evidence is still admissible (PNB v.
document sought to be presented is in the Olila, 98 Phil. 1002, unreported, 1956)
possession of the person against whom it is to be
offered and such party fails to present it even after Affidavits as public documents
reasonable notice. (Pacasum v. People, G.R. No. [W]hile affidavits may be considered as public
180314, 2009) documents if they are acknowledged before a
notary public, these Affidavits are still classified
The mere fact that the original of the writing is in as hearsay evidence. The reason for this rule is
the custody or control of the party against whom that they are not generally prepared by the affiant,
it is offered does not warrant the admission of but by another one who uses his or her own
secondary evidence. The offeror must prove that language in writing the affiant's statements, parts
he has done all in his power to secure the best of which may thus be either omitted or
evidence by giving notice to the said party to misunderstood by the one writing them.
produce the document. Moreover, the adverse party is deprived of the
opportunity to cross-examine the affiants.
The notice may be in the form of a motion for the
production of the original or made in open court For this reason, affidavits are generally rejected
in the presence of the adverse party or via a for being hearsay, unless the affiants themselves
subpoena duces tecum, provided that the party in are placed on the witness stand to testify thereon.
custody of the original has sufficient time to (Republic v. Marcos-Manotoc, G.R. No. 171701,
produce the same. When such party has the 2012)
original of the writing and does not voluntarily
offer to produce it or refuses to produce it, Collateral matter
secondary evidence may be admitted. (Edsa When the original is not closely-related to a
Shangri-la Hotel and Resort v. BF Corporation, controlling issue (Rule 130, Sec. 3[e])
G.R. No. 145842, 2008)
This is an exception to the original document rule
Rules on Reasonable Notice to prevent an overly rigid technical application of
No particular form of notice is required, as long as the rule as when the original is so tangential that
it fairly apprises the other party as to what papers

ATENEO CENTRAL
its production would add little or nothing to the voluminous records must, however, be made
reliability of the fact-finding process. accessible to the adverse party so that the
correctness of the summary may be tested on
Thus, incidental references by a witness to road cross-examination.
signs, street names, addresses, license plate
numbers, billboards, newspaper headlines, An accountant’s written summary of some
names of commercial establishments, brand 150,000 sales invoices for goods sold by the
names, tickets and similar writings will normally plaintiff may be allowed under this exception
be permitted, unless the terms of the writing have despite the defendant’s objection that the sales
particular significance in litigation (Mueller & invoices constitute the original documents and
Kirkpatrick, Modern Evidence, Sec. 10.2 [1995]) should be presented (Compania Maritima v.
Allied Free Workers Union, G.R. No. L-28999,
Party who calls for document not bound to 1977).
offer it
A party who calls for the production of a document 4. PAROL EVIDENCE RULE
and inspects the same is not obliged to offer it as
evidence (Rule 130, Sec. 9) PAROL EVIDENCE: any evidence aliunde
(extraneous evidence), whether oral or written,
It is not until the party who demanded the which is intended or tends to vary or contradict a
production of the papers examines them and complete and enforceable agreement embodied
offers them in evidence that they assume the in a document.
status of evidentiary matter.
EVIDENCE ALIUNDE: extrinsic evidence that
If there is no timely objection to a document on may refer to testimonial, real or documentary
the ground that it violates the Best Evidence Rule, evidence
the secondary evidence will be admitted.
General Rule: When the terms of an agreement
Under the rules, it is axiomatic that before a party have been reduced to writing, it is to be
is allowed to adduce secondary evidence to considered as containing all the terms agreed
prove the contents of the original of a deed or upon and there can be, between the parties and
document, the party has to prove with the their successors in interest, no evidence of such
requisite quantum of evidence, the loss, terms other than the contents of the written
destruction, or unavailability of all the copies of agreement. (Rule 130, Sec. 10, first par.)
the original of the said deed. (Ebreo v. Ebreo,
G.R. No. 160065, February 28, 2006) Exception: A party may present evidence to
modify, explain or add to the terms of the written
Summaries agreement if he puts in issue in a verified pleading
When the contents of documents, records any of the following:
photographs, or numerous accounts are An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or
voluminous and cannot be examined in court imperfection in the written agreement;
without great loss of time, and the fact sought to The failure of the written agreement to
be established is only the general result of the express the true intent and agreement of
whole, the contents of such evidence may be the parties thereto;
presented in the form of a chart, summary, or The validity of the written agreement; or
calculation. The existence of other terms agreed to by
the parties or their successors in interest
The originals shall be available for examination or after the execution of the written
copying, or both, by the adverse party at a agreement. (Rule 130, Sec. 10, second
reasonable time and place. The court may order par.)
that they be produced in court. (Rule 130, Sec. 7)
The term “agreement” includes wills. (Rule 130,
There is no need to present the original where the Sec. 10, last par.)
documents are too voluminous. Secondary
evidence may consist of a summary of the
voluminous documents or records. The

ATENEO CENTRAL
No express trust concerning an immovable or any

interest therein may be proved by parol evidence. The parol evidence rule becomes operative when
(Civil Code, Art. 1443) the issues in litigation are the terms of a written
agreement. (Riano, p. 176)
Basis for the Rule
The parol evidence rule is based upon the No express trust concerning an immovable or any
consideration that when the parties have reduced interest therein may be proved by parol evidence
their agreement on a particular matter into writing, (Civil Code, Art. 1443)
all their previous and contemporaneous
agreements on the matter are merged therein, The parol evidence rule is predicated on the
hence evidence of a prior or contemporaneous existence of a document embodying the terms of
verbal agreement is generally not admissible to an agreement. A receipt is not such a document
vary, contradict, or defeat the operation of a valid as it merely attests to the receipt of money and it
document. is not and could have not been intended by the
parties to be the sole memorial of their
The reason for the parol evidence rule is the agreement. (Cruz v. CA, G.R. No. 79962, 1990)
presumption that when the parties have reduced
their agreement to writing, they have made such For purposes of the parol evidence rule, a person
writing the only repository and memorial of the who claims to be the beneficiary of an alleged
truth, and whatever is not found in the writing stipulation pour autrui in a contract (such as
must be understood to have been waived or petitioners) may be considered a party to that
abandoned. (Cruz v. CA, G.R. No. 79962, 1990) contract. It has been held that a third party who
avails himself of a stipulation pour autrui under a
The rule forbidding the admission of parol or contract becomes a party to that contract. This is
extrinsic evidence to alter, vary, or contradict a why under Article 1311, a beneficiary of a
written instrument does not apply so as to prohibit stipulation pour autrui is required to communicate
the establishment by parol of an agreement his acceptance to the obligor before its
between the parties to a writing entered into revocation. Moreover, to preclude the application
subsequent to the time when the written of Parol Evidence Rule, it must be shown that “at
instrument was executed, notwithstanding such least one of the parties to the suit is not party or a
agreement may have the effect of adding to, privy of a party to the written instrument in
changing, modifying, or even altogether question and does not base a claim on the
abrogating the contract of the parties as instrument or assert a right originating in the
evidenced by the writing; for the parol evidence instrument or the relation established thereby.” A
does not in any way deny that the original beneficiary of a stipulation pour autrui obviously
agreement of the parties was that which the bases his claim on the contract. He therefore
writing purports to express, but merely goes to cannot claim to be a stranger to the contract and
show that the parties have exercised their right to resist the application of the Parol Evidence Rule.
change or abrogate the same, or to make a new (Heirs of Mario Pacres v. Heirs of Cecilla Ygoña,
and independent contract. (Canuto v. Mariano, G.R. No. 174719, 2010)
G.R. No. L-11346, 1918)
The parol evidence rule does not apply, and may
a. Application of the parol evidence not properly be invoked by either party to the
rule litigation against the other, where at least one of
the parties to the suit is not party or a privy of a
When Parol Evidence Rule Applies party to the written instrument in question and
1. The existence of a valid contract; does not base a claim on the instrument or assert
2. The terms of the agreement must be in a right originating in the instrument or the relation
writing; established thereby. (Lechugas v. CA, G.R. Nos.
3. The dispute is between parties and their L-39972 & L-40300, 1986)
successors in interest;
4. There is dispute as to the terms of the The parol evidence rule does not apply to persons
agreement; who are not parties to a deed and do not base
5. The grounds for applicability must be put their claim on it. (Eagleridge Development
in issue in the verified pleading. (Rule Corporation v. Cameron Granville, G.R. No.
130, Sec. 10) 204700, 2014)

ATENEO CENTRAL
no clause in the written contract which even

For the parol evidence rule to apply, a written remotely suggests such a condition. (Yu Tek v.
contract need not be in any particular form, or be Gonzales, G.R. No. L-9935, 1915)
signed by both parties. What is required is that
the agreement be in writing since written Serrano introduced parol evidence to prove that
evidence is so much more certain and accurate he was merely acting as an agent without any
than that which rests in fleeting memory only. consideration. The Court held that Serrano can
(Inciong, Jr. v. CA, G.R. No. 96405, 1996) introduce such parol evidence because the case
at bar is not one where the evidence offered
The parol evidence rule provides that “when the varies, alters, modifies, or contradicts the terms
terms of an agreement have been reduced into of indorsement admittedly existing. (Maulini v.
writing, it is considered containing all the terms Serrano, G.R. No. L-8844, 1914)
agreed upon and there can be, between the
parties and their successors in interest, no The act or statement of Woodhouse was not
evidence of such terms other than the contents of sought to be introduced to change or alter the
the written agreement.” In this case, the parties terms of the agreement, but to prove how he
entered into a compromise agreement to put an induced Halili to enter into it — to prove the
end to the litigation between them. Nothing in the representations or inducements, or fraud, with
quitclaim, however, indicates that the which or by which he secured the other party's
compromise amount respectively paid to consent thereto. These are expressly excluded
petitioners included separation pay. Since there from the parol evidence rule. (Woodhouse v.
is no evidence that the compromise amount Halili, G.R. No. L-4811, 1953)
included separation pay, the services of
petitioners are presumed continuous, reckoned Although parol evidence is admissible to explain
from the date they first came under the employ of the meaning of a contract, it cannot serve the
respondent. (Cuadra v. San Miguel Corp., G.R. purpose of incorporating into the contract
No. 194467, 2020) additional contemporaneous conditions which are
not mentioned at all in the writing unless there has
b. When parol evidence can be been fraud or mistake. (Ortañez v. CA, G.R. No.
introduced 107372, 1997)
In order that the parol evidence may be i) An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or

admissible, the mistake or imperfection of the imperfection in the written agreement
document, or its failure to express the true intent
and agreement of the parties, or the validity of the Purpose: The purpose of this exception is to
agreement, or the existence of other terms enable the court to ascertain the true intention of
agreed to after the execution of the written the parties or the true nature of the transaction
agreement must be put in issue in the between the parties.
pleadings. Where the plaintiff failed to allege any
such fact in his complaint, he cannot introduce INTRINSIC AMBIGUITY: Is one which is not
parol evidence thereon. apparent on the face of the document but which
lies in the person or thing that is subject of the
If the defendant invoked such fact in his answer, document or deed. The language of the writing is
parol evidence may be introduced as such fact is clear and intelligible and suggests but a single
now put in issue. meaning, but some matter extraneous to the
writing creates the ambiguity. The document is
While parol evidence is admissible in a variety of clear on its face but matters outside the
ways to explain the meaning of written contracts, agreement create the ambiguity. (Riano, p.161,
it cannot serve the purpose of incorporating into 2016)
the contract additional contemporaneous
conditions which are not mentioned at all in the Example of intrinsic ambiguity is when the
writing, unless there has been fraud or mistake. documents refer to a particular person but such
In the case at bar, it is sought to show that the name pertains to many persons with same name.
sugar was to be obtained exclusively from the
crop raised by the defendant; however, there is

ATENEO CENTRAL
PATENT OR EXTRINSIC AMBIGUITY: is such

ambiguity which is apparent on the face of the The pleading does not need to specifically state
writing itself and requires something to be added words and phrases such as “mistake,”
in order to ascertain the meaning of the words “imperfection,” or “failure to express the true
used. In this case, parol evidence is not intent of the parties.” When the other party
admissible, otherwise the court would be creating responds to the allegations by making the proper
a contract between the parties. denial, such matters have already been put in
issue. (see Sps. Paras v. Kimwa Construction,
G.R. No. 171601, 2015)
INTRINSIC / LATENT EXTRINSIC /
AMBIGUITY PATENT
To justify the reformation of a written
AMBIGUITY
instrument upon the ground of mistake, the
concurrence of three things is necessary:
The document is clear Such ambiguity which
1. Mistake should be of FACT;
on its face but matters is apparent on the
2. Mistake should be MUTUAL or common
outside the face of the writing
to both parties to the instrument; and
agreement create the itself and requires
3. The mistake should be ALLEGED and
ambiguity. something to be
PROVED by clear and convincing
added in order to
evidence.
ascertain the meaning
of the words used.
The concurrence of these three things is
When the intrinsic Parol evidence is not necessary; and the parties must have come to an
ambiguity is put in admissible, otherwise actual oral agreement before they have
issue in the party’s the court would be attempted to reduce it to writing.
verified pleading, this creating a contract
will authorize the between the parties. IMPERFECTION: includes an inaccurate
introduction of parol statement in the agreement, or incompleteness in
evidence. the writing, or the presence of inconsistent
provisions therein. As a matter of substantive
law, when one party was mistaken and the other
INTERMEDIATE AMBIGUITY: A situation where knew that the instrument did not state their real
an ambiguity partakes of the nature of both patent agreement but concealed the fact from the
and latent ambiguity. In this case, while the former, the instrument may be reformed.
words are seemingly clear and with a settled
meaning, they are actually equivocal and admit of ii) Failure of the written agreement to
two interpretations. Here, parol evidence is express the true intent and agreement
admissible to clarify the ambiguity provided that of the parties thereto
the matter is put in issue by the pleader.
(Regalado, p. 734 citing 20 Am. Jur. 1011) The failure of the writing to express the true
agreement of the parties must be put in issue in
Example: “Dollars” may refer to the currency of the verified pleading by the party who wants to
United States, Hong Kong or Australia. prove the defect in the writing.
Intrinsic and intermediate ambiguities are curable Although parol evidence is admissible to explain
by extraneous evidence. the meaning of the contract, it cannot serve the
purpose of incorporating into the contract
NOTE: False description does not vitiate a additional contemporaneous conditions which are
document if the subject is sufficiently identified. not mentioned at all in the writing unless there has
The incorrect description shall be rejected as been fraud or mistake.
surplusage while the correct and complete
description standing alone shall sustain the Due execution of a writing may be proved by parol
validity of the writing. evidence because what the rule prohibits is
varying the terms of the writing by parol evidence.
MISTAKE: A mistake of fact which is mutual to
the parties or where the innocent party was Ramos set up as affirmative defense that the
imposed upon by unfair dealing of the other. contract does not express the true agreement of

ATENEO CENTRAL
the parties because certain important conditions husband and this office.” When the operation of
agreed upon were not included therein by the the contract is made to depend upon the
counsel who prepared the contract. The Court occurrence of an event, which, for that reason is
held that the parol evidence is admissible when a condition precedent, such may be established
there is allegation that the agreement does not by parol evidence. (Land Settlement and
express the intent of the parties. (Enriquez v. Development Corporation v. Garcia Plantation,
Ramos, G.R. No. L-18077, 1962) G.R. No. L-17820, 1963)
Even if the document appears to be a sale, parol

evidence may be resorted to if the same does not Rule on Collateral Oral Agreements
express the true intent of the parties. The true A contract made prior to or contemporaneous
understanding in this case is that the portion of with another agreement and if oral and not
the property will not be disposed of. (Madrigal v. inconsistent with the written contract is
Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 142944, 2005) admissible within the exception to the parol
evidence rule. The parol evidence rule will not
iii) Validity of the written agreement apply when the collateral oral agreement refers to
separate and distinct subjects.
Parol evidence is admissible to show that the
contract never existed on the ground of fraud, The verbal assurance given by Seeto is a
illegality or incapacity of one of the parties. collateral agreement, separate and distinct from
the indorsement, by virtue of which PNB was
induced to cash the check, and therefore,
iv) The existence of other terms
admissible as an exception to the parol evidence
agreed to by the parties or their rule. An extrinsic agreement between indorser
successors in interest after the and indorsee which cannot be embodied in the
execution of the written agreement instrument without impairing its credit is provable
by parol. (PNB v. Seeto, G.R. No. L-4388, 1952)
Canuto claimed that two days before the
expiration of the original redemption period, she The only proof of the payment was Robles'
asked Mariano for an extension of time for the testimony regarding it. The Court held that The
repurchase of the land and Mariano agreed. The rule against the admission of parol evidence does
Court held that the rule forbidding the admission not extend so far as to preclude the admission of
of parol or extrinsic evidence to alter, vary, or extrinsic evidence to show prior or
contradict a written instrument does not apply so contemporaneous collateral parol agreements
as to prohibit the establishment by parol of an between the parties, but such evidence may be
agreement between the parties to a writing, received, regardless of whether or not the written
entered into subsequent to the time when the agreement contains any reference to such
written instrument was executed. (Canuto v. collateral agreement, and whether the action is at
Mariano, G.R. No. L-11346, 1918) law or in equity. (Robles v. Lizarraga, G.R. No. L-
26173, 1927)
ADDITIONAL RULES:
Waiver of the Parol Evidence Rule
Rule on Conditional Agreements The parol evidence rule can be waived by failure
When the operation of the contract is made to to invoke the benefits of the rule. This waiver may
depend upon the occurrence of an event, which be made by failure to object to the introduction of
for that reason is a condition precedent, such may evidence aliunde. (Riano, p. 164, 2016)
be established by parol evidence. This is not
varying the terms of the written contract by c. Distinguish: parol evidence rule
extrinsic agreement for the simple reason that and original document rule
there is no contract in existence; there is nothing
to which to apply the excluding rule.
Parol Evidence Rule Original Document
The second paragraph contained in the letter is a Rule
condition precedent, which states: “This matter
has been the subject of agreement between your

ATENEO CENTRAL
If there is an inconsistency between the written

It presupposes that the Establishes a
words and the printed form of an instrument, the
original document (or preference for the
written words control the printed provisions.
admissible secondary original document over
(Sec. 16, Rule 130)
evidence) is available in secondary evidence
court. thereof.
General and Particular Provisions of an
Instrument
Precludes the admission Precludes the
When a general and a particular provision are
of other evidence to admission of
inconsistent, the particular provision is paramount
prove the terms of an secondary evidence if
to the general provision. A particular intent will
agreement other than the original document
control a general one that is inconsistent with it.
the contents of the is available.
(Sec. 13, Rule 130)
agreement itself for the
purpose of varying the
General Rule: Terms of a writing are presumed
terms of the writing.
to have been used in their primary and general
Can be invoked only by Can be invoked by any acceptation
the parties to the litigant to an action
document and their whether or not said Exception: Proof that they have a local,
successors-in-interest. litigant is a party to the technical, or otherwise peculiar signification, and
document involved. were so used and understood in the particular
instance.
(Sec. 15, Rule 130)
Applies to written Applies to all forms of
agreements (contracts), writings
Interpretation When an instrument is
including wills.
According to Intention being construed, the
(Sec. 13, Rule 130) intention of the parties
When the subject of the When the subject of the is to be pursued.
inquiry is the terms of the inquiry is the contents
agreement, one must, as of a writing, he must Interpretation The circumstances
a rule, read the look at the original According to under which the
agreement itself and not writing. This is the Circumstance instrument was made
seek guidance on Original Document (Sec. 14, Rule 130) may be shown, so that
sources outside the Rule. the judge may be
writing. Sources outside placed in the position
the writing are of those whose
considered parol language he is to
evidence, and are interpret.
inadmissible.
Interpretation An instrument may be
According to Usage construed according to
(Sec. 20, Rule 130) usage, to determine its
5. INTERPRETATION OF DOCUMENTS true character.
General Rule: The language of a writing is to be
interpreted according to the legal meaning it
bears in the place of its execution
Exception: Parties intended otherwise

(Sec. 11, Rule 130)
If an instrument contains several provisions or

particulars, it should be construed, if possible, in
a manner that will give effect to all.
(Sec. 12, Rule 130)

ATENEO CENTRAL
F. TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE (RULE 130, A deaf-mute is competent to be a witness so long

C) as he/she has the faculty to make observations
and he/she can make those observations known
1. QUALIFICATIONS OF WITNESSES to others. (People v. Aleman y Longhas, G.R. No.
181593, 2012)
General Rule:
Parties declared in default are not disqualified
All persons who can perceive, and perceiving,
from taking the witness stand for non-disqualified
can make known their perception to others, may
parties. The law does not provide default as an
be witnesses (Rule 130, Sec. 21)
exception. (Marcos v. Heirs of Navarro, G.R. No.
198240, 2013)
Exceptions: Except as provided by law or the
Rules, such as:
There is no substantive or procedural rule which
1. Disqualification by reason of marriage
requires a witness for a party to present some
(Rule 130, Sec. 23)
form of authorization to testify as a witness for the
2. Disqualification by reason of privileged
party presenting him or her. (AFP Retirement and
communication (Rule 130, Sec. 24)
Separation Benefits System v. Republic, G.R. No.
3. Parental and filial privilege (Rule 130,
188956, 2013)
Sec. 25)
4. Privilege relating to trade secrets (Rule
2. DISQUALIFICATIONS OF
130, Sec. 26)
WITNESSES
NOTE: The 2019 Amendments to the Rules on
Evidence have deleted the previous Sec. 21 a. Disqualification by reason of
relating to disqualifications by reason of mental marriage
incapacity or immaturity since it is deemed
superfluous, given that the general rule as to the Reasons:
competency of a witness necessarily covers such 1. There is identity of interests between
disqualifications. husband and wife;
2. If one were to testify for or against the other,
General Rule: Religious or political belief, there is the consequent danger of perjury;
interest in the outcome of the case, or conviction 3. The policy of the law is to guard the security
of a crime shall not be a ground for and confidence of private life and to prevent
disqualification. (Rule 130, Sec. 21) domestic disunion and unhappiness;
4. Where there is want of domestic tranquility,
Exceptions: there is danger of punishing one spouse by
1. Those convicted of the following cannot the testimony of the other (Alvarez v.
be witnesses to a will: Ramirez, G.R. No. 143349, 2005)
a. Falsification of a document;
b. Perjury; or Requisites:
c. False testimony (Civil Code, Art. 821) 1. Spouses are legally married; and
2. Those co-accused who are denied as 2. Either spouse must be a party to a case
state witness because the said accused
has been convicted of any offense Exceptions:
involving moral turpitude (Rule 119, Sec. 1. The case in which the husband or wife is
17) called to testify is a civil case instituted by one
against the other;
A prospective witness must show that he has the 2. That it is a criminal case for a crime
following abilities: (ORRR) committed by one against the other, or the
1. To Observe, the testimonial quality of latter's direct descendants or ascendants.
perception; (Rule 130, Sec. 23)
2. To Remember the perception;
3. To Relate the perception; Reason for the Exceptions:
4. To Recognize a duty to tell the truth, under Where the martial and domestic relations are so
oath or affirmation. (Herrera, p. 278) strained that there is no more harmony to be
preserved or peace and tranquility which may be

ATENEO CENTRAL
disturbed, the reason based upon such harmony Daquigan, G.R. No. L-39012, 1975) This ruling
and tranquility fails. In such a case, identity of has been codified under Rule 130, Sec. 23.
interests disappears, and the consequent danger
of perjury based on that identity is nonexistent. Testimony Where Spouse is Accused with
(Alvarez v. Ramirez, G.R. No. 143349, 2005) Others
The disqualification is between husband and wife,
When an offense directly attacks or directly and the law not precluding the wife from testifying
vitally impairs the conjugal relation, it comes when it involves other parties or accused. The
within the exception to the statute that one shall wife may proceed and testify in the murder case
not be a witness against the other except in a against the brothers who were jointly tried with
criminal prosecution for a crime committed by one her husband, but the testimony cannot be used
against the other. (People v. Castañeda, G.R. No. against the husband through the guise of taking
L-46306, 1979) judicial notice of the proceedings in the murder
case without violating the rule. What cannot be
Indeed, in those jurisdictions which allow one done directly cannot be done indirectly. (People
spouse to be subjected to examination by the v. Quidato, G.R. No. 117401, 1998)
adverse party as a hostile witness when both
spouses are parties to the action, either the Non-Applicability of Disqualification:
interests of the spouses are separate or This rule may be waived.
separable, or the spouse offered as a witness is
merely a formal or nominal party. (Lezama v. Objections to the competency of a husband or
Rodriguez, G.R. No. L-25643, 1968) wife to testify in a criminal prosecution against the
other may be waived as in the case of the other
Note: The marital disqualification rule under Rule witnesses generally. It is also true that objection
130, Sec. 23 has been amended: The words “for to the spouse's competency must be made when
or against the affected spouse” became just he or she is first offered as witness, and that the
“against the other” in line with the rule’s incompetency may be waived by the failure of the
purpose to foster marital harmony. There lies no accused to make timely objection to the
compelling rationale for extending the admission of the spouse's testimony, although
disqualification to testimony “for” the affected knowing of such incompetency, and the
spouse. The disqualification should be limited to testimony admitted, especially if the accused has
“adverse spousal testimony.” assented to the admission, either expressly or
impliedly. (People v. Francisco, G.R. No. L-568,
Duration of the Privilege: 1947)
The privilege lasts only during marriage.
Where the wife is a co-defendant in a suit
Q: Should the phrase "in a criminal case for a charging fraud against the spouses, the wife
crime committed by one against the other" be could not be compelled to testify as an adverse
restricted to crimes committed by one spouse party witness concerning her participation in the
against the other, such as physical injuries, alleged fraud without violating [Sec. 23] of Rule
bigamy, adultery or concubinage, or should it be 130. (Lezama v. Rodriguez, G.R. No. L-25643,
given a latitudinarian interpretation as referring to 1968)
any offense causing marital discord?
Whether her testimony will turn out to be adverse
A: When an offense directly attacks or directly or beneficial to her own interest, the inevitable
and vitally impairs, the conjugal relation, it comes result would be to pit her against her husband.
within the exception to the statute that one shall The interests of husband and wife in this case are
not be a witness against the other except in a necessarily interrelated.
criminal prosecution for a crime committed by one
against the other. Where the marital and domestic relations are so
strained that there is no more harmony to be
Using the criterion thus judiciously enunciated in preserved nor peace and tranquility which may be
the Cargill case, it can be concluded that in the disturbed, the reason based upon such harmony
law of evidence the rape perpetrated by the father and tranquility fails. In such a case, identity of
against his daughter is a crime committed by him interests disappears and the consequent danger
against his wife (the victim's mother). (Ordoño v. of perjury based on that identity is non-existent.

ATENEO CENTRAL
Thus, there is no longer any reason to apply the 4. The spouse against whom such is being
Marital Disqualification Rule. (Alvarez v. Ramirez, offered has not given his/her consent to such
G.R. No. 143349, 2005) testimony
b. Disqualification by reason of privileged A widow of a victim allegedly murdered may

communications; rule on third parties testify as to her husband’s dying declaration as to
how he died since the same was not intended to
Privilege – a rule of law that to protect a particular be confidential (U.S. v. Antipolo, G.R. No. L-
relationship or interest, either permits a witness to 13109, 1918)
refrain from giving testimony he otherwise could
be compelled to give, or permits someone, The privilege applies to any form of confidential
usually one of the parties, to prevent the witness disclosure both in words and in conduct.
from revealing certain information. (Herrera, p.
315) To whom the privilege belongs
The privilege belongs to the spouse against
Under the 2019 Amendments to the Rules on whom the testimony is given.
Evidence, communication shall remain
privileged, even in the hands of a third person The privilege does NOT apply:
who may have obtained the information, as long 1. When the husband or wife testifies against
as the original parties to the communication the other in a civil case instituted by one
took reasonable precaution to protect its against the other.
confidentiality. (Rule 130, Sec. 24, last par.) 2. When the husband or wife testifies against
the other in a criminal case for a crime
Privileged communications are matters committed by one against the other or the
learned in confidence latter’s direct ascendants or descendants.
3. When there is waiver, such as in failure to
Privileged Communications (Rule 130, Section object on a timely basis to its presentation or
24): by any conduct that may be construed as
1. Husband and Wife implied consent. (Lacurom v. Jacoba, A.C.
2. Attorney and Client No. 5921, 2006)
3. Physician and Patient
4. Priest and Penitent Marital Disqualification versus Marital
5. Public Officers Privileged Communication
Marital Marital Privileged
(i) Husband and Wife (Marital Disqualification Communication
Communications Privilege) Rule
Does NOT refer to Refers to confidential
confidential communications
Reason:
communications received by one
Society’s interest in the preservation of peace of
between spouses. spouse from the other
families and its strongest safeguard is to preserve
during the marriage.
any violations of those confidences inherent in
the marital status. Includes facts, Applies only to
occurrences, or confidential
Ability to communicate without inhibitions is information even prior information received
essential in a marital relationship. to the marriage. during the marriage.
Requisites: The scope of this rule

1. There must be a valid marriage between is broader because it
husband and wife; prevents testimony
2. There is a communication received in against the spouse on
confidence by one from the other; any fact and not
3. The confidential communication was merely a disclosure of
received during the marriage; and confidential
information.

ATENEO CENTRAL
The rule can no The spouse affected 1. There must be a communication made by the
longer be invoked by the disclosure of client to the attorney, OR advice given by the
once the marriage is the information or attorney to his client;
dissolved. testimony may object (No particular form is required under the
It may be asserted even after the Rules)
only during the dissolution of the 2. The communication or advice must be given
marriage. marriage. The in confidence; and
privilege does not 3. The communication or advice must be given
cease just because either:
the marriage has a. In the course of professional
ended. employment; or
Requires that the No such requirement b. With a view to professional
spouse against whom as it applies employment (This contemplates
the testimony is regardless of whether preliminary negotiations, even if later
offered is a party to the spouses are on the attorney-client relationship is
the action. parties or not. not perfected)
The prohibition is What is prohibited is 4. The client does not consent to the
directed at testimony the examination of a examination of the attorney, his/her
against the other. spouse as to matters secretary, clerk, etc. (Rule 130, Sec. 24[b])
received in
confidence by one Attorney’s secretary, stenographer, clerk or other
from the other during persons assisting the attorney are also covered
the marriage. by the rule and cannot be examined concerning
(Riano, p. 235) any fact the knowledge of which has been
acquired in such capacity without the consent of
(ii) Attorney and Client; exceptions the client AND their employer.
Reason: It is based upon grounds of public policy NOTE: Also covered is a “person reasonably
to enable full disclosure. believed by the client to be licensed to engage in
the practice of law”
McPartlin was entitled to the protection of the
attorney-client privilege, because his statements The Privilege Does NOT Apply:
were made in confidence to an attorney for a co- a. As provided for by the Rules of
defendant for a common purpose related to both Court (Rule 130, Sec. 24[b]):
defenses. (U.S. vs. McPartlin, 595 F.2d 1321,
1979) Furtherance of crime or fraud (future crime-
fraud) – If the services or advice of the lawyer
The period to be considered is the date when the were sought or obtained to enable or aid
privileged communication was made by the client anyone to commit or plan to commit what the
to the attorney in relation to either a crime client knew or reasonably should have known
committed in the past or with respect to a crime to be a crime or fraud. (Rule 130, Sec. 24[b][i])
intended to be committed in the future. In other
words, If the client seeks his lawyer’s advice with There is no privilege if the services of the
respect to a crime that the former has theretofore lawyer were sought or obtained to enable or
committed, he is given the protection of a virtual aid anyone to commit or plan to commit a
confessional seal which the attorney-client crime or a fraud. (People v. Sandiganbayan,
privilege declares cannot be broken by the G.R. No. 115439-41, 1997)
attorney without the client’s consent.
Clients are not entitled to use lawyers to help
If the advice he seeks is with respect to a future them in pursuing unlawful or fraudulent
crime, the communication is not protected. objectives. If the privilege were to cloak such
(People vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 115439- activity, the result would be loss of public
41, 1997) confidence and corruption of the profession.
Requisites: An attorney’s service knowingly used to

further a crime or fraud is hardly qualified as

ATENEO CENTRAL
“professional legal services”, an essential to testify to the matter attested (Lempert, R. &
element of the privilege (Mueller & Kirkpatrick, Saltzburg, S. at 697)
Sec. 5.22)
Joint clients – As to a communication relevant to
Claimants through same deceased client – As a matter of common interest between two or
to a communication relevant to an issue more clients if the communication was made
between parties who claim through the same by any of them to a lawyer retained or
deceased client, regardless of whether the consulted in common, when offered in an
claims are by testate or intestate or by inter action between any of the clients, unless they
vivos transaction (Rule 130, Sec. 24[b][ii]) have expressly agreed otherwise (Rule 130,
Sec. 24[b][v])
While the attorney-client privilege survives the
death of a client, there is no privilege in a will While joint client are within the class of
contest or other case between parties who persons to whom otherwise confidential
both claim through that very client since it is communications can be disclosed without
not known who stands in the shoes of the destroying confidentiality, if they have a falling
deceased client. out, the communications are not privileged in
subsequent litigations between themselves,
Communication of such information may be unless they have expressly agreed otherwise.
essential to an accurate resolution of
competing claims of succession, and the Joint clients do not intend their
testator would presumably favor disclosure of communication to be confidential from each
the communications in order to dispose of his other. Therefore, joint representation means
estate in accord with his intentions (Mueller & each joint client accepts the risk that another
Kirkpatrick, Sec. 5.24) joint client may later use what one has said to
the lawyer (Mueller & Kirkpatrick, Sec. 5.14)
Breach of duty by lawyer or client – As to a
communication relevant to an issue of breach b. Others
of duty by the lawyer to his or her client, or by
the client to his or her lawyer (Rule 130, Sec. 1. When there is no attorney-client relationship
24[b][iii]) 2. When the communication was not intended to
be confidential
If the client alleges a breach of duty on the 3. When the action is one brought by the client
part of the lawyer - e.g., professional against the attorney and the disclosure of the
malpractice, incompetence or ethical confidential information becomes necessary
violations OR a lawyer sues a client for his for the attorney (But limited only for what is
fee, either may testify as to communications necessary for the attorney's own protection).
between them which would otherwise be
privileged. NOTE: Contracts between attorneys and
clients are inherently personal and private
This “self-defense” exception is sometimes matters, but they are a constant subject of
justified on the theory that client impliedly litigation, and contracts relating to fees are
waives the privilege by making allegations of essentially not of a privileged nature. In other
breach of duty against the lawyer (Mueller & words, the terms of employment between
Kirkpatrick, Sec. 5.23) attorney and client are not of a privileged
nature. (Orient Insurance v. Revilla, G.R. No.
Document attested by the lawyer – As to a 34098, 1930)
communication relevant to an issue
concerning an attested document to which the 4. When there is waiver.
lawyer is an attesting witness (Rule 130, Sec.
24[b][iv]) The attorney cannot make a waiver without
the client's consent - express or implied.
When an attorney serves as an attesting
witness, he is not acting as a lawyer and the Waiver of the Privilege:
client’s obvious intent is to have him available

ATENEO CENTRAL
a) Client or the attorney consents to (iii) Physician and Patient

disclose privileged communication.
b) Giving evidence on the privileged Reason:
communication. This rule on the physician-patient privilege is
c) When the privileged communication falls intended to facilitate and make safe, full, and
into the hands of the adverse party. confidential disclosure by the patient to the
physician of all facts, circumstances, and
BUT NOTE THIS 2019 AMENDMENT: symptoms, untrammeled by apprehension of their
The communication shall remain subsequent and enforced disclosure and
privileged, even in the hands of a third publication on the witness stand, to the end that
person who may have obtained the the physician may form a correct opinion, and be
information, provided that the original enabled safely and efficaciously to treat his
parties to the communication took patient.
reasonable precaution to protect its
confidentiality. (Rule 130, Sec. 24, last Requisites:
par.) 1. The privilege is asserted as to
confidential communication with:
d) In calling or cross-examining his attorney a. A physician or a psychotherapist; or
regarding the privileged communication. b. A person reasonably believed to be
authorized to practice medicine or
The receipt of fees from a client is not usually psychotherapy; or
within the privilege because the payment of a fee c. A person who has participated in the
is not normally a matter of confidence or a diagnosis or treatment of the patient
communication. The ministerial or clerical under the direction of the physician
services of an attorney in transferring funds to or or psychotherapist;
from a client is not a matter of confidence that is 2. The privilege is claimed in a civil case;
protected by the privilege. (In re Grand Jury 3. The communication is made for the
Investigation, 732 F.2d 447, 1983) purpose of diagnosis or treatment of the
patient’s:
General Rule: Client’s identity is not privileged. a. Physical condition; or
b. Mental condition; or
Exceptions: c. Emotional condition; or
1. Where a strong probability exists that d. Alcohol or drug addiction
revealing the client’s identity would 4. The patient does not consent to the
implicate him in the activity for which he examination of the physician,
sought the lawyer’s advice. psychotherapist, etc. (Rule 130, Sec.
2. Where disclosure would open the client 24[c])
to civil liability.
3. Where the government’s lawyers have NOTE: The 2019 Amendments to the Rules on
no case against an attorney’s client Evidence have removed the requirement that the
unless, by revealing the client’s name, information involved “would blacken the
the said name would furnish the only link reputation of the patient”.
that would form the chain of testimony
necessary to convict an individual of a Duration of privilege
crime (LAST LINK DOCTRINE). The privilege survives the death of the patient.
(Regala v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. After one has gone to his grave, the living are not
105398, 1996) permitted to impair his name and disgrace his
memory by dragging to light communications and
Where the government’s lawyers have no case disclosures made under the seal of the statute.
against an attorney’s client unless, by revealing (Gonzales v. CA, G.R. No. 117740, 1998).
the client’s name, the said name would furnish the
only link that would form the chain of testimony The Privilege Does Not Apply:
necessary to convict an individual of a crime, the 1. When the case is a criminal case.
client’s name is privileged. (Regala v. 2. When the testimony refers to information
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 105398, 1996) regarding a patient which the physician
acquired either before the relation of

ATENEO CENTRAL
physician and patient began or after its (Sec. 30 of R.A. 10029, Philippine Psychology
termination. Act of 2009)
3. When there is waiver. • This has been incorporated into the
4. If the physician acted for purposes other than privilege under the 2019 Amendments
to prescribe for the patient. which include “psychotherapists” within
5. When the information was not necessary for the coverage of the privilege.
the proper treatment of the patient.
6. Where an action for damages is brought by (iv) Priest and Penitent
the patient against his physician.
7. When the physician is presented as an expert Reason:
witness and the facts testified to are merely To compel a minister or priest to testify to a
hypothetical. (Lim v. Court of Appeals, G.R. confession made to him is equivalent to an
No. 91114, 1992) annulment of the confession institution.
8. When the information was intended to be
public, such as results of physical and mental Requisites:
examinations ordered by the court and 1. The communication or confession must be:
results of autopsies. (See Rule 28, Sec. 4) a. Made to a minister or priest or person
reasonably believed to be so;
Where the person against whom the privilege is b. Given by him or her in his
claimed is the patient’s husband who testifies on professional character;
a document executed by medical practitioners, 2. The communication or confession or advice
his testimony does not have the force and effect must be in the course of discipline enjoined
of the testimony of the physician who examined by the rules of practice of the denomination to
the patient and executed the report. Plainly, this which the priest or minister belongs.
does not fall within the prohibition. (Krohn vs. 3. The affected person does not consent to the
Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 108854, 1994) examination of the minister, priest, etc. (Rule
130, Sec. 24[d])
NOTE: The 2019 Amendments to the Rules on
Evidence include, as privileged, communication The Privilege Does Not Apply:
which is obtained by third persons “provided that 1. Where a minister is consulted not as such
the original parties to the communication took (e.g., he is consulted as a friend or
reasonable precaution to protect its interpreter).
confidentiality.” (Rule 130, Sec. 24, last par.) 2. Where the confession is not made in the
course of religious discipline.
Hospital Records during Discovery Procedure 3. When there is waiver by the affected person.
To allow the disclosure during discovery
procedure of the hospital records would be to NOTE: The 2019 Amendments to the Rules on
allow access to evidence that is inadmissible Evidence changed the coverage from “the person
without the patient’s consent. Disclosing them making the confession” to “the affected person”.
would be the equivalent of compelling the
physician to testify on privileged matters he (v) Public Officers
gained while dealing with the patient, without the
latter’s prior consent. (Chan v. Chan, G.R. No.
Requisites:
179786, 2013)
1. The communication must have been made to
a public officer;
NOTE: A psychologist or psychometrician
2. The communication was made in official
cannot, without the consent of the client/patient,
confidence; and
be examined on any communication or
3. Public interest would suffer by the disclosure
information disclosed and/or acquired in the
of the information.
course of giving psychological services to such
client. The protection accorded herein shall
Public interest means more than a mere
extend to all pertinent records and shall be
curiosity; it means something in which the public,
available to the secretary, clerk or other staff of
the community at large, has some pecuniary
the licensed psychologist or psychometrician.
interest by which their legal rights or liabilities
are affected. It does not mean anything so narrow

ATENEO CENTRAL
as to interest the particular localities which may Elements of Presidential Communications

be affected by the matters in question (Banco Privilege
Filipino v. Monetary Board, G.R. No. L-70054, 1. Must relate to a “quintessential and non-
1986). delegable presidential power;”
2. Must be authored or “solicited and received”
This privilege is intended not for the protection of by a close advisor of the President or the
public officers but for the protection of public President himself; and
interest. Where there is no public interest that 3. Privilege may be overcome by a showing of
would be prejudiced, this invoked rule will not be adequate need such that the information
applicable (Banco Filipino v. Monetary Board, sought “likely contains important evidence”
G.R. No. L-70054, 1986). and by the unavailability of the information
elsewhere (Neri v. Senate Committee, G.R.
What is usually referred to as informer’s privilege No. 180643, 2008)
is in reality the government’s privilege to withhold
from disclosure the identity of persons who Newsman’s Privilege
furnish information of violations of laws to officers General Rule: Without prejudice to his liability
charged with enforcement of that law. (People v. under the civil and criminal laws, any publisher,
Ong, G.R. No. 137348, 2004) owner, or duly recognized or accredited
journalist, writer, reporter, contributor, opinion
The privilege under Section 24, Rule 130 is writer, editor, columnist, manager, media
intended not for the protection of public officers practitioner involved in the writing, editing,
but for the protection of public interest. Where production, and dissemination of news for mass
there is no public interest that would be circulation, of any print, broadcast, wire service
prejudiced, this rule will not be applicable. The organization, or electronic mass media, including
rule that a public officer cannot be examined as cable TV and its variants, cannot be compelled to
to communications made to him in official reveal the source of any news item, report or
confidence does not apply when there is nothing information appearing or being reported or
to show that the public interest would suffer by the disseminated through said media, which was
disclosure. (Banco Filipino v. Monetary Board, related in confidence to the abovementioned
G.R. No. 70054, 1986) media practitioners. (R.A. No. 53, as amended by
R.A. 11458, Sec. 1)
When the ground for asserting the privilege as to
subpoenaed materials sought for use in a criminal Exception: Unless the court or the House of
trial is based only on the generalized interest in Representatives or the Senate or any committee
confidentiality, unsupported by a claim of the of Congress finds that such revelation is
need to protect military, diplomatic or sensitive demanded by the security of the State. (R.A. No.
national security secrets, it cannot prevail against 53, as amended by R.A. 11458, Sec. 1)
a demonstrated, specific need for the
documents/recordings needed and over the Privileged Communication in Labor
fundamental demands of due process of law in Conciliation Proceedings
the administration of criminal justice. The Information and statements made at conciliation
generalized assertion of the privilege must yield proceedings shall be treated as privileged
to the demonstrated need for evidence in a communication and shall not be used as
pending criminal trial. (U.S. vs. Nixon, 418 U.S. evidence in the Commission. Conciliators and
683, 1974) similar officials shall not testify in any court or
body regarding any matters taken up at
Presidential Communications Privilege conciliation proceedings conducted by them.
There is a Recognized Presumptive Presidential (Labor Code, Art. 233)
Communications Privilege - it was the President
herself, through Executive Secretary Ermita, who Secrecy of Bank Deposits
invoked executive privilege on a specific matter All deposits of whatever nature with banks or
involving an executive agreement between the banking institutions in the Philippines including
Philippines and China, which was the subject of investments in bonds issued by the Government
the three questions. (Neri v. Senate Committee, of the Philippines, its political subdivisions and its
G.R. No. 180643, 2008) instrumentalities, are hereby considered as of an
absolutely confidential nature and may not be

ATENEO CENTRAL
examined, inquired or looked into by any person, of the case, pursuant to Rule 7, Section 3 of
government official, bureau or office, except upon the Internal Rules of the Supreme Court;
written permission of the depositor, or in cases of
impeachment, or upon order of a competent court 2. Court deliberations or the deliberations of the
in cases of bribery or dereliction of duty of public Members in court sessions on cases and
officials, or in cases where the money deposited matters pending before the Court;
or invested is the subject matter of the litigation.
(R.A. 1405, Sec. 2) 3. Court records which are "predecisional" and
"deliberative" in nature, in particular,
Court-Annexed Mediation and Judicial documents and other communications which
Dispute Resolution are part of or related to the deliberative
Any and all matters discussed, or process, i.e., notes, drafts, research papers,
communications made, including requests for internal discussions, internal memoranda,
mediation, and documents presented during records of internal deliberations, and similar
CAM or JDR proceedings, shall be privileged and papers.
confidential.
4. Confidential Information secured by justices,
If personal notes are taken for guidance, the judges, court officials and employees in the
notes shall be destroyed. Should such records course of their official functions, mentioned in
exist, the same shall also be privileged and (2) and (3) above, are privileged even after
confidential. their term of office.
All privileged and confidential information 5. Records of cases that are still pending for
obtained in CAM or JDR shall be inadmissible as decision are privileged materials that cannot
evidence for any purpose in any other be disclosed, except only for pleadings,
proceedings. orders and resolutions that have been made
available by the court to the general public.
However, evidence or information that is
otherwise admissible does not become 6. The principle of comity or inter-departmental
inadmissible solely by reason of its use in CAM or courtesy demands that the highest officials of
JDR (Guidelines for the Conduct of CAM and JDR each department be exempt from the
in Civil Cases, A.M. No. 19-10-SC, Part D, Sec. compulsory processes of the other
7). departments.
Judicial Privilege 7. These privileges belong to the Supreme

At the most basic level and subject to the principle Court as an institution, not to any justice or
of comity, Members of the Court, and Court judge in his or her individual capacity. Since
officials and employees may not be compelled to the Court is higher than the individual justices
testify on matters that are part of the internal or judges, no sitting or retired justice or judge,
deliberations and actions of the Court in the not even the Chief Justice, may claim
exercise of their adjudicatory functions and exception without the consent of the Court.
duties, while testimony on matters external to (In re: Production of Court Records, 2012)
their adjudicatory functions and duties may be
compelled by compulsory processes. Witness Protection, Security and Benefit Act
All proceedings involving application for
To summarize these rules, the following are admission into the Program and the action taken
privileged documents or communications, and thereon shall be confidential in nature. No
are not subject to disclosure: information or documents given or submitted in
support thereof shall be released except upon
1. Court actions such as the result of the raffle written order of the Department of Justice or the
of cases and the actions taken by the Court proper court. (R.A. 6981, Sec. 7)
on each case included in the agenda of the
Court's session on acts done material to THIRD PERSONS:
pending cases, except where a party litigant
requests information on the result of the raffle

ATENEO CENTRAL
The communication shall remain privileged, even was not compelled to testify against his father; he
in the hands of a third person who may have chose to waive that filial privilege when he
obtained the information, provided that the voluntarily testified against Artemio. Elven
original parties to the communication took declared that he was testifying as a witness
reasonable precaution to protect its confidentiality against his father of his own accord and only to
(Rule 130, Sec. 24, last par.) tell the truth (People v. Invencion, G.R. No.
131636, 2003)
Note: Communication divulged to "strangers" or
outsiders can scarcely be considered a • Persons other than direct ascendants
confidential communication between attorney and descendants
and client. (U.S. vs. Gordon-Nikkar, 518 F.2d
972, 1975) The privilege under the provision mentioned
applies only to direct ascendants and
3. TESTIMONIAL PRIVILEGE descendants, a family tie connected by a
common ancestry. A stepdaughter has no
a. Parental and filial privilege rule common ancestry by her stepmother. (Lee v.
Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 177861, 2010)
No person shall be compelled to testify against
his or her parents, other direct ascendants, b. Trade Secrets
children and other direct descendants, except
when such testimony is indispensable in a crime A person cannot be compelled to testify about any
against that person or by one parent against the trade secret, unless non-disclosure will conceal
other. (Rule 130, Sec. 25) fraud or otherwise work injustice. When
disclosure is directed, the court shall take such
Note: This provision was amended in 2019 to protective measure as the interest of the owner of
include the exception under Art. 215 of the Family the trade secret and of the parties and the
Code. furtherance of justice may require. (Rule 130,
Sec. 26)
Art. 215: No descendant shall be compelled, in a
criminal case, to testify against his parents and A trade secret is defined as a plan or process,
grandparents, except when such testimony is tool, mechanism or compound known only to its
indispensable in a crime against the descendant owner and those of his employees to whom it is
or by one parent against the other. necessary to confide it.
There are two privileges embodied in this rule: The definition also extends to a secret formula or
Parental privilege rule and Filial privilege rule process not patented, but known only to certain
1. Parental Privilege: A parent cannot be individuals using it in compounding some article
compelled to testify against his child or direct of trade having a commercial value.
descendants
2. Filial Privilege: A child cannot be compelled A trade secret may consist of any formula,
to testify against his parents or other direct pattern, device, or compilation of information that:
ascendants (1) is used in one's business; and (2) gives the
employer an opportunity to obtain an advantage
When the privilege does not apply over competitors who do not possess the
• Voluntary testimony; waiver information. (Air Philippines vs. Pennswell, Inc.,
G.R. No. 172835, 2007)
A person may voluntarily testify against his
parents, but if he refuses to do so, the rule The following are factors in determining if a piece
protects him from any compulsion. of information is a trade secret protected from
disclosure:
This rule is not strictly a rule on disqualification 1. The extent to which the information is known
because a descendant is not incompetent or outside of the employer’s business;
disqualified to testify against an ascendant. The 2. The extent to which the information is known
rule refers to a privilege not to testify, which can by employees and others involved in the
be invoked or waived like other privileges. Elven business;

ATENEO CENTRAL
3. The extent of measures taken by the Otherwise: it would be self-serving and

employer to guard the secrecy of the inadmissible
information;
4. The value of the information to the employer Two Types of Admissions:
and to competitors; 1. JUDICIAL ADMISSION - one made in a
5. The amount of effort or money expended by judicial proceeding under consideration.
the company in developing the information; 2. EXTRAJUDICIAL ADMISSION - one
and
made out of court or in a judicial
6. The extent to which the information could be
easily or readily obtained through an proceeding other than the one under
independent source. (Air Philippines vs. consideration.
Pennswell, Inc., G.R. No. 172835, 2007)
JUDICIAL EXTRAJUDICIAL
4. Admissions and ADMISSION ADMISSION
confessions Rule 129, Sec. 4 Rule 130, Sec. 27
Made in the course of
Out-of-court
(i) Admission by a party the proceedings in the
declaration
same case
Rule on Admissions by a party Does not require proof; Requires proof;
The act, declaration, or omission of a party as to deemed automatically must be formally
a relevant fact may be given in evidence against part of the record offered in evidence
him. (Rule 130, Sec. 27) Conclusive upon the
admitter
Example: After a murder, accused goes to his BUT may be
neighbor and tells her, “Nakapatay ako”. His contradicted by
neighbor can testify on this fact in a murder case showing that:
against the accused. The admission may be a. It was made
given in evidence against the accused. through Rebuttable
palpable
The admissions of the president of a company as mistake
to its indebtedness are binding on the company b. The imputed
under the rule that admissions of liability by a admission was
party may be given against it. (Keller & Co. v. not, in fact,
COB, G.R. No. L-68097, 1986) made
Admissible, even if it is Admissible, only if it
Reason: a self-serving is not a self-serving
Based on presumption that no man would declare declaration declaration
anything against himself unless such declarations
were true. Two (2) Ways to Introduce an Admission as
Evidence:
ADMISSION: refers to a voluntary 1. As INDEPENDENT EVIDENCE
acknowledgement, in express terms or by 2. As IMPEACHING EVIDENCE
implication, by a party in interest or by another by
whose statement he is legally bound, against his SELF-SERVING DECLARATIONS
interest, of the existence or truth of a fact in Unsworn statements made by the declarant out
dispute material to the issue. In other words, it is of court and which are favorable to his interests.
an acknowledgement of fact/s opposite to the But if the declarant takes the stand to testify and
fact/s raised or positions taken in court. be cross-examined, then it is not self-serving.
When is an admission admissible? It must: Example: Accused tells neighbor that:

1. Involve matters of fact, and not of law; “Nakapatay yung barkada namin pero wala
2. Be categorical and definite; akong kinalaman.” Later on, accused cannot
3. Be knowingly and voluntarily made; and have his neighbor testify in court and say that
4. Be adverse to the admitter’s interests Accused went to him and said that he had nothing
to do with the killing. Accused’s statement to the

ATENEO CENTRAL
neighbor is self-serving because it was given out as to make such admission binding upon
of court and it served his interest. respondents. Although defendants and
respondents were all defendants in the
Accused may, however, take the stand and complaints for unlawful detainer filed by
explain why he has nothing to do with the killing. petitioners, it is very clear that defendants and
respondents espoused different defenses.
(ii) Res inter alios acta rule
Contrary to defendants’ position, respondents, as
This rule refers to the maxim, “res inter alios acta early as the filing of their response to petitioners'
alteri nocere non debet,” which means, “A thing demand letter, firmly and consistently denied the
done among some persons ought not to do harm existence of any lease contract between them
to another.” (Regalado, 2008 ed.) and petitioners over the subject land. (Tan Siok
Kuan v. Returta, G.R. No. 175085, 2016)
Reason for Res Inter Alios Acta rule
The reason for the rule is that, on a principle of Additional Exception
good faith and mutual convenience, a man’s own Statements made by an employee against his
acts are binding upon himself, and are evidence employer are admissible against the latter, where
against him. It would not only be inconvenient, the statements were made while in employ and
but also manifestly unjust, that a man should be where they concerned a matter within the scope
bound by the acts of mere unauthorized of his employment. (Mahlandt v. Wild Canid
strangers; and that if a party ought not to be Survival & Research Center, 588 F.2d 626, 8th
bound by the acts of strangers, neither ought their Cir. 1978)
acts or conduct be used as evidence against him.
(People v. Raquel, G.R. No. 119005, 1996) Inadmissibility of Extrajudicial Declaration of
Accused
Two branches of the res inter alios acta rule As a general rule, the extrajudicial declaration of
1. The rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by an accused, although deliberately made, is not
an act, declaration, or omission of another admissible and does not have probative value
(Rule 130, Sec. 29) against his co-accused. It is merely hearsay
evidence as far as the other accused are
2. Similar Acts Rule: Evidence that one did or concerned. (People v. Alegre, G.R. No. L-30423,
did not do a certain thing at one time is not 1979)
admissible to prove that he or she did or did
not do the same or similar thing at another The rights of an accused cannot be prejudiced by
time (Rule 130, Sec. 35) the extra-judicial declarations of another person.
(People v. Raquel, G.R. No. 119006, 1996)
This rule only applies to extrajudicial declarations
(People v. Raquel, G.R. No. 119006, 2006) (iii) Admission by a third party
Exceptions to the res inter alios acta rule (1st Rule on Admissions by a third party (Res Inter
Branch): Alios Acta)
1. Admission by a Co-Partner or Agent (Rule The rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by an
130, Sec. 30); act, declaration, or omission of another, except as
2. Admission by a Conspirator (Rule 130, Sec. hereinafter provided. (Rule 130, Sec. 29)
31);
3. Admission by Privies (Rule 130, Sec. 32); Example: After a murder, Accused goes to his
4. Admission by Silence (Rule 130, Sec. 33; see neighbor and tells her, “Napatay namin ni Jose si
Tan Siok Kuan v. Returta, G.R. No. 175085, Juan”. His neighbor can testify on this fact in a
2016, J. Perez); and murder case against Accused; the declaration
5. Interlocking Confessions (People v. Muit, may be given in evidence as an admission only
G.R. No. 181043, 2008) against Accused. It is not admissible against
Jose.
In a case, petitioners failed to establish that the
defendants’ alleged implied admission of a HOWEVER: If the Accused testifies and explains
lessor-lessee relationship falls under the the participation of Jose, then that testimony is
exceptions to the principle of res inter alios acta admissible against Jose.

ATENEO CENTRAL
The act or declaration of a conspirator may be

NOTE: Sec. 28 [now Sec. 29], Rule 130 refers to given in evidence against the co-conspirator
the first branch of the res inter alios acta rule. The provided the following requisites are present:
second branch can be found in Sec. 35, Rule 1. That the conspiracy be first proved by
130—similar acts as evidence. (Regalado 2008 evidence other than the act or declaration
ed., 758) itself.
2. That the act or declaration was in furtherance
(iv) Admission by a co-partner or agent of the conspiracy.
3. That the act or declaration was made during
The act or declaration of a partner or agent of the existence of the conspiracy. (Rule 130,
the party may be given in evidence against his Sec. 31)
co-partner or agent provided that the
following requisites are present: In the example above, the utterance of the
1. That the partnership or agency be previously Accused that “Napatay namin ni Jose si Juan”
proven by evidence other than the admission was made after the conspiracy. Hence, the out-
itself. of-court statement to the neighbor is not binding
2. The act or declaration refers to a matter on Jose.
within the scope of his authority or the partner
or agent was authorized by the party to make Reason: Identity of interests for the commission
a statement concerning the subject of a crime.
3. The act or declaration was made during the
existence of the partnership or agency. (Rule Scope: This rule applies only to extrajudicial acts
130, Sec. 30) or declaration but NOT to testimony at the trial
where the defendant has the opportunity to cross-
Reason: Identity of interests between the co- examine the declarant. (People v. Janjalani, G.R.
partners or agents. No. 188314, 2011)
Proving the Partnership, Agency, or Joint If the declaration is made after the act designed
Ownership is fully accomplished and after the object of the
1. Entries in the partnership books made by one conspiracy has been either attained or finally
partner during the continuance of the defeated, the declaration will be admissible only
partnership; against the person who made it. (People v. Yatco,
2. By the separate admissions of all who are G.R. No. L-9181, 1955)
sued;
3. By the acts, declarations, or conduct of the In the absence of any other evidence to prove the
parties; or existence of an alleged conspiracy, extra-judicial
4. The act of one and the declarations or statements and admissions of an individual
conduct of the others cannot be taken as evidence against an alleged
co-conspirator. An extrajudicial statement made
The same rule applies to the act or declaration by a co-accused is, by itself, insufficient to convict
of a joint owner, joint debtor, or other person an accused of a crime charged because said
jointly interested with the party. statement is inadmissible since they were made
1. There exists a joint interest between the joint not during the existence of the conspiracy but
owner, joint debtor, or other person jointly after the said conspiracy had already ceased and
interested with the party; when the co-accused was already in the custody
2. The existence of the joint interest must first of the police. (People vs. Cabrera, G.R. No. L-
be made to appear by evidence other than 37398, 1974)
the act or declaration itself;
3. The act or declaration was made while the The admissibility of a confession by one accused
interest was subsisting; and against the other in the same case, must relate to
4. The act relates to the subject matter of the statements made by one conspirator during the
joint interest (Rule 130, Sec. 30) pendency of the unlawful enterprise (or during its
existence) and in furtherance of its objects, and
(v) Admission by a conspirator not to a confession made, as in this case, long
after the conspiracy had been brought to an end.

ATENEO CENTRAL
(People v. Chaw Yaw Shun, G.R. No. L-19590, is such as naturally to call for action or comment
1968) if not true, and when proper and possible for him
or her to do so, may be given in evidence against
The testimony of a witness must be considered him or her. (Rule 130, Sec. 33)
and calibrated in its entirety and not by truncated
portions thereof or isolated passages therein. It is Reason:
perfectly reasonable to believe the testimony of a Based on common experience and natural
witness with respect to some facts and disbelieve human behavior.
it with respect to other facts, as there is hardly a
witness who can perfectly remember the details Applicability to Criminal Cases
of a crime. (People v. Bulan, G.R. No. 143404, The rule allowing silence of a person to be taken
2005) as an implied admission of the truth of the
statements uttered in his presence is applicable
(vi) Admission by privies in criminal cases. (People v. Paragsa, G.R. No.
L-44060, 1978)
PRIVIES: denotes not only the idea of succession
in right of heirship or testamentary legacy but also But Before the Silence of a Party can be Taken
succession by virtue of acts inter vivos as by as an Admission of What is Said, it Must
assignment, subrogation or purchase – in fact Appear that:
any act whereby the successor is substituted in 1. He heard and understood the statement;
the place of the predecessor in interest. The 2. He was at liberty to interpose a denial;
purchaser at an execution sale is a privy of the 3. The statement was in respect to some matter
execution debtor. (Alpuerto v. Pastor, G.R. No. L- affecting his rights or in which he was then
12794, 1918) interested, and calling, naturally, for an
answer;
General Rule: In order for an admission of a 4. The facts were within his knowledge; and
former owner of property to be admissible against 5. The fact admitted or the inference to be
his successor in title, it must relate to the property drawn from his silence would be material to
and it have been made at the time when the title the issue. (People v. Paragsa, G.R. No. L-
was still held by the declarant. (Rule 130, Sec. 32) 44060, 1978)
Exception: The declaration made subsequent to Silence of an Accused Under Custodial

the transfer of the property shall be admissible: Investigation
1. Where the declaration was made in the The silence of an accused under custody, or his
presence of the transferee and he failure to deny statements by another implicating
acquiesces in the statements or asserts him in a crime, especially when such accused is
no rights where he ought to speak. (Rule not asked to comment or reply to such
130, Sec. 33) implications or accusations, cannot be
2. Where the evidence establishes a considered as a tacit confession of his
continuing conspiracy to defraud which participation in the commission of the crime.
conspiracy exists between the vendor and (People v. Alegre, G.R. No. L-30423, 1979)
the vendee. (Rule 130, Sec. 31)
(viii) Confessions
The act of a predecessor is not binding on the
successor if the acts/declarations made by the CONFESSION – declaration of an accused
predecessor acknowledging ownership or acknowledging his or her guilt of the offense
offering to purchase the property from a third charged, or of any offense necessarily included
party were made before the predecessor held title therein. (Rule 130, Sec. 34)
to the land. (City of Manila v. Del Rosario, G.R.
No. 1284, 1905) A confession is an acknowledgement in express
terms, by a party in a criminal case, of his guilt of
(vii) Admission by silence the crime charged, while an admission is a
statement by the accused, direct or implied, of
An act or declaration made in the presence and facts pertinent to the issue and tending, in
within the hearing or observation of a party who connection with proof of other facts, to prove his
does or says nothing when the act or declaration

ATENEO CENTRAL
guilt. (People v. Maqueda, G.R. No. 112983, accorded the opportunity to cross-examine the
1995) admitter, such admission or confession is
transposed into a judicial admission or
ADMISSION CONFESSION confession. (People v. Buntag, G.R. No. 123070,
A statement of fact Involves an 2004)
which does not acknowledgement of
involve an guilt or liability Admissibility of Extra-judicial Confessions
acknowledgement of To be admissible, it is necessary that:
guilt or liability 1. The confession must involve an express and
May be express or Must be express categorical acknowledgement of guilt.
tacit 2. The facts admitted must be constitutive of a
May be made by third Can be made only by criminal offense.
persons and, in the party himself and, 3. The confession must have been given
certain cases, are in some instances, voluntarily.
admissible against a are admissible 4. The confession must have been intelligently
party (see Rule 130, against his co- made, the accused realizing the importance
Sec. 40, on accused (e.g., or legal significance of his act.
declarations against interlocking 5. There must have been no violation of Section
interest) confessions) 12, Art. III of the 1987 Constitution.
The rights of an accused are not confined to the Rights of Persons Arrested, Detained or
period prior to the filing of an information but are Under Custodial Investigation
available at that stage when a person is under Any extrajudicial confession made by a person
investigation for the commission of an offense. arrested, detained, or under custodial
These rights are available to a person at any time investigation shall be in writing, and signed by
before arraignment whenever he is investigated such person in the presence of his counsel or in
for the commission of an offense. (People v. the latter’s absence, upon a valid waiver, and in
Maqueda, G.R. No. 112983, 1995) the presence of any of the parents, older brothers
and sisters, his spouse, the municipal mayor, the
A Confession May be municipal judge, district school supervisor, or
1. JUDICIAL CONFESSION: One made before priests or minister of the gospel as chosen by him;
a court in which the case is pending and in otherwise, such extrajudicial confession shall be
the course of legal proceedings therein and, inadmissible as evidence in any proceeding.
by itself, can sustain a conviction in capital (R.A. 7438, Sec. 2(d))
offenses.
This is admissible against the declarant’s co- The silence of an accused under custody, or his
accused since the latter are afforded the failure to deny statements by another implicating
opportunity to cross-examine. him in a crime, especially when such accused is
2. EXTRA-JUDICIAL CONFESSION: One neither asked to comment nor reply to such
made in any other place or occasion and implications or accusations, cannot be
cannot sustain a conviction unless considered as a tacit confession of his
corroborated by evidence of the corpus participation in the commission of the crime.
delicti. Such an inference of acquiescence drawn from
May be given in evidence against the his silence or failure to deny the statement would
confessant but not against his co-accused as appear incompatible with the right of an accused
they are deprived of the opportunity to cross- against self-incrimination. xxx While an accused
examine him. (Riano 2016 ed.) is in custody, his silence may not be taken in
evidence against him as he has a right to remain
NOTE: The important thing is the affected party silent. His silence when in custody may not be
(i.e., co-accused) was given the opportunity to used as evidence against him, otherwise, his right
cross-examine. It is irrelevant whether such party of silence would be illusory. (People v. Alegre,
actually cross-examined the confessant. G.R. No. L-30423, 1979)
Where an extrajudicial admission or confession is Admissions obtained during custodial

repeated during trial and the other accused is interrogations without the benefit of counsel

ATENEO CENTRAL
although later reduced to writing and signed in the rule” because the constitutional guarantees
presence of counsel are flawed under the embodied in the Bill of Rights are given and
Constitution and as such cannot be admitted in extend to all persons, both aliens and citizens.
Court. (People v. Compil, G.R. No. 95028, 1995) The accused cannot be made to affix their
signatures on evidence without complying with
Any confession, including a re-enactment without the Bill of Rights. By affixing their signatures on
admonition of the right to silence and to counsel, the evidence, the accused are in effect made to
and without counsel chosen by the accused is tacitly admit the crime charged for, in this case,
inadmissible in evidence. (People v. Yip Wai mere possession of prohibited drugs is a crime.
Ming, G.R. No. 120959, 1996) These signatures amount to uncounseled extra-
judicial confession prohibited by the Bill of Rights
General Rule – The extrajudicial confession of and are therefore inadmissible as evidence.
an accused is binding only upon himself and is (People v. Wong Chuen Ming, G.R. Nos. 112801-
not admissible against his co-accused. 11, 1996)
Exceptions: The rule that an extrajudicial Confrontation Clause and Confessions

statement is evidence only against the person The Confrontation Clause does not bar admission
making it, also recognizes various exceptions. into evidence of every relevant extrajudicial
One such exception worth noting is the rule that statement by a non-testifying declarant simply
where several extrajudicial statements had been because it in some way incriminates the
(i) made by several persons charged with an defendant. And an instruction directing the jury to
offense and (ii) there could have been no consider a co-defendant's extrajudicial statement
collusion with reference to said several only against its source is generally sufficient to
confessions, (iii) the facts that the statements are avoid offending the implicated defendant's
in all material respects identical, is confirmatory confrontation right. The court may admit into
of the confession of the co-defendants and is evidence interlocking confessions of co-
admissible against other persons implicated defendants/accused even without giving the
therein. accused an opportunity to cross-examine his co-
defendant. The rule however is different when a
They are also admissible as circumstantial co-defendant does not confess. In such cases,
evidence against the person implicated therein to the co-defendant must be given an opportunity to
show the probability of the latter’s actual cross-examine the confessant if and when such
participation in the commission of the crime and person takes the witness stand. (Parker v.
may likewise serve as corroborative evidence if it Randolph, 442 U.S. 62, 1979)
is clear from other facts and circumstances that
other persons had participated in the perpetration Admissions made before the Mayor & Station
of the crime charged and proved. These are Commander during a conference that defendants
known as “interlocking confessions”. (People v. were responsible for killing the victims is an
Lising, G.R. Nos. 106210-11, 1998). admission. Also a judicial admission by one
accused is admissible against his co-accused,
After accused-appellant was arrested, he stated unlike in an extrajudicial confession, where it is
that five police officers at the police station beat admissible only against the one making it.
him up. They asked him to undress, forced him to (People v. Encipido, G.R. No. 70091, 1986)
lie down on a bench, sat on his stomach, placed
a handkerchief over his face, and poured water A videotaped interview showing the accused
and beer over his face. When he could no longer unburdening his guilt, willingly, openly and
bear the pain, he admitted the crime charged, publicly in the presence of newsmen does not
participated in a re-enactment, and signed an form part of custodial investigation if it was not
extrajudicial statement. He was not informed of given to police officers but media men in an
his right to remain silent nor did he have counsel attempt to elicit sympathy and forgiveness from
of his choice to assist him in confessing the crime. the public. However, it is prudent that the trial
This was contrary to the constitution (People v. courts are reminded that extreme caution must be
Yip Wai Ming, G.R. No. 120959, 1996). taken in further admitting confessions of such
nature. (People v. Endino, G.R. No. 133026,
The fact that all accused are foreign nationals 2001)
does not preclude application of the “exclusionary

ATENEO CENTRAL
A confession to a radio reporter is admissible

where it was not shown that said reporter was 2. CRIMINAL CASES:
acting for the police or that the interview was
conducted under circumstances where it is General Rule: an offer of compromise by the
apparent that the suspect confessed to the killing accused may be received in evidence as an
out of fear. (People v. Coyos, G.R. No. 138403, implied admission of guilt.
2001)
Exceptions:
An uncounseled confession or admission given 1. Plea of guilty later withdrawn;
by the accused to a private individual is not
covered by Sec. 12, Art. III of the Constitution 2. Tax cases – payment of any internal
where there is no showing that said private revenue tax may be compromised, and
individual was acting under police authority. all criminal violations may likewise be
(People v. Mayo, G.R. No. 170470, 2006) compromised (Sec. 204, NIRC)
An uncounseled extrajudicial confession taken by Exception to the exception: Those

a “bantay bayan,” who is charged with the state already filed in court & those involving
related function of peace-keeping, is inadmissible fraud
in evidence. (People v. Lauga, G.R. No. 186228,
2010) 3. Offer to pay or the payment of medical,
Any confession, including a re-enactment without hospital, or other expenses occasioned
admonition of the right to silence and to counsel, by an injury
and without counsel chosen by the accused, is 4. Those involving quasi-offenses or
inadmissible. (People v. Duero, G.R. No. L- criminal negligence;
52016, 1981) 5. An unaccepted offer of plea of guilty to a
lesser offense;
(ix) Admissibility of offers or compromise 6. Those covered by Katarungang
Pambarangay Law; and
Rule on Compromises 7. B.P. 22 cases
8. Any statement made in the course of plea
1. CIVIL CASES: bargaining with the prosecution, which
does not result in a plea of guilty or which
General Rule: An offer of compromise is not an results in a plea of guilty later withdrawn
admission of any liability and is NOT admissible
in evidence against the offeror. The following are NOT admissible in evidence
against the accused who made the plea or
Exception: When such offer is clearly not only to offer:
buy peace but amounts to an admission of 1. A plea of guilty later withdrawn, or
liability, the offered compromise being directed 2. An unaccepted offer of a plea of guilty to
only to the amount paid (El Varadero de Manila v. lesser offense
Insular Lumber, G.R. No. 21911, September 15, 3. Any statement made in the course of plea
1924). bargaining with the prosecution, which
does not result in a plea of guilty or which
Rule on Compromise Negotiations: results in a plea of guilty later withdrawn
Neither is evidence of conduct nor statements
made in compromise negotiations admissible Rule on Offer of Payment of Expenses
occasioned by injury (Good Samaritan
Exception: Doctrine)
a. Evidence otherwise discoverable; An offer to pay or the payment of medical,
b. Offered for another purpose, such as hospital or other expenses occasioned by an
proving bias or prejudice of a witness, injury is not admissible in evidence as proof of
negativing a contention of undue delay or civil or criminal liability for the injury.
proving an effort to obstruct a criminal
investigation or prosecution. (Rule 130, Jurisprudence on offer of compromise for
Sec. 28) criminal cases

ATENEO CENTRAL
The offer of compromise which naturally, under to prove that he did or did not do the same or
the general rules of evidence, must be excluded, similar thing at another time. (Rule 130, Sec. 35)
except that as the amounts named in the offers to
accept certain sums in settlement appear to have Exceptions: - Similar acts may be received as
been arrived at as a fair estimate of value, they evidence to prove. SIPPS-HCU
are relevant. (El Veradero v. Insular, G.R. No. 1. A specific intent or knowledge
21911, 1924) 2. Identity
3. Plan
The accused is permitted to show that the offer 4. System
was not made under the consciousness of guilt 5. Scheme
but merely to avoid the inconvenience of 6. Habit
imprisonment or for some other reason which 7. Custom or Usage; and
would justify a claim by the accused that the offer 8. The like.
to compromise was not in truth and admission of
guilt, or an attempt to avoid the legal The prosecution may, however, introduce the
consequences which would ordinarily ensue robbery in January to prove the robbery in June
therefrom. (People v. Godoy, G.R. No. 115908- to establish a modus operandi: that in both
09, 1995)) robberies, the robbers used explosives to gain
entry into the bank, that the robbers threw tear
A plea for forgiveness may be considered as gas while wearing gas masks; and that the
analogous to an attempt to compromise. In robbers struck at the close of bank hours.
criminal cases, except those involving quasi-
offenses or those allowed by law to be NOTE: Rule 130, Sec. 35 is the second branch of
compromised, an offer of compromise by the the res inter alios acta rule and applies to both
accused may be received in evidence as an civil and criminal cases.
implied admission of guilt. (People v. De
Guzman, G.R. No. 117217, 1996) Burden of proof: The offering party must allege
and prove specific, repetitive conduct that might
An offer of compromise does not require that a constitute evidence of habit. The examples
criminal complaint be first filed before the offer offered in evidence to prove habit, or pattern of
can be received in evidence against the offeror. evidence must be numerous enough to base on
What is required is that after committing the inference of systematic conduct. Mere similarity
crime, the accused or his representative makes of contracts does not present the kind of
an offer to compromise and such offer is proved. sufficiently similar circumstances to outweigh the
(People v. Yparraguirre, G.R. No. 117702, 1997) danger of prejudice and confusion. (Boston Bank
v. Manalo, G.R. No. 158149, 2006)
The return by the accused of money belonging to
the private complainant will not reverse a The general rule is that evidence of other
consummated act of Estafa. Quite the contrary, offenses committed by the defendant is
such action may even uphold a conviction. inadmissible. However, such evidence may be
Defendant's initial attempts to reimburse admitted where its purpose is to ascertain the
Complainant through checks, coupled with the knowledge and intent of the defendant to fix his
actual return of the latter's money after the RTC negligence. Evidence which tends to explain or
issued its judgment of conviction, may all be establish conduct of the accused or defendant is
considered as unequivocal gestures to admissible unless it has no legitimate bearing on
compromise and which can be measured against the issue (irrelevant) or where it is merely
the Defendant as his implied admission of guilt. calculated to prejudice the accused. (US v.
(J. Hernando: Arriola v. People, G.R. No. Pineda, G.R. No. L-12858, 1918)
199975, 2020)
While evidence of another crime is generally not
5. Previous conduct as admissible in another prosecution, it is admissible
evidence when it is otherwise relevant, as where it tends to
identify the defendant as the perpetrator of the
General Rule – Evidence that one did or did not robbery charged, or tends to show his presence
do a certain thing at one time is not admissible at the scene or in the vicinity of the crime at the
time charged or when it is evidence of a

ATENEO CENTRAL
circumstance connected with the crime. (People Doctrine of Independently Relevant

v. Irang, G.R. No. L-45179, 1937) Statements
Only the fact that such statements were made is
Similar Acts Rule in Special Laws relevant, and the truth or falsity thereof is
1.) RAPE SHIELD (SEC. 6, R.A. No. 8505): In immaterial. The hearsay rule does not apply. The
prosecutions for rape, evidence of the statements are admissible as evidence. (People
complainant’s past sexual conduct, opinion v. Gumimba G.R. No. 174056, 2007)
thereof, or of his/her reputation shall not be
admitted: 7. Hearsay rule and exceptions
to the hearsay rule
Exception: Unless, and only to the extent
that the court finds that, such evidence is (i) Meaning of hearsay
relevant and material to the case.
Statement other than one made by the declarant
2.) RULE ON EXAMINATION OF CHILD while testifying at a trial or hearing, offered to
WITNESSES (Sec. 30): The following evidence prove the truth of the facts asserted therein.
is not admissible in any criminal proceeding
involving alleged sexual child abuse: A statement is:
a. Evidence offered to prove that the (a) An oral or written assertion or
alleged victim engaged in other (b) A non-verbal conduct of a person, if it is
sexual behavior; and intended by him or her as an assertion
b. Evidence offered to prove the sexual
predisposition of the alleged victim Hearsay evidence is inadmissible except as
otherwise provided in these Rules.
Exception: Evidence of specific instances of
sexual behavior by the alleged victim to prove A statement is not hearsay if the declarant
that a person, other than the accused, was testifies at the trial or hearing and is subject to
the source of the semen, injury, or other cross-examination concerning the statement, and
physical evidence. (This is admissible.) the statement is:
(a) Inconsistent with the declarant’s
6. Testimonial knowledge testimony and was given under oath
subject to the penalty of perjury at a trial,
A witness can testify only to those facts which he hearing or other proceeding, or in a
or she knows of his or her personal knowledge. deposition
(b) Consistent with the declarant’s testimony
Personal Knowledge and is offered to rebut an express or
implied charge against the declarant of
Facts derived from his or her own perception. recent fabrication or improper influence
(Rule 130, Section 22) or motive; or
(c) One of identification of a person made
Thus, while it is true that the testimony of a after perceiving him or her (Rule 130,
witness regarding a statement made by another Sec. 37)
person, if intended to establish the truth of the fact
asserted in the statement, is clearly hearsay Any evidence is hearsay if its probative value is
evidence, it is otherwise if the purpose of not based on the personal knowledge of the
placing the statement in the record is merely witness, but on the knowledge of some other
to establish the fact that the statement was person not on the witness stand. (Regalado 2008
made or the tenor of such statement. ed.)
Regardless of the truth or falsity of a statement,
when the fact that it has been made is relevant, The Hearsay Rule renders inadmissible as
the hearsay rule does not apply and the evidence, out-of-court statements made by
statement may be shown. (Comilang v. Burcena persons not presented as witnesses but are
G.R. No. 146853, 2006) offered as proof of the matters stated. This rule
proceeds from the basic rationale of fairness, as
the party against whom it is presented is unable

ATENEO CENTRAL
to cross-examine the person making the opportunity to cross-examine the person to whom
statement. (DST Movers Corp. v. People’s the statements are attributed. Moreover, the court
General Insurance Corp., G.R. No. 198627, 13 is without opportunity to test the credibility of
January 2016) hearsay statements by observing the demeanor
of the person who made them. (People of the
The personal knowledge of a witness is a Philippines v. Victor P. Padit, G.R. No. 202978,
substantive prerequisite for accepting testimonial 2016)
evidence that establishes the truth of a disputed
fact. The rule excluding hearsay as evidence is Failure to object to hearsay evidence
based upon serious concerns about the Consequently, if a party does not object to the
trustworthiness and reliability of hearsay hearsay evidence, the same is admissible, as a
evidence due to its not being given under oath or party can waive his right to cross-examine.
solemn affirmation and due to its not being However, it has also been held that hearsay
subjected to cross-examination by the opposing evidence not objected to may be admissible but,
counsel to test the perception, memory, veracity whether objected to or not, has no probative value
and articulateness of the out-of-court declarant or and, as opposed to direct primary evidence, the
actor upon whose reliability the worth of the out- latter always prevails. (Regalado 2008 ed. citing
of-court statement depends. (Patula v. People, People v. Ola, G.R. No. L-47147, 1987)
G.R. No. 164457, 11 April 2012)
Hearsay Statements may be the basis of
The term “hearsay” as used in the law on Probable Cause
evidence, signifies evidence which is not founded Probable cause can be established with hearsay
upon the personal knowledge of the witness from evidence, as long as there is substantial basis for
whom it is elicited and which consequently does crediting the hearsay. Hearsay evidence is
not depend wholly for its credibility and weight admissible in determining probable cause in a
upon the confidence which the court may have in preliminary investigation because such
him; its value, if any, is measured by the credit to investigation is merely preliminary and does not
be given to some third person not sworn as a finally adjudicate rights and obligations of parties.
witness to that fact, and consequently, not subject (Estrada v. Ombudsman, G.R. No. 212140-41,
to cross-examination. If one therefore testifies to 2015)
facts which he learned from a third person not
sworn as a witness to those facts, his testimony Hearsay Statements may be considered in an
is inadmissible as hearsay evidence. Amparo Proceeding
Though hearsay evidence is generally
Elements of Hearsay considered inadmissible under the rules of
1. There must be an out-of-court statement, evidence, such may be considered in a writ of
whether oral or written, or a non-verbal amparo proceeding if required by the unique
conduct intended as an assertion, and circumstances of the case. It is the totality of the
2. The statement made out of court is repeated obtaining situation that must be taken into
and offered by the witness to prove the truth consideration to determine if a petitioner is
of the matters asserted in the statement. entitled to a writ of amparo. Clearly, and based
on the totality of obtaining circumstances, X and
Form of Hearsay Evidence her children were the subject of surveillance
It may be verbal, in writing or even non-verbal because of their relationship with a suspected
conduct. member of the NPA, creating a real threat to their
life, liberty, or security. (Sanchez v. Darroca,
(ii) Reason for exclusion of hearsay evidence G.R. No. 242257, 2019)
Hearsay evidence is excluded because the party
against whom it is presented is deprived of his (iii) Exceptions to the hearsay rule
right and opportunity to cross-examine the
persons to whom the statements or writings are (a) Dying declarations
attributed. (Regalado 2008 ed.)
Dying declaration. - The declaration of a dying
The reason for the exclusion of hearsay evidence person, made under the consciousness of an
is that the party against whom the hearsay impending death, may be received in any case
testimony is presented is deprived of the right or

ATENEO CENTRAL
wherein his or her death is the subject of inquiry, renders the dying declaration admissible (People
as evidence of the cause and surrounding v. Bautista, G.R. No. 11148, 1997)
circumstances of such death. (Rule 130, Sec. 38)
The fact that death did not ensue until three days
A statement made by a dying person referring to after the declaration was made will not alter its
the material facts which concern the cause and probative force since it is not indispensable that a
circumstances of his death and which is uttered declarant expires immediately thereafter. It is the
under a fixed belief that death is impending and belief in impending death and not the rapid
is certain to follow immediately, or in a very short succession of death, in point of fact, that renders
time, without an opportunity of retraction and in the dying declaration admissible. (People v.
the absence of all hopes of recovery. Sabio, G.R. No. L-26193, 1981)
Elements: Dying declarations are Admissible in Both

1. That death is imminent and the declarant Civil and Criminal Cases
is conscious of that fact;
2. That the declaration refers to the cause The former rule was that dying declarations were
and surrounding circumstances of such admissible only in criminal prosecutions for
death; homicide, murder, or parricide wherein the
3. That the declaration relates to facts declarant is the victim. As amended, the rule now
which the victim is competent to testify to; provides for such admissibility in any case as
4. That the declaration is offered in a case long as requisites concur. (Regalado 2008 ed.)
wherein the declarant’s death is the
subject of the inquiry. (People vs. Purposes for Admitting Dying Declaration:
Bautista, G.R. No. 117685, 1999) 1. To identify the accused or
2. To show the cause of death or
NOTE: A dying declaration is NOT considered 3. To show the circumstances under which
confidential communication between spouses the assault was made upon the victim.
(U.S. v. Antipolo, G.R. No. L-13109, 1918).
The declaration of the deceased is not admissible
Examples: as an ante mortem declaration since the
‘Tabangi ko Pre, gipusil ko ni kapitan,’ meaning deceased was in doubt as to whether he would
‘Help me, Pre, I was shot by the captain.’ → dying die or not. The declaration fails to show that the
declaration (Marturillas v. People, G.R. No. deceased believed himself in extremis, "at the
163217, 2006). point of death when every hope of recovery is
extinct, which is the sole basis for admitting this
kind of declarations as an exception to the
Intervening Time is Immaterial hearsay rule." It may be admitted, however, as
There must be a settled, hopeless expectation part of the res gestae since the statement was
that death is at hand. It is sufficient that the made immediately after the incident and the
declarant believed himself to be in imminent deceased had no sufficient time to concoct a
danger of death at the time of such declaration. charge against the accused. (People v. Laquinon,
G.R. No. L-45470, 1985)
But death need not follow soon; statements made
during a 7-day interval between stabbing and the Dying declarations may be used to corroborate
victim’s death were held to be a dying declaration the testimony of a witness. (People v. Brioso,
(People v. Rarugal, G.R. No. 188603, 2013). G.R. No. L-28482, 1971)
It is the belief in impending death and not the Thus, while a dying declaration may be
rapid succession of death in point of fact that admissible in evidence, it must identify with
certainty the assailant. Otherwise, it loses its

ATENEO CENTRAL
significance. (People v. Ador, G.R. Nos. 140538- action demanding or claiming against the
39, 2004) executor, administrator or other representative of
the deceased or the person of unsound mind, can
(b) Statement of decedent or person of TESTIFY on a matter of fact occurring before the
unsound mind death of the deceased or before the person
became of unsound mind, if the requisites under
0. In an action: Rule 130, Sec. 39 are satisfied .
Against an executor or administrator or other
representative of a deceased person or To minimize the danger of injustice to the
Against a person of unsound mind decedent’s estate or person of unsound mind,
however, the (otherwise hearsay) statement of
1. Upon a claim or demand against the estate the deceased or person of unsound mind may
of such deceased person or against such be admitted, so long as the statement was made
person of unsound mind, upon the personal knowledge of the deceased or
person of unsound mind, at the time when the
2. Where a: matter had been recently perceived by him or her
Party or and while his or her recollection was clear, and
Assignor of a party or there are no circumstances indicating its lack of
A person in whose behalf a case is prosecuted trustworthiness.
TESTIFIES on a matter of fact occurring (c) Declaration against interest

before the death of the deceased or
before the person became of unsound The declaration made by a person deceased, or
mind, unable to testify, against the interest of the
declarant, if the fact asserted in the declaration
3. Any statement of the deceased or the was at the time it was made so far contrary to
person of unsound mind, may be declarant’s own interest, that a reasonable
received in evidence if: person in his or her position would not have made
The statement was made upon the personal the declaration unless he or she believed it to be
knowledge of the deceased or person of true, may be received in evidence against himself
unsound mind or herself or his or her successors in interest and
At a time when the matter had been recently against third persons.
perceived by him or her and
While his or her recollection was clear. A statement tending to expose the declarant to
criminal liability and offered to exculpate the
Such statement, however may be inadmissible if accused is not admissible unless corroborating
made under circumstances indicating its lack of circumstances clearly indicate trustworthiness of
TRUSTWORTHINESS (Rule 130, Sec. 39) the statement. (Rule 130, Sec. 40)
NOTE: The previous version of this provision was NOTE: The second sentence of this rule is an
the former Rule 130, Sec. 23 on disqualifications addition to the old rule concerning declarations
by reason of death or insanity of adverse party against interest.
(Dead Man’s rule)
Consider this factual scenario: the alleged
The former Dead Man’s rule has now been declarant Zoilo Fuentes Jr., a cousin of accused-
superseded. appellant Alejandro Fuentes Jr., supposedly
verbally admitted to the latter, and later to their
The former Dead Man’s rule prohibited the common uncle Felicisimo Fuentes, that he (Zoilo)
survivor from testifying against the deceased killed the victim because of a grudge, after which
or person of unsound mind; the Dead Man’s rule he disappeared. One striking feature that
put the two parties on equal footing: Where death militates against the acceptance of such a
has sealed the lips of the dead, the law seals the statement is its patent untrustworthiness.
lips of the living. Zoilo who is related to accused-appellant had
every motive to prevaricate. The same can be
BUT now, a party, a party’s assignor or a person said of accused-appellant and his uncle
in whose behalf a case is being prosecuted in an

ATENEO CENTRAL
Felicisimo (Fuentes v. CA, G.R. No. 111692, DECLARATIONS ADMISSIONS

1996) AGAINST INTEREST
contrary to the interest at the time it
Requisites for declarations against interest: declarant’s own was made.
1. Declarant must not be available to testify interest that a
due to death, mental incapacity, or reasonable man in his
physical incompetence, or his being position would not
outside the territorial jurisdiction of the have made that
country if exact whereabouts are declaration unless he
unknown. believed it to be true
2. The declaration must concern a fact NOT necessary that The declarant or
cognizable by the declarant. the declarant be a someone identified in
3. The circumstances must render it party to the action; it is interest is a party to
improbable that a motive to falsify admissible in an the action
existed. (Fuentes vs. CA, G.R. No. action where his
111692, 1996) declaration is relevant
May be admitted Used only against the
Scope: The declaration against interest includes against himself or his party admitting and
all kinds of interests such as pecuniary, successors-in-interest those identified with
proprietary, or penal interests. and against 3rd him in legal interest
persons
Kinds of Declarations against Interests: The declarant must be An admission is made
1. Declaration against Pecuniary first accounted for as by the party himself; it
Interests - those which may bar in whole dead, absent from the is primary evidence
or in part the declarant’s interests or jurisdiction, or and it is admissible
which may give rise to a monetary claim otherwise unavailable whether or not the
against him. as a witness declarant is available
2. Declaration against Proprietary as witness (Lazaro v.
Interests - those which are at variance Agustin, GR 152364,
with the declarant’s property interests. 2010)
3. Declaration against Penal Interests - Declarations against May be made at any
those which put the declarant at the risk interests must have time, before or during
of prosecution. been made ante litem the trial
motam (before the
Declarations Against Interest and controversy)
Admissions Distinguished
DECLARATIONS ADMISSIONS Declaration Against Interest and Self-serving
AGAINST INTEREST
Declaration Distinguished
Exception to the Admissions of a party
hearsay rule; are NOT covered by DECLARATION SELF-SERVING
admissible the Hearsay Rule AGAINST DECLARATION
(see Estrada v. INTEREST
Desierto) Admissible in Not admissible in
Secondary evidence; Primary evidence; evidence evidence as proof of the
admissible only if the admissible whether notwithstanding its facts asserted since its
declarant is dead or or not the declarant is hearsay character introduction in evidence
unable to testify. available as witness would open the door to
(Unchuan v. Lozada, (Lazaro v. Agustin, fraud and perjury
G.R. No. 172671, GR 152364, 2010)
April 16, 2009) The testimony of the accused that he was married
to the deceased was an admission against his
The fact asserted in A party’s admission penal interest. It was a confirmation of the maxim
the declaration must need not have been semper praesumitur matrimonio and the
have been at the time made against his presumption “that a man and woman deporting
it was made so far themselves as husband and wife have entered

ATENEO CENTRAL
into a lawful contract of marriage.” He and the admission. (People v. Alegado, G.R. No. 93030-
deceased had five children. He alluded in his 31, 1991)
testimony to his father-in-law. That implies that
the deceased was his lawful wife. The fact that he Requisites:
bitterly resented her infidelity, her failure to visit 1. That the actor/declarant is dead or
him in prison and her neglect of their children are unable to testify;
other circumstances confirmatory of their marital 2. That the actor/declarant be related to the
status. (People v. Majuri, G.R. No. L-38833, person whose pedigree is the subject of
1980) inquiry;
3. That such relationship be shown by
But more importantly, the far weightier reason evidence other than the act or
why the admission against penal interest cannot declaration; and
be accepted in the instant case is that the 4. That the act or declaration was made
declarant is not “unable to testify.” There is no ante litem motam, that is, not only before
showing that the declarant is either dead, the commencement of the suit involving
mentally incapacitated or physically incompetent the subject matter of the declaration, but
which Sec. 38 [now Sec. 40] obviously before any controversy has arisen
contemplates. His mere absence from the thereon. (J. Hernando: Ende v. Roman
jurisdiction does not make him ipso facto Catholic Prelate of the Prelature Nullius
unavailable under this rule. (Fuentes vs. CA, G.R. of Cotabato, Inc. citing Tison v. CA, G.R.
No. 111692, 1996) No. 191867, 2021)
A statement of fact in a verified petition and an Rule on Proving Evidence of Relationship for
accompanying silence about any contrary fact Establishing Pedigree
may be appreciated in more than one context—a
declaration against interest and a judicial General Rule: Where the party claiming seeks
admission combined. A declaration against recovery against a relative common to both
interest is the best evidence which affords the claimant and declarant, but not from the declarant
greatest certainty of the facts in dispute. A judicial himself or the declarant's estate:
admission binds the person who makes the
same, and absent any showing that this was The relationship of the declarant to the common
made through palpable mistake, no amount of relative may not be proved by the declaration
rationalization can offset it. (Heirs of Miguel itself. There must be some independent proof of
Franco v. CA, G.R. No. 123924, 2003) this fact.
(d) Act or declaration about pedigree Exception: [Where the party seeks] to reach the
estate of the declarant himself and not merely to
PEDIGREE – history of family descent which is establish a right through his declarations to the
transmitted from one generation to another by property of some other family member:
both oral and written declarations and traditions.
The declaration itself will suffice. (Tison v. CA,
The word “pedigree” includes relationship, family G.R. No 121027, 1997)
genealogy, birth, marriage, death, the dates when
and the places where these facts occurred, and In a marriage nullity case, the lack of personal
the names of the relatives. It embraces also facts interview of the respondent does not render
of family history intimately connected with hearsay the psychological report (Camacho-
pedigree. (Rule 130, Sec. 41) Reyes v. Reyes, G.R. No. 185286, 2010).
Reasons for Admissibility (e) Family reputation or tradition regarding

Declarations in regard to pedigree, although pedigree
hearsay, are admitted on the principle that they
are natural expressions of persons who must The reputation or tradition existing in a family
know the truth. Pedigree testimony is admitted previous to the controversy, in respect to the
because it is the best that the nature of the case pedigree of any one of its members, may be
admits and because greater evil might arise from received in evidence if the witness testifying
the rejection of such proof than from its thereon be also a member of the family, either by

ATENEO CENTRAL
consanguinity, affinity or adoption. Entries in the family, now dead, and concerning the family
family bibles or other family books or charts, genealogy of the same. (Ferrer v. de Inchausti,
engraving on rings, family portraits and the like, G.R. No. L-12993, 1918)
may be received as evidence of pedigree. (Rule,
130 Sec. 42) A person’s testimony as to his age is admissible
although hearsay and though a person can have
By family reputation or tradition regarding no personal knowledge of the date of his birth as
pedigree is meant such declarations and all the knowledge a person has of his age is
statements as have come down from generation acquired from what he is told by his parents, he
to generation from deceased relatives in such a may testify as to his age as he had learned it from
way that even though it cannot be said or his parents and relatives. His testimony in such
determined which of the deceased relatives case is an assertion of family tradition. (People v.
originally made them, yet it appears that such Alegado, G.R. No. 93030-31, 1991)
declarations and statements were made as family
history, ante litem motam, by a deceased person Distinguish Section 41 v. Section 42
connected by blood, marriage or adoption with SECTION 41 SECTION 42
the person whose pedigree is to be established. Family reputation or
Act or declaration
tradition regarding
Requisites: about pedigree
pedigree
1. There is controversy in respect to the The witness testifies
pedigree of any member of a family; as to the reputation or
2. The reputation or tradition of the pedigree Actor/Declarant is tradition regarding
of the person concerned existed previous deceased or unable pedigree within the
to the controversy; and to testify family (the
3. The witness testifying to the reputation or actors/declarants may
tradition regarding the pedigree of the be dead or alive).
person concerned must be a member of Witness need not be
the family of said person either by Witness is a member
a member of the
consanguinity, affinity or adoption. of the family
family
The witness himself is
Scope of enumeration: Relation of the
the one to whom the
The scope of the enumeration contained in the actor/declarant and
fact relates; it is not
second portion of this provision is limited to the person subject of
necessary for him to
objects which are commonly known as family the inquiry must be
establish by
possessions, or those articles which represent, in established by
independent evidence
effect, a family’s joint statement of its belief as to independent
his relationship to his
the pedigree of a person. These are objects evidence
family
openly exhibited and well known to the family; or
those which, if preserved in a family, may be (f) Common reputation
regarded as giving a family tradition. Other
examples are: inscriptions on tombstones, Common reputation existing previous to the
monuments or coffin plates (Jison v. CA, G.R. No. controversy, as to boundaries of or customs
124853, 1998) affecting lands in the community and reputation
as to the events of general history important to
The law does not require that the entries in the the community, or respecting marriage or moral
said booklet be made at the same time as the character, may be given in evidence. Monuments
occurrence of those events; hence, the written and inscriptions in public places may be received
memorandum in the same is not subject to the as evidence of common reputation (Rule 130,
defect attributed to it. The witness Joaquin Jose Sec. 43)
de Inchausti declared affirmatively that the
memorandum under consideration has been Testimony does not constitute common
written in the handwriting of his brother Ramon reputation unless such is equivalent to universal
Martinez de Viademonte, whose handwriting he reputation. (City of Manila v. Del Rosario, G.R.
was familiar with, and the testimony of this No. 1284, 1905)
witness contains some reference to a member of

ATENEO CENTRAL
Common reputation is the definite opinion of the expressed of his character. It means that
community in which the fact to be proved is which a person is reputed to be.
known or exists. It means the general or
substantially undivided reputation, as Under this section, the character of a person is
distinguished from a partial or qualified one, permitted to be established by his common
although it need not be unanimous. (Regalado, reputation. (Regalado, 2008 ed.)
2008 ed.)
The character of a certain place as an “opium
What may be Established by Common joint” can be established by proof of facts and
Reputation: circumstances including evidence of its common
1. Boundaries of or customs affecting lands reputation in the community (U.S. v. Choa Chiok,
in the community G.R. No. 12423, 1917)
2. Reputation as to events of general
history important to the community (g) Part of the res gestae
3. Reputation respecting marriage
4. Reputation respecting moral character Statements made by a person while a startling
occurrence is taking place or immediately prior or
Requisites for Admissibility of Common subsequent thereto, under the stress of
Reputation as to events of general history excitement caused by the occurrence with
important to the community: respect to the circumstances thereof, may be
1. The facts must be of public or general given in evidence as part of the res gestae. So,
interest; also, statements accompanying an equivocal act
2. The reputation must have been formed material to the issue, and giving it a legal
among a class of persons who were in a significance, may be received as part of the res
position to have some sources of gestae (Rule 130, Sec. 44)
information and to contribute intelligently
to the formation of the opinion; and RES GESTAE is from the Latin phrase meaning
3. The reputation must have been existing “things done”.
previous to the controversy.
Res gestae, as an exception to the hearsay rule,
refers to those exclamations and statements
made by either the participants, victims, or
Requisites for Admissibility of Common spectators to a crime immediately before, during,
Reputation Respecting Marriage: or after the commission of the crime, when the
1. The common reputation must have been circumstances are such that the statements were
formed previous to the controversy; and made as a spontaneous reaction or utterance
2. The reputation must have been formed inspired by the excitement of the occasion and
among a class of persons who were in a there was no opportunity for the declarant to
position to have some sources of deliberate and to fabricate a false statement.
information and to contribute intelligently (DBP Pool of Accredited Insurance Companies v.
to the formation of the opinion. Radio Mindanao Network, Inc., G.R. No. 147039
January 27, 2006)
Requisites for Admissibility of Common
Reputation Respecting Moral Character: There are two types of res gestae utterances:
1. That it is the reputation in the place where 1. Spontaneous Statements - statements
the person in question is best known; and made by a person while a startling
2. That it was formed previous to the occurrence is taking place or immediately
controversy. (People v. Alegado, G.R. prior or subsequent thereto with respect
No. 93030-31, 1991) to the circumstances thereof. The
spontaneous or excited utterance is part
Reputation and Character Distinguished of the “things done”, the startling
1. Character – refers to the inherent occurrence.
qualities of a person. It means that which
a person really is. Example: A heard a gunshot and saw B
2. Reputation – applies to the opinion holding a gun pointed at C who was slumped
which others may have formed and on the ground. C shouted, “Please don't kill

ATENEO CENTRAL
me.” A’s testimony regarding the statement attending circumstances. (People v.

made by C may be deemed part of the res Estibal, G.R. No. 208749, 2014)
gestae.
It is important to stress that the statement must
2. Verbal Acts – utterances which not only be spontaneous. It must also be made
accompany some equivocal act or at a time when there was no opportunity for the
conduct to which the utterances give a person to concoct or develop his own story.
legal effect. (People v. Lungayan, G.R. No. L-64556, 1988)
A verbal act presupposes conduct that is Not every statement made under the startling
equivocal or ambiguous, one which, in itself, event is admissible even if it be spontaneous. The
does not signify anything when taken only spontaneous statement made under the
separately. It only acquires a meaning, stress of excitement of the startling event that
specifically what the rules call a legal qualifies for admissibility is one that relates to the
significance, only because of the statements circumstances of the event. The statement must
that accompany the act. (Riano, 2019 ed.) describe the event perceived. (Riano, 2019 ed.)
Example: A gives B, a public officer, P1 Requisites for Admissibility of Verbal Acts

Million. As he gives the money to B, A says 1. Act or occurrence characterized must be
that the P1 Million is the loan he is extending equivocal;
to B. In a case for corruption of public officer, 2. Verbal acts must characterize or explain
A’s statement can be given as part of the res the equivocal act;
gestae. 3. Equivocal act must be relevant to the
issue; and
Rationale: 4. Verbal acts must be contemporaneous
Statements made instinctively at the time of with the equivocal act (Talidano v.
some startling event or incident without the Falcom Maritime & Allied Services, G.R.
opportunity for formulation of statements No. 172031, 2008)
favorable to one’s own cause cast important
light upon the matter in issue and are Res Gestae and Dying Declaration
presumed truthful. This is the first type of res Distinguished (People v. Peralta, G.R. No.
gestae statement. The event is “speaking 94570, 1994)
through” the witness and not the witness RES GESTAE DYING
talking about the event. DECLARATION
It is the event itself A sense of impending
Spontaneous Statements v. Verbal Acts which is speaking death takes the place
SPONTANEOUS
VERBAL ACTS through the witness of an oath and the law
STATEMENTS (People v. Peralta, regards the declarant
Res gestae is the Res gestae is the G.R. No. 94570, as testifying (People v.
startling occurrence equivocal act 1994) Peralta, G.R. No.
Statement may be Statement must be 94570, 1994)
made prior, or contemporaneous A statement as part Made only by the
immediately after, with or must of the res gestae victim (Regalado,
the startling accompany the may be that of the 2008 ed.)
occurrence equivocal act killer himself during
or after the killing or
Requisites for Admissibility of Spontaneous
that of a third person
Statements:
(Regalado, 2008 ed.)
1. There must be a startling occurrence;
2. The statement must be made before the The rule of res The trustworthiness of
declarant had the time to contrive or gestae has its a dying declaration is
devise a falsehood; and justification in the based upon its being
3. The statement must concern the spontaneity of the given under the
occurrence in question and its immediate awareness of

ATENEO CENTRAL
RES GESTAE DYING be ascertained whether the utterances were the

DECLARATION products of truth. That the utterances may be
statement impending death mere idle talk is not remote. At best, the
(Regalado, 2008 ed.) (Regalado, 2008 ed.) testimonies of the investigators that the
statements were made may be considered as
It may precede, Confined to matters
independently relevant statements gathered in
accompany or follow surrounding or the course of their investigation and are
the events occurring occurring after the admissible not as to the veracity thereof but to the
as a part of the homicidal act (People fact that they had been thus uttered. (DBP Pool
principal act (People v. Peralta, G.R. No. of Accredited Insurance Companies v. Radio
v. Peralta, G.R. No. 94570, 1994) Mindanao Network, Inc., G.R. No. 147039 2006)
94570, 1994)
(h) Records of regularly conducted business
Although a declaration does not appear to have activity
been made by the declarant under the
expectation of a sure and impending death, and, A memorandum, report, record or data
for that reason, is not admissible as a dying compilation of acts, events, conditions, opinions
declaration yet if such declaration was made at or diagnoses, made by writing, typing, electronic,
the time of, or immediately after, the commission optical or other similar means at or near the time
of the crime, or at a time when the exciting of or from transmission or supply of information
influence of the startling occurrence still —
continued in the declarant’s mind, it is admissible 1. By a person with knowledge thereof and
as a part of the res gestae. The victim’s statement 2. Kept in the regular course or conduct of
was given sometime after the stabbing while he a business activity and
was undergoing treatment at a medical clinic. He 3. Such was the regular practice to make
had no time to concoct a falsehood or to fabricate the memorandum, report, record or data
a malicious charge against Putian. No motive has compilation by electronic, optical or
been shown as to why he would frame up the similar means
accused. (People v. Putian, G.R. No. L-33049, 4. All of which are shown by the testimony
1976) of the custodian or other qualified
witnesses,
The interval of time between the startling — is excepted from the rule of hearsay evidence
occurrence and the statement depends upon the (Rule 130, Sec. 45)
circumstances; but such statement must have
been made while the declarant was under the NOTE:
immediate influence of the startling occurrence, • There are two persons covered by this
hence it is generally required to have been made exception, the entrant and the witness.
immediately prior or subsequent to the event. • The entrant himself or herself is not
(Regalado, 2008 ed.) required to be dead or unable to testify
(which was the requirement under the old
If the statement was made under the influence of version of the rule).
a startling event and the declarant did not have • The testimony of the custodian or the
the opportunity to concoct or contrive a story, other qualified witnesses should be able
even if made 9 hours after the killing, the to prove the other requisites under this
statement is admissible as part of res gestae. exception.
(Regalado citing People v. Berame, G.R. L- • The counterpart provision in the Rules on
27606, 1976) Electronic Evidence is Rule 8, Section 1.
The statements taken cannot be considered as (i) Entries in official records

part of res gestae when the bystanders already
had enough time and opportunity to mill around, Entries in official records made in the
talk to one another and exchange information, not performance of his or her duty by a public officer
to mention theories and speculations, as is the of the Philippines, or by a person in the
usual experience in disquieting situations where performance of a duty specially enjoined by law,
hysteria is likely to take place. It cannot therefore are prima facie evidence of the facts therein
stated. (Rule 130 Sec. 46)

ATENEO CENTRAL
regularity in the performance of his functions and

Requisites: duties. Moreover, under Section 44 [now Section
1. That the entry was made by: 46], Rule 130, entries in official records made in
a. A public officer, or the performance of official duty are prima facie
b. Another person, specially enjoined evidence of the facts therein stated. An unverified
by law to do so; medical certificate not issued by a government
2. That it was made by the public officer in physician is unreliable. (Tarapen v. People, G.R.
the performance of his or her duties, or No. 173824, 2008)
by such other person in the performance
of a duty specially enjoined by law; and (j) Commercial lists and the like
3. That the public officer or other person
had sufficient knowledge of the facts Evidence of statements of matters of interest to
stated by him or her, which must have persons engaged in an occupation contained in a
been acquired by him or her personally list, register, periodical, or other published
or through official information. (Africa v. compilation is admissible as tending to prove the
Caltex, G.R. No. L-12986, 1966) truth of any relevant matter so stated if that
compilation is published for use by persons
Proof of Unavailability of Entrant engaged in that occupation and is generally used
Unnecessary and relied upon by them therein. (Rule 130, Sec.
It is not necessary to show that the person making 47)
the entry is unavailable for he is excused from
appearing in court in order that public business be Requisites for Admissibility:
not interrupted. 1. It is a statement of a matter of interest to
persons engaged in an occupation;
The written entries in the clinical case record, 2. Such statement is contained in a list,
showing the date of her admission in the hospital register, periodical or other published
on April 22, 1973, her complaint of vaginal compilation;
bleeding and the diagnosis of "Healing lacerated 3. That compilation is published for the use
wide at 2 o'clock and 10 o'clock hymen" are prima of persons engaged in that occupation,
facie evidence of the facts therein stated, the said and
entries having been made in official records by a 4. That compilation is generally used and
public officer of the Philippines in the relied upon by persons in the same
performance of his duty especially enjoined by occupation. (Rule 130, Sec. 47)
law, which is that of a physician in a government
hospital. (People v. Leones, G.R. No. L-48727, Examples:
1982) 1. Trade journals
2. Table of mortality compiled by life
It remains only to note that entries in a police insurance companies
blotter, though regularly done in the course of 3. Abstracts of title compiled by reputable
performance of official duty, are not conclusive title examining institutions or individuals
proof of the truth of such entries. (People v. 4. Business directories
Cabuang, G.R. No. 103292, 1993)
NOTE: A preliminary foundation must first be laid
In a homicide case, one of the issues was for such evidence showing that such publications
determining which of the two medical certificates have been regularly prepared by a person in
issued by two different doctors, one of whom was touch with the market and that they are generally
a government physician, should be given regarded as trustworthy and relied upon.
credence. The Court ruled that the medical
certificate issued by the government doctor Mere price quotations are not commercial lists.
should be given more weight. By actual practice, They are issued personally to the claimant, who
only government physicians, by virtue of their requested for them from dealers of equipment
oaths as civil service officials, are competent to similar to the ones lost at the collision of the two
examine persons and issue medical certificates vessels. These are not published in any list,
which will be used by the government. As such, register, periodical or other compilation on the
the medical certificate carries the presumption of relevant subject matter. Neither are these market

ATENEO CENTRAL
reports or quotations within the purview of treatise, periodical or pamphlet is

commercial lists as these are not standard recognized in his profession or calling as
handbooks or periodicals, containing data of expert in the subject. (Rule 130, Sec. 48)
everyday professional need and relied upon in
the work of the occupation. (PNOC Shipping v. Learned Treatises are Admissible Only if:
CA, G.R. No. 107518, 1998) 1. The court takes judicial notice that the writer
is recognized in his profession as expert in
A mere newspaper account with nobody testifying the subject; or
as to its accuracy, and which was not even a 2. A witness who is an expert on the subject
commercial list, does not qualify under Section 45 testifies that the writer of the statement is
[now Section 47] of Rule 130. No evidence was recognized in his profession as expert in the
presented that the publication was regularly subject.
prepared by a person in touch with the market
and that it is generally regarded as trustworthy (l) Testimony or deposition at a former
and reliable. At most, it is but an analysis or proceeding
opinion which carries no persuasive weight, as no
sufficient figures to support it were presented. It The testimony or deposition of a witness
cannot be said that businessmen generally rely deceased or out of the Philippines or who cannot,
on news items such as this in their occupation. with due diligence, be found therein, or is
Absent extrinsic proof of accuracy, these reports unavailable or otherwise unable to testify, given
are not admissible. (Manila Electric Company v. in a former case or proceeding, judicial or
Quisumbing, G.R. No. 127598, 2000) administrative, involving the same parties and
subject matter, may be given in evidence against
Newspapers containing stock quotations are not the adverse party who had the opportunity to
admissible in evidence when the source of the cross-examine him or her. (Rule 130, Sec. 49)
reports is available. With more reason, mere
analyses or projections of such reports cannot be Requisites:
admitted. Statement of matters contained in a 1. The witness whose testimony is offered
periodical may be admitted only "if that in evidence:
compilation is published for use by persons a. is deceased
engaged in that occupation and is generally used b. is out of the Philippines
and relied upon by them therein." (Manila Electric c. cannot with due diligence be found in
Company vs. Quisumbing, G.R. No. 127598, the Philippines,
2000) d. is unavailable; or
e. is otherwise unable to testify
(k) Learned treatises 2. His testimony or deposition was given in
a former case or proceeding, judicial or
A published treatise, periodical or pamphlet on a administrative, between the same parties
subject of history, law, science, or art is or those representing the same interests
admissible as tending to prove the truth of a (identity of parties);
matter stated therein if the court takes judicial 3. The former case involved the same
notice, or a witness expert in the subject testifies, subject as that in the present case,
that the writer of the statement in the treatise, although on different causes of action
periodical or pamphlet is recognized in his or her (identity of issues); and
profession or calling as expert in the subject. 4. The adverse party had an opportunity to
(Rule 130, Sec. 48) cross-examine the witness in the former
case. (Riano, 2019 ed.)
Requisites:
1. There is a published treatise, periodical While a former testimony or deposition appears
or pamphlet on a subject of history, law, under the Exceptions to the Hearsay Rule, the
science, or art classification of former testimony or deposition as
2. It is offered to prove the truth of a matter an admissible hearsay is not universally
stated therein conceded. A fundamental characteristic of
3. The court takes judicial notice, or a hearsay evidence is the adverse party’s lack of
witness expert in the subject testifies, opportunity to cross-examine the out-of-court
that the writer of the statement in the declarant. However, Section 49, Rule 130

ATENEO CENTRAL
explicitly requires, inter alia, for the admissibility embarrassment in the community. The usual
of a former testimony or deposition that the dangers inherent in hearsay evidence, such as
adverse party must have had an opportunity to lack of memory, faulty narration, intent to
cross-examine the witness or the deponent in the influence the court proceedings, and plain lack of
prior proceeding. This rule contemplates a truthfulness are not present here. (Dallas County
different kind of cross-examination, whether v. Commercial Union Assurance Co., 286 F.2d
actual or a mere opportunity, whose adequacy 388)
depends on the requisite identity of issues in the
former case or proceeding and in the present (n) Independently relevant statements
case where the former testimony or deposition is
sought to be introduced. (Republic v. Where the statements or writings attributed to a
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 152375, 2011). person who is not on the witness stand are being
offered not to prove the truth of the facts stated
Laying the Proper Predicate is Necessary therein but only to prove that those statements
Before the former testimony or deposition can be were actually made, or those writings were
introduced in evidence, the proponent must first executed, such evidence is not covered by the
lay the proper predicate therefor, i.e., the party hearsay evidence rule. The witness who testifies
must establish the basis for the admission of the thereto is competent because he heard the same
deposition in the realm of admissible evidence. or saw the execution of the document, as these
(Riano, 2019 ed.) are matters of fact derived from his own
perception and the purpose is only to prove either
NOTE: Actual cross-examination of the witness in that the statement was made or the tenor thereof.
the former trial is not a prerequisite. It is enough (Regalado citing People v. Cusi, G.R. No. L-
if there was an opportunity to cross-examine. 20986, 1965; Cornejo, Sr. v. Sandiganbayan,
G.R. No. 58831, 1987; Sebastian, Sr. v.
(m) Residual exception Garchitorena. et al., G.R. No. 114026, 2000)
A statement not specifically covered by any of the While the testimony of a witness regarding a
foregoing exceptions, having equivalent statement made by another person given for the
circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness, purpose of establishing the truth of the fact
is admissible if the court determines that: asserted in the statement is clearly hearsay
1. The statement is offered as evidence of evidence, it is otherwise if the purpose of placing
a material fact; the statement on the record is merely to establish
2. The statement is more probative on the the fact that the statement, or the tenor of such
point for which it is offered than any other statement, was made. Regardless of the truth or
evidence which the proponent can falsity of a statement, when what is relevant is the
procure through reasonable efforts; and fact that such statement has been made, the
3. The general purposes of these rules and hearsay rule does not apply and the statement
the interests of justice will be best served may be shown. As a matter of fact, evidence as
by admission of the statement into to the making of the statement is not secondary
evidence. but primary, for the statement itself may
constitute a fact in issue or is circumstantially
However, a statement may not be admitted under relevant as to the existence of such a fact. This is
this exception unless the proponent makes the doctrine of independently relevant
known to the adverse party, sufficiently in statements. (J. Hernando: Arriola v. People
advance of the hearing, or by the pre-trial stage citing People v. Umapas, G.R. No. 199975, 2020)
in the case of a trial of a main case, to provide the
adverse party with fair opportunity to prepare to Two Classes of Independently Relevant
meet it, the proponent’s intention to offer the Statements
statement and the particulars of it, including the 1. Those statements which are the very
name and address of the declarant. (Rule 130, facts in issue.
Sec. 50) 2. Those statements which are
circumstantial evidence of the facts in
He is without motive to falsify, and a false report issue. (Republic v. Heirs of Alejaga, G.R.
would have subjected the newspaper and him to No. 146030, 2002)

ATENEO CENTRAL
The Second Class of Independently Relevant Weight or Probative Value of Expert

Statements Includes the Following: Testimony
1. Statement of a person showing his state The court is not bound by the opinion of an expert
of mind; such as a handwriting expert. Expert opinion
2. Statement of a person showing his evidence is to be considered or weighed by the
physical condition; court, like any other testimony, in light of its own
3. Statements of a person from which general knowledge and experience upon the
inference may be made as to the state of subject of inquiry. (Dizon v Tuazon, G.R. No.
mind of another person; 172167, 2008)
4. Statements which may identify the date, A finding of forgery does not depend entirely on
place, and person in question; and the findings of handwriting experts, because the
5. Statements showing the lack of credibility judge must conduct an independent examination
of a witness. (Estrada v. Desierto, G.R. of the questioned signature in order to arrive at a
Nos. 146710-15, 2001) reasonable conclusion. (Lorzano v. Tabayag,
G.R. No. 189647, 2012)
8. Opinion Rule
Where the sanity of a person is at issue, expert
OPINION EVIDENCE opinion is not necessary. The observations of the
It is the statement by the witness of an inference trial judge coupled with evidence establishing the
as to the existence or nonexistence of a fact in person's state of mental sanity will suffice.
issue based upon other facts presented directly (Hernandez v. San Juan-Santos, G.R. No.
to the senses of the witness. 166470, 2009)
General rule: The opinion of a witness is not (ii) Opinion of ordinary witness
admissible. (Rule 130, Sec. 51)
The Opinion of a Witness for Which Proper
Exceptions: Basis is Given, May be Received in Evidence
1. Opinion of expert witness (Rule 130, Sec. Regarding:
52) 1. The identity of a person about whom he
2. Opinion of ordinary witness as to certain or she has adequate knowledge
matters (Rule 130, Sec. 53) 2. A handwriting with which he or she has
sufficient familiarity; and
(i) Opinion of expert witness; weight given 3. The mental sanity of a person with whom
he or she is sufficiently acquainted.
The opinion of a witness on a matter requiring
special knowledge, skill, experience, training or The witness may also testify on his or her
education, which he or she is shown to possess, impressions of the emotion, behavior, condition
may be received in evidence. (Rule 130, Sec. 52) or appearance of a person. (Rule 130, Sec. 53)
Expert Proper Basis or Predicate Must First be

A person who is so qualified either by actual Established
experience or by careful study as to enable him 1. Adequate knowledge of the person
to form a definite opinion of his own respecting identified
any division of science, art, or trade about which 2. Sufficient familiarity with the
persons having no particular training are handwriting regarding which the opinion
incapable of forming accurate opinions or of is given
deducing correct conclusions. 3. Sufficient acquaintance with the person
whose mental sanity is the subject of the
Expert Evidence opinion given
It is the testimony of persons who are particularly
skilled, or experienced in a particular art, science, An ordinary witness cannot give an opinion as to
trade, business, profession, or vocation, a the mental sanity of a person based in whole or
thorough knowledge of which is not possessed by in part upon an abstract hypothetical question,
man in general, in regard to matters connected but must base his opinion solely upon his own
therewith.

ATENEO CENTRAL
personal knowledge, observation, or “scientific knowledge,” since the adjective

acquaintance. “scientific” implies a grounding in science’s
methods and procedures, while the word
American and Philippine courts uniformly reject “knowledge” connotes a body of known facts or of
the results of polygraph tests when offered in ideas inferred from such facts or accepted as true
evidence for the purpose of establishing the guilt on good grounds. The Rule’s requirement that the
or innocence of one accused of a crime, whether testimony “assist the trier of fact to understand the
the accused or the prosecution seeks its evidence or to determine a fact in issue” goes
introduction, for the reason that the polygraph has primarily to relevance by demanding a valid
not as yet attained scientific acceptance as a scientific connection to the pertinent inquiry as a
reliable and accurate means of ascertaining truth precondition to admissibility. Expert testimony is
or deception (People v. Adoviso, G.R. No. thus admissible only if relevant and reliable.
116196, 1999) (Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 113 S.
Ct. 2786, 1933)
Generally, a lay witness may testify only to facts
and not to opinions or conclusions, but may be “Hot Tub” Method – Concurrent Expert
permitted to use so-called short hand Evidence (ISAAA v. Greenpeace, G.R. No.
descriptions (in reality, opinions), in presenting 209271, 2015)
to court their impressions of general physical "Hot tubbing," the colloquial term for concurrent
condition of a person. In murder prosecution, expert evidence, is a method used for giving
where the defendant’s mother testified on the evidence in civil cases in Australia.
issue of the defendant’s insanity and related
history of the defendant from infancy to the day of In a "hot tub" hearing, the judge can hear all the
the alleged crime, including his illness, both experts discussing the same issue at the same
mental and physical, his hospitalizations, his time to explain each of their points in a discussion
moral delinquencies and his crimes, and with a professional colleague.
whatever might throw light on his mental
condition, words used by defendant’s mother Objective: to achieve greater efficiency and
“such a terrible shape” and “physically ill” in expedition by reduced emphasis on cross-
describing defendant’s condition should have examination and increased emphasis on
been permitted to stand. (State v. Garver, 225 professional dialogue, and swifter identification of
P.2d 771, 1950) critical areas of disagreement between experts.
Just when a scientific principle or discovery How to Determine Weight to be Given to

crosses the line between the experimental and Opinion of Expert Witness
demonstrable stages is difficult to define.
Somewhere in this twilight zone the evidential In any case where the opinion of an expert
force of the principle must be recognized, and witness is received in evidence, the court has a
while courts will go a long way in admitting expert wide latitude of discretion in determining the
testimony deduced from a well-recognized weight to be given to such opinion, and for that
scientific principle or discovery, the thing from purpose may consider the following:
which the deduction is made must be sufficiently 1. Whether the opinion is based upon
established to have gained general acceptance in sufficient facts or data;
the particular field in which it belongs. (U.S. v. 2. Whether it is the product of reliable
Stifel, 433 F.2d 431, 1970) principles and methods;
3. Whether the witness has applied the
The Rules place appropriate limits on the principles and methods reliably to the
admissibility of purportedly scientific evidence by facts of the case; and
assigning to the trial judge the task of ensuring 4. Such other factors as the court may
that an expert’s testimony both: deem helpful to make such
1. rests on a reliable foundation and determination. (Rule 133, Sec. 5)
2. is relevant to the task at hand.
9. Character evidence
The reliability standard is established by the
requirement that an expert’s testimony pertains to Character

ATENEO CENTRAL
The possession by a person of certain qualities of reputation for being a quarrelsome

mind or morals, distinguishing him from others. person.
Character and Reputation Distinguished 2. As to the Character of the Offended

CHARACTER REPUTATION Party
Aggregate of the Depends on attributes
moral qualities which which others believe The character of the offended party may be
belong to and one to possess. proved if it tends to establish in any reasonable
distinguish an (Riano, Evidence, degree the probability or improbability of the
individual person. 491-492, 2019 ed.) offense charged. (Rule 130, Sec. 54[a][1])
General Rule: Evidence of character or a trait of For example, in a murder case, the accused,
character is not admissible for the purpose of invoking self-defense, can present evidence that
proving action in conformity therewith on a the offended party (the victim) was of a
particular occasion. (Rule 130, Sec. 54) quarrelsome disposition.
Reason: Sexual abuse shield rule in child sexual abuse

The rule is that the character or reputation of a cases
party is regarded as legally irrelevant in The following evidence, however is not
determining a controversy, so that evidence admissible in any criminal proceeding involving
relating thereto is not admissible. Ordinarily, if the alleged child sexual abuse under the “sexual
issues in the case were allowed to be influenced abuse shield” rule:
by evidence of the character or reputation of the a) Evidence to prove that the alleged victim
parties, the trial would be apt to have the aspects engaged in other sexual behavior; and
of a popularity contest rather than a factual inquiry b) Evidence offered to prove the sexual
into the merits of the case. After all, the business predisposition of the alleged victim
of the court is to try the case, and not the man; (Riano, p. 367 citing Sec. 30 of the Rule
and a very bad man may have a righteous cause. on Examination of a Child Witness)
(People v. Lee, G.R. No. 139070, 2002)
(ii) Civil cases
Exceptions:
Evidence of the moral character of a party in a
(i) Criminal cases civil case is admissible only when pertinent to the
issue of character involved in the case. (Rule 130,
1. As to the character of the accused – Sec. 54[b])
A. The accused may prove his or her good
moral character, which is pertinent to the General Rule: The moral character of a party to
moral trait involved in the offense a civil case is not a proper subject of inquiry.
charged. (Rule 130, Sec. 54[a][2])
Exception: In cases where, because of the
For example, the accused in a murder nature of the action, the character of a party
case may present evidence that he has a becomes a matter in issue.
reputation for being a peaceful person.
(iii) Criminal and civil cases
B. The prosecution may not prove his or her
bad moral character, unless on rebuttal. Evidence of the good character of a witness is
(Rule 130, Sec. 54[a][2]) not admissible until such character has been
impeached. (Rule 130, Sec. 54[c], first par.)
In rebuttal, the prosecution may present
evidence that the accused has a In all cases in which evidence of character or trait
of character of a person is admissible, proof may

ATENEO CENTRAL
be made by testimony as to reputation or by NOTE: In a civil case, the plaintiff is always

testimony in the form of an opinion. On cross- compelled to allege affirmative assertions in his
examination, inquiry is allowable into relevant complaint. When he alleges a cause of action, he
specific instances of conduct. (Rule 130, Sec. 54, must necessarily allege that he has a right and
second par.) that such right was violated by the other party.
Thus, he has the duty to prove the existence of
In cases in which character or a trait of character this affirmative allegation. (see Vitarich Corp v.
of a person is an essential element of a charge, Locsin, G.R. No. 181500, 2010)
claim or defense, proof may also be made of
specific instances of that person’s conduct (Rule CRIMINAL CASES - The burden of proof is on
130, Sec. 54, third par.) the prosecution by reason of the presumption of
innocence. (People v. Alicante, G.R. No. 182941,
G. BURDEN OF PROOF, BURDEN OF 2009)
EVIDENCE AND PRESUMPTIONS
(RULE 131) In cases of self-defense, the burden of evidence
shifts to the accused to show that the killing was
1. BURDEN OF PROOF AND BURDEN OF legally justified. (People v. Dagani, G.R. No.
EVIDENCE 153875, 2006)
Burden of Proof In both civil and criminal cases, the burden of

Burden of proof is the duty of a party to present evidence lies on the party who asserts an
evidence on the facts in issue necessary to affirmative allegation.
establish his or her claim or defense by the
amount of evidence required by law. Burden of Shifting of Burden of Evidence
proof never shifts. (Rule 131, Sec. 1, first par.) In Civil Cases: In the course of trial in a civil
case, once plaintiff makes out a prima facie case
Burden of Evidence in his favor, the duty or the burden of evidence
Burden of evidence is the duty of a party to shifts to defendant to controvert plaintiff’s prima
present evidence sufficient to establish or rebut a facie case, otherwise, a verdict must be returned
fact in issue to establish a prima facie case. in favor of plaintiff. (Vitarich Corporation v. Locsin,
Burden of evidence may shift from one party to G.R. No. 181560, 2010)
the other in the course of the proceedings, In Criminal Cases: When the trial court denies a
depending on the exigencies of the case. (Rule motion to dismiss by way of demurrer to
131, Sec. 1, second par.) evidence, the accused has the burden of proving
his innocence. When a prima facie case is
Burden of evidence is the duty of a party to go established by the prosecution in a criminal case,
forward with the evidence to overthrow any prima as in the case at bar, the burden of proof does not
facie presumption against him. (Bautista v. shift to the defense. It remains throughout the trial
Sarmiento, G.R. No. L-45137, 1985) with the party upon whom it is imposed, the
prosecution. It is the burden of evidence which
Upon Whom the Burden of Proof Rests shifts from party to party depending upon the
CIVIL CASES - the plaintiff has the burden of exigencies of the case in the course of the trial.
proof to show the truth of his allegations if the The accused only has to present evidence to
defendant raises a negative defense. equalize his evidence versus that of the plaintiff,
not a preponderance of evidence. (Bautista v.
The defendant has the burden of proof if he raises Sarmiento, G.R. No. L-45137, 1985)
an affirmative defense on the complaint of the
plaintiff. (Jimenez v. NLRC, G.R. No. 116960,
1996)

ATENEO CENTRAL
This rule refers to a situation where the evidence

BURDEN OF BURDEN OF
of the parties is evenly balanced, or there is doubt
PROOF EVIDENCE
on which side the evidence preponderates or
weighs more heavily. In this case the decision
Duty of a party to Duty of a party –
should be against the party with the burden of
present evidence on - to present evidence
proof. Hence, where the burden of proof is on the
the facts in issue sufficient to establish
plaintiff and the evidence does not suggest that
necessary to or rebut a fact in issue
the scale of justice should weigh in his favor, the
establish his claim or to establish a prima court should render a verdict for the defendant
defense by the facie case (Rivera v. CA, G.R. No. 115625, 1998)
amount of evidence - to go forward with the Also known as the Equiponderance Doctrine, it
required by law evidence to overthrow provides that where the evidence in a criminal
any prima facie case is evenly balanced, the constitutional
presumption against presumption of innocence tilts the scales in
him favor of the accused (People v. Lagmay, G.R. No.
125310, 1999)
Does not shift in the May shift from one 2. PRESUMPTIONS

course of the trial. side to the other as
trial unfolds. Presumption – is an inference as to the
existence or non-existence of a fact which courts
are permitted to draw from the proof of other
facts. (In the Matter of the Intestate Estates of
Delgado v. Heirs of Marciana, G.R. No. 155733,
Principle of Negative Averments
2006)
General Rule: Negative allegations need not be
A presumption is an assumption of fact resulting
proved, whether in a civil or criminal action.
from a rule of law which requires such fact to be
Exception: When such negative allegations are
assumed from another fact found or otherwise
essential parts of the cause of action or defense
established in the action. (Estate of Honorio
in a civil case or are essential ingredients of the
Poblador, Jr. v. Manzano, G.R. No. 192391,
offense in a criminal case or defenses thereto.
2017)
(see People v. Yang, G.R. No. 148077, 2004)
Judicial Admissions v. Presumptions
In CRIMINAL CASES, if the subject of a negative
averment inheres to the offense as an essential JUDICIAL PRESUMPTION
ingredient thereof, the prosecution has the ADMISSIONS AND
burden of proving the same. In view, however, of JUDICIAL NOTICE
the difficult office of proving a negative allegation,
the prosecution, under such circumstance, needs Proponent need not Proponent still has to
to do no more than make a prima facie case from introduce any introduce evidence to
the best evidence obtainable. For example, in a evidence establish or prove the
case for illegal possession of firearms, the basis of the
prosecution has to present a certification from the presumption
Firearms and Explosives Division of the
Philippine National Police that the accused is not Inference v. Presumption
licensed to carry a firearm outside of his or her
residence. (People v. Quebral, G.R. No. 46094,
INFERENCE PRESUMPTION
1939)
EQUIPOISE RULE

ATENEO CENTRAL
A factual conclusion Mandated by law Certain inference Discretion is vested in

drawn from other must be made the tribunal as to
facts that is not whenever the facts drawing the inference
appear which furnish
mandated by law the basis of the
inference
Effect of Presumption
Reduced to fixed Derived wholly and
A party in whose favor the legal presumption rules and form a part directly from the
exists may invoke such presumption to establish of the system of circumstances of the
a fact in issue and need not introduce evidence to jurisprudence particular case by
prove the fact for the presumption is prima facie means of the
proof of the fact presumed. (Diesel Construction common experience
Co. v. UPSI Property Holdings Inc., G.R. No. of mankind
154937, 2008)
PRESUMPTION JURIS may be divided into:
A presumption shifts the burden of evidence or 1. CONCLUSIVE PRESUMPTION (juris et
the burden of going forward with the evidence. It de jure) – inferences which the law
imposes on the party against whom it is directed makes so peremptory that it will not allow
the burden of going forward with evidence to meet them to be overturned by any contrary
or rebut the presumption. However, it does not proof however strong. (See Rule 131,
shift the burden of proof. Sec. 2)
2. DISPUTABLE PRESUMPTIONS (juris
In the law of evidence, a distinction should be tantum) –That which the law permits to
drawn between the role of presumptions, judicial be overcome or contradicted by other
notice and judicial admissions. In the case of evidence (See Rule 131, Sec. 3)
presumptions, the proponent still has to introduce
evidence of the basis of the presumption, that is,
he has to introduce evidence of the existence or a. Conclusive Presumption
non-existence of the facts from which the court
can draw the inference of the fact in issue. In the (i) ESTOPPEL IN PAIS – whenever a party has,
case of judicial notice and judicial admissions, as by his or her own declaration, act, or omission,
a rule, the proponent does not have to introduce intentionally and deliberately led another to
any evidence. (Regalado, p. 819) believe a particular thing true and to act upon
such belief, he or she cannot, in any litigation
Classification of Presumptions arising out of such declaration, act or omission,
1. PRESUMPTION JURIS OR OF LAW – is be permitted to falsify it. (Rule 131, Sec. 2[a])
a deduction which the law expressly
directs to be made from particular facts. Estoppel is effective only as between the parties
2. PRESUMPTION HOMINIS OR OF FACT thereto or their successors in interest. (Civil
– is a deduction which reason draws from Code, Art. 1439)
facts proved without an express direction
from the law to that effect. Requisites as to the Party to be Estopped:
1. Conduct amounting to false
PRESUMPTION OF PRESUMPTION OF representation or concealment;
2. Intent or at least expectation that the
LAW FACT
conduct shall be acted upon; and
3. Knowledge, actual or constructive, of the
real facts (Kalalo v. Luz, G.R. No. L-
27782, 1970)

ATENEO CENTRAL
Requisites as to the Party CLAIMING administration shall only be prima facie

Estoppel: evidence of the death of the testator or
1. Lack of knowledge of truth as to the facts intestate;
in question;
2. Reliance in good faith upon the conduct (b) In other cases, the judgment or final order
or statements of the party to be estopped; is, with respect to the matter directly
and adjudged or as to any other matter that could
3. Action or inaction based thereon led to have been raised in relation thereto,
his detriment or prejudice (Kalalo v. Luz, conclusive between the parties and their
G.R. No. L-27782, 1970)
successors in interest by title subsequent to
the commencement of the action or special
(ii) ESTOPPEL against Tenant – the tenant is
proceeding, litigating for the same thing and
not permitted to deny the title of his or her landlord
under the same title and in the same
at the time of the commencement of their
capacity; and
landlord-tenant relationship. (See Rule 131, Sec.
2[b])
(c) In any other litigation between the same
The rule on estoppel against tenants is subject to parties or their successors in interest, that
a qualification. It does not apply if the landlord’s only is deemed to have been adjudged in a
title has expired, or has been conveyed to former judgment or final order which appears
another, or has been defeated by a title upon its face to have been so adjudged, or
paramount, subsequent to the commencement of which was actually and necessarily included
lessor-lessee relationship [VII Francisco]. In other therein or necessary thereto. (Rule 39, Sec.
words, if there was a change in the nature of the 47)
title of the landlord during the subsistence of the
lease, then the presumption does not apply. b. Disputable Presumptions
Otherwise, if the nature of the landlord’s title
remains as it was during the commencement of Disputable presumptions are satisfactory if
the relation of landlord and tenant, then estoppel uncontradicted, but they may be contradicted and
lies against the tenant. (Santos v. National overcome by other evidence. (Rule 131, Sec. 3)
Statistics Office, G.R. No. 171129, 2011)
There is no constitutional objection to a law
(iii) CONCLUSIVE EFFECTS OF FINAL providing that the presumption of innocence may
JUDGMENT — Effect of judgments or final be overcome by a contrary presumption founded
orders. The effect of a judgment or final order upon the experience of human conduct, and
rendered by a court of the Philippines, having declaring what evidence shall be sufficient to
jurisdiction to pronounce the judgment or final overcome such presumption of innocence. The
order, may be as follows: legislature may provide for prima facie evidence
of guilt provided there be a rational connection
(a) In case of a judgment or final order between the facts proved and the ultimate fact
presumed. (Vallarta v. CA, et al., G.R. No. L-
against a specific thing, or in respect to the
40195, 1987) Thus, the prima facie presumption
probate of a will, or the administration of the
of guilt in Article 217, Revised Penal Code, is
estate of a deceased person, or in respect to
valid (Bacasnot v. Sandiganbayan, et al., G.R.
the personal, political, or legal condition or
No. 60884, 1987).
status of a particular person or his
relationship to another, the judgment or final The following are DISPUTABLE
order is conclusive upon the title to the thing, PRESUMPTIONS:
the will or administration, or the condition, (a) That a person is innocent of crime or
status or relationship of the person; however, wrong;
the probate of a will or granting of letters of

ATENEO CENTRAL
(b) That an unlawful act was done with an (g) That a thing delivered by one to another
unlawful intent; belonged to the latter;
(c) That a person intends the ordinary (h) That an obligation delivered up to the
consequences of his or her voluntary act; debtor has been paid;
A person is equally liable for all the (i) That prior rents or installments had been
consequences arising from his criminal paid when a receipt for the later one is
act, and which are inherent therein; for produced;
example, such complications as may
arise and which are not due to See, in connection with par. (i), the provisions of
circumstances completely foreign to the Art. 1176, Civil Code, which also lays down the
act committed, or from the fault or presumption that interest has been paid if the
carelessness of the injured party (U.S. v. principal is received by the creditor without
Monasterial, G.R. No. L-5098, 1909) reservation. (Regalado, p. 823)
(d) That a person takes ordinary care of his (j) That a person found in possession of a
or her concerns; thing taken in the doing of a recent
wrongful act is the taker and the doer of
(e) That evidence willfully suppressed would the whole act; otherwise, that things
be adverse if produced; which a person possesses, or exercises
acts of ownership over, are owned by him
In order that the presumption in par. (e) or her;
may arise, it is necessary:
1. That the evidence is material The application of this disputable presumption is
(Cuyugan v. Dizon, G.R. No. L-208, limited to cases where such possession is either
1947); unexplained or that the proffered explanation is
2. That the party had the opportunity to rendered implausible in view of independent
produce the same (People v. evidence inconsistent thereto. (People v. Urzais,
Balansag, G.R. No. L-41568, 1934); G.R. No.207662, 2016; Panaligan v. Phyvita
and Enterprises Corporation, G.R. No. 2020886,
3. That the said evidence is available 2017)
only to said party (People v. Tulale,
97 Phil. 953 [unreported case]). (k) That a person in possession of an order
on himself or herself for the payment of
The adverse presumption of suppression the money, or the delivery of anything,
of evidence does not arise when: has paid the money or delivered the thing
1. the suppression is not willful; accordingly;
2. the evidence withheld is merely
corroborative or cumulative; (l) That a person acting in a public office was
3. the evidence is at the disposal of both regularly appointed or elected to it;
parties, and
4. the suppression is an exercise of a (m) That official duty has been regularly
privilege (People v. Navaja, G.R. No. performed;
104044, 1993).
(n) That a court, or judge acting as such,
(f) That money paid by one to another was whether in the Philippines or elsewhere,
due to the latter; was acting in the lawful exercise of
jurisdiction;

ATENEO CENTRAL
(o) That all the matters within an issue raised ten (10) years. If he or she disappeared
in a case were laid before the court and after the age of seventy-five years, an
passed upon by it; and in like manner that absence of five (5) years shall be
all matters within an issue raised in a sufficient in order that his or her
dispute submitted for arbitration were laid succession may be opened.
before the arbitrators and passed upon by The following shall be considered dead
them; for all purposes including the division of
the estate among the heirs:
(p) That private transactions have been fair 1. A person on board a vessel lost
and regular; during a sea voyage, or an
aircraft which is missing, who
(q) That the ordinary course of business has has not been heard of for four (4)
been followed; years since the loss of the vessel
or aircraft;
(r) That there was a sufficient consideration 2. A member of the armed forces
for a contract; who has taken part in armed
hostilities, and has been missing
(s) That a negotiable instrument was given or for four (4) years;
indorsed for a sufficient consideration; 3. A person who has been in danger
of death under other
(t) That an indorsement of a negotiable circumstances and whose
instrument was made before the existence has not been known
instrument was overdue and at the place for four (4) years; and
where the instrument is dated; 4. If a married person has been
absent for four (4) consecutive
(u) That a writing is truly dated; years, the spouse present may
contract a subsequent marriage
(v) That a letter duly directed and mailed was if he or she has well-founded
received in the regular course of the mail; belief that the absent spouse is
already dead. In case of
For the presumption to arise, it must be proved disappearance, where there is a
that: danger of death, the
• The letter was properly addressed with circumstances hereinabove
postage pre-paid; and provided, an absence of only two
• That it was actually mailed (Barcelon, (2) years shall be sufficient for
Roxas Securities v. CIR, G.R. No. the purpose of contracting a
157064, 2006) subsequent marriage. However,
in any case, before marrying
If said letter was not returned to the again, the spouse present must
sender, it is presumed that it was institute summary proceedings
received by the addressee (Sebastian v. as provided in the Family Code
WCC, et al., L-42587, 1978). and in the rules for declaration of
(w) That after an absence of seven (7) years, presumptive death of the
it being unknown whether or not the absentee, without prejudice to
absentee still lives, he or she is the effect of reappearance of the
considered dead for all purposes, except absent spouse.
for those of succession. There are four essential requisites for the
declaration of presumptive death:
The absentee shall not be considered
- The absent spouse has been
dead for the purpose of opening his or
missing for 4 consecutive years,
her succession until after an absence of
or 2 consecutive years if the

ATENEO CENTRAL
disappearance occurred where (dd) That if the marriage is terminated and the
there is danger of death under mother contracted another marriage
the circumstances laid down in within three hundred days after such
Article 391 of the Civil Code; termination of the former marriage, these
(Family Code, Art. 41) rules shall govern in the absence of proof
- The present spouse wishes to to the contrary:
remarry;
- The present spouse has a well- 1. A child born before one hundred eighty
founded belief that the absentee (180) days after the solemnization of the
is dead; and subsequent marriage is considered to
- The present spouse files a have been conceived during the former
summary proceeding for the marriage, provided it be born within the
declaration of presumptive death three hundred days after the termination
of the absentee. (Republic of the of the former marriage.
Philippines v. Nilda B. Tampus, 2. A child born after one hundred eighty
G.R. No. 214243, 2016) days (180) following the celebration of
(x) That acquiescence resulted from a belief the subsequent marriage is considered to
that the thing acquiesced in was have been conceived during such
conformable to the law or fact; marriage, even though it be born within
the three hundred days after the
(y) That things have happened according to termination of the former marriage.
the ordinary course of nature and ordinary
habits of life; (ee) That a thing once proved to exist
continues as long as is usual with things
(z) That persons acting as copartners have of that nature;
entered into a contract of co-partnership;
(ff) That the law has been obeyed;
(aa) That a man and woman deporting
themselves as husband and wife have (gg) That a printed or published book,
entered into a lawful contract of marriage; purporting to be printed or published by
public authority, was so printed or
(bb) That property acquired by a man and a published;
woman who are capacitated to marry
each other and who live exclusively with (hh) That a printed or published book,
each other as husband and wife, without purporting to contain reports of cases
the benefit of marriage or under a void adjudged in tribunals of the country
marriage, has been obtained by their joint where the book is published, contains
efforts, work or industry. correct reports of such cases;
(cc) That in cases of cohabitation by a man (ii) That a trustee or other person whose
and a woman who are not capacitated to duty it was to convey real property to a
marry each other and who have acquired particular person has actually conveyed
property through their actual joint it to him or her when such presumption is
contribution of money, property or necessary to perfect the title of such
industry, such contributions and their person or his or her successor in interest;
corresponding shares, including joint
deposits of money and evidences of (jj) That, except for purposes of succession,
credit, are equal. when two persons perish in the same
calamity, such as wreck, battle, or
conflagration, and it is not shown who

ATENEO CENTRAL
died first, and there are no particular not involving successional rights, e.g., in
circumstances from which it can be insurance cases. Furthermore, par. (kk) provides
inferred, the survivorship is determined a presumption of simultaneity in the deaths of the
from the probabilities resulting from the persons called to succeed each other, while par.
strength and the age of the sexes, (jj) provides for presumptions of survivorship.
according to the following rules: (Regalado, p. 831)
1. If both were under the age of Some Disputable Presumptions Explained:

fifteen years, the older is 1. Presumption of innocence– Applies to
deemed to have survived; criminal cases.
2. If both were above the age sixty, Section 14. (2) In all criminal prosecutions, the
the younger is deemed to have accused shall be presumed innocent until the
survived; contrary is proved, and shall enjoy the right to be
3. If one is under fifteen and the heard by himself and counsel, to be informed of
other above sixty, the former is the nature and cause of the accusation against
deemed to have survived; him, to have a speedy, impartial, and public trial,
4. If both be over fifteen and under to meet the witnesses face to face, and to have
compulsory process to secure the attendance of
sixty, and the sex be different,
witnesses and the production of evidence in his
the male is deemed to have behalf. However, after arraignment, trial may
survived, if the sex be the same, proceed notwithstanding the absence of the
the older; and accused provided that he has been duly notified
5. If one be under fifteen or over and his failure to appear is unjustifiable. (Art. III,
sixty, and the other between Sec 14(2), 1987 Constitution)
those ages, the latter is deemed
to have survived. EQUIPOISE RULE:
In order that the presumption of Faced with two conflicting versions, the Court is
survivorship in par. (jj) may arise, it is guided by the equipoise rule. Thus, where the
necessary that (a) the deaths occurred in inculpatory facts and circumstances are capable
a calamity, and (b) there are no particular of two or more explanations, one of which is
consistent with the innocence of the accused and
circumstances from which it can be
the other consistent with his guilt, then the
inferred that one died ahead of the other. evidence does not fulfill the test of moral certainty
Thus, regarding the third rule, if one is a and is not sufficient to support a conviction. The
one-day old child and the other is 61 equipoise rule provides that where the evidence
years old, it cannot be presumed that the in a criminal case is evenly balanced, the
one-day old child survived, in view of the constitutional presumption of innocence tilts the
second requirement. (Regalado, p. 830) scales in favor of the accused. (People v. Erguiza,
(kk) That if there is a doubt, as between two G.R. No. 171348, 2008)
or more persons who are called to
succeed each other, as to which of them 2. A person takes ordinary care of his
concerns
died first, whoever alleges the death of
All men are presumed to be sane and normal and
one prior to the other, shall prove the subject to be moved by substantially the same
same; in the absence of proof, they shall motives.
be considered to have died at the same When of age and sane, they must take care of
time. themselves. Courts operate not because one
person has been defeated or overcome by
Par. (kk) may be distinguished from the rule in another but because he has been defeated or
par. (jj) as, in the former, it is not required that the overcome illegally. There must be a violation of
parties perished in a calamity and, furthermore, it law, the commission of what the law knows as an
only applies in questions of successional rights. actionable wrong before the courts are authorized
The rule in par. (jj) applies only where the deaths to lay hold of the situation and remedy it.
occurred during a calamity and applies to cases Men may do foolish things, make ridiculous
contracts, use miserable judgment, and lose

ATENEO CENTRAL
money by them — indeed, all they have in the On a rationale similar to that of the presumption
world; but not for that alone can the law intervene in par. (j), it has been held that if a person had in
and restore. There must be, in addition, a his possession a falsified document and he made
violation of law, the commission of what the law use of it, taken advantage of it and profited
knows as an actionable wrong, before the courts thereby, the presumption is that he is the material
are authorized to lay hold of the situation and author of the falsification (People v. Sendaydiego,
remedy it. (Valles v. Villa, G.R. No. 10028, 1916) et al., L-33252-54, 1978 and cases cited therein).
Exception: When one of the parties is unable to 4. A person acting in a public office was
read, or if the contract is in a language not regularly appointed or elected to it
understood by him, and mistake or fraud is REASON - It would cause great inconvenience if
alleged, the person enforcing the contract must in the first instance strict proof were required of
show that the terms thereof have been fully appointment or election to office in all cases
explained to the former (Civil Code, Art. 1332) where it might be collaterally in issue.
The burden of proof is on the adverse party to
3. Possession of stolen goods show that he was not appointed or designated.
This is not in conflict with the presumption of
innocence. At the start of the criminal case, the 5. An official duty has been regularly
court will apply the presumption of innocence. performed
But once the prosecution is able to prove that a
certain object has been unlawfully taken, that REASONS
there is a crime of theft committed and that the • Innocence and not wrongdoing is to be
prosecution has also proven that the accused is presumed;
in possession of this object unlawfully taken, and • An official oath will not be violated;
then the presumption of innocence disappears. • A republican form of government cannot
The new presumption of guilt takes its place. survive unless a limit is placed upon
The doctrinal rule is that before an inference of controversies and certain trust and
guilt arising from possession of recently stolen confidence reposed in each government,
goods can be made, the following basic facts department, or agent at least to the
need to be proved by the prosecution, viz.: extent of such presumption. (People v.
(1) the crime was actually committed; De Guzman, G.R. No. 106025, 1994)
(2) the crime was committed recently;
(3) the stolen property was found in the Instances when the presumption of regularity
possession of the accused; and cannot be invoked:
(4) the accused is unable to satisfactorily The respondent, who is a public officer or
explain his possession thereof. employee, in writ of Amparo cases, cannot invoke
the presumption (The Rule on the Writ of Amparo,
For purposes of conclusively proving possession, A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC, Sec. 17)
it is necessary that: In custodial investigations (People v. Rodriguez,
(1) the possession must be unexplained by G.R. No. 112262, 1996)
any innocent origin; Where the official act in question is irregular on its
(2) the possession must be fairly recent; and face, no presumption of regularity can arise
(3) the possession must be exclusive (People v. Casabuena, G.R. No. 186455, 2014)
(Mabunga v. People, G.R. No. 143039, When there is gross disregard of the procedural
2004). safeguards set forth in Republic Act No. 9165,
serious uncertainty is generated as to the identity
On this score, the Supreme Court has theretofore of the seized items that the prosecution
taken the stand that convictions in cases presented in evidence. Such doubt cannot be
involving the foregoing assumptions are not remedied by merely invoking the presumption of
actually sustained upon a presumption of law but regularity in the performance of official duties for
rest wholly upon an inference of fact as to the guilt a gross, systematic, or deliberate disregard of the
of the accused. (U.S. v. Catimbang, G.R. No. procedural safeguards effectively produces an
11750, 1916) irregularity in the performance of official duties.
(People v. Lagahit, G.R. No. 200877, 2014)

ATENEO CENTRAL
6. The presumption of regularity and legality No presumption of legitimacy or illegitimacy

of official acts is applicable to criminal as well (Rule 131, Sec. 4)
as civil cases. There is no presumption of legitimacy or
This presumption of authority is not confined to illegitimacy of a child born after three hundred
official appointees. It has been extended to days following the dissolution of a marriage or the
persons who have been appointed pursuant to a
separation of the spouses. Whoever alleges the
local or special statute to act in quasi-public or
quasi-official capacities and to professional men legitimacy or illegitimacy of such child must prove
like surgeons and lawyers. his or her allegation.
While law enforcers enjoy the presumption of NOTE: Foundlings are presumed to be natural-
regularity in the performance of their duties, this born Filipinos and the presumption of natural-
presumption cannot prevail over the born status of a foundling may not be impugned
constitutional right of the accused to be presumed in any proceeding unless substantial proof of
innocent and it cannot by itself constitute proof of foreign parentage is shown. The natural-born
guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The presumption status of a foundling shall not also be affected by
of regularity is merely just that - a mere
the fact that the birth certificate was simulated, or
presumption disputable by contrary proof and
that there was absence of a legal adoption
which when challenged by evidence cannot be
regarded as binding truth. (People v. Hementiza, process, or that there was inaction or delay in
G.R. No. 227398, 2017) reporting, documenting, or registering a
foundling. (R.A. 11767, Sec. 5)
7. Regularity of judicial proceedings It is a generally accepted principle of international
The court rendering the judgment is presumed to law to presume foundlings as having been born
have jurisdiction over the subject matter and the of nationals of the country in which the foundling
parties and to have rendered a judgment valid in is found. (Poe-Llamanzares v. Comelec, G.R. No.
every respect.
221697, 2016)
Jurisdiction is presumed in all cases, be it of a
superior or inferior court.
Jurisprudence on Disputable Presumptions
8. Private transactions have been fair and
regular A certificate of stock is a written instrument signed
An individual intends to do right rather than wrong by the proper officer of a corporation stating or
and intends to do only what he has the right to do. acknowledging that the person named in the
In the absence of proof to the contrary, there is a document is the owner of a designated number of
presumption that all men act fairly, honestly, and shares of its stock. It is prima facie evidence that
in good faith. the holder of the certificate of stock is a
shareholder of a corporation. (Teng v. SEC and
9. Ordinary course of business has been Ting Ping Lay, G.R. No. 184332, 2016)
followed
Those who were engaged in a given trade or The burden of proof in overcoming the
business are presumed to be acquainted with the presumption of State ownership of the lands of
general customs and usages of the occupation the public domain is on the person applying for
and with such other facts as are necessarily registration (or claiming ownership), who must
incident to the proper conduct of the business. prove that the land subject of the application is
alienable or disposable. To overcome this
10. Evidence willfully suppressed would be presumption, incontrovertible evidence must be
adverse if produced. established that the land subject of the
The natural conclusion is that the proof, if application (or claim) is alienable or disposable.
produced, instead of rebutting, would support the (Central Mindanao University v. Republic, G.R.
inference against him and the court is justified in No. 195026, 2016)
acting upon the conclusion.
Notarization creates a presumption of regularity
and authenticity of the document. This

ATENEO CENTRAL
presumption may be rebutted by strong, complete presumptions: (1) private transactions have been
and conclusive proof to the contrary. While fair and regular; (2) the ordinary course of
notarial acknowledgment attaches full faith and business has been followed; and (3) there was
credit to the document concerned, it does not give sufficient consideration for a contract. A
the document its validity or binding effect. When presumption may operate against a challenger
there is evidence showing that the document is who has not presented any proof to rebut it. The
invalid, the presumption of regularity or effect of a legal presumption upon a burden of
authenticity is not applicable. (University of proof is to create the necessity of presenting
Mindanao, Inc. v. Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas, evidence to meet the legal presumption or the
G.R. No. 194964-65, 2016) prima facie case created thereby, and which, if no
There is a disputable presumption that things proof to the contrary is presented and offered, will
have happened according to the ordinary course prevail. The burden of proof remains where it is,
of nature and the ordinary habits of life. All of the but by the presumption, the one who has that
foregoing evidence, that a person with typical burden is relieved for the time being from
Filipino features is abandoned in a Catholic introducing evidence in support of the averment,
Church in a municipality where the population of because the presumption stands in the place of
the Philippines is overwhelmingly Filipinos such evidence unless rebutted. In this case, because
that there would be more than a 99% chance that of Atanacio, affixing his signature on the deed of
a child born in the province would be a Filipino, absolute sale, there arose a disputable
would indicate with more than ample probability if presumption that consideration was paid. A mere
not statistical certainty, that petitioner's parents allegation that no payment was received is not
are Filipinos. (Poe-Llamanzares, v. Comelec, sufficient to dispel such legal presumption.
G.R. No. 221697, 2016) Furthermore, the record shows an official
communication, dated October 8, 1958, from the
“Ownership of copyrighted material is shown by District Land Office of Cebu to the Provincial
proof of originality and copyrightability.” While it is Treasurer of Cebu stating that Provincial Voucher
true that where the complainant presents a No. 05358 was disbursed in favor of Atanacio.
copyright certificate in support of the claim of (Mactan-Cebu International Airport Authority v.
infringement, the validity and ownership of the Unchuan, 2016)
copyright is presumed. This presumption,
however, is rebuttable and it cannot be sustained Literally, res ipsa loquitur means the thing speaks
where other evidence in the record casts doubt for itself. It is the rule that the fact of the
on the question of ownership, (Olano v. Lim Eng occurrence of an injury, taken with the
Co, G.R. No. 195835, 2016) surrounding circumstances, may permit an
inference or raise a presumption of negligence, or
Manuel's birth certificate, a public document and make out a plaintiff’s prima facie case, and
an official record in the custody of the Civil present a question of fact for defendant to meet
Registrar, enjoys the presumption of regularity with an explanation. (Cruz v. Agas, G.R. No.
and authenticity. To defeat these presumptions, 204095, 2015)
the party making the allegation must present
clear, positive and convincing evidence of Under the res ipsa loquitur doctrine, expert
alteration. For obvious reasons, this burden testimony may be dispensed with to sustain an
cannot be discharged by the mere submission of allegation of negligence if the following requisites
an inconclusive report from the Senate obtain:
Committee and the presentation of an excerpt of a) the event is of a kind which does not
an NBI report on the purported alterations. ordinarily occur unless someone is
(Republic v. Harp, G.R. No. 188829, 2016) negligent;
b) the cause of the injury was under the
Section 3, Rule 131 of the Rules of Court exclusive control of the person in charge;
identifies the following as disputable and

ATENEO CENTRAL
c) the injury suffered must not have been due

to any voluntary action or contribution on Presumption against an accused in criminal
the part of the person injured. cases
(Geromo v. La Paz Housing and Development
Corporation, G.R. No. 211175, 2017) If a presumed fact that establishes guilt, is an
element of the offense charged, or negates a
c. Presumptions in civil actions and defense, the existence of the basic fact must be
proceedings; Presumption against an proved beyond reasonable doubt and the
accused in criminal cases presumed fact follows from the basic fact beyond
reasonable doubt. (Rule 130, Sec. 6)
Presumptions in civil actions and
proceedings NOTE: Establish basic fact first, then
presumption may apply
In all civil actions and proceedings not otherwise
provided for by the law or these Rules, a Example: In theft, you must first prove beyond
presumption imposes on the party against whom reasonable doubt the basic fact of taking, then the
it is directed the burden of going forward with presumption of intent to gain may follow
evidence to rebut or meet the presumption.
Presumption of regularity cannot overcome
If presumptions are inconsistent, the presumption presumption of innocence
that is founded upon weightier considerations of
policy shall apply. If considerations of policy are It must also be emphasized that the presumption
of equal weight, neither presumption applies. of regularity in the performance of official
(Rule 130, Sec. 5) functions cannot, by itself, overcome the
presumption of innocence. Evidence of guilt
Presumption of regularity in a petition for Writ beyond reasonable doubt, and nothing else, is
of Amparo required to erase all doubts as to the culpability of
the accused. (Riano, 74 citing Zafra v. People,
The presumption of regularity does not apply in a 671 SCRA 396, 405, April 25, 2012)
petition for a Writ of Amparo. Under Sec. 17 of the
Rule on the Writ of Amparo, the “respondent Hence, in case of conflict between the
public official or employee cannot invoke the presumption of regularity in the performance of
presumption that official duty has been regularly duty of police officers and the presumption of
performed to evade responsibility or liability.” innocence of the accused, the latter must prevail
(Riano, 75) as the law imposes upon the prosecution the
highest degree of proof of evidence to sustain
Presumption of regularity in custodial conviction. (Riano, 74 citing People v. Guinto,
investigation G.R. No. 198314, September 24, 2014)
The presumption of regularity of official acts does It would be unconstitutional to place a higher
not apply during in-custody investigation, it is value in the presumption of regularity in the
incumbent upon the prosecution to prove during performance of official duties – a mere tool of
the trial that prior to questioning, the confessant evidence – than in the more substantial
was warned of his constitutionally-protected presumption of innocence favoring xxx an
rights. Trial courts should further keep in mind accused – a right enshrined in the Bill of Rights.
that even if the confession of the accused is (Casona v. People, G.R. No. 179757, September
gospel truth, if it was made without the assistance 13, 2017)
of counsel, it is inadmissible in evidence
regardless of the absence of coercion or even if it Because presumption in the regularity of the
had been voluntarily given. (Riano, 75 citing performance of duty is not sufficient for
People v. Camat, G.R. No. 112262, 1996) conviction, the Court, in a subsequent

ATENEO CENTRAL
pronouncement, had the occasion to caution trial (d) a person authorized by a statute to be
courts from judicially pronouncing an accused as present. (Rule 132, Sec. 15, first par.)
guilty just because he could not impute any ill
motives to arresting officers in arresting him and Separation of witnesses
from presuming the regularity of the arrest on that The court may also cause witnesses to be kept
separate and to be prevented from conversing
basis alone. (Riano, 75 citing Casona v. People,
with one another, directly or through
G.R. No. 179757, September 13, 2017) intermediaries, until all shall have been
examined. (Rule 132, Sec. 15, second par.)
H. PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE
(RULE 132) Right to inspect writing shown to witness
Whenever a writing is shown to a witness, it may
1. EXAMINATION OF WITNESS be inspected by the adverse party. (Rule 132,
Sec. 18)
General Rule: The examination of witnesses
presented in a trial or hearing shall be done in a. Rights and obligations of a
open court, and under oath or affirmation. witness
Exception: Unless the witness is incapacitated to Obligation of a witness

speak, or the question calls for a different mode A witness must answer questions, although
of answer, the answers of the witness shall be his/her answer may tend to establish a claim
given orally. (Rule 132, Sec. 1) against him/her. (Rule 132, Sec. 3)
Proceedings to be recorded NOTE: Refusal of a witness to answer is

The entire proceedings of a trial or hearing, punishable by Contempt (Rule 71).
including the questions propounded to a witness
and his or her answers thereto, and the Rights of a Witness
statements made by the judge or any of the 5. To be protected from irrelevant, improper, or
parties, counsel, or witnesses with reference to insulting questions, and from harsh or
the case, shall be recorded by means of insulting demeanor;
shorthand or stenotype or by other means of 6. Not to be detained longer than the interests
recording found suitable by the court. (Rule 132, of justice require;
Sec. 2, first par.) 7. Not to be examined except only as to matters
pertinent to the issue;
Prima facie correct statement 8. Not to give an answer which will tend to
A transcript of the record of the proceedings subject him/her to a penalty for an offense
made by the official stenographer, stenotypist or unless otherwise provided by law (Right
recorder and certified as correct by him or her, against self-incrimination);
shall be deemed prima facie a correct statement 9. Not to give an answer which will tend to
of such proceedings. (Rule 132, Sec. 2, second degrade his/her reputation, unless it be to the
par.) very fact at issue or to a fact from which the
fact in issue would be presumed. But a
Exclusion of witnesses witness must answer to the fact of his/her
General Rule: The court, motu proprio or upon previous final conviction for an offense. (Right
motion, shall order witnesses excluded so that Against Self-Degradation) (Rule 132, Sec. 3)
they cannot hear the testimony of other
witnesses. Scope of Right Against Self-Incrimination
The right against self-incrimination is granted only
Exception: This rule does not authorize in favor of individuals. Therefore, a corporation
exclusion of cannot invoke that privilege as the questioned
(a) a party who is a natural person, testimony can come only from a corporate officer
(b) a duly designated representative of a or employee who has a personality distinct from
juridical entity which is a party to the case, that of the corporation.
(c) a person whose presence is essential to
the presentation of the party's cause, or

ATENEO CENTRAL
It is elementary that the right against self- (Regalado, Evidence,

incrimination has no application to juridical 842)
persons. While an individual may lawfully refuse
to answer incriminating questions unless
protected by an immunity statute, it does not
follow that a corporation, vested with special
privileges and franchises, may refuse to show its
hand when charged with an abuse of such Immunity Statutes
privileges. (Bataan Shipyard v. PCGG, GR
75885) “USE” IMMUNITY “TRANSACTIONAL”
IMMUNITY
The right covers only testimonial compulsion and
production by him/her of incriminating Prohibits the use of the Grants immunity to the
documents. It does not include the body when it witness’s compelled witness from
can furnish relevant and competent evidence. testimony and its fruits in prosecution for an
any manner in offense to which his
connection with the compelled testimony
Right Against Self-incrimination of an criminal prosecution of relates. This second
Accused and of an Ordinary Witness the witness. immunity is broader.
Distinguished
Immunity statutes may be generally classified into
ACCUSED ORDINARY WITNESS two: one, which grants “use immunity”; and the
other, which grants what is known as
He cannot be He may be compelled to “transactional immunity.” The distinction between
compelled to testify or testify by subpoena, but the two is as follows: “Use immunity” prohibits use
produce evidence even he will have the right to of witness’s compelled testimony and its fruits in
by subpoena or other refuse to answer an any manner in connection with the criminal
process or order of the incriminating question at prosecution of the witness. On the other hand,
court. the time it is asked to “transactional immunity” grants immunity to the
him. witness from prosecution for an offense to which
his compelled testimony relates. (Galman v.
He can refuse outright He does not have a right Pamaran, 138 SCRA 294, G.R. Nos. L-71208-09
to take the stand as a to disregard a and L-71212-13, 1985)
witness subpoena, decline to
appear before the court NOTE: Under R.A. 6981 (Witness Protection,
at the time appointed, or Security and Benefit Act), a witness admitted into
refuse to testify the witness protection program cannot refuse to
altogether. The witness testify or give evidence, produce books,
receiving a subpoena documents, records, or writings necessary for the
must obey. It is only prosecution of the offense or offenses for which
when the incriminating he has been admitted on the ground of the right
question is addressed against self-incrimination. (R.A 6981, Sec. 14)
that he may refuse to (Riano, Evidence, 363)
answer. (Rosete v. Lim,
GR No. 136051, June 8, b. Order in the examination of an
2006) individual witness
Invocation of the right The offense involved is The order in which an individual witness may be
may be with reference one for which he may be examined is as follows:
to: tried in another case. 1. Direct-examination by the proponent;
the offense involved in (Regalado, Evidence, 2. Cross-examination by the opponent;
the same case wherein 842) 3. Re-direct examination by the
he is charged, or proponent;
an offense for which he 4. Re-cross examination by the
may be charged and opponent. (Rule 132, Sec. 4)
tried in another case

ATENEO CENTRAL
DIRECT EXAMINATION is the examination-in- 2. To enable counsel to impeach or to

chief of a witness by the party presenting him on impair the credibility of the witness.
the facts relevant to the issue. (Riano, Evidence, supra citing Kelly v
Bailey 1961 189 CA2d 728, 11 CR 448)
Scope of Direct Examination: All facts relevant
to the issue Rules on Cross-Examination
Purpose AMERICAN RULE

To elicit facts about the client’s cause of action or Cross-examination must be confined to matters
defense. It is now subject to the Judicial Affidavit inquired about in the direct examination.
Rule, which took effect on January 1, 2013.
(Riano, Evidence, 369) (But see Section 9 of the ENGLISH RULE
JAR on application to criminal cases) A witness may be cross-examined not only upon
matters testified by him on his direct examination
CROSS EXAMINATION but also on all matters relevant to the issue. We
Cross examination is the questioning of a witness follow the English Rule.
at a trial or hearing by the party opposed to the
party who called the witness to testify (Black’s NOTE:
Law Dictionary, 7th Ed. 433) But, where the witness is an unwilling or hostile
witness so declared by the court or is an adverse
Scope of Cross Examination party, the cross-examination shall only be on the
On any relevant matter, with sufficient subject matter of his examination-in-chief. (Rule
fullness and freedom to test the witness’s 132, Sec. 13)
accuracy and truthfulness and freedom
from interest or bias, or the reverse Cross Examination is an Absolute Right
All important facts bearing upon the issue Cross-examination is an absolute right. The
Constitution provides that the accused shall enjoy
NOTE: The 2019 amendment of Rule 132, Sec. the right to meet the witnesses face to face. (PHIL.
6 now expanded the coverage of cross- CONST. art. III, § 14)
examination on “any relevant matter”. However,
Rule 115, Sec. 1(d) provides that the scope of the When Cross Examination Becomes a
cross-examination of an accused shall only be on Privilege
“matters covered by his/her direct examination.” When the cross-examination in chief is concluded
and the attendance of the witness is either
In People v. Ayson, G.R. No. 85215, 1989, the dispensed with from the stand or the re-
Supreme Court ruled that if an accused chooses examination, if any, has begun.
to testify, then he may be cross-examined as any
other witness. He may be cross-examined as to The right of a party to confront and cross-examine
any matters stated in his direct examination, or opposing witnesses in a judicial litigation is a
connected therewith. fundamental right which is part of due process.
Until such cross-examination has been finished,
Although there is no definitive case on this matter the testimony of the witness cannot be
yet, one can cite the 2019 amendment of Rule considered as complete and may not be allowed
132, Sec. 6 as basis to say that the accused who to form part of the evidence to be considered by
testifies may indeed be cross-examined “on any the court in deciding the case. However, the right
relevant matter” because he “may be cross- to cross-examine is a personal one which may be
examined as any other witness.” waived expressly or impliedly by conduct
amounting to a renunciation of the said right. In
Purpose of Cross Examination this case, the testimony of the last witness was
1. To bring out facts favorable to the never finished. However, the court permitted the
counsel’s [cross-examiner’s] client not testimony anyway because the petitioners’ failure
established by direct testimony (Riano, to cross-examine was due to its own repeated
Evidence, supra citing Jackson v Feather postponing of the cross-examination and failure
River Water Co., 1859 14 C 18) to appear at hearings. (De la Paz v. IAC, G.R. No.
71537, 1987)

ATENEO CENTRAL
It may also be an opportunity to rehabilitate a

The right is a personal one which may be waived witness whose credibility has been damaged.
expressly or impliedly by conduct amounting to a (Riano, Evidence, 370)
renunciation of the right of cross-examination.
Thus, where a party has had the opportunity to RE-CROSS EXAMINATION
cross-examine a witness but failed to avail It is the examination of a witness (who has
himself/herself of it, he/she necessarily forfeits finished his/her examination-in-chief, cross-
the right to cross-examine and the testimony examination, and re-direct examination) by the
given on direct examination of the witness will be counsel who cross-examined.
received or allowed to remain in the record.
(Fulgado v. CA, G.R. No. L-61570, 1990) Scope of Re-cross Examination
Matters stated in the re-direct examination.
Effects of death or absence of a witness However, other matters may be allowed by the
court in its discretion.
1. Dies before his cross examination is over
If the witness dies before his cross-examination RECALLING WITNESS
is completed, his testimony on the direct may be After the examination of a witness by both sides
stricken out only with respect to the testimony not has been concluded, the witness cannot be
covered by the cross-examination. The absence recalled without leave of the court.
of the witness is not enough to warrant striking
out his testimony for failure to appear for further The court will grant or withhold leave in its
cross-examination where the witness has already discretion, as the interests of justice may require.
been sufficiently cross-examined, and the matter
on which the cross-examination is sought is not in Purpose
controversy. (People v. Señeris, G.R. No. L- For the witness to correct or explain his/her prior
48883, 1980) testimony.
Witnesses may also be recalled after they have
2. Witness not cross-examined. left the stand to lay the proper foundation for
If the witness was not cross-examined because impeachment but this is within the discretion of
of causes attributable to the cross-examining the court.
party and the witness had always made himself
available for cross examination, the direct Section 9, Rule 132 of the Rules of Court explicitly
testimony of witness shall remain in the record provides that the court may grant or withhold
and cannot be ordered stricken off because the leave to recall a witness, in its discretion, as the
cross examiner is deemed to have waived the interest of justice may require. The record is
right to cross-examine witness. (De la Paz v. IAC, loaded with circumstances tending to show
G.R. No. 71537, 1987) insidious attempts to tamper with the witnesses
for the prosecution. It was the better part of
RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION discretion and caution on the part of the trial court
It is the further examination by a party of his/her to have denied as it did, the request of the
own witness after cross-examination. defense to recall Ceribo. (People v. Del Castillo,
G.R. No. L-16941, 1968)
Scope of Re-direct Examination
Matters dealt with during the cross-examination. c. Leading and misleading
Other matters may be allowed by the court in its questions
discretion.
LEADING QUESTION
Purpose It is a question which suggests to the witness the
To allow the witness to explain or supplement his answer which the examining party desires.
answers given during the cross-examination. It is not allowed, EXCEPT:
1. On cross-examination;
The counsel may elicit testimony to correct or 2. On preliminary matters;
repel any wrong impression or inferences that 3. When there is difficulty in getting direct
may have been created in the cross-examination. and intelligible answers from a witness
who is ignorant, or a child of tender years,
or is of feeble mind, or a deaf-mute;

ATENEO CENTRAL
4. Of an unwilling or hostile witness; or supplies him with full suggestions which he

5. Of a witness who is [i] an adverse party incorporates without any effort, by the simple
or [ii] an officer, director, or managing answer, “I did” or “I did not.” Thus, the question
agent of a public or private corporation or may or may not be improper according to the
of a partnership or association which is amount of palpably suggestive detail which it
an adverse party. (Rule 132, Sec. 10) embodies. (State v. Scott, 149 P.2d 152, 1944)
Generally, leading questions are not allowed in d. Impeachment of a witness

direct examination and should be confined to
cross-examination save for the exceptions To impeach a witness means to call into question
aforementioned. the veracity of the witness or by showing that the
witness is unworthy of belief.
However, some leading questions were
warranted given the circumstances. A child of
Destroying credibility is vital because it is linked
tender years may be asked leading questions
under Section 10, Rule 132 of the Rules of Court. with a witness’s ability and willingness to tell the
Section 20 of the 2000 Rule on Examination of a truth. (Riano, Evidence, 373)
Child Witness also provides that the court may
allow leading questions in all stages of (i) Adverse party’s witness
examination of a child if the same will further the
interests of justice. This rule was formulated to The Adverse Party’s Witness May be
allow children to give reliable and complete Impeached By:
evidence, minimize trauma to children, 1. Contradictory evidence;
encourage them to testify in legal proceedings 2. Evidence that his or her general
and facilitate the ascertainment of truth. (People reputation for truth, honesty, or integrity
v. Ilogon, G.R. No. 206294, 2016) is bad;
3. Prior Inconsistent Statements – Evidence
MISLEADING QUESTION that he/she has made at other times
It is one which assumes as true a fact [i] not yet statements inconsistent with his/her
testified to by the witness, or [ii] contrary to that present testimony.
which he or she has previously stated. It is not
allowed. (Rule 132, Sec. 10) General Rule: The adverse party’s witness
cannot be impeached by evidence of particular
Test Whether Question Leading or Misleading wrongful acts.
The test whether a question is leading or not is
the suggestiveness of its substance and not the For example, a lawyer for the other party cannot
form of the question. If the question suggests the ask a witness the following question on cross-
answer desired by putting words into the mouth examination: “Isn’t it a fact that you shoplifted one
of the witness, it is leading. week ago?”
The principal test to a leading question is: Does it Exception: It may be shown by the examination
suggest the answer desired? In order to elicit the of the witness or the record of the judgment that
facts, a trial lawyer may find it necessary to direct the adverse party’s witness has been convicted
the attention of the witness to the specific matter of an offense. (Rule 132, Sec. 11)
concerning which his testimony is desired, and if
the question does not suggest the answer, it is
not leading. Even though the question may call
for a “yes” or “no” answer, it is not leading for that
reason unless it is so worded that by permitting
the witness to answer the “yes” or “no,” he would
be testifying in the language of the interrogator
rather than his own. Nevertheless, such a PRIOR
question may become leading, insofar as it CONTRADICTORY
INCONSISTENT
rehearses lengthy details, which the witness EVIDENCE
STATEMENTS
might not otherwise have mentioned and thus

ATENEO CENTRAL
Contradictory evidence Prior inconsistent counsel may simply bring in the police officer to
whom witness A made his prior inconsistent
normally is sourced in statements are
statement.
a declaration made by statements made by
the witness in his a witness on an Impeachment by bad reputation
direct testimony which earlier occasion
does not correspond to which contradict the When a witness testifies, he puts his credibility at
the real facts of the statements he later issue because the weight of his testimony
case (Riano, p. 260) made during the depends upon his credibility. One way to impair
trial (Riano, p. 262) his credibility is by showing a not so pleasing
…witnesses have reputation.
given conflicting
But not every aspect of a person’s reputation may
testimonies, which
be the subject of impeachment. Evidence of bad
are inconsistent with reputation should only refer to the following
their present specific aspects:
testimony and which 1. For truth
would accordingly 2. For honesty
cast a doubt on their 3. For integrity
credibility. (Villalon
v. IAC, G.R. No. These are aspects of a person’s reputation that
73751, 1986) are relevant to his credibility. He cannot be
impeached for his reputation on any other
grounds. (Riano, p. 267)
Example of contradictory evidence v. prior
inconsistent statements: Sec. 11 of Rule 132 talks about a witness’s
reputation and not his character. A witness is not
Contradictory evidence allowed to be impeached by evidence of bad
Witness A testifies on direct examination that he character but by evidence of bad reputation.
was barely 5 meters away from where the
accused D shot victim V. The defense counsel “Character” is made up of the things an individual
has reliable information that at the time the is and does.
shooting took place, witness A was standing as a
witness in a wedding of his friend, witness B, in a “Reputation” is what people think an individual is
place a hundred miles away. When the defense and what they say about him.
counsel asks witness A as to his direct testimony
of being within 5 meters away from the accused (ii) By evidence of conviction of crime
when the shooting happened, witness A would
say yes. The defense counsel would then call For the purpose of impeaching a witness,
witness B to provide information that witness A evidence that he or she has been convicted by
was in his wedding at said time. final judgement of a crime shall be admitted if:
1. The crime was punishable by a penalty in
Prior inconsistent statements excess of one year; or
In a robbery case, witness A stands in trial as the 2. The crime involved moral turpitude,
prosecution witness. The defense counsel asks regardless of the penalty.
him to confirm his direct examination stating that
he saw a man with a 5’3 frame and oriental However, evidence of a conviction is not
features exit the burglarized store. Witness A admissible if the conviction has been the subject
would confirm this. The defense counsel would of an amnesty or annulment of the conviction
then bring up witness A’s statement to the police (Rule 132, Sec. 12)
that he could not provide the description of the
man who came out because he was wearing a (iii) Own witness
mask and was wearing a dark-sleeved shirt. The
witness then is forced to respond whether he General Rule: The party presenting the witness
denies or admits the same. If he admits it, then he is not allowed to impeach his/her credibility.
should explain, and if he denies, then the defense

ATENEO CENTRAL
Exceptions: 1. By relating to him or her such statements with

1. If the witness has become an unwilling or the circumstances of the times and places
hostile witness. and the persons present.
2. If the witness is [a] an adverse party or [b] 2. By asking him or her whether he made such
an officer, director or managing agent of statements.
a public or private corporation or of a 3. By giving him or her a chance to explain the
partnership or association which is an inconsistency.
adverse party (Rule 132, Sec. 13) 4. If the statements be in writing, they must be
3. If the witness is not voluntarily offered but shown to the witness before any question is
is required by law to be presented by the put to him or her concerning them. (Rule 132,
proponent, as in the case of subscribing Sec. 14)
witnesses to a will (Fernandez v.
Tantoco, G.R. No. 25489, 1926) Unless the witness is given the opportunity to
explain the discrepancies, the impeachment is
A witness may be considered as unwilling or incomplete. However, such defect can be waived
hostile only if so declared by the court upon if no objection is raised when the document
adequate showing of his or her adverse interest, involved is offered for admission. (Regalado,
unjustified reluctance to testify or his or her Evidence, 852)
having misled the party into calling him or her to
the witness stand. (Rule 132, Sec. 13) The “Laying the Predicate” Rule Does NOT
Apply:
A party can impeach his or her own witness 1. If the prior inconsistent statement
only by: appears in a deposition of the adverse
1. Evidence contradictory to witness’s party, and not a mere witness, as such
testimony; or statements are in the nature of
2. Evidence of prior inconsistent statements admissions of said adverse party.
of the witness. (Regalado, Evidence, 852)
2. Where the previous statements of a
NOTE: The rule provides that the unwilling or witness are offered as evidence of an
hostile witness or adverse party may be admission, and not merely to impeach
impeached in the same manner as if he or she him. (Regalado, Evidence, 852 citing
was an adverse party witness, except by Juan Ysmael & Co., Inc, v. Hashim, et.
evidence of his or her bad character. Al., G.R. No. L-26247)
But, where the witness is an unwilling or hostile e. When witness may refer to
witness so declared by the court or is an adverse memorandum memorandum
party witness, the cross-examination shall only be
on the subject matter of his examination-in-chief. A witness may be allowed to refresh his or her
(Rule 132, Sec. 13) memory respecting a fact, by anything written or
recorded by himself or herself, or under his or her
(iv) How the witness is impeached by direction at the time when the fact occurred, or
evidence of inconsistent statements
immediately thereafter, or at any time when the
General Rule: A witness cannot be impeached fact was fresh in his or her memory and he or she
by proof of inconsistent statements until the knew that the same was correctly written or
proper foundation or predicate has been laid. recorded; but in such the case the writing or
record must be produced and may be inspected
Exception: Failure to lay a proper foundation by the adverse party, who may, if he or she
may be waived by the failure of the adverse party chooses, cross-examine the witness upon it, and
to object in proper form to the alleged inconsistent may read it in evidence.
statement.
A witness may also testify from such writing or
A Witness is Impeached by Prior Inconsistent
record, although he or she retains no recollection
Statements by “Laying the Predicate”:
of the particular facts, if he or she is able to swear

ATENEO CENTRAL
that the writing or record correctly stated the i. Examination of a child witness
transaction when made; but such evidence must
be received with caution (Rule 132, Sec. 16) (i) Applicability of the rule
Unless otherwise provided, this Rule shall govern

PRESENT the examination of child witnesses who are
PAST RECOLLECTION
RECOLLECTION victims of crime, accused of a crime, and
RECORDED
REFRESHED witnesses to crime.
Stimulus attempts to Where the witness It shall apply in all criminal proceedings and
revive current memory cannot recall the incident non-criminal proceedings involving child
—document need not but a written record witnesses. (Sec. 1, A.M. 004-07 SC; the Rule on
be admitted into adopted by witness at the Examination of a Child Witness)
evidence because the time is admitted in place
testimony is the of witness’s testimony — (ii) Meaning of “child witness”
evidence. the document is the
evidence itself. A “child witness” is any person who at the time
of giving testimony is below the age of eighteen
(18) years.
f. When part of transaction, writing
or record given in evidence
NOTE: In child abuse cases, a child includes one
Part of a record, etc. over eighteen (18) years but is found by the
When part of an act, declaration, conversation, court as unable to fully take care of himself or
writing or record is given in evidence by one party, protect himself from abuse, neglect, cruelty,
the whole of the same subject may be inquired exploitation, or discrimination because of a
into by the other. (Rule 132, Sec. 17) physical or mental disability or condition.
Detached record, etc. (iii) Competency of a child witness

When a detached act, declaration, conversation,
writing or record is given in evidence, any other Every child is presumed qualified to be a witness
act, declaration, conversation, writing or record (Sec. 6, A.M. 004-07 SC). Thus the burden of
necessary to its understanding may also be given proof lies on the party challenging his
in evidence. (Rule 132, Sec. 17) competence.
g. Power of the court to stop Youth and immaturity are badges of truth and
further evidence sincerity. (People v. Entrampas, G.R. No.
212161, 2017)
The court may stop the introduction of further
testimony upon any particular point when the When the court finds that substantial doubt exists
evidence upon it is already so full that more regarding the ability of the child to perceive,
witnesses to the same point cannot be remember, communicate, distinguish truth from
reasonably expected to be additionally falsehood, or appreciate the duty to tell the truth
persuasive. This power shall be exercised with to the court, the court shall conduct a competency
caution. (Rule 133, Sec. 7) examination of the child. The court may do so
motu proprio or on motion of the party (Riano,
h. Evidence on motion citing Sec. 6 of the Rule on Examination of a Child
Witness)
When a motion is based on facts not appearing of
A party seeking a competency examination must
record, the court may hear the matter on affidavits
present proof of necessity of competency
or depositions presented by the respective
examination. Proof of such necessity must be
parties, but the court may direct that the matter be
grounded on reasons other than the age of the
heard wholly or partly on oral testimony or
child because such age, in itself, is not a sufficient
depositions. (Rule 133, Sec. 8)
basis for a competency examination. (Riano,

ATENEO CENTRAL
citing Sec. 6[a] of the Rule on Examination of a harm to him, hinder the ascertainment of truth, or
Child Witness) result in his inability to effectively communicate
due to embarrassment, fear, or timidity.
The competency examination of a child witness is
not open to the public and only the following are The court may, motu proprio, exclude the public
allowed to attend a competency examination: from the courtroom if the evidence to be produced
during trial is of such character as to be offensive
1. The judge and necessary court to decency or public morals.
personnel;
2. The counsel for the parties; The court may also, on motion of the accused,
3. The guardian ad litem; exclude the public from trial, except court
4. One or more support persons for the personnel and the counsel of the parties. (Sec. 23
child; and of the Rule on Examination of a Child Witness)
5. The defendant, unless the court
determines that competence can be fully The court may also order that persons attending
evaluated in his absence. (Sec. 6[c] of the trial shall not enter or leave the courtroom
the Rule on Examination of a Child during the testimony of the child (Sec. 24 of the
Witness) Rule on Examination of a Child Witness)
The conduct of the examination of a child as to When a child does not understand the English or
his competence shall be conducted only by the Filipino language or is unable to communicate in
judge. Counsel for the parties may not do so said languages due to his developmental level,
directly, but instead can submit questions to the fear, shyness, disability, or other similar reason,
judge that he may, in his discretion, ask the child an interpreter whom the child can understand and
(Sec. 6[d] of the Rule on Examination of a Child who understands the child may be appointed by
Witness) the court, motu proprio or upon motion, to
interpret for the child. Being another witness in
The questions asked at the competency the same case or a member of the family of the
examination shall be appropriate to the age and child is not in itself a disqualification. Such a
developmental level of the child. The questions person may be an interpreter if he is the only one
shall not be related to the issues at trial but shall who can serve as interpreter. If the interpreter
focus on the ability of the child to remember, though is also a witness, he shall testify ahead of
communicate, distinguish between truth and the child (Sec. 9 of the Rule on Examination of a
falsehood, and appreciate the duty to testify Child Witness)
truthfully. (Sec. 6[e] of the Rule on Examination of
a Child Witness) If the court determines that the child is unable to
understand or respond to questions asked, the
(iv) Examination of a child witness court may, motu proprio or upon motion, appoint
a facilitator. The facilitator may be a child
The examination of a child witness presented in a psychologist, psychiatrist, social worker,
hearing or any proceeding shall be done in open guidance counselor, teacher, religious leader,
court parent, or relative. If the court appoints a
facilitator, questions to the child are posed only
Unless the witness is incapacitated to speak, or through the facilitator. (Sec. 10 of the Rule on
the question calls for a different mode of answer, Examination of a Child Witness)
the answers of the witness shall be given orally.
(Sec. 8 of the Rule on Examination of a Child A child testifying at a judicial proceeding or
Witness) making a deposition shall have the right to be
accompanied by one or two persons of his own
When a child testifies, the court may order the choosing to provide him emotional support. Said
exclusion from the courtroom of all persons, support persons shall remain within the view of
including members of the press, who do not have the child during his testimony. One of the support
a direct interest in the case. The order shall be persons may even accompany the child to the
made if the court determines on the record that to witness stand and the court may also allow the
testify in open court would cause psychological support person to hold the hands of the child or to

ATENEO CENTRAL
take other appropriate steps to provide emotional

support to the child in the course of the The prosecutor, counsel, or guardian ad litem
proceedings but the court shall instruct the may apply for an order that a deposition be taken
support person not to prompt, sway, or influence of the testimony of the child and that it be
the child during his testimony. (Sec. 11(a) of the recorded and preserved on videotape
Rule on Examination of a Child Witness)
If the court finds that the child will not be able to
The support person may be another witness but
testify in open court at trial, it shall issue an order
the court may disapprove the choice if it is
sufficiently established that the attendance of the that the deposition of the child be taken and
support person would pose a substantial risk of preserved by videotape. The judge shall preside
influencing or affecting the content of the at the videotaped deposition of a child. Objections
testimony of the child. If the support person is also to deposition testimony or evidence, or parts
a witness, he shall testify ahead of the child. (Sec. thereof, and the grounds for the objection shall be
11(b) and (c) of the Rule on Examination of a stated and shall be ruled upon at the time of the
Child Witness) taking of the deposition.
The rights of the accused during trial, especially
(v) Live-link TV testimony of a child witness the right to counsel and to confront and cross-
examine the child, shall not be violated during the
The prosecutor, counsel or the guardian ad litem
may apply for an order that the testimony of the deposition
child be taken in a room outside the courtroom The videotaped deposition shall be preserved
and be televised to the courtroom by live-link and stenographically recorded. The videotape
television. The application has to be made at least and the stenographic notes shall be transmitted
five (5) days before the trial date, unless the court to the clerk of the court where the case is pending
finds on the record that the need for such an order for safekeeping and shall be made a part of the
was not reasonably foreseeable. (Sec. 25(a) of record. The videotaped deposition and
the Rule on Examination of a Child Witness) stenographic notes shall be subject to a
protective order as provided in section 31(b).
The court may order that the testimony of the
child be taken by live-link television if there is a If, at the time of trial, the court finds that the child
substantial likelihood that the child would suffer
is unable to testify for a reason stated in section
trauma from testifying in the presence of the
accused, his counsel or the prosecutor as the 25(f) of this Rule, or is unavailable for any reason
case may be. The trauma must be of a kind which described in section 4(c), Rule 23 of the 1997
would impair the completeness or truthfulness of Rules of Civil Procedure, the court may admit into
the testimony of the child. (Sec. 25(f) of the Rule evidence the videotaped deposition of the child in
on Examination of a Child Witness) lieu of his testimony at the trial. The court shall
issue an order stating the reasons therefor. (Sec.
If the child is testifying by live-link television and it 27 of the Rule on Examination of a Child Witness)
is necessary to identify the accused at the trial,
the court may allow the child to enter the (vii) Hearsay exception in child abuse cases
courtroom for the limited purpose of identifying
the accused, or the court may allow the child to A statement made by a child describing any act
identify the accused by observing the image of or attempted act of child abuse, not otherwise
the latter on a television monitor. (Sec. 25(g)(3) of admissible under the hearsay rule, may be
the Rule on Examination of a Child Witness) admitted in evidence in any criminal or non-
criminal proceeding subject to the following rules:
The testimony of the child shall be preserved on
videotape, digital disc, or other similar devices (a) Before such hearsay statement may be
which shall be made part of the court record and admitted, its proponent shall make
shall be subject to a protective order as provided known to the adverse party the intention
in section 31(b). (Sec. 25(h) of the Rule on to offer such statement and its particulars
Examination of a Child Witness)
to provide him a fair opportunity to object.
(vi) Videotaped deposition of a child witness

ATENEO CENTRAL
If the child is available, the court shall, attendance by process or other

upon motion of the adverse party, require reasonable means (Sec. 28 of
the child to be present at the presentation the Rule on Examination of a
of the hearsay statement for cross- Child Witness)
examination by the adverse party.
(viii) Sexual abuse shield rule
When the child is unavailable, the fact of
such circumstance must be proved by General Rule: The following evidence is not
the proponent and his hearsay testimony admissible in any criminal proceeding involving
shall be admitted only if corroborated by alleged sexual child abuse:
other admissible evidence. a. Evidence offered to prove that the
alleged victim engaged in other
(b) In ruling on the admissibility of such sexual behavior; and
hearsay statement, the court shall b. Evidence offered to prove the sexual
consider the time, content and predisposition of the alleged victim.
circumstances thereof which provide
sufficient indicia of reliability. Factors to Exception: Evidence of specific instances of
be considered: sexual behavior by the alleged victim to prove that
a. Whether there is a motive to lie a person, other than the accused, was the source
b. The general character of the of the semen, injury, or other physical evidence.
declarant child (This is admissible.) (Sec. 30 of the Rule on
c. Whether more than one person Examination of a Child Witness)
heard the statement
d. Whether the statement was
spontaneous (ix) Protective orders
e. The timing of the statement and
Any videotape or audiotape of a child that is part
the relationship between the
of the court record shall be under a protective
declarant child and witness
order that provides as follows:
f. Cross-examination could not (a) Tapes may be viewed only by parties,
show the lack of knowledge of their counsel, their expert witness, and
the declarant child the guardian ad litem. None of these
g. The possibility of faulty people may divulge the tapes or any
recollection of the declarant child portion thereof to any other person,
is remote except as necessary for the trial nor shall
h. The circumstances surrounding they be given, loaned, sold or shown to
the statement are such that there any other person except by order of the
is no reason to suppose the court
declarant child misrepresented (b) No person shall be granted access to the
the involvement of the accused tape, its transcription or any part thereof
unless he signs a written affirmation that
he has received and read a copy of the
(c) The child witness shall be considered
protective order; that he submits to the
unavailable under the following jurisdiction of the court with respect to the
situations: protective order; and that in case of
a. Is deceased, suffers from violation thereof, he will be subject to the
physical infirmity, lack of contempt power of the court.
memory, mental illness, or will be (c) Within thirty (30) days from receipt, all
exposed to severe psychological copies of the tape and any transcripts
injury; or thereof shall be returned to the clerk of
b. Is absent from the hearing and court for safekeeping unless the period is
the proponent of his statement extended by the court on motion of a
has been unable to procure his party.

ATENEO CENTRAL
(d) This protective order shall remain in full DOCUMENTS – a deed, instrument or other duly
force and effect until further order of the authorized paper by which something is proved,
court. evidenced or set forth (US v. Orera, GR No. 3810,
(e) Each of the tape cassettes and 1907).
transcripts thereof made available to the
parties, their counsel, and respective
For the purpose of their presentation in evidence,
agents shall bear a cautionary notice
stating the provisions of this section. documents are either public or private (Rule 132,
Sec. 19).
Whoever publishes or causes to be published in
any format the name, address, telephone PUBLIC DOCUMENTS
number, school, or other identifying information of 1. The written official acts, or records of the
a child who is or is alleged to be a victim or official acts of the sovereign authority,
accused of a crime or a witness thereof, or an official bodies and tribunals, and public
immediate family of the child shall be liable to the officers, whether of the Philippines, or of
contempt power of the court. a foreign country;
2. Documents acknowledged before a
Where a youthful offender has been charged
before any city or provincial prosecutor or before notary public except last wills and
any municipal judge and the charges have been testaments;
ordered dropped, all the records of the case shall 3. Documents that are considered public
be considered as privileged and may not be documents under treaties and
disclosed directly or indirectly to anyone for any conventions which are in force between
purpose whatsoever. If he is charged and the Philippines and the country of source;
acquitted or the case is dismissed, the records and
are also privileged. 4. Public records, kept in the Philippines, of
private documents required by law to the
The youthful offender concerned shall not be held
entered therein.
under any provision of law to be guilty of perjury
or of concealment or misrepresentation by reason
of his failure to acknowledge the case or recite All other writings are PRIVATE (Rule 132, Sec.
any fact related thereto in response to any inquiry 19).
made to him for any purpose. (Sec. 31 of the Rule
on Examination of a Child Witness) PRIVATE DOCUMENTS
A private document is any other writing, deed, or
2. AUTHENTICATION AND PROOF OF instrument executed by a private person without
DOCUMENTS the intervention of a notary or other person legally
authorized by which some disposition or
a. Meaning of authentication agreement is proved or set forth. (Patula v.
People, G.R. No. 164457, 2012)
Authentication is the process of proving the due
execution and genuineness of the document. Public v. Private Documents
In order to be admissible in evidence, the object PUBLIC PRIVATE

sought to be offered must be authenticated, that DOCUMENT DOCUMENT
is, it must be shown to have been the very thing
that is the subject matter of the lawsuit or the very Admissible without Before admitted in
one involved to prove an issue in the case. further proof as to its evidence as
due execution and authentic, its due
Authentication is the preliminary step in showing genuineness (Riano, execution and
the admissibility of an evidence. (Riano, p. 189) Evidence, 172, 2016 authenticity must be
citing Kummer v. proved (Rule 132,
b. Classes of documents Sec. 20)

ATENEO CENTRAL
when a private document is offered as authentic

People, GR No.
as when it is offered to prove that the document
174461, 2013) was truly executed by the person purported to
have made the same. Otherwise, only
identification is necessary (Riano, Evidence, 169,
2016).
Private documents in the custody of PCGG are

Evidence even Binds only the parties not public documents. What became public are
against third parties and privies to the not the private documents (themselves) but the
of the fact which gave private writing as to recording of it in the PCGG. If a private writing
itself is inserted officially into a public record, its
rise to its due the due execution
record, its recordation, or its incorporation into the
execution and of the and date of the public record becomes a public document, but
date of the latter document that does not make the private writing itself a
public document so as to make it admissible
without authentication. (Republic v.
Last wills and testaments are considered private Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 188881, 2014)
documents EVEN IF notarized (Riano, Evidence,
167, 2016). Additional Modes of Authenticating a Private
Writing:
Church registries of births, marriages, and deaths 1. Doctrine of Self-Authentication
made subsequent to the promulgation of General Where the facts in the writing could only have
Orders No. 68, promulgated on December 18, been known by the writer.
1889, and the passage of Act No. 190, enacted 2. Rule of Authentication by Adverse Party
Where the reply of the adverse party refers to
on August 7, 1901, are no longer public writings,
and affirms the sending and his receipt of the
nor are they kept by duly authorized public letter in question, a copy of which the
officials. They are private writings and their proponent is offering as evidence (Regalado,
authenticity must, therefore, be proved, as are all Remedial Law, 859).
other private writings in accordance with the
Rules of Evidence (Riano, Evidence, 179, 2016 "RECEIPT OF REPLY COMMUNICATION. -
citing Llemos v. Llemos, G.R. No. 150162, 2007). With respect to a letter received thus in due
course of mail and purporting to come from a
c. When a private writing requires person to whom a letter has previously been sent
authentication; proof of a and to be in reply thereto, a presumption of fact is
private writing indulged in favor of the genuineness of the
signature and the letter is admissible in evidence
without further authentication; although, in order
Before any private document offered as authentic
to obtain the benefit of this presumption, it must
is received in evidence, its due execution and
first be proven that a letter was written and
authenticity must be proved by any of the
mailed, to which the letter offered is an answer.
following means:
The rule that the genuineness of the signature to
1. By anyone who saw the document
a reply letter may be assumed applies to a letter
executed or written;
signed in typewriting, or by rubber stamp. The
2. By evidence of the genuineness of the
majority of the recent cases also support the rule
signature or handwriting of the maker; or
that where a letter sent in the ordinary course of
3. By other evidence showing its due
business is answered by an agent of the
execution and authenticity
individual or corporation addressed, authority of
such person is presumed and the reply letter is
Any other private document need only be
admissible against the alleged principal without
identified as that which it is claimed to be. (Rule
132, Sec. 20) preliminary proof of authority. In a few
jurisdictions, however, without expressly
repudiating the above rule, the decisions tend to
The manner of authenticating a document,
the contrary (Anstine v. McWilliams, 24 Wash. 2d
required by Sec. 20 of Rule 132, applies only

ATENEO CENTRAL
230, 163 P.2d 816, 1945 citing Jones 1. Any witness who believes it to be the
Commentaries on Evidence (2d ed.) 341, § 201)." handwriting of such person because:
d. When evidence of authenticity a. He has seen the person write; or

of a private writing is not b. He has seen writing purporting to be his
required upon which the witness has acted or
been charged; and has thus acquired
1. Ancient Documents knowledge of the handwriting of such
2. When the genuineness and authenticity person; or
of an actionable document have not been
specifically denied under oath by the 2. By comparison made by the witness or the
adverse party under Sec. 8 of Rule 8 of court, with writings admitted or treated as
the Rules of Court genuine by the party against whom the
3. When the genuineness and authenticity document is offered, or proved to be genuine
of the document have been admitted to the satisfaction of the judge (Rule 132,
under Sec. 4 of Rule 129 Sec. 22)
4. When the document is not being offered
as authentic as implied from Sec. 20, There is no inflexible rule as claimed by petitioner
Rule 132 of the Rules of Court, which under Sec. 22, Rule 132 of the Revised Rules of
requires authentication only when the Court that gives priority to subscribing witnesses
document is offered as “authentic” in the order and quality of evidence to prove a
(Riano, p. 193) handwriting. The rule referred to above merely
Ancient Document enumerates the means or methods by which the
Where a private document is: handwriting of a person may be proved...The law
makes no preference, much less distinction
1. More than thirty years old; among and between the different means stated
2. Is produced from a custody in which it above in proving the handwriting of a person
would naturally be found if genuine; and (Lopez v. CA, L-31494, 1978).
3. Is unblemished by any alterations or
circumstances of suspicion; The deed of sale (Exhibit 1) is not notarized and
is, therefore, a private writing (U.S. v. Orera, G.R.
no other evidence of its authenticity need be No. 3810, 1907), whose due execution and
given. (Rule 132, Sec. 21) authenticity must be proved before it can be
The last requirement of the “ancient document received in evidence (Bunag v. Court of Appeals,
rule” that a document must be unblemished by G.R. No. L-39013, 1988).
any alteration or circumstances of suspicion
refers to the extrinsic quality of the document NOTE: Expert testimony on handwriting is not
itself. The lack of signatures on the first pages, mandatory (Riano, Evidence, 171, 2016).
therefore, absent any alterations or Summary of authenticating private
circumstances of suspicion cannot be held to documents:
detract from the fact that the documents in
question, which were certified as copies of the Due execution and authenticity are proved:
originals on file with the Register of Deeds of
Pampanga, are genuine and free from any 1. By anyone who saw the document
blemish or circumstances of suspicion (Heirs of executed or written
Lacsa v. CA, G.R. No. 79597-98, 1994). 2. By evidence of the genuineness of the
signature or handwriting
e. Genuineness of handwriting a) By a witness who believes it to be the
handwriting of such person because:
The handwriting of a person may be proved by: i. He or she has seen the person
write

ATENEO CENTRAL
ii. Has seen writing purporting to be accompanied with a certificate that such
his or hers upon which the officer has the custody. (Rule 132, Sec.
witness has acted or been 24, 1st par.)
charged, and has thus acquired
knowledge of the handwriting of If the office in which the record is kept is in a
foreign country which is a contracting party to a
such person
treaty or convention to which the Philippines is
b) By comparison made either by the also a party, or considered a public document
witness or the court with writings either: under such treaty or convention pursuant to
i. Admitted or treated as genuine paragraph (c) of Sec. 19 hereof: the certificate or
by the party against whom the its equivalent shall be in the form prescribed by
evidence is offered or such treaty or convention subject to reciprocity
ii. Proved to be genuine to the granted to public documents originating from the
satisfaction of the judge. Philippines (Rule 132, Sec. 24, 2 nd par.)
3. By other evidence showing its due execution
and authenticity. The certificate shall not be required when a
treaty or convention between a foreign country
and the Philippines has abolished the
NOTE: Expert testimony on handwriting is not requirement, or has exempted the document itself
mandatory (Riano, Evidence, 171, 2016). from this formality. (Rule 132, Sec. 24, 4th par.,
The opinions of handwriting experts are not 2nd sentence)
necessarily binding upon the court, the expert’s
function being to place before the court data upon For documents originating from a foreign country
which the court can form its own opinion. (Heirs which is not a contracting party to a treaty or
of Peter Donton v. Stier, G.R. No. 216491, 2017) convention referred to [in Rule 132, Sec, 24, 2nd
par.]: the certificate may be made by secretary
of the embassy or legation, consul-general,
f. Public documents as evidence;
consul, vice-consul or consular agent or by any
proof of official record
officer in the foreign service of the Philippines
stationed in the foreign country in which the
Public documents are admissible without further record is kept, and authenticated by the seal of
proof of their genuineness and due execution. his or her office. (Rule 132, Sec. 24, 3rd par.)
Documents consisting of entries in public records A document that is accompanied by a certificate
made in the performance of a duty by a public or its equivalent may be presented in evidence
officer are prima facie evidence of the facts without further proof, the certificate or its
therein stated. [This is a hearsay exception.] equivalent being prima facie evidence of the due
execution and genuineness of the document
All other public documents are evidence, even involved. (Rule 132, Sec. 24, 4th par., 1st
against a third person, of the fact which gave rise sentence)
to their execution and of the date of the latter.
(Rule 132, Sec. 23) Even assuming (arguendo) that the POEA has
jurisdiction to recognize and enforce a foreign
Proof of official record judgment, still respondent Rances cannot rely
The record of public documents referred to in upon the Dubai decision. The Dubai decision was
paragraph (a) of Section 19 (the written official not properly proved before the POEA. The Dubai
acts, or records of the official acts of the decision purports to be the written act or record of
sovereign authority, official bodies and tribunals, an act of an official body or tribunal of a foreign
and public officers, whether of the Philippines, or country, and therefore a public writing under
of a foreign country), when admissible for any Section 20 (a) of Rule 132 of the Revised Rules
purpose, may be evidenced by: of Court. Sections 25 and 26 of Rule 132 (now
1. An official publication thereof Sections 24 and 25 of Rule 132, respectively)
2. By a copy attested by the officer having prescribe the manner of proving a public or official
the legal custody of the record, or by his record of a foreign country
deputy and if the record is not kept in the
Philippines, the attestation should be

ATENEO CENTRAL
Foreign laws do not prove themselves nor can the By a copy thereof, attested by the legal custodian
courts take judicial notice of them. Like any other of the record, with an appropriate certificate that
fact, they must be alleged and proved. Written law such officer has the custody. (Rule 132, Sec. 27).
may be evidenced by an official publication
thereof or by a copy attested by the officer having Financial statements, whether audited or not, are,
the legal custody of the record, or by his deputy,
as general rule, private documents. However,
and accompanied with a certificate that such
officer has custody. once financial statements are filed with a
government office pursuant to a provision of law,
The certificate may be made by a secretary of an they become public documents. (Salas v. Sta.
embassy or legation, consul general, consul, Mesa Market Corporation, G.R. No. 157766, July
vice-consul, or consular agent or by any officer in 12, 2007)
the foreign service of the Philippines stationed in
the foreign country in which the record is kept, i. Proof of lack of record
and authenticated by the seal of his office
(Spouses Zalamea v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. A written statement signed by an officer having
104235, 1993). the custody of an official record or by his or her
deputy that after diligent search no record or entry
Doctrine of Processual Presumption of a specified tenor is found to exist in the records
Where a foreign law is not pleaded or, even if of his or her office, accompanied by a certificate
pleaded, is not proven, the presumption is that the as above provided, is admissible as evidence that
foreign law is the same as Philippine law (Orion the records of his or her office contain no such
Savings Bank v. Suzuki, G.R. No. 205487, 2014). record or entry (Rule 132, Sec. 28).
g. Attestation of a copy It is not a conclusive proof however of the non-

existence of the record at all. It only provides
Whenever a copy of a document or record is evidence that the record is not entered or found
attested for the purpose of evidence, the
in that particular office.
attestation must state, in substance, that the copy
is a correct copy of the original, or a specific part
thereof, as the case may be. j. How a judicial record is
impeached
The attestation must be under the official seal of
the attesting officer, if there be any, or if he or she Judicial record
be the clerk of a court having a seal, under the The record of judicial proceedings. It does not
seal of such court (Rule 132, Sec. 25). only include official entries or files or the official
acts of a judicial officer, but also the judgment of
The certificate (under Sec. 24) and attestation the court (Riano, Evidence, 174, 2016 citing
(under Sec. 25) are required, because of the Black’s Law Dictionary, 5 thEd., p. 762 &
general rule on the “irremovability of public Wharton’s Criminal Evidence, 11thEd., Sec. 805).
records”: Any public record, an official copy of
Any judicial record may be impeached by
which is admissible in evidence, must not be
removed from the office in which it is kept, except evidence of:
upon order of a court where the inspection of the 1. Want of jurisdiction in the court or judicial
record is essential to the just determination of a officer;
pending case [Rule 132, Sec. 26; Riano, 2. Collusion between the parties; or
Evidence, 174, 2016]. 3. Fraud in the party offering the record, in
respect to the proceedings (Rule 132,
h. Public record of a private Sec. 29).
document
k. Proof of notarial documents
An authorized public record of a private document
may be proved by: Every instrument duly acknowledged or proved
The original record, or and certified as provided by law, may be
presented in evidence without further proof, the

ATENEO CENTRAL
certificate of acknowledgment being prima facie document (Aguinaldo v. Torres, G.R. No. 225808,
evidence of the execution of the instrument or 2017)
document involved (Rule 132, Sec. 30).
“Acknowledgement” refers to an act in which an
Notarized documents fall under the second individual, on a single occasion:
classification of public documents. However, not a) appears in person before the notary
all types of public documents are deemed prima public and presents and integrally
facie evidence of the facts therein stated. Hence, complete instrument or document;
b) is attested to be personally known to the
under Section 23, notarized documents are
notary public or identified by the notary
merely proof of the fact which gave rise to their public through competent evidence of
execution (e.g., the notarized Answer to identity as defined by these Rules; and
Interrogatories in the case at bar is proof that c) represents to the notary public that the
Philtrust had been served with Written signature on the instrument or document
Interrogatories), and of the date of the latter (e.g., was voluntarily affixed by him for the
the notarized Answer to Interrogatories is proof purposes stated in the instrument or
that the same was executed on October 12, 1992, document, declares that he has executed
the date stated thereon), but is not prima facie the instrument or document as his free
evidence of the facts therein stated. Additionally, and voluntary act and deed, and, if he
acts in a particular representative
under Section 30 of the same Rule, the
capacity, that he has the authority to sign
acknowledgement in notarized documents is in that capacity. (Coquia v. Laforteza,
prima facie evidence of the execution of the A.C. No. 9364, 2017)
instrument or document involved (e.g., the
notarized Answer to Interrogatories is prima facie l. Alterations in a document
proof that petitioner executed the same)
(Philippine Trust Company v. Court of Appeals, The party producing a document as genuine
G.R. No. 150318, 2010). which has been altered and appears to have been
altered after its execution, in a part material to the
Notarial documents, except last wills and question in dispute, must account for the
alteration.
testaments, are public documents and are
evidence of the facts that gave rise to their
How a party may account for such alteration
execution and of their date (Siguan v. Lim, G.R.
1. The alteration was made by another,
No. 134685, 1999).
without his or her concurrence; or
2. It was made with the consent of the
A public document duly acknowledged before a
parties affected by it; or
notary public, under his hand and seal with his
3. It was otherwise properly or innocently
certificate thereto attached, is admissible in
made; or
evidence without further proof of its due execution
4. The alteration did not change the
and delivery until some question is raised as to
meaning or language of the instrument.
the verity of said acknowledgment and certificate
(Antillon v. Barcelon, G.R. No. L-12483, 1917)
If he or she fails to do that, the document shall not
be admissible in evidence (Rule 132, Sec. 31).
The above rule presupposes that the document
was notarized by a person duly authorized to
m. Seal
perform notarial functions, as well as that the
document was properly notarized in the presence
There shall be no difference between sealed and
of the notary public.
unsealed private documents insofar as their
admissibility as evidence is concerned. (Rule
The improper notarization stripped the document
132, Sec. 32)
of its public character and reduced it into a private

ATENEO CENTRAL
n. Documentary evidence in 2. They have been incorporated in the records

unofficial language of the case. (People v Libnao, G.R. No.
13860, 2003)
Documents written in an unofficial language shall
not be admitted as evidence, unless Purpose of Offer
accompanied with a translation into English or Formal offer is necessary because it is the duty of
Filipino. To avoid interruption of proceedings, the judge to rest his findings of facts and his
parties or their attorneys are directed to have judgment only and strictly upon the evidence
such translation prepared before trial (Rule 132, offered by the parties at the trial. (Candido v. CA,
Sec. 33). G.R. No. 107493, 1996)
More than once, this Court has taken into The purpose for which the evidence is offered
consideration documents written in a Philippine must be specified because such evidence may be
dialect, unaccompanied by the required admissible for several purposes under the
translation but which had been admitted in doctrine of multiple admissibility, or may be
evidence without objection by the accused. In admissible for one purpose and not for another;
those instances, the Court merely ordered official otherwise the adverse party cannot interpose the
translations to be made. proper objection. Evidence submitted for one
purpose may not be considered for any other
It is true that Section 33, Rule 132 of the Revised purpose. (Catuira v. CA, G.R. No. 105813, 1994)
Rules of Court now prohibits the admission of
such document in an unofficial language but we A party who has offered evidence is NOT entitled
believe that in the interest of justice, such as a matter of right to withdraw it on finding that it
injunction should not be taken literally here, does not answer his purpose.
especially since no objection thereto was
interposed by appellant, aside from the fact that A party who calls for the production of a document
appellant, the concerned parties and the judicial and inspects the same is not obliged to offer it as
authorities or personnel concerned appeared to evidence. (Rule 130, sec. 9)
be familiar with or knowledgeable of Cebuano in
which the document was written. There was, A party has the option of not offering into
therefore, no prejudice caused to appellant and evidence the evidence identified at the trial and
no reversible error was committed by that lapse marked as an exhibit.
of the trial court (People v. Salison, G.R. No. The mere fact that a particular document is
115690, 1996). identified and marked as an exhibit does not
mean it will be or has been offered as part of the
3. OFFER AND OBJECTION evidence of the party. The party may decide to
formally offer it if it believes this will advance its
a. Offer of evidence cause, and then again it may decide not to do so
at all. (Interpacific Transit v. Aviles, G.R. No.
The court shall consider no evidence which has 86062, 1990)
not been formally offered. The purpose for which
the evidence is offered must be specified. (Rule There are instances when the Court relaxed the
132, Sec. 34) foregoing rule and allowed evidence not formally
offered to be admitted. Citing People v. Napat-a
Exceptions: and People. v. Mate, the Court in Heirs of
1. Evidence not formally offered can be Romana Saves, et al., v. Heirs of Escolastico
considered by the court as long as they have Saves, et al. (G.R. No. 152866, 2010),
been properly identified by testimony duly enumerated the requirements for the evidence to
recorded and be considered despite failure to formally offer it,
namely: “first, the same must have been duly
identified by testimony duly recorded and,

ATENEO CENTRAL
second, the same must have been

incorporated in the records of the case.” Purposes of Objections:
1. To keep out inadmissible evidence that would
In People v. Vivencio De Roxas et al. (G.R. No. cause harm to a client’s cause. The rules of
L-16947, 1962), the Court also considered evidence are not self-operating and hence,
exhibits which were not formally offered by must be invoked by way of an objection;
the prosecution but were repeatedly referred 2. To protect the record, i.e., to present the
to in the course of the trial by the counsel of issue of inadmissibility of the offered
the accused. evidence in a way that if the trial court rules
erroneously, the error can be relied upon as
In the instant case, the Court finds that the above a ground for a future appeal;
requisites are attendant to warrant the relaxation 3. To protect a witness from being embarrassed
of the rule and admit the evidence of the on the stand or from being harassed by the
petitioners not formally offered. As can be seen in adverse counsel;
the records of the case, the petitioners were able 4. To expose the adversary’s unfair tactics like
to present evidence that have been duly identified his consistently asking obviously leading
by testimony duly recorded. To identify is to prove questions;
the identity of a person or a thing. Identification 5. To give the trial court an opportunity to
means proof of identity; the proving that a person, correct its own errors and, at the same time,
subject or article before the court is the very same warn the court that a ruling adverse to the
that he or it is alleged, charged or reputed to be. objector may supply a reason to invoke a
(Rodolfo Laborte, et al. v. Pagsanjan Tourism higher court’s appellate jurisdiction; and
Consumers’ Cooperative, et al., G.R. No. 6. To avoid a waiver of the inadmissibility of
183860, 2014) otherwise inadmissible evidence. (Riano,
Evidence, 517-518)
b. When to make an offer
Purpose: To stop an answer to a question put to
TESTIMONIAL DOCUMENTARY a witness or to prevent the receipt of a document
EVIDENCE AND OBJECT in evidence until the court has had opportunity to
EVIDENCE make a ruling upon its admissibility.
The offer must be It shall be offered after
made at the time the the presentation of a Rules on Objections (Rule 132, Sec. 36)
witness is called to party’s testimonial
testify. (Rule 132, evidence. (Rule 132, Objection to offer of evidence— must be made
Sec. 35) Sec. 35) orally immediately after the offer is made
The Rules of Court now mandate that all evidence Objection to the testimony of a witness for
be offered orally. (Rule 132, Sec. 35) lack of formal offer— must be made as soon as
the witness begins to testify
NOTE: The party presenting the judicial affidavit
of his witness in place of direct testimony shall Objection to a question propounded in the
state the purpose of such testimony at the start of course of the oral examination of a witness—
the presentation of the witness. The adverse must be made as soon as the grounds therefor
party may move to disqualify the witness or to become reasonably apparent
strike out his affidavit or any of the answers found
in it on ground of inadmissibility. (Judicial Affidavit Grounds for the objections must be specified.
Rule, Sec. 6)
An objection to evidence cannot be made in
c. When to make an objection advance of the offer of the evidence sought to be
introduced.

ATENEO CENTRAL
The right to object is a mere privilege which the Documentary Evidence

parties may waive. And if the ground for Formally offered by
objection is known and not seasonably made, the the proponent after
objection is deemed waived and the court has no the presentation of At the time it is formally
power, on its own motion, to disregard the his/her last witness offered. (Francisco,
evidence. (People v. Yatco, G.R. No. L-9181, and before he rests supra)
1955) his case. (Francisco,
supra)
WHEN OFFERED WHEN IT MAY BE
OBJECTED TO d. When repetition of an objection
Object Evidence unnecessary (Continuing
When the same is Objection)
presented for its view
or evaluation, as in When it becomes reasonably apparent in the
course of the examination of a witness that the
ocular inspection or
questions being propounded are of the same
demonstrations, or Should be made either
class as those to which objection has been made,
when the party rests at the time it is whether such objection was sustained or
his case (after the presented in an ocular overruled, it shall not be necessary to repeat the
presentation of a inspection or objection, it being sufficient for the adverse party
party’s testimonial demonstration or when to record his or her continuing objection to such
evidence [Rule 132, it is formally offered class of questions. (Rule 132, Sec. 37)
Sec. 35]) and the
real evidence e. Ruling
consists of objects
exhibited in court. When Ruling of Court Must be Given
Testimonial Evidence
As to the qualification General Rule: The ruling of the court must be
of the witness – should given immediately after the objection is made
be made at the time he
is called to the stand Exception: Unless the court desires to take a
and immediately after reasonable time to inform itself on the question
the opposing party presented.
offers his/her
testimony. The ruling shall always be made:
When witness is 1. During the trial; and
called to the witness 2. At such time as will give the party against
If otherwise qualified -
stand, before he/she whom it is made an opportunity to meet the
objection should be
testifies situation presented by the ruling. (Rule 132,
raised when the
objectionable question Sec. 38)
is asked or after the
answer is given if the When Reason For Ruling Must be Stated
objectionable features GENERAL RULE: The reason for sustaining or
became apparent by overruling an objection need not be stated.
reason of such EXCEPTION: If the objection is based on two or
answer. more grounds, a ruling sustaining the objection
on one or some of them must specify the ground
or grounds relied upon. (Rule 132, Sec. 38)
The rulings of the trial court on procedural

questions and on admissibility of evidence during
the course of a trial are interlocutory in nature and

ATENEO CENTRAL
may not be the subject of separate appeals or

review on certiorari. These are to be assigned as Where the court refuses to permit the counsel to
errors and reviewed in the appeal taken from the present testimony which he thinks is competent,
trial court on the merits of the case. (Gatdula v. material and necessary to prove his case, the
method to properly preserve the record to the end
People, GR No. 140688, Jan. 26, 2001)
that the question may be saved for the purposes
of review, is through the making of an offer of
f. Striking out of an answer proof.
General Rule: An objection to questions Purpose:
propounded in the course of oral examination 1. To inform the court of what is expected to be
must be interposed as soon as the ground(s) proved.
become evident. Failure to interpose a timely 2. To enable a higher court to determine from
objection may be taken as a waiver of the right to the record whether the proposed evidence is
object and the answer will be admitted. competent.
Exceptions: A motion to strike out the answer, Rule on Tender of Excluded Evidence
testimony or narration is available as a remedy 1. If the excluded evidence is documentary
where:
or object − the offeror may have the same
1. Where a witness answers a question
attached to or made part of the record. (Rule
before the adverse party had the
132, Sec. 40)
opportunity to voice fully its objection to
2. If the evidence excluded is oral – the
the same
offeror may state for the record the name and
2. Where a question is not objectionable,
other personal circumstances of the witness
but the answer is not responsive
and the substance of the proposed testimony.
3. Where a witness testifies without a
(Rule 132, Sec. 40)
question being posed
4. Where witness testifies beyond limits
The non-inclusion of the controverted bills of
set by the court
lading in the formal offer of evidence cannot,
5. Where the witness does a narration
under the facts of this particular case, be
instead of answering the question
considered a fatal procedural lapse as would bar
(Rule 132, Sec. 39)
respondent carrier from raising the defense of
prescription. (PHILAMGEN v. Sweet Lines, Inc.,
An Answer, Testimony or Narration May be
G.R. No. 87434, 1992)
Stricken Off the Record:
1. On motion of party - Should a witness
The reason for requiring that evidence be formally
answer the question before the adverse
introduced is to enable the court to rule
party had the opportunity to voice fully its
intelligently upon the objection to the questions
objection to the same or where a
which have been asked. As a general rule, the
question is not objectionable, but the
proponent must show its relevancy, materiality
answer is not responsive, or where a
and competency. Where the proponent offers
witness testifies without a question being
evidence deemed by counsel of the adverse party
posed or testifies beyond limits set by the
to be inadmissible for any reason, the latter has
court or when the witness does a
the right to object. But such right is a mere
narration instead of answering the
privilege which can be waived. Necessarily, the
question and such objection is found to
objection must be made at the earliest
be meritorious, the court shall sustain the
opportunity, lest silence when there is opportunity
objection and order the answer,
to speak may operate as a waiver of objections.
testimony or narration to be stricken off
(Catuira v. CA, G.R. No. 105813, 1994)
the record. (Rule 132, Sec. 39)
2. On proper motion, the court may also
In Inter-pacific Transit, Inc. v. Aviles, we had the
order the striking out of answers which
occasion to make a distinction between
are incompetent, irrelevant, or otherwise
identification of documentary evidence and its
improper. (Rule 132, Sec. 39)
formal offer as an exhibit. We said that the first is
done in the course of the trial and is accompanied
g. Tender of excluded evidence

ATENEO CENTRAL
by the marking of the evidence as an exhibit while scheduled hearing with respect to motions and
the second is done only when the party rests its incidents, the following:
case and not before. A party, therefore, may opt
to formally offer his evidence if he believes that it (1) The judicial affidavits of their witnesses, which
will advance his cause or not to do so at all. In the shall take the place of such witnesses' direct
event he chooses to do the latter, the trial court is testimonies; and
not authorized by the Rules to consider the same.
(Vda. de Oñate v. CA, G.R. No. 116149, 1995) (2) The parties' documentary or object evidence,
if any, which shall be attached to the judicial
I. JUDICIAL AFFIDAVIT RULE (A.M. NO. affidavits and marked as Exhibits A, B, C, and so
on in the case of the complainant or the plaintiff,
12-8-8-SC)
and as Exhibits 1, 2, 3, and so on in the case of
the respondent or the defendant.
The rule modifies the existing practice in the
conduct of a trial and reception of evidence by (b) Should a party or a witness desire to keep the
doing away with the usual oral examination of a original document or object evidence in his
witness in a direct examination. (Riano, possession-- he may, after the same has been
Evidence, 418, 2019 ed.) identified, marked as exhibit, and authenticated,
warrant in his judicial affidavit that the copy or
SCOPE reproduction attached to such affidavit is a faithful
copy or reproduction of that original. In addition,
The Judicial Affidavit Rule shall apply to all the party or witness shall bring the original
actions, proceedings, and incidents requiring the document or object evidence for comparison
reception of evidence before: during the preliminary conference with the
1. The Metropolitan Trial Courts, the attached copy, reproduction, or pictures, failing
Municipal Trial Courts in Cities, the which the latter shall not be admitted.
Municipal Trial Courts, the Municipal
Circuit Trial Courts, and the Shari' a This is without prejudice to the introduction of
Circuit Courts but shall not apply to small secondary evidence in place of the original when
claims cases under A.M. 08-8-7-SC; allowed by existing rules. (JAR, Sec. 2)
2. The Regional Trial Courts and the Shari'a
District Courts; The judicial affidavit shall take the place of the
3. The Sandiganbayan, the Court of Tax direct testimonies of witnesses. The rule,
Appeals, the Court of Appeals, and the therefore, modifies the existing practice in the
Shari'a Appellate Courts; conduct of a trial and reception of evidence by
4. The investigating officers and bodies doing away with the usual oral examination of a
authorized by the Supreme Court to witness in a direct examination. (Riano, p. 296)
receive evidence, including the Integrated
Bar of the Philippine (IBP); and Under the 2019 Amendments to the 1997 Rules
5. The special courts and quasi-judicial of Civil Procedure, the judicial affidavits of the
bodies, whose rules of procedure are witnesses shall be attached to the pleading and
subject to disapproval of the Supreme form an integral part thereof. (Rule 7, Section 6)
Court, insofar as their existing rules of
procedure contravene the provisions of
this Rule. (JAR, Sec. 1(a)) CONTENTS
A judicial affidavit shall be prepared in the

SUBMISSION IN LIEU OF DIRECT language known to the witness and, if not in
TESTIMONY English or Filipino, accompanied by a translation
in English or Filipino, and shall contain the
following:
(a) The parties shall file with the court and serve (a) The name, age, residence or business
on the adverse party, personally or by licensed address, and occupation of the witness;
courier service, not later than five days before (b) The name and address of the lawyer who
pre-trial or preliminary conference or the conducts or supervises the examination

ATENEO CENTRAL
of the witness and the place where the The party presenting the judicial affidavit of his
examination is being held; witness in place of direct testimony shall state the
(c) A statement that the witness is answering purpose of such testimony at the start of the
the questions asked of him, fully presentation of the witness. The adverse party
conscious that he does so under oath, may move to disqualify the witness or to strike out
and that he may face criminal liability for his affidavit or any of the answers found in it on
false testimony or perjury; ground of inadmissibility. The court shall promptly
(d) Questions asked of the witness and his rule on the motion and, if granted, shall cause the
corresponding answers, consecutively marking of any excluded answer by placing it in
numbered, that: brackets under the initials of an authorized court
(1) Show the circumstances under personnel, without prejudice to a tender of
which the witness acquired the excluded evidence under Section 40 of Rule 132
facts upon which he testifies; of the Rules of Court. (JAR, Sec. 6)
(2) Elicit from him those facts which
are relevant to the issues that the Oral offer of and objections to exhibits—
case presents; and
(3) Identify the attached (a) Upon the termination of the testimony of his
documentary and object last witness, a party shall immediately make an
evidence and establish their oral offer of evidence of his documentary or object
authenticity in accordance with exhibits, piece by piece, in their chronological
the Rules of Court; order, stating the purpose or purposes for which
(e) The signature of the witness over his he offers the particular exhibit.
printed name; and
(f) A jurat with the signature of the notary (b) After each piece of exhibit is offered, the
public who administers the oath or an adverse party shall state the legal ground for his
officer who is authorized by law to objection, if any, to its admission, and the court
administer the same. (JAR, Sec. 3) shall immediately make its ruling respecting that
(g) A sworn attestation at the end, executed exhibit.
by the lawyer who conducted or
supervised the examination of the (c) Since the documentary or object exhibits form
witness, to the effect that: part of the judicial affidavits that describe and
(1) He faithfully recorded or caused authenticate them, it is sufficient that such
to be recorded the questions he exhibits are simply cited by their markings during
asked and the corresponding the offers, the objections, and the rulings,
answers that the witness gave; dispensing with the description of each exhibit.
and (JAR, Sec. 8)
(2) Neither he nor any other person
then present or assisting him
coached the witness regarding APPLICATION IN CRIMINAL CASES
the latter's answers. (JAR, Sec.
4(a)) This rule shall apply to all criminal actions:
a) Where the maximum of the imposable
The questions to be asked of the witness in the penalty does not exceed six years;
preparation of the judicial affidavit will determine b) Where the accused agrees to the use of
whether he/she has personal knowledge of the judicial affidavits, irrespective of the penalty
facts upon which he/she testifies. The matters involved; or
testified to should also be on matters relevant to
c) With respect to the civil aspect of the
the issues of the case. (Riano, Evidence, 272)
actions, whatever the penalties involved are.
(JAR, Sec. 9(a))
OFFER AND OBJECTION
Example of crimes where applicable:
Offer of and objections to testimony in judicial • Falsification and use of falsified
affidavit— documents.
• False testimony and perjury.

ATENEO CENTRAL
• Indirect bribery. Here, Yap is a requested witness who is the

• Death caused in a tumultuous affray (if it adverse party’s witness. Regardless of whether
cannot be ascertained who actually killed he unjustifiably declines to execute a judicial
the deceased) affidavit or refuses without just cause to present
• Inducing a minor to abandon his home. the documents, Section 5 cannot be made to
• Adultery and Concubinage. apply to him for the reason that he is included in
• Acts of lasciviousness. a group of individuals expressly exempt from the
• Consented abduction. provision’s application. Section 5 of the JAR
expressly excludes from its application
adverse party and hostile witnesses. (Ng
EFFECT OF NON-COMPLIANCE Meng Tam vs. Chinabank, G.R. No. 214054,
2015)
a) A false attestation shall subject the lawyer
mentioned to disciplinary action, including c) A party who fails to submit the required
disbarment. (JAR, Sec. 4(b)) judicial affidavits and exhibits on time shall be
deemed to have waived their submission.
b) If the government employee or official, or the • The court may, however, allow
requested witness, who is neither the witness only once the late submission of
of the adverse party nor a hostile witness, the same provided, the delay is
unjustifiably declines to execute a judicial for a valid reason, would not
affidavit or refuses without just cause to make unduly prejudice the opposing
the relevant books, documents, or other party, and the defaulting party
things under his control available for copying, pays a fine of not less than
authentication, and eventual production in P1,000.00 nor more than
court, the requesting party may avail himself P5,000.00 at the discretion of the
of the issuance of a subpoena ad court.
testificandum or duces tecum under Rule 21
of the Rules of Court. The rules governing the d) The court shall not consider the affidavit of
issuance of a subpoena to the witness in this any witness who fails to appear at the
case shall be the same as when taking his scheduled hearing of the case as required.
deposition except that the taking of a judicial Counsel who fails to appear without valid
affidavit shall be understood to be ex parte. cause despite notice shall be deemed to have
(JAR, Sec. 5) waived his client's right to confront by cross-
examination the witnesses there present.
Section 5 of the JAR contemplates a situation
where there is a (a) government employee or e) The court shall not admit as evidence judicial
official or (b) requested witness who is not the (1) affidavits that do not conform to the content
adverse party’s witness nor (2) a hostile requirements of Section 3 and the attestation
witness. If this person either (a) unjustifiably requirement of Section 4.
declines to execute a judicial affidavit or (b) • The court may, however, allow only
refuses without just cause to make the relevant once the subsequent submission of
documents available to the other party and its the compliant replacement affidavits
presentation to court, Section 5 allows the before the hearing or trial provided
requesting party to avail of issuance of the delay is for a valid reason and
subpoena ad testificandum or duces would not unduly prejudice the
tecum under Rule 21 of the Rules of Court. Thus, opposing party and provided further,
adverse party witnesses and hostile that public or private counsel
witnesses being excluded, they are not responsible for their preparation and
covered by Section 5. submission pays a fine of not less
than P1,000.00 nor more than

ATENEO CENTRAL
P5,000.00, at the discretion of the • To deny bail when discretionary – when the
court. (JAR, Sec. 10) evidence of guilt is strong
• To accept a plea of guilty to a capital
offense – that the accused voluntarily and
J. WEIGHT AND SUFFICIENCY OF
fully comprehended the consequences of his
EVIDENCE (RULE 133) plea
• To grant demurrer to evidence – the
QUANTUM OF FOR WHICH CASES evidence is insufficient to sustain a conviction
EVIDENCE
The prosecution has to prove its affirmative
allegations in the information (i.e., the elements
Proof Beyond Criminal cases of the crime as well as the attendant
Reasonable Doubt circumstances), while the defense has to prove
(Rule 133, Sec. 2) its affirmative allegations regarding the existence
of justifying or exempting circumstances,
Clear and Extradition cases absolutory causes or mitigating circumstances.
Convincing Charges filed against
Evidence judges and justices Hierarchy of Evidence
(Gov’t of HK v. • Proof beyond reasonable doubt
Olalia, G.R. No. • Clear and convincing evidence
153675, 2007) • Preponderance of evidence
• Substantial evidence
Preponderance of Civil cases
Evidence
(Rule 133, Sec. 1) 1. PROOF BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT
Substantial Administrative Cases, In a criminal case, the accused is entitled to an
Evidence Cases before Quasi- acquittal unless his or her guilt is shown beyond
(Rule 133, Sec. 6) Judicial Bodies, Writ of reasonable doubt.
Amparo
Proof beyond reasonable doubt does not mean
Degree of Proof That Satisfies the Burden of such a degree of proof as, excluding possibility of
Proof error, produces absolute certainty.
Civil Cases – Preponderance of evidence Moral certainty only is required, or that degree of
The plaintiff has to establish his case by proof which produces conviction in an
preponderance of evidence. If he claims a right unprejudiced mind. (Rule 133 Sec. 2)
granted or created by law, he must prove such
right. (Sps. Guidangen v. Wooden G.R. No. Requiring proof of guilt beyond reasonable doubt
174445, 2012) necessarily means that mere suspicion of the
guilt of the accused, no matter how strong, should
Criminal Cases - not sway judgment against him. It further means
• To Sustain Conviction – Guilt beyond that the courts should duly consider every
reasonable doubt. evidence favoring him; and that in the process,
• To File an Information – probable cause - the courts should persistently insist that
engenders a well-founded belief of the fact of accusation is not synonymous with guilt; hence,
the commission of a crime, and that the every circumstance favoring his innocence
respondent is probably guilty thereof, and should be fully taken into account. Without the
should be held for trial proof of his guilt being beyond reasonable doubt,
therefore, the presumption of innocence in favor
• Issuance of warrant of arrest – probable
of the accused herein was not overcome. (People
cause (i.e., that there is reasonable ground to
v. Claro, G.R. No. 19994, 2017)
believe that a criminal offense has been
committed and that the accused committed
Circumstantial Evidence → competent to
the offense).
establish guilt as long as it is sufficient to

ATENEO CENTRAL
establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the An accused who invokes self-defense must prove
accused, and not someone else, was it by clear and convincing evidence. (Guevarra v.
responsible for the killing. People, G.R. No. 170462, 2014)
In extradition cases, the potential extraditee must
For circumstantial evidence to suffice to convict prove by "clear and convincing evidence" that he
an accused, the following requisites must concur: is not a flight risk and will abide with all the orders
1. There is more than one circumstance; and processes of the extradition court. (Gov’t of
2. The facts from which the inferences are HK v. Olalia, G.R. No. 153675, 2007)
derived are proven; and The rule is that charges of misconduct against
3. The combination of all the circumstances judges should be proven by clear and convincing
is such as to produce a conviction evidence, otherwise they should be dismissed.
beyond reasonable doubt. In this case, (Pesole v. Rodriguez, A.M. No. 755-MJ, 1978)
these requisites for circumstantial
evidence to sustain a conviction are 3. PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE
present. (People v. Oandasan, Jr., G.R.
In civil cases, the party having the burden of proof
No. 194605, 2016; Rule 133, Sec.4)
must establish his or her case by a
preponderance of evidence. (Rule 133, Sec. 1)
To be clear, then, circumstantial evidence may be
resorted to when to insist on direct testimony
In civil cases, the party having the burden of proof
would ultimately lead to setting a felon free. The
must establish his case by preponderance of
Rules of Court makes no distinction between
evidence, or that evidence which is of greater
direct evidence of a fact and evidence of
weight or is more convincing than that which is in
circumstances from which the existence of a fact
opposition to it. (BPI v. Reyes, G.R. 157177,
may be inferred; hence, no greater degree of
2008)
certainty is required when the evidence is
circumstantial than when it is direct.
It does not mean absolute truth; rather, it means
In either case, the trier of fact must be convinced
that the testimony of one side is more believable
beyond a reasonable doubt of the guilt of the
than that of the other side, and that the probability
accused. Nor has the quantity of circumstances
of truth is on one side than on the other. (Rivera
sufficient to convict an accused been fixed as to
v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 115625, 1998)
be reduced into some definite standard to be
followed in every instance. (People v. Magbitang,
Land Bank failed to prove that the amount
G.R. No. 175592, 2016)
allegedly “miscredited” to Oñate’s account came
2. CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE from the proceeds of the pre-terminated loans of
its clients. It is worth emphasizing that in civil
cases, the party making the allegations has the
Evidence is clear and convincing if it produces in burden of proving them by preponderance of
the mind of the trier of fact a firm belief or evidence. Mere allegation is not sufficient. (Land
conviction as to allegations sought to be Bank of the Philippines v. Emmanuel C. Oñate,
established. (Black’s Law Dictionary, 5thed., 596) G.R. No. 192371, 2014)
Clear and convincing evidence is evidence
indicating that the thing to be proved is highly Positive identification where categorical and
probable or reasonably certain. consistent and without any showing of ill motive
This is a greater burden than preponderance of on the part of the eyewitness testifying on the
evidence, the standard applied in most civil trials, matter, prevails over a denial which, if not
but less than evidence beyond a reasonable substantiated by clear and convincing evidence,
doubt, the norm for criminal trials. (Black’s Law is negative and self-serving evidence
Dictionary, 8thed., 596) undeserving of weight in law. They cannot be
given greater evidentiary value over the
testimony of credible witnesses who testify on

ATENEO CENTRAL
affirmative matters. (People v. Caballero y relevant provisions of the Rules on Electronic

Garsola, G.R. No. 210673, 2016) Evidence in this area.
Factors which the court may consider in Electronic Document- information or the
determining where the preponderance or superior representation of information, data, figures,
weight of evidence lies: symbols or other modes of written expression,
• All the facts and circumstances of the described or however represented, by which a
case; right is established or an obligation extinguished,
• The witnesses’ or by which a fact may be proved and affirmed,
a) manner of testifying; which is received, recorded, transmitted, stored,
b) their intelligence; processed, retrieved or produced electronically.
c) their means and opportunity of (REE, Rule 2, Sec. 1(h))
knowing the facts to which they are
testifying; Electronic Data Message- information
d) the nature of the facts to which they generated, sent, received or stored by electronic,
testify; optical or similar means. (REE, Rule 2, Sec. 1(g))
e) the probability or improbability of
their testimony; A facsimile transmission cannot be considered as
f) their interest or want of interest; electronic evidence. It is not the functional
g) their personal credibility so far as the equivalent of an original under the Best Evidence
same may legitimately appear upon Rule and is not admissible as electronic
the trial. evidence. (MCC v. Ssangyong, G.R. No. 170633,
• The number of witnesses (though 2007)
preponderance is not necessarily with the
greater number). (Rule 133, Sec. 1) For purposes of these Rules, the term “electronic
document” may be used interchangeably with
“electronic data message.” (REE, Rule 2, Sec
4. SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE 1(h))
In cases filed before administrative and quasi- Scope and Coverage

judicial bodies, a fact may be deemed established The Rules on Electronic Evidence (REE) shall
if it is supported by substantial evidence. apply whenever an electronic document or
electronic data message as defined in these rules
is offered or used in evidence. (REE, Rule 1, Sec.
Substantial evidence is that amount of relevant 1)
evidence which a reasonable mind might accept
as adequate to justify a conclusion. (Rule 133, These Rules shall apply to all criminal and civil
Sec. 6) actions and proceedings, as well as quasi-judicial
and administrative cases. (REE, Rule 1, Sec. 2,
As in all administrative cases, the quantum of as amended by Sept. 24, 2002 Resolution in AM
proof necessary in election cases is substantial No. 01-7-01-SC)
evidence, or such relevant evidence as a
Applicability to Criminal Actions
reasonable mind will accept as adequate to As to the admissibility of the text messages, the
support a conclusion. (Sabili v. Comelec, G.R. RTC admitted them in conformity with the Court’s
No. 193621, 2012) earlier Resolution applying the Rules on
Electronic Evidence to criminal actions. (People
K. RULES ON ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE v. Enojas, G.R. No. 204894, 2014)
(A.M. NO. 01-7-01-SC)
Admissibility: An electronic document is
1. MEANING OF ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE; admissible in evidence if:
ELECTRONIC DATA MESSAGE a. It complies with the rules on admissibility
prescribed by the Rules of Court and related
NOTE: The 2019 Amendments to the Rules on laws; and
Evidence have essentially incorporated the

ATENEO CENTRAL
b. It is authenticated in the manner prescribed Trial court ruled that the photographs are
by these Rules. (REE, Rule 3, Sec. 2) inadmissible. The Court held that the
photographs are inadmissible because the map
Admissibility of Tape Recordings or photograph, to be admissible, must first be
Before a tape recording is admissible in evidence made a part of some qualified person's testimony.
and given probative value, the following Someone must stand forth as its testimonial
requisites must first be established: sponsor; in other words, it must be verified.
1. A showing that the recording device was (Adamczuk v. Holloway, 13 A.2d 2, 1940)
capable of taking testimony;
2. A showing that the operator of the device On appeal, Tatum questioned the film’s
was competent; admission into evidence. The Court held that for
3. Establishment of the authenticity and a photograph to be admissible in evidence, the
correctness of the recording; authentication required by courts is that some
4. A showing that changes, additions, or witness (not necessarily the photographer) be
deletions have not been made; able to give some indication as to when, where,
5. A showing of the manner of the and under what circumstances the photograph
preservation of the recording; was taken, and that the photograph accurately
6. Identification of the speakers; and portray the subject or subjects illustrated. (State
7. A showing that the testimony elicited was v. Tatum, 360 P.2d 754, 1961)
voluntarily made without any kind of
inducement. (Torralba v. People, G.R.
No. 153699, 2005) 2. PROBATIVE VALUE OF ELECTRONIC
EVIDENCE OR EVIDENTIARY WEIGHT;
Admissibility of Photographs METHOD OF PROOF
Under the Rules on Electronic Evidence,
photographic evidence of events, acts, or
transactions shall be admissible in evidence, Factors in Determining Evidentiary Weight of
provided that it shall be presented, displayed, and Electronic Evidence (REE, Rule 7, Secs. 1-2)
shown to the court, and it shall be identified, In assessing the evidentiary weight of an
explained or authenticated by either: the person
electronic document, the following factors may be
who made the recording; or some other person
competent to testify on the accuracy thereof considered: (REE, Rule 7, Sec. 1)
(REE, Rule 11, Sec. 1) 1. The reliability of the manner or method in
which it was generated, stored or
Some courts insist on requiring the photographer communicated, including but not limited
to testify but this view has been eroded by the to input and output procedures, controls,
tendency of modern courts to admit as a witness tests and checks for accuracy and
one who has familiarity with the scene portrayed. reliability of the electronic data message
(Sison v. People, G.R. No. 108280-83, 1995) or document, in the light of all the
circumstances as well as any relevant
The correctness of a photograph as a faithful
agreement;
representation of the object portrayed can be
proved prima facie, either by the testimony of the 2. The reliability of the manner in which its
person who made it or by other competent originator was identified;
witnesses, after which the court can admit it 3. The integrity of the information and
subject to impeachment as to its accuracy. (Sison communication system in which it is
v. People, G.R. Nos. 108280-83, 1995) recorded or stored, including but not
limited to the hardware and computer
The rule is well-settled that a photograph may be programs or software used as well as
put in evidence if relevant to the issue and if programming errors;
verified by the taker. Its verification depends on 4. The familiarity of the witness or the
the competency of the verifying witness and the
person who made the entry with the
trial judge must in the first instance decide,
subject to reversal for substantial error. communication and information system;
(Adamczuk v. Holloway, 13 A.2d 2, 1940) 5. The nature and quality of the information
which went into the communication and

ATENEO CENTRAL
information system upon which the examined as a matter of right by the adverse
electronic data message or electronic party. (REE, Rule 9, Sec. 2)
document was based; or
6. Other factors which the court may Examination of Witness
consider as affecting the accuracy or Electronic Testimony - After summarily hearing
integrity of the electronic document or the parties pursuant to Rule 9 of these Rules, the
electronic data message. court may authorize the presentation of
testimonial evidence by electronic means. Before
In any dispute involving the integrity of the so authorizing, the court shall determine the
information and communication system in which necessity for such presentation and prescribe
an electronic document or electronic data terms and conditions as may be necessary under
message is recorded or stored, the court may the circumstances, including the protection of the
consider, among others, the following factors: rights of the parties and witnesses concerned.
(REE, Rule 7, Sec. 2) (REE, Rule 10, Sec. 1)
1. Whether the information and
communication system or other similar Transcript of electronic testimony - When
device was operated in a manner that did examination of a witness is done electronically,
not affect the integrity of the electronic the entire proceedings, including the questions
document, and there are no other and answers, shall be transcribed by a
reasonable grounds to doubt the integrity stenographer, stenotypist or other recorder
of the information and communication authorized for the purpose, who shall certify as
system; correct the transcript done by him. The transcript
2. Whether the electronic document was should reflect the fact that the proceedings, either
recorded or stored by a party to the in whole or in part, had been electronically
proceedings with interest adverse to that recorded. (REE, Rule 10, Sec. 2)
of the party using it; or
3. Whether the electronic document was Storage of Electronic Evidence
recorded or stored in the usual and The electronic evidence and recording thereof as
ordinary course of business by a person well as the stenographic notes shall form part of
who is not a party to the proceedings and the record of the case. Such transcript and
who did not act under the control of the recording shall be deemed prima facie evidence
party using it. of such proceedings. (REE, Rule 10, Sec. 3)
Method of Proof
Affidavit Evidence- All matters relating to the 3. AUTHENTICATION OF ELECTRONIC
admissibility and evidentiary weight of an EVIDENCE AND ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES
electronic document may be established by an
affidavit stating facts of:
Burden of proving authenticity
1. direct personal knowledge of the affiant;
The person seeking to introduce an electronic
or
document in any legal proceeding has the burden
2. based on authentic records
of proving its authenticity in the manner provided
in this Rule. (REE, Rule 5, Sec. 1)
The affidavit must affirmatively show the
competence of the affiant to testify on the matters
Manner of authentication
contained therein. (REE, Rule 9, Sec. 1)
Before any private electronic document offered
as authentic is received in evidence, its
Cross-Examination of Deponent – The affiant
authenticity must be proved by any of the
shall be made to affirm the contents of the
following means: (REE, Rule 5, Sec. 2)
affidavit in open court and may be cross-

ATENEO CENTRAL
1. By evidence that it had been digitally The confidential character of a privileged

signed by the person purported to have communications is not solely on the ground that it
signed the same; is in the form of an electronic document. (REE,
2. By evidence that other appropriate Rule 3, Sec. 3)
security procedures or devices as may be
Original of an electronic document
authorized by the Supreme Court or by
An electronic document shall be regarded as the
law for authentication of electronic equivalent of an original document under the Best
documents were applied to the Evidence Rule if it is a printout or output readable
document; or by sight or other means, shown to reflect the data
3. By other evidence showing its integrity accurately. (REE, Rule 4, Sec. 1)
and reliability to the satisfaction of the
Judge. When copies or duplicates of a document
shall be regarded as original:
Proof of electronically notarized document It is in two or more copies executed at or
A document electronically notarized in about the same time with identical
contents; or
accordance with the rules promulgated by the
It is a counterpart produced by the same
Supreme Court shall be considered as a public impression as the original, or from the
document and proved as a notarial document same matrix, or by mechanical or
under the Rules of Court. (REE, Rule 5, Sec. 3) electronic re-recording, or by chemical
reproduction, or by other equivalent
Authentication of Electronic Signature techniques which accurately reproduce
An electronic signature or a digital signature the original
authenticated in the manner prescribed
hereunder is admissible in evidence as the Such copies or duplicates shall be regarded as
functional equivalent of the signature of a person the equivalent of the original. (REE, Rule 4, Sec.
2)
on a written document. (REE, Rule 6, Sec. 1)
Notwithstanding the foregoing, copies or
An electronic signature may be authenticated in duplicates shall not be admissible to the same
any of the following manner: (REE, Rule 6, Sec. extent as the original if:
2)
• By evidence that a method or process a. A genuine question is raised as to the
was utilized to establish a digital authenticity of the original; or
signature and verify the same; b. In the circumstances it would be unjust or
• By any other means provided by law; or; inequitable to admit the copy in lieu of the
original. (REE, Rule 4, Sec. 2)
• By any other means satisfactory to the
judge as establishing the genuineness of NOTE: This is essentially the same as Rule 130,
the electronic signature. Sec. 4 under the Original Document Rule
Business records as exception to the hearsay

4. ELECTRONIC DOCUMENTS AND THE rule (REE, Rule 8, Secs. 1 & 2)
HEARSAY RULE A memorandum, report, record or data
compilation of acts, events, conditions, opinions,
Electronic evidence as functional equivalent or diagnoses, made by electronic, optical or other
of paper-based documents - Whenever a rule similar means is an exception to the hearsay rule
of evidence refers to the term writing, document, provided that the following are shown by the
record, instrument, memorandum or any other testimony of the custodian or other qualified
form of writing, such term shall be deemed to witness:
include an electronic document as defined in 1. That it was made at or near the time of or
these Rules. (REE, Rule 3, Sec. 1) from transmission or supply of
information;
Privileged communication 2. That it was made by a person with
knowledge thereof;

ATENEO CENTRAL
3. That it was kept in the regular course or

conduct of a business activity; and NOTE: If the foregoing communications are
4. That such was the regular practice to recorded or embodied in an electronic document,
make the memorandum, report, record, then the provisions of Rule 5 on authentication of
or data compilation by electronic, optical electronic documents shall apply. (REE, Rule 11,
or similar means (REE, Rule 8, Sec. 1)
Sec. 2)
This exception (to the hearsay rule) may be
overcome by evidence of the untrustworthiness of Text Messages
the source of information or the method or Text messages have been classified as
circumstances of the preparation, transmission or “ephemeral electronic communication” under
storage thereof. (REE, Rule 8, Sec. 2) Section 1(k), Rule 2 of the Rules on Electronic
Evidence, and “shall be proven by the testimony
of a person who was a party to the same or has
5. AUDIO, PHOTOGRAPHIC, VIDEO, AND personal knowledge thereof.” (Vidallon-Magtolis
EPHEMERAL EVIDENCE v. Salud, A.M. No. CA-05- 20-P, 2005)
Ephemeral Electronic Communication – refers
Closed-Circuit Television (CCTV) Footage
to telephone conversations, text messages,
The person authorized to authenticate the video
chatroom sessions, streaming audio, streaming
or CCTV recording is not limited solely to the
video, and other electronic forms of
person who made the recording but also by
communication the evidence of which is not
another competent witness who can testify to its
recorded or retained. (REE, Rule 2, Sec. 1(k))
accuracy.
Admissibility (REE, Rule 11, Section 1 and 2)
The victim’s son testified that he was the one who
transferred the video footages from the barangay-
Audio, photographic, and video evidence
owned CCTV that was located outside their
Audio, photographic and video evidence of
house to the compact disc that was submitted in
events, acts or transactions shall be admissible
court as evidence. When the footage was played
provided: (REE, Rule 11, Sec. 1)
in court and the enlarged screenshot was
• It shall be shown, presented or displayed
presented, he identified said person as the
to the court; and
perpetrator of the crime. The Court upheld the
• It shall be identified, explained or
appreciation of the CCTV footages and admitted
authenticated by the person who made
the same as evidence because they bolstered the
the recording or by some other person
testimonies of the witnesses and supported the
competent to testify on the accuracy
finding of treachery in the case at bar. (J.
thereof
Hernando: People v. Manansala y Alfaro, G.R.
No. 233104, 2020)
Ephemeral electronic communications
evidence
-- end of topic --
Ephemeral evidence shall be proven by the
testimony of a person who was a party to the
same or has personal knowledge thereof. (REE,
Rule 11, Sec. 2)
In the absence or unavailability of such

witnesses, other competent evidence may be
admitted. (REE, Rule 11, Sec. 2)
A recording of the telephone conversation or

ephemeral electronic communication shall be
covered by REE, Rule 11, Sec. 1.

2023 Blue Notes Remedial Law

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2023 Blue Notes Remedial Law

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ATENEO CENTRAL

Back to TOC Page 2 of 508

Back to TOC Page 3 of 508

Back to TOC Page 4 of 508

I. GENERAL PRINCIPLES IN REMEDIAL LAW ........................................................................ 14

III. CIVIL PROCEDURE ................................................................................................................ 37

Back to TOC Page 6 of 508

J. DISMISSAL OF ACTIONS ............................................................................................... 77

Back to TOC Page 7 of 508

4. ANNULMENT OF JUDGMENTS AND FINAL ORDERS AND RESOLUTIONS (Rule

IV. PROVISIONAL REMEDIES .................................................................................................. 146

V. SPECIAL CIVIL ACTIONS .................................................................................................... 182

Back to TOC Page 8 of 508

1. DIFFERENTIATED FROM ACCION PUBLICIANA AND ACCION REIVINDICATORIA

VI. SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS ................................................................................................... 225

VII. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE .................................................................................................... 281

Back to TOC Page 9 of 508

2. WHEN INJUNCTION MAY BE ISSUED TO RESTRAIN CRIMINAL PROSECUTION

K. JUDGMENT (RULE 120) ............................................................................................... 371

VIII. EVIDENCE .......................................................................................................................... 396

Back to TOC Page 11 of 508

3. TESTIMONIAL PRIVILEGE ........................................................................................ 440

PART II ...................................................................................................................................... 508

Back to TOC Page 12 of 508

Back to TOC Page 13 of 508

I. GENERAL PRINCIPLES IN REMEDIAL It does not originate

c. When demanded by the broader interest

This principle holds that courts of equal and

Back to TOC Page 16 of 508

Back to TOC Page 17 of 508

II. JURISDICTION A. CLASSIFICATION OF

acquired by the court, it retains that jurisdiction C. JURISDICTION OF VARIOUS

Back to TOC Page 19 of 508

Petitions for certiorari, prohibition or mandamus against:

1. With the CA 1. Petitions for certiorari, prohibition or mandamus against:

1. Petitions for review on certiorari against:

Back to TOC Page 20 of 508

1. Actions for annulment of judgments of the RTCs

1. With the SC 1. Petitions for certiorari, prohibition or mandamus against:

1. Ordinary Appeals from:

2. Appeal by Appeals from:

Back to TOC Page 21 of 508

Per Sec. 19 of RA 1125 as amended by RA 9282 decisions of the CTA en banc

3. COURT OF TAX APPEALS

CTA EN BANC: APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CTA DIVISION: GENERAL/CIVIL MATTERS

1. Decisions from the COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE in cases involving

Back to TOC Page 22 of 508

CTA DIVISION: CRIMINAL CASES

i. Original Criminal cases arising from violations of the:

TAX COLLECTION CASES

(as amended by Section 4, R.A. 10660, promulgated April 16, 2015)

Back to TOC Page 24 of 508

5. REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS

Back to TOC Page 25 of 508

ORIGINAL AND EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION

Back to TOC Page 26 of 508

3. Petitions for adoption of children and revocation thereof.

7. MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS – MeTC, MTC and MCTC

Back to TOC Page 27 of 508

In the absence of all the RTC Judges in a province of city—

2. Criminal 1. Traffic violations.

Back to TOC Page 29 of 508

D. ASPECTS OF JURISDICTION It is the power to deal with the general subject