Civil Procedure 1

Lecture Notes Rule 2 to Rule 9

RULE 2 CAUSE OF ACTION

Basis of ordinary civil action: Every ordinary civil action MUST BE BASED on a CAUSE OF
ACTION.

What is a CAUSE OF ACTION?

A cause of action is an ACT or OMISSION of one party in VIOLATION of the LEGAL RIGHTS
of another.

What are the elements of a cause of action?

1. LEGAL RIGHT of the PLAINTIFF;

2. Correlative OBLIGATION of the DEFENDANT to RESPECT PLAINTIFF’s RIGHTS

Sources of Obligation are: (Art. 1157 of the Civil Code)

a. Law
b. Contract
c. Quasi Contract
d. Delict
e. Quasi Delict

3. ACT or OMMISSION (i.e. BREACH) of the DEFENDANT in violation of PLAINTIFF’S LEGAL

RIGHTS at the time, but when there is ONLY ONE DELICT or WRONG, there is but only
one single cause of action regardless of the number of rights violated.

 A Complaint states a CAUSE OF ACTION if it SUFFICIENTLY alleges the existence of the

elements of a cause of action.

 If the elements of a cause of action are NOT ALLEGED in the Complaint, then the
Complaint if vulnerable to a MOTION TO DISMISS on the ground of FAILURE TO STATE A
CAUSE OF ACTION

 Plaintiff’s cause of action should not be merely “STATED” but must be “SUFFICIENTLY
STATED”;

 Only ULTIMATE FACTS and NOT CONCLUSION OF LAW, constituting plaintiff’s cause of
action must be ALLEGED in the Complaint.
  In resolving whether or not the Complaint fails to state a cause of action, the trial court
should limit itself to examining the SUFFICIENCY of the ALLEGATIONS in the Complaint.
In so doing, the court should NOT INQUIRE into the TRUTH of the ALLEGATIONS in the
Complaint or the AUTHENTICITY of any of the DOCUMENTS, BECAUSE the Defendant is
deemed to have HYPOTHETICALLY ADMITTED the averments/allegations in the
Complaint to be TRUE.

 Test of Sufficiency of Cause of Action

“Whether or not, hypothetically admitting the allegations in the Complaint to be true,

could the court render a valid judgment in accordance with the Prayer/Reliefs Prayed for
in the said Complaint?”

 The insufficiency of the cause of action MUST APPEAR on the face of the Complaint to
sustain a dismissal based on lack of cause of action.
EXCEPTIONS:
FIRST, there is NO HYPOTHETICAL ADMISSION of:
a. Veracity of Allegations of their falsity is subject to judicial notice (Rule 129 Sec. 1,2,
and 3 of the Rules of Court)
b. Allegations that are legally impossible;
c. Facts inadmissible in evidence
d. Facts, which appear, by record or document, included in the pleadings, to be
unfounded;

SECONDLY, inquiry is not confined to the Complaint if culled from:

a. Annexes and other pleadings submitted by the parties to the case;
b. Documentary evidence submitted by stipulations which disclose facts sufficient to
defeat a claim
c. Evidence admitted in the course of hearings related to the case;

 Failure to State a Cause of Action is NOT the SAME as Lack of Cause of Action. The terms
are NOT INTERCHANGEABLE.

Failure to State a Cause of Action vs Lack of Cause of Action

Refers to INSUFFICIENCY of ALLEGATIONS INSUFFICIENCY of factual basis
In the Complaint for the action
May be raised in a Motion to Dismiss May be raised at any time

Dismissal of the Complaint can be made Dismissal of Complaint can be made

At the earliest stage of the action, or after questions of facts have been
Before a responsive pleading is filed resolved on the basis of stipulations
or evidence presented

Issue can be resolved only on the basis of Motion to Dismiss may be filed after
The allegations in the initiatory pleading the plaintiff rested

Veracity of allegations is immaterial Court MUST DETERMINE the

Veracity of the allegations based on
The evidence presented

Source: Leticia Aquino et al vs Cesar Quiazon et al, GR 201248

Zenaida Roa vs Robinson Sy and Mary Valerie Sy, GR 221586

SECTION 4 SPLITTING A CAUSE OF ACTION

“A CAUSE OF ACTION MAY GIVE RISE TO SEVERAL RELIEFS, BUT ONLY ONE ACTION CAN BE
FILED.”

 A single cause of action or entire claim or demand CANNOT be SPLIT UP or DIVIDED into
two or more different actions.

 What is “SPLITTING A CAUSE OF ACTION”?

It is when a party institutes more than one suit for a single cause of action. (S3 Rule 2)

 What is the effect of SPLITTING A CAUSE OF ACTION?

Ground for DISMISSAL of the other case either as litis pendentia or res judicata.

 Purpose of the Rule vs SPLITTING A CAUSE OF ACTION

1. To prevent repeated litigation between the same parties over the same subject
matter of controversy;
 2. To protect defendant from unnecessary vexation, and to avoid the cost and expenses
incident to numerous suits;

“nemo debet bis vexare pro una et eadem causa” (no man shall be twice vexed for
one and the same causes”)

Source: City of Bacolod vs San Miguel Brewery Inc. GR L-25134, October 30, 1969)

SECTION 5 JOINDER OF CAUSES OF ACTION

 Joinder of Causes of Action refers to:

- the assertion of as many causes of action as a party may have against another in one
pleading/Complaint.
- Uniting of 2 or more demands or rights of action in ONE ACTION;
- The statement of more than one cause of action in a declaration
- Union of 2 or more civil causes of action, each could be made the basis of a separate
suit, ina the same Complaint or petition.

 Joinder of Causes of Action is NOT COMPULSORY but only PERMISSIVE

 The joining of the causes of action must be subject to the rules regarding VENUE and
JOINDER OF CAUSES OF ACTION under Section 5 Rule 2, as follows:

a. Joinder of actions shall NOT INCLUDE Special Civil Actions or those actions governed
by Special Rules (Rule 62 to Rule 71 of the Rules of Court)

b. Causes of Action are between the SAME PARTIES but the causes of action pertain to
different venue or jurisdiction, the Joinder may be ALLOWED in the RTC provided
that one of the causes of action falls within the jurisdiction of the RTC and the venue
lies therein;

Reason: To avoid confusion in the conduct of the proceedings as well as in the

determination of the presence of the requisite elements of each particular cause of
action.

c. If the claim in all the causes of action are principally for recovery of money, the
totality or aggregate amount claimed shall be the test of jurisdiction.

 Objectives of Joinder of Causes of Action

1. To avoid multiplicity of suits;

 2. To expedite the disposition of litigation at a minimum cost;
3. For a COMPLETE DETERMINATION of ALL MATTERS in controversy and litigation
between the same parties involving one subject matter;

 EFFECT OF MISJOINDER OF CAUSES OF ACTION:

MISJOINDER OF CAUSES OF ACTION is NOT A ground for DISMISSAL of the Complaint.

Ex of Misjoinder of Causes of Action.

Action for Partition and Recission of Donation

Partition is a Special Civil Action governed by Special Rules while Recission of Donation is
an Ordinary civil action.

 Duty of Court if there is Misjoinder of Cause of Action:

Upon Motion of a party to the case; or Sua Sponte (motu proprio):
1. “the court shall order the severance of misjoined cause of action to be proceeded
with separately; or
2. If there is no objection to the improper joinder of cause of action, or the court DID
NOT motu proprio order the severance of misjoined cause of action, and there is NO
BAR, the court can SIMULTANEOUSLY Adjudicate ALL the misjoined cause of action,
provided the court has jurisdiction over ALL of the CAUSES OF ACTION.

Source: Lilia Ada et al vs Florante Baylon GR 182435

RULE 3 PARTIES TO CIVIL ACTION
Who may be parties to civil action?
a. Natural person
b. Juridical person
c. Entities authorized by law

c.1. Estate of a Deceased Person provided properly represented by its Heir or

Administrator or Executor;

c.2. A registered Labor Union

 c.3. An entity without juridical personality sued as a Defendant under Rule 3 Section
15
c.4 Corporation by estoppel
c.5. Contract of partnership with capital of P3,000.00 or more but fails to comply with
the registration requirement
c.6. The Roman Catholic Church
c.7. Dissolved corporation for suits that occur within 3 years after its dissolution and
suits in connection with the settlement and closures of its affairs

 A party’s legal capacity to sue or be sued must be ALLEGED in the Complaint/Initiatory

Pleading.
 If the plaintiff is NOT A NATURAL PERSON, JURIDICAL PERSON or NOT AN ENTITY
AUTHORIZED by LAW TO BE A PARTY, the Complaint is dismissible on the ground that the
plaintiff HAS NO LEGAL CAPACITY TO SUE.

 LOCUS STANDI or LEGAL STANDING - it refers to personal and substantial

INTEREST in the case such that the party has sustained or will sustain a direct injury as a
result of the act or omission of the other party that is being challenged.

To prove locus standi, the plaintiff must ALLEGE his personal stake in the outcome of the
controversy

 INTEREST - refers to MATERIAL INTEREST in issue affected by the decree or

decision; not merely INCIDENTAL INTEREST.

Source: Association of Flood Victims vs COMELEC GR 203775, August, 2014

Section 2 - REAL PARTIES IN INTEREST

Who is a real party in interest?
He/She/It is the party who stands to be BENEFITTED or INJURED by the JUDGMENT in the suit
or ENTITLED to the avails of the suit.
Requisites:
1. To institute an action, the plaintiff MUST BE the REAL PARTY in Interest or MATERIAL
INTEREST or an interest in issue to be affected by the decree or judgment of the case as
distinguished from mere CURIOSITY about the question involved;

2. The action must be prosecuted in the name of the real party in interest.
 One who has NO MATERIAL INTEREST to protect cannot invoke the jurisdiction of the
court as the plaintiff in an action.

 Purpose of the Rule on Real Parties in Interest (Section 2)

To bring before the court ONLY the PARTY RIGHTFULLY INTERESTED in the LITIGATION so
that only real CONTROVERSIES will be presented and the JUDGMENT will be BINDING
and CONCLUSIVE and the DEFENDANT will be saved from further harassment and
vexation at the hands of other claimants for the same demand.

 A Complaint filed by a person NOT AUTHORIZED by the plaintiff is a Complaint NOT

DEEMED FILE and produces NO LEGAL EFFECT. It is DISMISSIBLE on the ground of LACK
of JURISDICTION over the Complaint and the Plaintiff.
 If the plaintiff is NOT the REAL PARTY IN INTEREST, the Complaint shall be DISMISSED for
LACK OF CAUSE OF ACTION.

Source: Philippine Numistic Ad Antiquarian Society vs Genesis Aquino GR 206617,

January, 2017

 Civil Action must be PROSECUTED IN THE NAME OF the real party in interest but not
necessarily BY the real party n interest.; hence, an action is allowed to be PROSECUTED
or DEFENDED by the REPRESENTATIVE PARTY or someone ACTING in a fiduciary capacity
but the BENEFICIARY shall be INCLUDED in the Title of the case and shall be deemed the
REAL PARTY ININTEREST.

Ex.

Republic of the Philippines

National Capital Judicial Region
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
Branch _______, Pasig City

In the Matter of Correction of Entries in the

Birth Certificate of Baby Girl Dela Pena

Baby Girl Dela Pena

Represented by Her Mother MRS. DELA PENA,
Petitioner

Vs SP Case No.: Psg-24-0001

 For: Correction of Entries
In the Birth Certificate

Civil Registrar of Pasig City,

Respondent
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x

Section 4 - Spouses as Parties

Pertinent Rules:

 If one SPOUSE (i.e. Husband) is suing as PLAINTIFF, the other SPOUSE (i.e. WIFE) NEED
NOT be JOINED as party, even if the suit relates to their community or conjugal property.

Reason: SPOUSES are joint administrators of the community or conjugal property

(Article 96 of the Family Code) and the filing of suit is an act of administration of
property.

 If one SPOUSE (i.e. HUSBAND) is being sued or is the DEFENDANT, the other SPOUSE (i.e.
WIFE) SHOULD be JOINED if the suit/Complaint could RESULT in LIABILITY being incurred
by the community or conjugal property.

If the suit/Complaint would only RESULT in the SEPARATE LIABILITY of a SPOUSE (i.e.
HUSBAND), the other SPOUSE (i.e. WIFE) should NOT be JOINED.

Section 5 - Minor or Incompetent Person

 Rules regarding Minor or Incompetent Person as Party

a. Minor or person alleged to be incompetent may sue or be sued;

b. Minor or incompetent Person suing as PLAINTIFF or sued as DEFENDANT, shall be
ASSISTED by his father, mother, guardian, or if none, guardian ad litem;

Section 6 - JOINDER OF PARTIES

Rules:

 Joinder of Parties is permissive NOT compulsory

 Who will be joined as plaintiffs/defendant?

ALL persons in whom any right to relief in respect to or arising to the SAME
TRANSACTION or SERIES of TRANSACTIONS shall be joined as PLAINTIFFS in ONE
COMPLAINT, where an question of law or fact COMMON to ALL such plaintiffs may arise
in the action;

What is “transaction” referred to in Section 6 (Joinder of Parties)

“Transaction” refers to “whatever may be done by one person which affects another’s
RIGHTS, and out of which a cause of action may arise.

“Series of Transactions” is equivalent to “TRANSACTIONS CONNECTED WITH THE SAME

SUBJECT OF THE ACTION”. (Civil Procedure, Ricardo J. Francisco, 2001)

“Transaction” is not limited to agreements or contracts but also includes ACTS,

OMISSIONS or FACTS out of which the cause of action arises. (Pantranco North Express
vs. Standard Insurance, March 2005)

 MISJOINDER or NON JOINDER of PARTIES is NOT a ground for DISMISSAL of action.

 Duty of the court in case of Misjoinder of Parties

a. Upon motion or sua sponte, at any stage of the proceeding, ORDER the SEVERANCE
of the MISJOINED party. MISJOINED party either as plaintiff or defendant has NO
BUSINESS participating in the case.

SOURCE: Christine Chua vs. Jorge Torres and Antonio Beltran, GR 151900, August 2005)

INDISPENSABLE PARTY

Who is an Indispensable Party?

An indispensable party is a “ party-in-interest”, WITHOUT whom, NO FINAL

DETERMINATION can had in an action.

Indispensable party can be JOINED as PLAINTIFF or DEFENDANT

EFFECT OF FAILURE to IMPLEAD INDISPENSABLE PARTY

 a. Subsequent actions of the court is NULL and VOID for lack of jurisdiction, not only as
to the ABSENT party but even as to those PRESENT;
b. The trial court should DIRECT the plaintiff to IMPLEAD the INDISPENSABLE party, if
plaintiff refused, the case may be DISMISSED for LACK OF JURISDICTION

Source: Sophia Mutilan et al vs Candidia Imam Mutilan GR 276109, February, 2020)

Margarita Fernando et al vs. Rosalinda Ramos et al, GR 237871

Test to determine whether a party is an INDISPENSABLE PARTY

If the party’s INTEREST would be DIRECTLY AFFECTED or necessarily PREJUDICED by the

JUDGMENT which would be rendered in the case, then he/she/it is an INDISPENSABLE
PARTY. (China Banking Corp vs Oliver, 390 SCRA 263)

 The rule requiring joinder of indispensable party is founded on the constitutional right to
due process.

 Examples of INDISPENSABLE PARTY

1. Co-owners in Partition suit

2. Tenant of defendant in an action for recovery of land
3. Vendor in an action for recission of fraudulent Deed of Sale filed by creditor
4. Registered Owner in an action for annulment of title over a lot

NECESSARY PARTIES

Who is a NECESSARY PARTY?

NECESSARY PARTY is one who is NOT INDISPENSABLE but who OUGHT to be JOINED as a party, if
COMPLETE RELIEF is to be accorded as to those already parties; or for COMPLETE
DETERMINATION or SETTLEMENT of the claim subject of the action.

 Necessary Party’s interest in the controversy is separate from the interest of the other
party, his/her presence in the suit would merely permit COMPLETE relief.
 Non-inclusion of NECESSARY PARTY does NOT PREVENT the court from proceeding in the
action, and the judgment rendered therein shall be without prejudice to the rights of the
necessary party)

 Examples of Necessary Party

 a. Joint Obligor in a joint obligation
b. Lienholders in an action to foreclose real estate mortgage
c. Co-owners in an ejectment suit filed by a co-owner

REPRESENTATIVE PARTY

 2 elements must be established to bring a Representative Suit:

a. The suit is brought on behalf of an identified party whose right has been violated,
resulting in some form of damages

See Oposa vs Factoran. GR 180771 and Resident Mammals of Tanion Strait vs. Sec.
Angelo Reyes, et al GR 186305

b. The representative is authorized by law or the Rules of Court to represent the victim

 Unincorporated association (i.e. Homeowners’ Association) may not sue in its own name
and may not be designated as beneficiary in a representative suit

 A representative who filed an action in court on behalf of unincorporated association

has no standing in court

 Rules of Procedures for Environmental cases relaxed the traditional rule on personal and
direct interest of a real party in interest based on the doctrines laid down in Oposa vs
Factoran and Resident Mammals of Tanion Strait vs. Sec. Angelo /Reyes.

- The doctrine in Oposa vs FActoran considered the plaintiff minors and the
“generations yet unborn” and “environmental activists” as real party in interest and
thus have locus standi based on the concept of “intergenerational responsibility to
ensure the right to a balanced and ecology granted by the 1987 Constitution.”

Who is “UNWILLING CO-PLAINTIFF”?

An “unwilling co-plaintiff” is any party who should be joined as plaintiff but whose consent to
such to such joinder cannot be obtained.

What is the remedy if there is an unwilling co-plaintiff?

The unwilling co-plaintiff may be made a defendant and the reason for making him/her a
defendant shall be stated in the Complaint. This will put the unwilling party under the
jurisdiction of the court, which can properly implead him/her through its processes.

 The unwilling party’s name CANNOT be simply included in a Petition, without his/her
knowledge and consent, as it is violative of his/her right to due process.

 The President of the Philippines cannot be impleaded as unwilling co-plaintiff by virtue

of the doctrine of immunity from suit of the Chief Executive.

Source: Resident Mammals of Tanion Strait vs Angelo Reyes et al.

Section 12 - CLASS SUIT
What is a CLASS SUIT?
A class suit is a suit brought by or defended by a representative member or members of a large
group of persons on behalf of all the members of the group.

What are the requisites?

a. The subject matter of the controversy is one of common or general interest to the
members of a group;
b. The persons who are members of the group are so numerous that it is impracticable to
join all as parties.

Source: Oposa vs FActoran

Resident Mammals of Tanion Strait vs. Ses Angelo Reyes

Effect of Death of a Party Litigant During the Pendency of Action

Rules:

a. Duty of Counsel:

Within 30 days after death of party litigant, inform the court of the fact of death of
plaintiff/defendant and the name and address of substitute.

b. If the Action Survives, the case shall continue after substitution.

c. The nature of the action and the damage sued for determines whether the action
survives or nots.
 d. General rule: A person’s rights and obligations are transmissible upon his death to his
heirs.

Intransmissible rights and obligations by law or by stipulations or are purely personal,

upon party’s death would result to extinguishment of claim.

e. Action which survives, the wrong complained of affects primarily and principally the
property and property rights, the injury to the person being merely incidental.

Actions that do not survive, the injury complained of is to the person, the property and
property rights being incidental.

Example; Action for Annulment of Sale and Reconveyance of Property

f. A deceased person or his estate may not be named a defendant in a case.

Reason: A deceased person does not have capacity to sue or be sued as the deceased
person lacks legal personality.

g. The plaintiff/defendant must have actual legal existence, that is, he/she/it must be a
person in law and possessed of a legal entity as either natural or artificial person, and no
suit can be lawfully prosecuted by or against such person save in his/her or its name

Source: Donald Francis Gaffrey vs Gina Butler, GR 219408, November 2017

Mdemoracion Cruz vs Oswald Cruz GR 173292

Effect of Death of Defendant during the pendency of the suit:

Before entry of final judgment:

The case shall not be dismissed but shall be allowed to continue until entry of judgment/finality.

The judgment shall be executed as a claim against the Estate of the Defendant.

Section 21 - INDIGENT PARTIES

Requisites under Section 21 Rule 3

 Upon ex-parte application or hearing, a party, plaintiff or defendant shall be allowed to

litigate as indigent PROVIDED, he/she has satisfactorily shown that:
 - He has no money or property sufficient for food, shelter and basic necessities for
himself and his family.

Under Section 19 Rule 141 of the Rules of Court:

Party Litigant to be considered as Indigent must show that:

- His/her gross income and that of his immediate family do not exceed an amount
double the monthly minimum pay
- He/she do not own real property with fair market value per tax declaration of more
than P300,000.00

Indigent Litigant is EXEMPT from payment of Legal Fees and Transcript of Stenographic
Notes

RULE 4 - VENUE

What is Venue?

It refers to possible or proper place or places for the trial of a suit, as among several places
where jurisdiction could be established.

Distinction between Jurisdiction and Venue

JURISDICTION VENUE

The authority to hear and determine a case the place where the case is to be heard
Or tried.

Matter of substantive law matter of procedural law

Establishes a relation between the court establishes relation between plaintiff

And the subject matter and defendant

Fixed by law and cannot be conferred or maybe conferred by the act or agreement
Stipulated by the parties /stipulations of the parties

 VENUE in Civil Actions is NOT JURISDICTIONAL

 VENUE in Criminal Action is JURISDICTIONAL
Rules on Venue
Real Action Personal Action Action vs Non Residents

Court which has
Jurisdiction over the
Area where the property
Involved or portion
Thereof is located
where plaintiff resides or
where the defendant
resides, at the option of
the plaintiff
Not found in the Philippines
and the action affects the
a) personal status of the
plaintiff – court of the place
where the plaintiff resides;

b) the property of the defednat

located in the Philippines –
court
of the place where the property
or any portion thereof is located

Exceptions:

1. Where specific rules or law provides for venue of action;

2. Upon stipulation in writing of the parties before the filing of action in court of exclusive
venue of action.

 Stipulations on VENUE may be:

Permissive - parties may file their suit NOT ONLY in the place AGREED upon but
also in the places fixed by law (Rule 4 Sections 1, 2, 3)

Restrictive - suit may be filed ONLY in the place AGREED upon by the parties.

 Convenience is the raison d’etre for entering into stipulations on venue of action, hence
said stipulation should be deemed as PERMISSIVE, and the interpretation of VENUE
stipulations should be adopted which most serves the parties’ CONVENINECE.

 Stipulations designating venues other than those assigned in Rule 4 of the Rules of
Court, should be interpreted as designed to make it more CONVENIENT for the parties to
institute actions arising from or in relation to their agreement, that is, simply adding to
or expanding the venues under said Rule 4.

Hence, if the parties’ intention is to limit the place or places or venue of action other
than those stated in Rule 4, the language of stipulation on venue of action must be so
CLEAR and CATEGORICAL.
Ex. “ The venue of action arising out of this Contract shall be in the proper court of
the City of Manila ONLY, to the exclusion of other courts.”
 Source: UNIMASTER CONGLOMERATION INC. vs. KUBOTA AGRI MACHINERY, GR 119657
Paglaum Management vs. Union Bank GR 179018
Auction In Malinta Inc. vs Warrren Embes Lubayan, GR 173979

Effect of Dismissal of a Case due to improper Venue; Remedy

Dismissal is without Prejudice and no appeal may be taken, But the proper remedy is to
a) file Special Civil Action for Certiorari under Rule 65;
b) Refile the case at the proper venue

Source: Pillars Property vs Century Communities Corp., GR. 201021, March, 2019

Rule 6 - KINDS OF PLEADINGS

Definition of Pleadings:

It refers to written statements of the respective claims and defenses of the parties
submitted to the court for appropriate judgment.

Kinds of Pleadings.

a. Complaint’
b. Counterclaim
c. Cross-claim
d. Third-party Complaint
e. Complaint-In-Intervention
f. Answer
g. Reply

Kind of Defenses:

Negative Defense - specific denial of the material fact or facts alleged in the pleading
of the claimant essential to his cause or causes of action.

Affirmative Defense - an allegation of a new matter which, while HYPOTHETICALLY

admitting the material allegations in the claimant’s pleading, would nevertheless prevent or bar
recovery by him.

What is a counterclaim?
It refers to any claim which a defending party may have against an opposing party

Counterclaim may be:

a) COMPULSORY COUNTERCLAIM: one which arises out of or is connected with the

transaction or occurrence constituting the subject matter of the opposing party’s claim
and complies with the other requirements set forth in the Rules

Compulsory Counterclaim vs Permissive Counterclaim

If not set up in an action is deemed NOT BARRED even if NOT set up in an

Barred. Action

Payment of Filing fees, suspended no filing fees required

Need not be answered SHOULD be answered

Allowed under the Rule on Summary Not allowed under the Rule on Summary
Procedure Procedure

Certification Against Non-Forum Shopping must be accompanied by Certification

NOT REQUIRED Against Non-Forum Shopping

Requisites for a Compulsory Counterclaim be considered.

a. Cognizable by a regular court

b. It arises out of or is connected to the transaction or occurrence constituting the subject
matter of the opposing party’s claim;
c. Does not require for its adjudication the presence of 3rd parties over whom the court
cannot acquire jurisdiction;
d. Must be WITHIN the jurisdiction of the court both as to the amount and the nature of
the counterclaim;

TESTS TO DETERMINE WHETHER COUNTERCLAIM IS COMPULSORY

1. Are the issues of fact and law raised by the claim and by the counterclaim the same?
2. Would res judicata bar a subsequent suit on defendant’s claims, absent the compulsory
counterclaim.
3. Will substantially the same evidence support or refute plaintiff’s claim as well as the
defendant’s counterclaim?
4. Is there any logical relation between the caim and the counterclaim?
COMPELLING TEST OF COMPULSORINESS of COUNTERCLAIM

Whether or not there is a “logical relationship between the claim and the counterclaim, that
is, where conducting separate trials would entail a substantial duplication of effort and time
by the parties and the court, if there is, then the claim is compulsory.
(Tan vs/ Kaakbay Finance Corp. GR 146595, June 2003.

 Dismissal of main complaint does not result to DISMISSAL of COUNTERCLAIM.

DEFINITION OF TERMS:

Right of Action - it is the remedial right or right to relief granted by law to a party to
institute an action against a person who has violated his right,; it is the legal right to SUE.
Relief - it refers to the redress or other measure which a plaintiff prays the
court to order or adjudicate in his favor;

Remedy - it refers to the form or type of action which the plaintiff may avail
of in order to obtain relief from the court.

Subject Matter - it refers to the THING, ACT, CONTRACT, or PROPERTY which is

directly involved in the action, concerning which the wrong has been done.
ILLUSTRATION:

Plaintiff granted loan to the Defendant in the amount of P1M. The Loan is secured by a real
estate mortgage executed by Defendant in favor of the Plaintiff. Defendant failed to pay the
loan despite repeated demands from the Plaintiff.

CAUSE OF ACTION Defendant’s non payment of his loan on due date.

RIGHT OF ACTION The substantive right on the part of the plaintiff to file a complaint
in court or sue for redress.

REMEDIES Civil Action for Collection of Sum of Money against the Defendant;
Civil Action for Foreclosure of Real Estate Mortgage against the
Mortgagor Defendant

RELIEF Payment of the P1M loan, or foreclosure of the Real Estate

Mortgage, and Damages and interest

SUBJECT MATTER Contract of Loan

May there be a cause of action without a corresponding right of action?

Yes, if the right of action is BARRED by PRESCRIPTION under Article 1139 to 1147 of the Civil
Code.

 A single ACT or OMISSION can be VIOLATIVE of VARIOUS RIGHTS of the plaintiff