1997 Rules on Civil Procedure 2001 Edition

Rule 02 Cause of Action

ORDINARY CIVIL ACTIONS Rule 02

CAUSE OF ACTION
SECTION 1. Ordinary civil actions, basis of. - Every ordinary civil action must be based on a cause of action. (n)

Section 1 of Rule 1 is entitled cause of action. That is an entirely new title, which is not found in the 1964 Rules. Section 1 expresses the principle that every ordinary civil action must be based on a cause of action. That is a new provision but it is a fundamental principle all along – you cannot have a case unless you have a cause of action. As a matter of fact under Rule 16, one of the grounds for a motion to dismiss is that your pleading states no cause of action.
Sec. 2. Cause of action, defined. - A cause of action is the act or omission by which a party violates a right of another. (n)

Now, for the first time, Section 2, which is also a new provision, has incorporated the definition of what is a cause of action. However, again, it is not a new principle because even under the 1964 Rules we must such definition is already recognized. Q: Define cause of action. A: CAUSE OF ACTION is an act or omission by which a party violates a right of another. Cause of Action; ELEMENTS: Q: What are the ELEMENTS of cause of action ? A: There are supposed to be 3 main elements: 1. a right pertaining to the plaintiff; 2. a correlative obligations of the defendant; and 3. violation of plaintiff's right by the defendant (also called delict) You remove one of these and there is no cause of action. You think of any case under the sun, it must have all these elements. Now, there is a fourth element added by some cases and commentators – the element of damage suffered by the plaintiff. So based on that, these are the elements of a cause of action: 1. a RIGHT pertaining to the plaintiff; 2. a CORRELATIVE OBLIGATIONS of the defendants; 3. a VIOLATION of plaintiff’s right; and 4. DAMAGE suffered by the plaintiff. Even if there is violation, if there is no damage, then what relief are you asking for? There can be no action where no injury is sustained. As a matter of fact, in a recent case, the SC remarked that wrong without damage or damage without wrong does not constitute a cause of action since damages are merely part of the remedy allowed for the injury caused by a beach or wrong. There can be damage without injury in those instances in which the loss harm was not the result of a violation of a legal duty. These equations loss are after all called “damnum absque injuria.” Another latin maxim, “accio non datur non damnificato”, which means there could be no action where no injury is sustained. So that is part of the definition of cause of action. Damage without injury does not create any cause of action.

Property of LAKAS ATENISTA

62

These are basic fundamental issues in Civil Procedure: Distinguish a cause of action from a right of action (bar question). still he has not paid you. RIGHT . You have the right to walk peacefully and not to be harmed.the right of the creditor to get back his money. OBLIGATION – every debtor has the obligation to pay. – the creditor cannot get back his money. Of course. So. And you are hospitalized. It is up for the defendant to analyze. VIOLATION or delict or wrong – the account fell due and the debtor is supposed to pay the creditor. OBLIGATION – The defendant has the obligation to pay back the loan under the law on contracts. the 4 elements are there. obligation. CAUSE OF ACTION vs. nasa istorya man yan ba. So there is a cause of action. DELICT or wrong – because of your recklessness. Q: Define right of action. These are the four elements of a cause of action. DAMAGE. DELICT or wrong – there is NO delict yet. You do not have to enter into a contract with a person saying you will not bump him. is there a cause of action? RIGHT – the creditor has the right to collect. OBLIGATION – it is the obligation of every person driving to be careful so that he will not bump other people. (Marquez vs. ANOTHER EXAMPLE: Defendant borrowed money from you last year payable in November 1998. as part of the study of cause of action. And despite demands. 373) Q: What are the ELEMENTS of a right of action? A: There are two (2) elements: Property of LAKAS ATENISTA 63 . A: Right of action is the right of the plaintiff to bring an action and to prosecute that action to final judgment. you cannot imagine a civil case where the 4 elements are not present. if I am the lawyer of the defendant. when you file a complaint against somebody. RIGHT OF ACTION And of course. It is not based on a cause of action. RIGHT – it is the right of every person not to be molested. Then. it is still premature to file a collection case now because one element is missing. you violated his right by injuring him. 92 Phil. but the former did not pay the latter. I will question your complaint. In other words. DAMAGE – I have to spend money in the hospital and I lost my income. Why? There is no delict yet because the account is payable next year pa. you do not prepare the complaint by enumerating the elements. That is dismissable under Rule 16. DAMAGE – I have not recovered the money.1997 Rules on Civil Procedure 2001 Edition Rule 02 Cause of Action So the elements are: right. ANOTHER EXAMPLE: Damages arising from culpa aquiliana. The 4 elements are present. EXAMPLE: A debtor borrows money from creditor. So. Now. In other words. You cannot imagine of any civil case where the 4 elements are not present. Ayaw pa ring magbayad. Let’s try to find out the elements. You are crossing the street and a driver just bump you there. it is already due. You fail to report for work. It is the duty of the lawyer to analyze the complaint whether the 4 elements are present. Varela. violation and damage. we must be able to differentiate it from the so-called right of action. So.

) Cause of action is the delict or wrong committed by the defendant.” “More particularly. There can be no right of action until there has been a wrong – a violation of a legal right – and it is then given by the adjective law. considering that the burden of proof to show that a party has a right of action is upon the person initiating the suit. and 2. whereas Right of action is regulated by procedural law. 2. Actually. AMERICAN GENERAL INSURANCE CO. Performance or fulfillment of all conditions precedent upon which a right of action depends must be sufficiently alleged. there is a stipulation that if the consignee wants to file a case arising from the contract of carriage against the carrier.” (De Guzman vs. COURT OF APPEALS 192 SCRA 507 HELD: “The right of action springs from the cause of action. whereas Right of action refers to the right of the plaintiff to institute the action. in the bill of lading.” BAR QUESTION: Distinguish a CAUSE OF ACTION from a RIGHT OF ACTION. You cannot file a case unless you comply with certain conditions and the best illustration of this element is the case of PHIL. he went to court directly without filing a notice of loss to the carrier. SWEETLINES 212 SCRA 194 FACTS: This involves a shipped cargoes from Manila to Davao but the goods were damaged.g.) Cause of action is created by substantive law (e. and under it arise rights of action. A: The following are the distinctions: 1. you cannot have a right of action unless you first have a cause of action. Now. then and not until then does the adjective or remedial law become operative. supra) Property of LAKAS ATENISTA 64 . vs. So. When there is an invasion of primary rights. rights under the Civil Code). ISSUE: Whether or not there is a right of action. “The right of action does not arise until the performance of all conditions precedent to the action.) the must have performed all conditions precedent to the filing of the action.” So. and that is the time the consignee can file a case before the court. where the contract of shipment contains a reasonable requirement of giving notice of loss of or injury to the goods. HELD: There is NO right of action because the consignee did not comply with the conditions precedent. while cause of action is a formal statement of the operative facts that give rise to such remedial right. the consignee filed a case against the carrier. there can be no right of action until there has been a wrong. Based on damaged cargoes. “Right of action is a remedial right belonging to some persons. That is why the SC said in the case of DE GUZMAN. CA. And you must comply with the conditions precedent. a violation of a legal right. the giving of such notice is a condition precedent to the action for loss or injury or the right to enforce the carrier’s liability. vs. JR.) the plaintiff must have a good cause of action. but does not accrue until all the facts which constitute the cause of action have occurred. the consignee must first send a notice of loss to the carrier and then if the carrier will not honor it.1997 Rules on Civil Procedure 2001 Edition Rule 02 Cause of Action 1. There can be no right of action unless there is first a cause of action.

The cause of action does not prescribe. under the law. 4.If two or more suits are instituted on the basis of the same cause of action. You should file only one case to recover the principal and the interest as well as the attorney’s fees. Q: What is splitting a single cause of action? A: Splitting a cause of action is the practice of dividing one cause of action into different parts and making each part a subject of a different complaint. the right to collect has prescribed and you cannot recover anything. you say that the action has prescribed. one case to recover his expenses for medicine. otherwise you are splitting it. another action to collect attorney’s fees. Icariñgal. the Civil Code provides that the obligation is converted into natural obligation. That is what you call LITIS PENDENTIA – there is another action pending between the same parties for Property of LAKAS ATENISTA 65 . Isang banggaan lang. But what has prescribed? Is it the cause of action? No.) The filing of one is available as a ground for the dismissal of other. .” The rule is simple: If there is one cause of action. He filed one case against the owner of the vehicle for reimbursement of hospital expenses. You cannot file two. Practical by you have filed four cases arising from one cause of action. After 10 years. naging apat ang kaso? Again. Sec. Yaan! SPLITTING A CAUSE OF ACTION Sec. What has prescribed is the right of action.A party may not institute more than one suit for a single cause of action. 3. So you are invoking the law on prescription. there is only one note and you sue me three times but there is only one cause of action. One suit for a single cause of action. Actually. “A party may not institute more than one suit for a single cause of action. (Bachrach vs. which is based on equity rather than a right. you file only one case. you have split your cause of action. three or four cases arising out of one cause of action. 287) That practice is expressly prohibited by law as expressed in Section 3. 68 Phil. the filing of one or a judgment upon the merits in any one is available as a ground for the dismissal of the others. the following are the effects: 1. while walking was bumped by a vehicle. His failure to pay is the cause of action. then another case for the lost income. effect of. In fact.1997 Rules on Civil Procedure 2001 Edition Rule 02 Cause of Action 3. So. by estoppel or other circumstances which do not affect at all the cause of action. there is already a wrong and you cannot erase a wrong. (3a) Section 3 is known as the rule against splitting the cause of action. (4a) Q: And what are the effects of splitting a cause of action? A: Under Section 4. EXAMPLE: In a suit under a promissory note.) Right of action may be taken away by the running of statute of limitations. not the cause of action because the moment he does not pay. EXAMPLE: When a debtor borrows money and he does not pay. the Carlo here has engaged in the prohibited practice of splitting cause of action. another action to collect the interest. Because sometimes. The cause of action is not affected by prescription. you file a case to collect the principal. Splitting a single cause of action. EXAMPLE: Damage (injury) suit: Carlo. Now. another one for doctor’s fees. what is barred is his right of action. . The correct procedure is that he should file one action and demand the recovery of all these expenses and the lost income.

(Bachrach vs. I think the law grants three remedies – (1) rescind the contract of sale. L-25134. Under Section 4.) a judgment upon the merits in any one is available as a ground for the dismissal of the others. Bacolod City vs. supra. Section 1 [e]) So you file a case. 30. However. That is what you call barred by prior judgment or RES ADJUDICATA. EXAMPLE: Credit Transactions: A bank has two (2) possible remedies against a debtor for non-payment of a loan secured by a mortgaged say. you are reviving the same case – you are filing again. Nemo debet vis vesare procuna em iyadens cusa – “No man shall be twice vexed for one and the same cause. supra. Otherwise. 2. Now. Icariñgal. one of them is subject to dismissal. and (3) foreclosure of mortgage. which is also a ground for dismissal under Rule 16. And why should you harass somebody when he only committed one wrong? You file a case against him but do not harass him more than once. (Bachrach vs. (2) exact fulfillment of obligation.. EXAMPLE: A case was already decided a long time ago. This is what happened in the case of DANAO vs. 1958) EXAMPLE: Obligations and Contracts: A violation or a breach of contract could give rise to a civil action for specific performance or a civil action for rescission of contract. it does not mean to say that the injured party can file both or one after the other. And while it is pending. you enforce the accessory contract of mortgage. Oct. De la Cruz. you file another case against the same party with the same cause of action. a single delict may give rise to two or more possible remedies but it does not mean to say the injured party can avail of all those remedies simultaneously or one after another.1997 Rules on Civil Procedure 2001 Edition Rule 02 Cause of Action the same cause. April 18. But even the law on Sales is very clear: the choice of one automatically bars resort to the other because it will be against splitting the cause of action. David vs. Icariñgal. This is one ground for dismissal of a case (Rule 16 – Motion to Dismiss. Under Section 4.” SINGLENESS OF A CAUSE OF ACTION Q: How do you determine the singleness of a cause of action? A: The singleness of a cause of action is determined by the singleness of the delict or wrong committed by the defendant and not by the number of remedies that the law grants the injured party. the bank cannot file a case the debtor to collect the loan and at the same time file an action to foreclose the mortgage for it will be splitting the cause of action. EXAMPLE: There is the Recto Law (on Sales) on the remedies of an unpaid seller of personal properties. or (2) file an action to collect the loan. COURT OF APPEALS 154 SCRA 446 Property of LAKAS ATENISTA 66 . It becomes an expensive process. L-11656. 1969) Actually. So it is either you enforce the principal contract of loan. to protect the defendant from unnecessary vexation. the reason is common sense eh – to protect the defendant from unnecessary vexation. Inc. Why create two cases when you have only one cause of action? And why make me spend more? Magasto yung balik-balik sa court. Meaning. San Miguel. Here. Q: What is the reason or philosophy for the rule against splitting a single cause of action? A: The rule against splitting a cause of action is intended to prevent repeated litigations between the same parties in regard to the same subject of controversy. the judgment in the first case years ago would be cited as a basis for the dismissal of the second case. or. piece of land: (1) foreclose the mortgage on the land. Section 1 [f]. and to avoid the costs incident to numerous suits. he will be splitting his cause of action.

Villanueva.000. And then the first installment is payable this year (1997).000 for 1997 – one cause of action. Pauline will also deliver to Nudj 100 sacks of sugar.” So those are examples of splitting a cause of action and illustrations of the rule that one cause of action may give rise to two or more remedies but it does not follow that you can avail of all those remedies. (#2) on the same date. with respect to splitting a cause of action. RULES IN DETERMINING THE SINGLENESS OF A CAUSE OF ACTION Now. Sometimes it is difficult. the creditor can file one case. there is only one contract of loan but the principal is payable in three installments at different times.” “Evidently. and (#3) on the same date. otherwise. the Court has laid down the rule that a mortgage creditor may institute against the mortgage debtor either a personal action for debt or a real action to foreclose the mortgage. The cause of action is not based on the number of paragraphs violated but on the contract itself. When the day arrived. Sometimes you get confused. but not both. Every installment is one cause of action even if there is only one note. Feb. So.payment of the first installment this year (1997). Property of LAKAS ATENISTA 67 . For non. Pauline will deliver to Nudj 100 sacks of rice. And then the second installment is payable in 1998 and the third installment is payable in 1999 without any acceleration clause. So three stipulations were violated. you will be splitting again you cause of action. HELD: “Anent real properties in particular. 53 Phil. (Larena vs. So P100. 1962) EXAMPLE: Pauline enters into a contract with Nudj which contains 3 stipulations: (#1) that next month. are not only a demonstration of the prohibited splitting up of a cause of action but also of the resulting vexation and oppression to the debtor. Remember that they are to be performed at different times. Q: Next year. even if it contains several stipulations. ‘ano ba ito? Isa lang ba ito o more than one?’ RULE #1 (General Rule): A contract embraces only one cause of action because it may be violated only once. nothing was delivered. the bank instituted an action to foreclose the mortgage. Sometimes it is easy to determine whether there is one cause of action. After filing a civil action to collect the loan. can the creditor file another case? A: YES. Pauline will also deliver to Nudj 100 sacks of corn. mortgaged their property and then they failed to pay. There is one promissory note where the loan is P300. Bautista.1997 Rules on Civil Procedure 2001 Edition Rule 02 Cause of Action FACTS: The Danao spouses borrowed money from the bank. he may pursue either of the two remedies. he did not pay the second installment. (Quioque vs. In other words. L-13159. because this time it is the exception. you must familiarize yourselves on how this rule is applied to breach of contract and if there are several stipulations. 28. The bank filed a civil action to collect the loan. the prior recourse of the creditor bank in filing a civil action against the Danao spouses and subsequently resorting to the complaint of foreclosure proceedings. Q: How many causes of action does Nudj have against Pauline? A: ONE. 923) EXAMPLE: A loan with a promissory note where the principal amount is payable in installment. The contract is only one cause of action even if it contains several stipulations. RULE #2 (Exception to the General Rule): A contract which provides for several stipulations to be performed at different times gives rise to as many causes of action as there are violations. One is enough.

(Larena vs. So there should only be one complaint for P200. I will file two cases. 55 Phil. (Blossom & Co.. So under rule #4.000 because it has been repudiated. it is deemed barred.1997 Rules on Civil Procedure 2001 Edition Rule 02 Cause of Action RULE #3 (Exception to the exception): All obligations which have matured at the time of the suit must be integrated as one cause of action in one complaint. You file only one case for the entire breach. arises from such breach. actual as well as prospective. Joinder of causes of action. this time. and those not so included would be barred. Isahin mo na lang yan. if you will wait for the entire note to mature. the second installment was not also paid. then next year. when the failure to comply with one of several stipulations in a continuing contract constitutes a total breach. as many causes of action as he may have against an opposing party (opening paragraph of Section 5) Q: What do you mean by joinder of causes of action? A: Joinder of causes of action is the provision of the Rules which allows a party to join in one pleading two or more causes of actions against the opposing party. 5.” Q: Is the creditor correct? A: He is wrong. vs. . RULE #4 (Exception to Rule #2): However. So dalawa na. If you do not file a claim for one. He is repudiating the entire note. 68 Property of LAKAS ATENISTA . 923) EXAMPLE: In 1997. it will be useless because he will still maintain the same position. So the creditor said. There is a total breach for a continuing obligation and there is now only one cause of action for the entire promissory note So theses are the basic principles of cause of action that I want you to remember. the debtor did not pay but the creditor did not file any case.000. JOINDER OF CAUSES OF ACTION SEC. there are two unpaid installments— 1997 and 1998! So dalawa na. Then in 1998. Manila Gas Corp. he is not only repudiating the first installment. The total claim now is P200. in the alternative or otherwise. the creditor can file a case for the entire loan of P300. 53 Phil. as many causes of action as he may have against an opposing party.A party may in one pleading assert. you cannot apply rule 2. file na naman. a single cause of action for damages. subject to the following conditions: x x x x x A party may in one pleading assert. Villanueva. 226) EXAMPLE: This year the first installment fell due. “Wala akong utang sa iyo! Tigas ng ulo!” So you do not wait anymore for the 2nd and 3rd installments to fall due. If you only file only one for the P100. everything must be integrated. You should only file one action for P300. in that kind of statement. when he files for collection of the unpaid second installment. So the creditor demanded payment for the first installment from the debtor which the latter denied.000 representing the first and second installments. pinabayaan lang niya. When all the installment are already due and the creditor has not filed any case for the collection of the first installment.000 and you go back to the general rule. in the alternative or otherwise. So for example.! The signature in the note is not mine!” Now.000 which fell due.

So there are 2 possible causes of action.000 payable in 1997 and then in 1996. that is allowed. So the creditor may file 3 complaints for the 3 promissory notes. The goods were delivered to Aileen in a damaged condition. Another Example: Chams is a passenger riding on a public utility vehicle which collided with another vehicle and she is not sure who is at fault. This is called joinder of causes of action. a second loan of P50.000 payable in 1997. then her cause of action against the other vehicle is quasi-delict. another loan of P50. 3 promissory notes in 3 different years. Carrier: “No. ALTERNATIVE joinder. file only one complaint asserting the 3 claims for the 3 promissory notes.” Now. Example: Aileen is the importer of the goods that were shipped on board a carrier. And when you file one case for every promissory note. He may or may not. A CUMULATIVE JOINDER exists when you are seeking relief for all your causes of action. but either one or the other. Q: Under Section 5. If the fault lies with the other vehicle.000 payable in 1997. In the problem above. and then reklamo siya sa arrastre or stevedoring. there are 3 loans. because joinder of causes of action is permissive. or. Section 5 allows you to file only one case and that is called joinder of causes of action. This is different from the case of an installment where there is only one loan although payable in three installments. you are not violating the rule against splitting a cause of action. Q: Can Aileen file a complaint incorporating the two (arrastre and the carrier) both as defendants? A: YES. ALTERNATIVE and CUMULATIVE Joinder of Causes of Action Q: How may causes of action be joined? A: Causes of action may be joined either: (a) alternatively or (b) cumulatively. You are not seeking relief from both but either one. You are actually not filing more than one case because there is one case for every loan. But the creditor can file one complaint to join the three loans. they were departed with the arrastre or stevedoring operator. But if the fault lies with the driver of the bus Property of LAKAS ATENISTA 69 . Aileen is not sure so she decided to file a case against both of them. In 1997 when they became due. Q: Were the cases properly filed? A: YES because there were 3 promissory notes.” Then when Aileen went to the carrier. However. An ALTERNATIVE JOINDER exists when your cause of action is either one or the other. So there are three debts that will fall due in 1997. ALTERNATIVE joinder. the debtor secured a loan of P50. and the driver of the bus where Chams was riding is not at fault. the Aileen here has two (2) possible causes of action: (1) an action against the stevedoring operator under the contract of depositary under the law on Credit Transaction. Then the arraster says. In 1995. Or. “Damaged na dati yan when it was unloaded from the carrier. So there are 3 causes of action. This is alternative joinder because Aileen is not claiming from both of them. Upon reaching Davao City.1997 Rules on Civil Procedure 2001 Edition Rule 02 Cause of Action PROBLEM: In 1994. At least isa sa kanila matamaan man ba. is the creditor obliged to file one complaint for the 3 promissory notes? A: NO. THE PRINCIPLE: You cannot file more than one case when you have only one cause of action but the law allows you to file one case for more than one cause of action. (2) an action against the carrier under the Law on Transportation. while you are allowed to file three cases. the creditor filed 3 cases against the debtor – one case for every promissory note. the damage happened in their (arrastre’s) custody.

That is alternative joinder of causes of action. Section 2: RULE 3. the pleading is not made insufficient by the insufficiency of one or more of the alternative statements.) Where the claims in all the causes of action are principally for recovery of money. EXAMPLE: Two or more passengers riding on the same bus. All of them were injured. Q: Can they be joined in one complaint? Property of LAKAS ATENISTA 70 . the joinder may be allowed in the Regional Trial Court provided one of the causes of action falls within the jurisdiction of said court and the venue lies therein.Where the plaintiff is uncertain against who of several persons he is entitled to relief. and d. her cause of action is culpa contractual. Alternative defendants. . b. There are two causes of action which are gained: an action for recognition and also for support.) The party joining the causes of action shall comply with the rules on joinder of parties. That is why the manner of joining the defendants alternatively or otherwise should be correlated with Rule 3. The child is asking for BOTH relief. files a case to collect 3 unpaid promissory notes from the John “The Yellow Man”. So they decided to file a damage suit. Section 13 and Rule 8. SEC. ANOTHER EXAMPLE: Roy “The Councilor. Example: Pches. although a right to relief against one may be inconsistent with a right of relief against the other. (2) Q: When is joinder of causes of action allowed? A: Under Section 5. these are cumulative. met an accident. 2.) The joinder shall not include special civil actions or actions governed by special rules. This is not alternative actions but rather. Section 6 which provides that two (2) or more persons can join as plaintiffs in one complaint or can be joined as defendants in one complaint. Pches is not claiming from either promissory notes but she is claiming all.A party may set forth two or more statements of a claim or defense alternatively or hypothetically. When two or more statements are made in the alternative and one of them if made independently would be sufficient. So lahat sila may cause of action noh? Every passenger who gets injured has a cause of action. SEC.) Where the causes of action are between the same parties but pertain to different venues or jurisdictions. either in one cause of action or defense or in separate causes of action or defenses. (13a) RULE 8. Alternative causes of action or defenses. the aggregate amount claimed shall be the test of jurisdiction. (5a) a.” an illegitimate child files a case against his father for compulsory acknowledgment as illegitimate child and support. Either of them is liable to her. provided there is a common question of fact or law involved in that case. c. he may join any or all of them as defendants in the alternative. 13. CUMULATIVE JOINDER. . So she has 2 possible causes of action.1997 Rules on Civil Procedure 2001 Edition Rule 02 Cause of Action where she was riding. who is forever on a diet.) The party joining the causes of action shall comply with the rules on joinder of parties We will meet joinder of parties when we reach Rule 3. Q: Is it possible for Chams to file one complaint naming both the drivers or both operators as defendants? A: YES. joinder of causes of action is allowed under the following conditions: a.

a joinder shall not include special civil actions or actions governed by special rules. breach of contract against the same operator. In the other case. The first accion publiciana is triable by the MTC (P20. Well of course the same kind of case: damage suit. In the first place. The defense of the operator here is different from his defense there.000. can their causes of action be joined? A: NO. Q: Can I file a case against Maceste joining the 2 cases? A: YES. And if the joinder of parties under Rule 3 is proper. insolvency cases. So there is a joinder of parties under Rule 3. Meaning. They cannot be joined because there is no common question of fact or law. the joinder may be allowed in the Regional Trial Court provided one of the causes of action falls within the jurisdiction of said court and the venue lies therein PROBLEM: Maceste encroached on two parcels of land belonging to me. meeting the same accident.000). In one parcel of land. the assessed vaue is P1 million. naturalization cases. and it must be filed it in the RTC.) The joinder shall not include special civil actions or actions governed by special rules So. In another parcel of land. and one is going to Cotabato. SEC 126 SCRA 31 FACTS: (This is still a good ruling) A stockholder of a corporation who is also the creditor of the corporation decided to file one complaint against the corporation asserting several causes of action.) Where the causes of action are between the same parties but pertain to different venues or jurisdictions.1997 Rules on Civil Procedure 2001 Edition Rule 02 Cause of Action A: YES because there is a common question of fact or law. c. HELD: The joinder is improper. against the same operator. among them is his rights as a stockholder under the Corporation Code and also his rights as a creditor under the Civil Code. one is going to General Santos. the joinder of causes of action under Rule 2 is also improper. So a special civil action cannot be joined with an ordinary civil action. The other accion publiciana is triable by the RTC. Now. Q: Where is now the governing venue? Property of LAKAS ATENISTA 71 . So if you cannot join them under Rule 3. an ordinary civil action cannot be joined with an action governed by special rules such as Election cases. vs.” Q: Suppose these passengers were riding on different buses owned by the one operator. And then he encroached in another land of mine in Davao City with an assessed value of P1 million. the jurisdiction is in the MTC for the case accion publiciana and the venue is Tagum because the property is situated there. So how can the RTC try a case when the cause of action is pertaining to the SEC and it is governed by the special rules of the SEC? So you cannot join that. In the 1983 case of UNION GLASS AND CONTAINER CORP. passenger A has nothing to do with the complaint of passenger B because there is no common denominator between them. Q: Can I join them? A: YES. They are on different trips. or. b. The reason here is simple: Special Civil Actions are governed by certain rules which do not apply to ordinary civil actions. PROBLEM: Maceste encroached on my land in Tagum with an assessed value of P20. then their causes of action can also be joined under Rule 2 because the condition is: “shall comply with the rules on joinder of parties. One is going to Mati. the assessed value of that is only P20. Dalawa eh – there are 2 lands encroached. All of them met an accident. the jurisdiction is in the RTC and the venue is Davao City. The jurisdiction of the RTC will prevail.000. You will notice that in the Tagum land. I would like to file a case of action publiciana against him. one is governed by a quasijudicial body (SEC). They are riding on the same bus.

you do not dismiss the case. Q: Can I join them under paragraph [c] although they belong to MTC and RTC? A: NO. In the other case. ang counterpart nito which is still present is misjoinder of parties under Rule 3. So my cause of action there is also accion publiciana but triable by the RTC. be severed and proceeded with separately. In this case there is misjoinder of causes of action. Q: In which RTC will you file the case joining the causes of action? A: Either Tagum or Davao City because both are RTCs. one case is forcible entry triable by the MTC and the latter is accion publiciana triable by the RTC. One of them belongs to the RTC. both belong to the MTC. the jurisdiction is MTC for the case accion publiciana. PROBLEM: Maceste encroached on my land in Tagum with an assessed value of P1 million.1997 Rules on Civil Procedure 2001 Edition Rule 02 Cause of Action A: The venue of the RTC case prevails. Q: Can they be joined under Section 5? A: NO. Misjoinder of causes of action. A misjoined cause of action may. because the law says provided one of the causes of action falls within the jurisdiction of said court and the venue lies therein. Now.000.000. it has to be filed with the MTC. Section 11: 72 Property of LAKAS ATENISTA . In the other case. The law allows only if it is between the same parties. so I decided to file a case naming both of them as defendants. the jurisdiction is also in the MTC. if there is misjoinder.) where the claims in all the causes of action are principally for recovery of money. Q: Can I join in one complaint the 2 actions? A: NO. EXAMPLE: A case joining an accion publiciana case and a forcible entry case which is not proper because a special civil action (forcible entry) cannot be joined. Plus the fact that you might violate paragraph [a] – there is no common question of fact and law between them. the jurisdiction is also in the RTC of Davao City. the case must be filed in Davao City. 6. And then he encroached in another land of mine in Davao City with an assessed value of P20. (n) There is misjoinder when two (2) or more causes of action where joined in one complaint when they should no be joined. So what is violated here is not paragraph [c] but paragraph [b].000 also. The remedy is to ask the court that the misjoined case be severed and tried separately. . PROBLEM: Maceste encroached on my land in Davao City on month ago and then he encroached on another land of mine (assessed value of P1 million) in Davao City two years ago. you cannot join them because of paragraph [b] – a forcible entry is special civil action which is also governed by the Summary Procedure. SEC. So judiciary law. Therefore. MTC. PROBLEM: Maceste encroached on my land in Tagum with an assessed value of P20. You will notice that in the Tagum land. So if I will file an accion publiciana. So both actions. On the other hand. basta sums of money. In the Tagum land. Under Section 6. the aggregate amount claimed shall be the test of jurisdiction The last is only a repetition of the old rule: TOTALITY RULE. In the example. There is nothing new here. Aaron encroached my other parcel of land more than one year ago and the assessed value of the land is P1 million. the jurisdiction is RTC for the case accion publiciana. totality rule. d. This time the parties are not the same. on motion of a party or on the initiative of the court. Therefore.Misjoinder of causes of action is not a ground for dismissal of an action. So both actions. And then he encroached in another land of mine in Davao City with an assessed value of P1 million also. RTC. PROBLEM: Maceste encroached on my land more than one year ago and the land has an assessed value of only P20. You cannot join a special civil action.

1997 Rules on Civil Procedure 2001 Edition Rule 02 Cause of Action RULE 3. A claim against a misjoined party may be severed and proceeded with separately. Property of LAKAS ATENISTA 73 .Neither misjoinder nor non-joinder of parties ground for dismissal of an action. Misjoinder and non-joinder of parties. Parties may be dropped or added by order of the court on motion of any party or on its own initiative at any stage of the action and on such terms as are just. Sec. 11. . Just remove the misjoined cause of action or the misjoined party. (11a) So misjoinder of parties and misjoinder of causes of action are not grounds for dismissal of an action.