UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN

MINDANAO (USM)
First Year Law, Section B
2022-2023

CIVIL PROCEDURE I
Rules 1 and 2
Outline of the Rules of Court:
I. Civil Actions
1. Rules 2-56 - Ordinary Civil Actions (including appeals)
2. Rules 57-61 – Provisional Remedies
3. Rules 62-71 -Special Civil Actions
II. Special Proceedings
1. Rules 73-91 -Settlement of Estate of Deceased Persons
2. Rules 92-109- General Guardians and Guardianship
III. Rules on Criminal Procedure (Rules 110-127)
IV. Rules on Evidence (Rules 128 -134)
V. Legal Ethics
Civil Procedure under LEB Memo No. 24
1. Civil Procedure I – Rules 1 -39
(up to execution stage)
2. Civil Procedure II – Rules 40-71
(from appeals up to Special Civil
Actions)
Rule 72-109 is now under the subject
Special Rules and Proceedings
 Rule 1
General Provisions
Sec. 1.  Title of the Rules. - These Rules shall be known
and cited as the Rules of Court. (1)
 
Sec. 2. In what courts applicable. - These Rules shall
apply in all courts, except as otherwise provided by the
Supreme Court. (n)

[“repealed, altered or supplemented” by Congress?]

Classification of Cases:
I. Civil Action
A. Ordinary Civil actions: 1-56; 57-61

B. Special Civil Actions: 62-71

I. Special Proceedings: 72-108
II. Criminal Actions: 109-127
Sec. 3. Cases governed. - These Rules shall
govern the procedure to be observed in actions,
civil or criminal, and special proceedings.
What of Administrative Proceedings? (still
covered by Rule 139 (Disbarment and
Suspension) and Rule 140 (Discipline of
Judges) also court employees
(a) A civil action is one by which a party sues
another for the enforcement or protection of
a right, or the prevention or redress of a
wrong. (1a, R2)
A civil action may either be ordinary or
special. Both are governed by the rules for
ordinary civil actions, subject to the specific
rules prescribed for a special civil action.
Classification of Actions:
1. As to nature: Ordinary or Special
1. Special
Rules 62-71 (Special) –Interpleader, Declaratory Relief &
Similar Remedies, Review of Judgments, Final Orders or
Resolutions of Comelec & COA, Certiorari, Prohibition,
Mandamus, Quo Warranto, Expropriation, Foreclosure
of Real Estate Mortgage, Partition, Forcible Entry & Unlawful
Detainer, Contempt

2. All others are ordinary-

2. As to the cause or foundation: Real or
Personal
Real – the issue or the subject of the suit is
title or ownership or possession or interest
in a real property (unlawful detainer)
Personal –one founded on privity of contract
or for enforcement of a contract or recovery
of personal property.
(Important in the Rules on Venue, and
determining jurisdiction)
3. As to the place of filing the action:
Local or Transitory-
A local action is one which must be
brought in a particular place. A
transitory action is an action which
follows the party wherever he may
reside.
4. As to the object of a civil action:
Action in Personam or Action in Rem or
Quasi-in-Rem
An action in personam is directed against
specific persons [on the basis of his personal
liability] and seek personal judgments, while
an action in rem is directed against the thing
or property or status of a person and seek
judgments with respect thereto as against the
whole world.
Action Quasi in Rem –
An action against a named defendant and
the purpose of the proceeding is to subject
his property to the obligation or lien burdening
it. [Attachment, foreclosure, partition, quieting
of title]
[important when we discuss Rule 14 on
Summons]
Examples:
1. Collection of sum of money (personam)
2. Action for Damages (personal)
3. Annulment of marriage (en rem)
4. Partition (en rem)
5. Quieting of title (Alonzo v. Cebu Country
Club, July 31, 2002) (quasi-en rem)
6. Foreclosure of mortgage (quasi-n rem)
Classification:
1. Ordinary or special
2. Real or Personal
3. Local or Transitory
4. In personam, in rem or quasi in rem
Sec. 3. [continued…]
(b) A criminal action is one by
which the State prosecutes a person for
an act or omission punishable by law
  (c) A special proceeding is a remedy by
which a party seeks to establish a status, a
right, or a particular fact. (2a, R2)
Distinctions:
(1) A civil action is one by which a party
sues another for the enforcement or
protection of a right, or the prevention or
redress of a wrong, whereas, a special
proceeding is a remedy by which a party
seeks to establish a status, a right, or a
particular fact. [Recognition, adoption]
(2) In a civil action, there are two (2) definite
and particular adverse parties, the party who
demands a right, called a plaintiff, and the
other whom the right is sought, called a
defendant. Whereas, in a special
proceeding, while there is a definite party
petitioner, there is no definite adverse party
as the proceeding is usually considered to be
against the whole world.
But take note:
1. Adoption (In re: Petition for Adoption of X,
Spouses A & B, Petitioners.
2. Probate of Will (In re: Probate of the Will of
X, A & B, Petitioners, versus Z respondent)
3. Habeas corpus (In the Matter of Petition for
(detaining officers as respondents
4. Correction of entry/Change of Name (versus
Local Civil Registrar of Mapet)
Sec. 4. In what cases not applicable. - These
Rules shall not apply to election cases, land
registration, cadastral, naturalization and
insolvency proceedings, and other cases not
herein provided for, except by analogy or in a
suppletory character and whenever practicable
and convenient. (R143a) [Ex. Ong Chia v.
Republic, 328CCRA 749 (2000)]
 Sec. 5. Commencement of an action. - A civil
action is commenced by the filing of the
original complaint in court. If an additional
defendant is impleaded in a later pleading, the
action is commenced with regard to him on the
date of the filing of such later pleading,
irrespective of whether the motion for its
admission, if necessary, is denied by the court.
(6a)
Bar Question 2000, No. 17:
X, an illegitimate child of Y, celebrated her 18 th birthday on May 2, 1996. A month before
her birthday, Y died. After countless efforts to convince her, X filed on April 25, 2000 an
action for recognition against Z, wife of Y. After Z filed her Answer on August 14, 2000, X
filed a motion to file an amended complaint and a motion to admit the said complaint
impleading the 3 legitimate children of Y. The trial court admitted the amended complaint
on August 22, 2000. What is the effect ogf the admission of the amended complaint? Has
the action of X prescribed? (4 year prescriptive period)
But: Verzosa v. CA, 299 SCRA 100 (1988): Since it merely added new defendants without
changing the cause of action, the amendment impleading new defendants retroacts to the
filing of the original complaint.
See also Descalar v. Heirs of Guevarra, G.R. No. 243874. October 06, 2021: Action for
reconveyance: Considering that the TCT was issued in the names of Spouses Descallar on
January 25, 1996, the Complaint filed by Belen and Augustus on March 29, 2004 is clearly
within the 10-year period. Petitioners' argument that the counting of the period should be
reckoned from the filing of the Amended Complaint on December 15, 2008 is contrary to
the purpose of prescription, which is "to protect the diligent and vigilant, not those who
sleep on their rights
 2. Docket Fee
Principle: The court acquires
jurisdiction over the case upon full
payment of docket fee. [Suit is deemed
filed only upon filing of the initiatory
pleading and payment of appropriate
docket fee.]
PAGCOR v. Lopez, 474 SCRA 76 (2005)
Sun Insurance Office
Also repeated in PGCOR v. Lopez, 474 SCRA 76 (2005)
 1.  It is not simply the filing of the complaint or
appropriate initiatory pleading, but the payment of
the prescribed docket fee,  that vests a trial court
with jurisdiction over the subject-matter or nature of
the action.  Where the filing of the initiatory pleading
is not accompanied by payment of the docket fee,
the court may allow payment of the fee within a
reasonable time but in no case beyond the applicable
prescriptive or reglementary period.
 
            2.  The same rule applies to
permissive counterclaims, third-party claims
and similar pleadings, which shall not be
considered filed until and unless the filing fee
prescribed therefor is paid.  The court may
also allow payment of said fee within a
reasonable time but also in no case beyond
its applicable prescriptive or reglementary
period.
       3.  Where the trial court acquires jurisdiction over a
claim by the filing of the appropriate pleading and
payment of the prescribed filing fee but,
subsequently, the judgment awards a claim not
specified in the pleading, or if specified the same has
been left for determination by the court, the
additional filing fee therefor shall constitute a lien on
the judgment.  It shall be the responsibility of the
Clerk of Court or his duly authorized deputy to
enforce said lien and assess and collect the additional
fee.  
Cases:
1. Where the complaint is for recovery of
possession and damages, but the
docket fee for the latter has not been
paid, the action need not be dismissed.
Plaintiff should be given a reasonable
time to pay or delete the claim for
damages. (Tacay v. RTC, GR No.
88075-77, Dec. 20, 1989)
2. Plaintiff cannot be allowed to pay the
docket fee dependent on the outcome
of the litigation. (Filipinas Shell
Petroleum v. CA, G.R. No. 76119, April
10, 1989) (Exception: Rule 111, Sec. 1,
RRCC)
Others:
1. Serrano v. Delica, 465 SCRA 82 (2005)
BIR Zonal Valuation not the basis, but the
Assessed Value
2. In re: Petition for Recognition of GSIS…,
AM No. 08-2-01-0, Feb. 11, 2010. Can
Congress pass a law exempting certain
entities from payment of docket fees?
3. Who are exempted from payment of
docket fees?
 Sec. 6. Construction. - These Rules shall be
liberally construed in order to promote
their objective of securing a just, speedy
and inexpensive disposition of every
action and proceeding. (2a)
Heirs of Llamas v. Sps. Gabrino, G.R. No. 239174. July 07, 2021
Defendants failed to attend preliminary conference despite warning from
the CA that failure to appear would lead to dismissal of the case.
"Liberality lies within the bounded discretion of a court to allow an
equitable result when the proven circumstances require it ." Liberality
however is not an end in itself, otherwise, it will become a backdoor
disguising the arbitrariness or despotism of judges and justices. Factual
antecedents of a plea for the exercise of liberality must be clear. There
must be a showing that the factual basis for a plea for liberality is not
one that is due to the negligence or design of the party requesting the
suspension of the rules. Moreover, the basis for claiming an equitable
result for all the parties must be clearly and sufficiently pleaded and
argued. Since courts exercise liberality in line with their equity
jurisdiction, it may only be exercised if it will result in fairness and
justice. For courts to exercise liberality, petitioners must show that it
would suffer from an injustice not commensurate to the
thoughtlessness of its procedural mistakes.”
Instances when liberal construction is proper: 
1. Where a rigid application will result in manifest failure or
miscarriage of justice
2. Where interest of substantial justice will be served
3. Where the resolution of the motion is addressed solely to the
sound discretion of the court
4. Where the injustice to the adverse party is not commensurate
with the degree of his thoughtlessness in not complying with
the procedure prescribed. Sea Power v. CA, GR No. 138270,
June 28, 2001 (First time to file petition, failed to attach
original documents)
Strict Construction:
1. Compliance with reglementary period to
appeal (Manila Memorial v. CA, G.R No.
137122, Nov. 15, 2000
2. Failure to include written explanation why
registered mail was resorted to Solar Team v.
Ricafort, 293 SCRA 661 1998
2. Party praying for liberal construction has
shown penchant for disregarding rules
Bar Question, No. 1, 1998:
How shall the Rules of Court be construed
Answer: The Rules of Court should be liberally
construed in order to promote their objective
of securing a just, speedy and inexpensivie
disposition of every action.
[However, strict observance of the rules is
an imperative necessity when they are
considered indispensable to the prevention of
needless delays and to the orderly and
speedy dispatch of judicial business.]
 Bar Questions:
1998 Bar Question, No. 1: Distinguish civil
actions from special proceedings?
Answer: A civil action is one which a party sues
another for the enforcement or protection of
a right, or the prevention or redress of a
wrong, while a special proceeding is a remedy
by which a party seeks to establish a status,
right or a particular fact.
1994, No. 1:
Distinguish:
1. An action in rem from an action quasi-en
rem
2. An action quasi-en rem from an action in
personam
3. An action in personam from a personal
action
4. An action en rem from a real action
5. A personal action from a local action
Answers:
1. An action in rem is an action against all who might
be minded to make an objection of any sort against
the right sought to be established, while an action
quasi en rem is an action against an individual
although the purpose of the suit is to subject his
interest in a particular property to an obligation or
lien burdening the property.
The judgment rendered in an action in rem binds
the whole world, while the judgment rendered in
actions quasi en rem is conclusive only between th
parties (Sandejas v. Robles, 81 Phil. 421).
2. An action quasi in rem (stated above)
is an action against a person over a
particular property or claim relating
thereto, while an action in personal is
an action to establish a claim against a
person with a judgment that binds him
personally.
3. An action in personam (stated above)
is an action against a person on the
basis of his personal liability, while a
personal action is an action where the
plaintiff seeks the recovery of personal
property, the enforcement or resolution
of a contract or the recovery of
damages. (Hernandez v. Rural Bank, 81
Phil. 75.
4. An action in rem (stated above) is an action
against all who might be minded to make an
objection of any sort against the right sought
to be established, while a real action is an
action affecting title to real property or for
the recovery of possession, or partition or
condemnation of, or foreclosure of a
mortgage property. Rule 4, Sec. 2.
5. A personal action (stated above) is an
action where the plaintiff seeks the recovery
of personal property, the enforcement or
resolution of a contract or the recovery of
damages, while a local action is that which
must be brought in a particular place.
Plaintiff in a personal action may file it in
the place where he resides or where the
defendant resides, while in a local action,
plaintiff has no choice except to file the
action where the property is located.
End of Lecture on Rule 1
 Rule 2
Cause of Action
Sec. 1.Ordinary civil actions, basis of. - Every ordinary civil
action must be based on a cause of action. (n) 
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)
Questions:
1. What if the face of the complaint states no cause of action?
Danfos v. Continental, 479 SCRA 505 (2005)
2. Can a judge dismiss the complaint on his own initiative
because it states no cause of action? Sec. 1, Rule 9
Elements:
1)     There must be right pertaining to the
plaintiff (by law or by contract);
2)     There is a correlative obligation of the
defendant not to violate the right
3)     There is a violation of plaintiff’s right by
the defendant (act or omission)
4) There is damage suffered by the
plaintiff. [Into v. Valle, 477 SCRA 159 (2005)
Swagman v. CA, 455 SCRA 175 (2005)
When plaintiff sued on the promissory notes, they had not yet
matured, though two (2) of them matured while the case was
already pending. At what point should the cause of action
exist?
Held: It thus follows that a complaint whose cause of action has
not yet accrued cannot be cured or remedied by an amended or
supplemental pleading alleging the existence or accrual of a
cause of action while the case is pending. Such an action is
prematurely brought and is, therefore, a groundless suit, which
should be dismissed by the court upon proper motion
seasonably filed by the defendant.  The underlying reason for
this rule is that a person should not be summoned before the
public tribunals to answer for complaints which are immature.
Cause of Action v. Right of Action
“The term "cause of action" has been held to be synonymous
with "right of action" (37 Words and Phrases, 642), but in the
law of pleading (Code Pleading) one is distinguished from the
other in that a right of action is a remedial right belonging to
some person, while a cause of action is a formal statement of
the operative facts that give rise to such remedial right. The one
is a matter of right and depends on the substantive law, while
the other is a matter of statement and is governed by the law of
procedure. (Phillips, Code Pleading, section 189, page 170.)”
“It bears restating that a right of action is the right to
presently enforce a cause of action, while a cause of action
consists of the operative facts which give rise to such right of
action.”
[right to institute an action
Distinctions:
1) Cause of action is the delict or wrong committed by
the defendant, whereas Right of action refers to the right
of the plaintiff to institute the action;
2) Cause of action is created by substantive law, whereas
Right of action is regulated by procedural law;
3) Right of action may be taken away by the running of
statute of limitations, by estoppel or other circumstances
which do not affect at all the cause of action.
De Guzman, Jr. v. Court of Appeals, 192 SCRA 507
Mijares v. Ranada, 455 SCRA 397 (2005)
Distinction between enforcement of a foreign
judgment and an ordinary litigation based on a cause
of action:
1. In the first, the cause of action is the foreign
judgment, while in the second it is the act or
omission violating plaintiff’s right
2. In the first, all you need to do is present the
foreign judgment, but in the second plaintiff has to
present evidence of the violation of his right
[similar to enforcement of Barangay
Settlement]
1997 Bar, No. 17(b):
Distinguish: (b) Cause of action from action.
1998 Bar, No. 2(a)
What is jurisdiction and how does it differ
from cause of action? How are they
acquired? Explain?
1999 Bar, No. 2 (a):
Distinguish action from cause of action.
Sec. 3. One suit for a single cause of action. - A party
may not institute more than one suit for a single
cause of action. (3a)
Examples: Loan/Interest, recovery of
ownership/damages, partition of land/partition of
improvements
Also Tanyag v. Tanyag, 231319, November 10, 2021:
Annulment of Marriage/Petition for Declaration of
Paraphernal Property
But: collection of loan and foreclosure of mortgage
[DBP v. Vda. de Valdehueza, GR No. 157983, Dec. 5,
2005
Santos Ventura Hocorma v. Mabalacat Institute, GR No.
211563, Sept. 29, 2021
Plaintiff filed a case for unlawful detainer in one court
and collection of unpaid rent in the amount of
P2,519,222.00, in the RTC. Is there splitting?
Held: No. An action for sum of money may not be
joined with an ejectment suit, otherwise a misjoinder
of causes of action would ensue. Sec. 5 of Rule 2
prohibits it. It states: “The joinder shall not include
special civil actions or actions governed by
special rules.”
Seems to contradict: Sec. 17 of Rule 70 of
the Revised Rules on Civil Procedure states
that:
If after trial the court finds that the
allegations of the complaint are true, it shall
render judgment in favor of the plaintiff for
the restitution if the premises, the sum justly
due in arrears of rent or as reasonable
compensation for the use and occupation of
the premises, attorney’s fees and costs.
CGR Corporation v. Treyes, Jr., G.R. No. 170916, April 27, 2007:
The recoverable damages in forcible entry and detainer cases thus
refer to rents or the reasonable compensation for the use and
occupation of the premises or fair rental value of the property and
attorneys fees and costs. xxx
Lastly, we agree with the CA and the RTC that there is no basis for the
MTC to award actual, moral, and exemplary damages in view of the
settled rule that in ejectment cases, the only damage that can be
recovered is the fair rental value or the reasonable compensation for
the use and occupation of the property. Considering that the only issue
raised in ejectment is that of rightful possession, damages which could
be recovered are those which the plaintiff could have sustained as a
mere possessor, or those caused by the loss of the use and occupation
of the property, and not the damages which he may have suffered but
which have no direct relation to his loss of material possession. x x x
(Emphasis, underscoring and italics supplied; citations omitted)
Other damages must thus be claimed in an ordinary action
Test? How many delicts or wrong? How
many acts or omissions?
Not: How many remedies? BREACH OF
CONTRACT
1. Specific Performance
2. Rescission of Contract
3. Damages
PBC v. Lim, 455 SCRA 175 (2005)
Where a bank grants a loan evidenced by a promissory note, and
the loan is secured by a surety who signs a surety agreement, how
many causes of action does the bank have if the loan is not paid?
Held: There are 2 causes of action. As against the principal, the
cause of action is the alleged failure to pay the debt in violation of the
promissory note; as against the surety, the cause of action is the
violation of the surety agreement. Because of the variance between
the causes of action, the bank can file separate actions against
respondents to recover the debt, on condition that it could not recover
twice from the same cause. It can proceed against only one or all of
them, as full payment by one of them would extinguish the obligation.
By the same token, respondents could be joinder as defendants in one
suit’ because the bank’s alleged right of relief arose from the same
transaction or series of transactions that had common questions of fact
and law. To avoid a multiplicity of suits, joinder of parties is
encouraged by the law.
Sec. 4. Splitting a single cause of
action; effect of. - If two or more
suits are instituted on the basis of
the same cause of action, the filing of
one or a judgment upon the merits in
any one is available as a ground for
the dismissal of the others. (4a)
Perez v. C.A., GR No.157616, July 22,
2005
What is splitting of a cause of action?
Answer: Splitting of a single cause of
action or entire claim or demand cannot
be split up or divided so as to be made
of two or more different actions.
 Effect of Splitting – Dismissal of One of them
Ground for motion to dismiss:
1. Litis Pendencia [That there is another action
pending between the same parties]
2. Res adjudicata[That the cause of action is
barred by prior judgment]
3. Forum Shopping [Santos Ventura Hocorma
v. Mabalacat Institute, GR No. 211563, Sept.
29, 2021]
Bar Question, 2017:
VII. Elise obtained a loan of ₱3 Million from Merchant Bank. Aside from
executing a promissory note in favor of Merchant Bank, she executed a deed of
real estate mortgage over her house and lot as security for her obligation. The
loan fell due but remained unpaid; hence, Merchant Bank filed an action against
Elise to foreclose the real estate mortgage. A month after, and while the
foreclosure suit was pending, Merchant Bank also filed an action to recover the
principal sum of ₱3 Million against Elise based on the same promissory note
previously executed by the latter.
In opposing the motion of Elise to dismiss the second action on the ground of
splitting of a single cause of action, Merchant Bank argued that the ground
relied upon by Elise was devoid of any legal basis considering that the two
actions were based on separate contracts, namely, the contract of loan
evidenced by the promissory note, and the deed of real estate mortgage.
Is there a splitting of a single cause of action? Explain your answer. (4%)
Dean Inigo’s Rules:
Rule No. 1. The cause of action is not based on the
stipulations but on the contract. A contract embraces only one
cause of action because it may be violated only once even if it
contains several stipulations
Rule No. 2. 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.
Rule No. 3. All obligations which have matured at the time of
the suit must be integrated as one cause of action in one
complaint and those not so included would be barred.
Rule No. 4. However, when the failure to comply with one of
the several stipulations, in a continuing contract constitutes a
total breach, a single cause of action for damages, actual as
well as prospective, arises from the breach.
.
 Sec. 5. Joinder of causes of action. - A party
may in one pleading assert, in the
alternative or otherwise, as many causes
of action as he may have against an
opposing party, subject to the following
conditions:

-Not mandatory, but permissive

-Alternative or cumulative
-Applies to causes of action, not parties
APT v. CA, GR No. 81024, Feb. 3, 2000:
“The statutory intent behind the provisions on joinder of causes
of action is to encourage the joinder of causes of action which
could reasonably be said to involve kindred rights and wrongs,
although the courts have not succeeded in giving a standard
definition of the trms used or in developing a rule of universal
application. The dominat idea is to permit joinder of causes of
action, legal or equitable, where there is some substantial unity
between them. While the rule allows a plaintiff to join as many
separate claims as he may have, there should nevertheless be
some unity in the problems presented and a common question
of law and fact involved, subject always to the restriction
thereon regarding jurisdiction, venue and joinder of parties.
Unlimited joinder is not allowed.”
[Also Sps. Perez v. Hermano, July 8, 2005
Conditions/Limitations:
(a) The party joining the causes of
action shall comply with the rules on
joinder of parties;

-same question of fact or law.

-arose out of the same transaction or
series of transactions
(b) The joinder shall not include special civil actions or actions
governed by special rules;

Santos Ventura Hocorma v. Mabalacat Institute, GR No. 211563,

Sept. 29, 2021
Plaintiff filed a case for unlawful detainer in one court and
collection of unpaid rent in another. Is there splitting?
Held: No. An Action for sum of money may not be joined with
an ejectment suit, otherwise a misjoinder of causes of action
would ensue. Sec. 5 of Rule 2 prohibits it. It states: “The
joinder shall not include special civil actions or actions
governed by special rules.”
Ada v. Baylon, 678 SCRA 297 (2012)
Can actions for partition and rescission of a donation inter vivos be joined
in a single Complaint?
Held: No. While parties to an action may assert in one pleading, in the
alternative or otherwise, as many causes of action as they may have against an
opposing party, such joinder of causes of action is subject to the condition, inter
alia, that the joinder shall not include special civil actions governed by special
rules. The action for partition could not be joined with the action for the
rescission of the said donation inter vivos. Lest it be overlooked, an action for
partition is a special civil action governed by Rule 69 of the Rules of Court while
an action for rescission is an ordinary civil action governed by the ordinary rules
of civil procedure. The variance in the procedure in the special civil action of
partition and in the ordinary civil action of rescission precludes their joinder in
one complaint or their being tried in a single proceeding to avoid confusion in
determining what rules shall govern the conduct of the proceedings as well as in
the determination of the presence of requisite elements of each particular cause
of action.
©     Where the causes of action are between
the same parties but pertain to different
venues or jurisdictions, 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; and
 
 Dean Inigo’s Examples: Sam Parties
1. Same venue but different jurisdiction -RTC
[recovery of ownership of 2 pieces of land
one worth P1,000,000.00 and the other
P200,000.00 both found in Kidapawan]
2. Different venue and different jurisdiction-
RTC
3. Same jurisdiction [only RTC] but different
venue- either place
Notes: [on the exception]:
1. What if both are triable by MTCs, can
there be joinder? Apparently yes, provided
venue is the same.
2. Does not apply if there is an additional
party?
3. Review: 1997 Bar Question, No. 1:
Which court has jurisdiction? An action for
specific performance or, in the alternative, for
damages in the amount of P180,000.00.
(d) Where the claims in all the causes
of action are principally for recovery
of money, the aggregate amount
claimed shall be the test of
jurisdiction. (5a)
1996 Bar, No. 4(2):
The complaint filed before the RTC of
Manila states 2 causes of action, one for
rescission of contract and the other for
the recovery of P100,000, both of which
arose out of the same transaction.
Is the joinder of the 2 causes of
action proper? Explain.
Bar Question, 2015, No. 1:
A. Lender extended to Borrower a PhP 100,000 loan covered
by a promissory note. Later, Borrower obtained another PhP
100,000 loan again covered by a promissory note. Still later,
Borrower obtained a PhP300,000 loan secured by a real
estate mortgage on his land valued at PhP 500,000. Borrower
defaulted on his payments when the loans matured. Despite
demand to pay the PhP 500,000 loan, Borrower refused to
pay. Lender, applying the Totality Rule, filed against Borrower
with the RTC of Manila, a collection suit for PhP 500,000.
(A)Did Lender correctly apply the Totality Rule and the
Rule on Joinder of Causes of Action?
B. At the trial, Borrower’s lawyer, while cross -
examining Lender, successfully elicited an admission
from the latter that the two promissory notes have
been paid. Thereafter, Borrower’s lawyer filed a
motion to dismiss the case on the ground that as
proven only PhP 300,000 was the amount due to
Lender and which claim is within the exclusive
original jurisdiction of the MTC. He further argued
that lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter can
be raised at any stage of the proceedings.
Should the court dismiss the case?
6. Misjoinder of causes of action. -
Misjoinder of causes of action is not
a ground for dismissal of an action.
A misjoined cause of action may, on
motion of a party or on the initiative
of the court, be severed and
proceeded with separately. (n)
2000, No. 18:
A brings an action in the Metropolitan Trial
Court of Manila against B for the annulment
of an extrajudicial foreclosure of real property
with an assessed value of P50,000.00 located
in Laguna. The complaint alleged prematurity
of the sale for the reason that the mortgage
was not yet due. B timely moved to dismiss
the case on the ground that the action should
have been brought in the RTC of Laguna,
Decide with reasons.
Quiz No. 1: True or False
1. _________________ An ordinary civil action must be
based on a cause of action.
2. _________________ The rule is that there must only be
one cause of action for a single suit.
3. _________________ The splitting of a cause of action
into two (2) can result to the dismissal of both.
4. _________________ The Rules of Court should be
construed liberally in favor of defendant, as a rule.
5. _________________ If I want to recover a piece of land
from a squatter and ask for damages that I suffered, I can file
two cases separately.
6. _________________ Several plaintiffs may be joined
together in a single case in some situations.
7. _________________ Several defendants may also be
joined in a single case in some situations.
8. _________________ Joinder of causes of action may be
done even if the venue of one is different from the other if one
cause of action is within the jurisdiction of the RTC and the
venue lies therein.
9. _________________ The Rules of Court also applies to
criminal actions.
10. ________________ Real actions necessarily involve
real property, such as land.
11. ________________ An action for breach of
contract is a personal action.
12. ________________ An action to recover
ownership of a car is a real action.
13. ________________ Misjoinder of causes of
action is not a ground for dismissal of an action.
14. ________________ Consequently, the court
must try the two cases together.
15. ________________ An action is deemed
commenced only upon filing of the complaint and
payment of docket fees based on case law.
Multiple Choice:
16. ________________ “A” executed a promissory note in
favor of “B” for P400,000.00, payable in 4 installments at the
rate of P100,000.00 monthly or every 15th of the month
starting January 15, 2023 until April 15, 2023, with no
acceleration clause. As of today, “A” can file a single suit to
collect: (a) P100,000.00; (b) P200,000.00; (c) P300,000.00; or
(d) P400,000.00
17. _________________ Which one is an ordinary civil action
governed by the Rules on Civil Procedure? (a) an election case;
(b) a naturalization case; (c) a case for recovery of real
property; or (d) a land registration case
18.__________________ Which decision in an
action would be binding upon the whole world? (a)
annulment of marriage; (b) action for ejectment; (c)
action for collection of sum of money; or (d) action
for damages for breach of contract
19. _________________ Which is not required as
an element of a cause of action? (a) a right in favor
of plaintiff; (b) an obligation on the part of defendant
to respect the right; (c) a crime on the part of
defendant in violation of the right of plaintiff; or (d)
an omission on the part of defendant constituting a
breach of obligation to plaintiff
20. _________________ “X” wanted to eject his tenant
“Y” in a summary proceeding for unlawful detainer.
It also happened that “Y” had borrowed the sum of
P1 million from “X” which” had not been paid and he
wanted to file a Small Claims” case. Which
statement is correct? (a) “X” must join his 2 causes
of action in one Complaint; (b) “X” may join his 2
causes of action in one Complaint; (c) “X” may join
his 2 causes of action if the judge agrees; or(d) “X” is
not permitted to join his causes of action