Rules 4,5,6,7

RULES 4,5,6,7
VENUE
UNIFORMITY OF RULES
KINDS OF PLEADINGS
PARTS AND CONTENTS OF A PLEADING
Torregosa, Norman
Saliling, Mary Jane
Alfonso, Imie
D. VENUE (Rule 4)
a. Declaration of nullity of void marriages and annulment of voidable marriages (A.M. No. 02-11-10- SC)
The petition shall be filed in the Family Court of the province or city where the petitioner or the
respondent has been residing for at least six months prior to the date of filing. Or in case of non-
resident respondent, where he may be found in the Philippines, at the election of the petitioner.
b. Legal separation (A.M. No. 02-11-11- SC)

The petition shall be filed in the Family Court of the province or city where the petitioner or the
respondent has been residing for at least six months prior to the date of filing. Or in case of non-
resident respondent, where he may be found in the Philippines, at the election of the petitioner.
c. Adoption (A.M. No. 02-6- 02- SC)

The petition for adoption shall be filed with the Family Court of the province or city where the
prospective adoptive parents reside.
1. VENUE and JURISDICTION
are distinguished as follows:
VENUE JURISDICTION
• Place where the action is instituted • Power of the court to hear and decide the
case
• May be waived
• Jurisdiction over the subject matter and
• Procedural
over the nature of the action is conferred by
•May be changed by the written agreement law
of the parties • Substantive
•Not a ground for motu propio dismissal • Cannot be subject of the agreement of the
(except in Summary Procedure) parties
• Ground for a motu propio dismissal
VENUE vs JURISDICTION
Radiowealth Finance Co. Inc., vs Nolasco
The RTC mistook jurisdiction for the more lenient concept of venue. Moreover, the Court
has emphasized in several cases that the RTC may not motu proprio dismiss the case on the
ground of improper venue. It is a matter personal to the parties and without their
objection at the earliest opportunity, as in a motion to dismiss or in the answer, it is
deemed waived.
Latorre vs Latorre
Collection and Declaration of Nullity of Deed of Absolute Sale
In this jurisdiction, we adhere to the principle that the nature of an action is determined
by the allegations in the Complaint itself, rather than by its title or heading. It is also a
settled rule that what determines the venue of a case is the primary objective for the
filing of the case. In her Complaint, petitioner sought the nullification of the Deed of
Absolute Sale on the strength of two basic claims that (1) she did not execute the deed in
favor of respondent; and (2) thus, she still owned one half (½) of the subject property.
Indubitably, petitioner's complaint is a real action involving the recovery of the subject
property on the basis of her co-ownership thereof.
2. VENUE OF REAL 3. VENUE OF
ACTIONS PERSONAL ACTIONS
(Rule 4 Section 1) (Rule 4 Section 2)
Actions affecting title to or possession of All actions may be commenced and tried
real property, or interest therein, shall be where the plaintiff or any of the principal
commenced and tried in the proper court plaintiffs resides, or where the defendant
which has jurisdiction over the area or any of the principal defendants resides,
wherein the real property involved, or a or in case of a non-resident defendant
portion thereof, is situated. where he may be found, at the election of
the plaintiff.
Forcible entry and detainer actions shall be
commenced and tried in the municipal trial
court of the municipality or city wherein
the real property involved, or a portion
thereof, is situated.
MARCOS-ARANETA vs COURT OF APPEALS
G.R. No. 154096
The fact that FEMII's assets include real properties does not
materially change the nature of the action, for the ownership
interest of a stockholder over corporate assets is only inchoate as
the corporation, as a juridical person, solely owns such assets. It is
only upon the liquidation of the corporation that the stockholders,
depending on the type and nature of their stockownership, may
have a real inchoate right over the corporate assets, but then only
to the extent of their stockownership.
4. VENUE OF ACTIONS AGAINST
NONRESIDENTS (Rule 4 Section 3)
If any of the defendants does not reside and is not found in the Philippines, and the action
affects the personal status of the plaintiff, or any property of said defendant located in
the Philippines, the action may be commenced and tried in the court of the place where
the plaintiff resides, or where the property or any portion thereof is situated or found.
a. RESIDENCE OF A JURIDICAL ENTITY

HYATT ELEVATORS AND ESCALATORS CORP vs GOLDSTAR ELEVATORS PHILS, 473 SCRA 705
Jurisprudence has, however, settled that the place where the principal office of a
corporation is located, as stated in the articles, indeed establishes its residence. This ruling
is important in determining the venue of an action by or against a corporation, as in the
present case.
b. RESIDENCE OF FOREIGN BANK
PHILIPPINE DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORP vs CITIBANK AND BANK OF AMERICA
In the case of Citibank and BA, it is apparent that they both did not incorporate a
separate domestic corporation to represent its business interests in the Philippines.
Their Philippine branches are, as the name implies, merely branches, without a
separate legal personality from their parent company, Citibank and BA. Thus, being one
and the same entity, the funds placed by the respondents in their respective branches
in the Philippines should not be treated as deposits made by third parties subject to
deposit insurance under the PDIC Charter.
c. RESIDENCE OF A SOLE PROPRIETOR
A sole proprietorship does not possess a juridical personality separate and distinct from
the personality of the owner of the enterprise. The law merely recognizes the
existence of a sole proprietorship as a form of business organization conducted for
profit by a single individual and requires its proprietor or owner to secure licenses and
permits, register its business name, and pay taxes to the national government. Thus,
not being vested with legal personality to file this case, the sole proprietorship is not
the plaintiff in this case but rather the owner in her personal capacity.
ANG vs ANG, G.R. No. 186993
The petitioners’ complaint for collection of sum of money against
the respondents is a personal action as it primarily seeks the
enforcement of a contract. However, if the plaintiff does not
reside in the Philippines, the complaint in such case may only be
filed in the court of the place where the defendant resides.
BRIONES vs CA, G.R. No. 204444
In this case, the venue stipulation found in the subject contracts is indeed restrictive
in nature, considering that it effectively limits the venue of the actions arising
therefrom to the courts of Makati City.
To be sure, it would be inherently consistent for a complaint of this nature to
recognize the exclusive venue stipulation when it, in fact, precisely assails the validity
of the instrument in which such stipulation is contained.
Hence, pursuant to the general rules on venue, petitioner properly filed his complaint
before a court in the City of Manila where the subject property is located.
5. EFFECTS OF STIPULATIONS IN VENUE
Rule 4, Section 4
When Rule not applicable – this Rule shall not apply-
a. In those cases where a specific rule or law provides otherwise
b. Where the parties have validly agreed in writing before the filing of the action on
the exclusive venue thereof
UNION BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES vs MAUNLAD HOMES INC., G.R. No. 190071
While Section 1, Rule 4 of the Rules of Court states that ejectment actions shall be
filed in "the municipal trial court of the municipality or city wherein the real property
involved is situated," Section 4 of the same Rule provides that the rule shall not apply
"where the parties have validly agreed in writing before the filing of the action on the
exclusive venue thereof."
WHEN THE RULES ON VENUE DO NOT APPLY
LEY CONSTRUCTION vs SEDANO

The venue for personal actions shall - as a general rule - lie with the court which has
jurisdiction where the plaintiff or the defendant resides, at the election of the
plaintiff. As an exception, parties may, through a written instrument, restrict the filing
of said actions in a certain exclusive venue.
An exclusive venue stipulation is valid and binding, provided that:
(a) the stipulation on the chosen venue is exclusive in nature or in intent;
(b) it is expressed in writing by the parties thereto; and
(c) it is entered into before the filing of the suit.
HOW TO CONSTRUE VENUE STIPULATIONS
UNIMASTERS CONGLOMERATION INC. vs CA, G.R. No. 119657
Absent additional words and expressions definitely and unmistakably denoting the
parties' desire and intention that actions between them should be ventilated only at
the place selected by them— the stipulation should be construed, not as confining suits
between the parties only to that one place
It equates venue with jurisdiction; but venue has nothing to do with jurisdiction,
except in criminal actions. This is fundamental.
E. UNIFORMITY OF RULES
Uniform Procedure in Trial Courts
Section 1. The procedure in the Municipal Trial Courts shall be the same as in the
Regional Trial Courts, except:
(a) where a particular provision expressly or impliedly applies only to either of the
said courts, or
(b) in civil cases governed by the Rule on Summary Procedure.
Section 2. The term “ Municipal Trial Courts’ as used in these Rules shall include
Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts in Cities, Municipal Trial Courts,
and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts.
F. KINDS OF PLEADINGS
(Rule 6, Sec. 1)
INITIATORY PLEADING RESPONSIVE PLEADING
• A pleading which commences an action • A pleading which responds to the adverse
containing plaintiff’s cause or causes of party’s pleading.
action
• It is not required to be verified as a
• It is required to be verified general rule, unless the rules or law
otherwise requires.
• It should contain a certification of non-
forum shopping • It need not contain a certificate of non-
forum shopping, unless it is accompanied
•Payment of docket and other lawful fees
by counter-claim or cross-claim.
are required (Rule 141)
• Payment of docket and other lawful fees
are not required.
1. KINDS OF PLEADINGS
A. COMPLAINT (R6,S3)
The complaint is the pleading alleging the plaintiff’s or claiming party’s cause or causes
of action. The names and residences of the plaintiff and defendant must be stated in
the complaint.
Example:
B borrowed from A the amount of 1,000,000.00 which he promised to pay on or before
December 25, 2016. B failed to pay the said loaned amount on December 25, 2016,
and despite demand from A, he failed to pay the same. A filed a complaint for sum of
money before the RTC of Tagbilaran.
A--------------------------vs--------------------B
(Creditor) (Original Complaint)
(Debtor)
B. ANSWER (R6,S4)
An answer is a pleading in which a defending party sets forth his or her defenses.
i. Negative Defenses (R6,S5(a))
A negative defense is the specific denial of the material fact or facts
alleged in the pleading of the claimant essential to his or her cause or
causes of action.
Example:
B denies the truth of the allegations in par. 7 of the complaint alleging that he
owes A 1,000,000.00, the truth of the matter being that it is A who owes B the same
amount.
Here, B absolutely denies his liability and alleges what to him are the facts.
B. ANSWER (R6,S4)
ii. Negative Pregnant

A negative pregnant is a negative implying also an affirmative. Although stated in
a negative form really admits the allegations to which it relates.
Example:
A complaint alleges: A extended a loan to B in the amount of P1,000,000.00 on December
25, 2016, in Tagbilaran City.
B in his answer alleges: B specifically denies that A extended a loan to B in the amount of
P1,000,000.00 on December 25, 2016, in Tagbilaran City.
B. ANSWER (R6,S4)
iii. Affirmative Defenses (R6,S5(b))
An allegation of a new matter which, while hypothetically admitting the material
allegations in the pleading of the claimant, would nevertheless prevent or bar
recovery by him or her.
The affirmative defenses include the following, to wit:

1) Fraud, 5) Illegality
9) Discharge in bankruptcy
2) Statute of Limitations 6) Statute of Frauds 10) Any
other matter by way
3) Release 7) Estoppel
of confession and
4) Payment 8) Former recovery
B. ANSWER (R6,S4)
iii. Affirmative Defenses

Affirmative defenses may also include grounds for the dismissal of a complaint,
specifically:
1. That the court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter;
2. That there is another action pending between the same parties for the same
cause (litis pendentia); or
3. That the action is barred by a prior judgment.
C. COUNTERCLAIMS (R6,S6)
A counterclaim is any claim which a defending party may have against an opposing
party.
i. Compulsory Counterclaims (R6,S7)
A compulsory counterclaim is a claim for money or any relief, which a
defending party may have against an opposing party, which at the time of the
suit arises out of or is necessarily connected with, the same transaction or
occurrence that is the subject matter of the plaintiff’s complaint.
(Manuel C. Bungcayao Sr. vs. Fort Ilocandia Property Holdings and Development
Corp., G.R. No. 170483, April 19, 2010)
Example: B borrowed from A the amount of 1,000,000.00 which he promised to pay on
or before December 25, 2016. B failed to pay the said loaned amount on December 25,
2016, and despite demand from A, he failed to pay the same. A filed a complaint for
sum of money before the RTC of Tagbilaran.
If B has a claim against A which arises out of the same transaction or series of
transaction or occurrence which is the subject matter of the claim of A, then he may
raise it in his Answer as a compulsory counterclaim.
(Compulsory Counterclaim)
A--------------------------vs--------------------B
(Creditor) (Original Complaint) (Debtor)
i. Compulsory Counterclaims (R6,S7)
Elements:
a. it arises out of, or is necessarily connected with the transaction or
occurrence which is the subject matter of the opposing party's claim;
b. it does not require for its adjudication the presence of 3rd parties over
whom the court cannot acquire jurisdiction; and
c. cognizable by the regular courts of justice and must be within the
jurisdiction of the court both as to the amount and the nature thereof, except that
in an original action before the RTC, the counterclaim may be considered
compulsory, regardless of the amount.
A compulsory counterclaim not raised in the same action is barred, unless
otherwise allowed by these Rules.
ii. Permissive counterclaim
A pleading asserting a claim which, being cognizable by the regular courts of
justice, which does not arise out of or is not connected with the transaction or
occurrence constituting the subject of the opposing party’s claim and require
for its adjudication the presence of third parties of whom the court can acquire
jurisdiction.
The rule in permissive counterclaim is that for the trial court to acquire
jurisdiction, the counter-claimant is bound to pay the prescribed docket fees.
(Manuel C. Bungcayao Sr. vs. Fort Ilocandia Property Holdings and
Development Corporation, G.R. No. 170483, April 19, 2010)
Example: B borrowed from A the amount of 1,000,000.00 which he promised to pay on
or before December 25, 2016. B failed to pay the said loaned amount on December 25,
2016, and despite demand from A, he failed to pay the same. A filed a complaint for
sum of money before the RTC of Tagbilaran.
If B has a claim against A which does not arise out of the same transaction or series of
transaction or occurrence which is the subject matter of the claim of A, then he may
raise it in his Answer as a permissive counterclaim.
(Permissive Counterclaim)
A--------------------------vs--------------------B
(Creditor) (Original Complaint) (Debtor)
The criteria to determine whether the counterclaim is compulsory or permissive are as
follows:
(a) Are issues of fact and law raised by the claim and by the counterclaim largely the same?
(b) Would res judicata bar a subsequent suit on defendant’s claim, absent the compulsory rule?
(c) Will substantially the same evidence support or refute plaintiff’s claim as well as defendant’s
counterclaim?
(d) Is there any logical relations between the claim and the counterclaim?
A positive answer to all four questions would indicate that the counterclaim is compulsory.
(Manuel C. Bungcayao Sr. vs. Fort Ilocandia Property Holdings and Development
Corporation, G.R. No. 170483, April 19, 2010; Lafarge Cement Phil., Inc. v. Continental
Cement Corp citing NAMARCO v. Federation of United Namarco Distributors)
iii. Effect on the counterclaim when the complaint is dismissed (R17,S2)
If a counterclaim has been pleaded by a defendant prior to the service upon
him or her of the plaintiff's motion for dismissal, the dismissal shall be limited to the
complaint.
The dismissal shall be without prejudice to the right of the defendant to
prosecute his or her counterclaim in a separate action unless within fifteen (15)
calendar days from notice of the motion he or she manifests his or her
preference to have his or her counterclaim resolved in the same action. Unless
otherwise specified in the order, a dismissal under this paragraph shall be without
prejudice.
WHEN COUNTERCLAIM EXCEEDS COURT JURISDICTION
CALO vs AJAX INTERNATIONAL, INC., G.R. No. L-22485, March 13, 1968
FACTS:
Benavides filed a complaint against Calo before Municipal Court of Manila. A judgment by default was entered
and a writ of execution was issued against Calo. The case was later remanded for further proceedings
In turn, Calo filed before CFI-Agusan a complaint against Ajax asking for either complete delivery of Charge
Order No. 37071 of that she be relieved from paying P855 and that she be indemnified for P12,000 in attorney's
fees, damages and expenses of litigation.
Instead of filing an answer, Ajax moved for the dismissal of the case on the ground that the subject matter
involved was related to a pending case filed in Manila by Benavides. The trial court (CFI-Agusan) sustained the
motion and dismissed the case. Plaintiff filed a motion for consideration but was denied.
The dismissal of the case in CFI-Agusan was premised on the theory that the petitioner’s claim is a compulsory
counterclaim to the case filed before MTC Manila.
WHEN COUNTERCLAIM EXCEEDS COURT JURISDICTION
CALO V. AJAX INTERNATIONAL, INC., G.R. No. L-22485, March 13, 1968
ISSUE:
Whether or not the case filed before the CFI-Agusan is a compulsory counterclaim.
RULING:
NO. The plaintiff’s claim in CFI-Agusan is not a compulsory counterclaim for the simple reason that
the amount thereof exceeds the jurisdiction of the Municipal Trial Court. The rule that a
compulsory counterclaim not set up is barred, when applied to the municipal court, presupposes
that the amount is within the said court’s jurisdiction. Otherwise, it would result to an absurd
situation where a claim must be filed within the MTC which is prohibited from taking cognizance
of, being beyond its jurisdiction.
D. CROSS-CLAIMS (R6,S8)
A cross-claim is any claim by one party against a co-party arising out of the transaction
or occurrence that is the subject matter either of the original action or of a
counterclaim therein. Such cross-claim may cover all or part of the original claim.
E. THIRD (FOURTH, ETC.) PARTY COMPLAINTS(R6,S11)
A third (fourth, etc.)-party complaint is a claim that a defending party may, with leave
of court, file against a person not a party to the action, called the third (fourth, etc.)-
party defendant, for contribution, indemnity, subrogation or any other relief, in
respect of his or her opponent’s claim.
WHEN CAN THE COURT DENY A THIRD(FOURTH,ETC.)-PARTY COMPLAINT
The third (fourth, etc.)-party complaint shall be denied admission, and the court shall
require the defendant to institute a separate action, where:
(a) the third (fourth, etc.)-party defendant cannot be located within thirty (30)
calendar days from the grant of such leave;
(b) matters extraneous to the issue in the principal case are raised; or
(c) the effect would be to introduce a new and separate controversy into the action.
i. Bringing in new parties (R6,S12)
When the presence of parties other than those to the original action is required
for the granting of complete relief in the determination of a counterclaim or cross-
claim, the court shall order them to be brought in as defendants, if jurisdiction over
them can be obtained.
i. Answers to third party complaint (R6,S13)
A third (fourth, etc.)-party defendant may allege in his or her answer his or
her defenses, counterclaims or cross-claims, including such defenses that the third
(fourth, etc.)-party plaintiff may have against the original plaintiff’s claim. In
proper cases, he or she may also assert a counterclaim against the original
plaintiff in respect of the latter’s claim against the third-party plaintiff.
F. COMPLAINT-IN-INTERVENTION (R19)
A pleading filed before the court with leave of court by a person who has a legal
interest in the matter in litigation, or against either or all of the original parties, or is
so situated as to be adversely affected by a distribution of the court or of an officer
thereof.
G. REPLY (R6,S10)
A reply is a pleading, the office or function of which is to deny, or allege facts in denial
or avoidance of new matters alleged in, or relating to, said actionable document.
A reply is allowed ONLY if the defendant's answer has an actionable document.
In the event of an actionable document attached to the reply, the defendant may file a
rejoinder if the same is based solely on an actionable document.
All new matters alleged in the answer are deemed controverted.

If the plaintiff wishes to interpose any claims arising out of the new matters so alleged,
such claims shall be set forth in an amended or supplemental complaint. However, the
plaintiff may file a reply only if the defending party attaches an actionable document
to his or her answer
H. COUNTER-COUNTERCLAIMS AND COUNTER-CROSSCLAIMS (R6,S9)
A counterclaim may be asserted against A cross-claim may also be filed
against an
an original counter-claimant. original cross-
claimant
2. PLEADINGS ALLOWED IN SMALL CLAIM
CASES AND CASES COVERED BY THE RULES ON
SUMMARY PROCEDURE
The pleadings which may be filed under the Rules on Small Claims are as follows:
1. Statement of Claim (Form 1-SCC-Sec. 5)
2. Response (Sec. 11)
3. Permissive counterclaim (Sec. 13)
4. Compulsory counterclaim (Sec. 13)
The pleadings allowed under the Rules on Summary Procedure are complaints,
compulsory counterclaim, cross-claim pleaded in the Answer and the answers thereto.
3. PARTS AND CONTENTS OF A PLEADING
(RULE 7)
A. CAPTION AND BODY OF A PLEADING(R7,S1 and S2)
The caption sets forth the:

1. Name of the court;
2. The title of the action; and
- indicates the names of the parties
3. The docket number if assigned
(RULE 7)
The body of the pleading sets forth the following:
1. Its designation;
2. The allegations of the party’s claims or defenses;
3. The relief prayed for; and
4. The date of the pleading.
The allegations in the body of a pleading shall be made in the following manner:
1. It shall be divided into paragraphs so numbered as to be readily identified;
2. Each of which shall contain a statement of a single set of circumstances so
far as that can be done with convenience;
3. A paragraph may be referred to by its number in all succeeding pleadings.
(RULE 7)
Headings in the pleadings shall be made as follows:

1. When two or more causes of action are joined, the statement of the first
shall be prefaced by the words “first cause of action,” for the second by “second
cause of action,” and so on for the others.
2. When one or more paragraphs in the answer are addressed to one of several
causes of action in the complaint, they shall be prefaced by the words “answer
to the first cause of action” or “answer to the second cause of action” and so on;
and when one or more paragraphs of the answer are addressed to several causes of
action, they shall be prefaced by words to that effect.
(RULE 7)
The pleading shall specify the relief sought, but it may add a general prayer for such
further or other relief as may be deemed just or equitable.
A court cannot grant a relief not prayed for in the pleadings or in excess of what is
being sought by the party.
A general prayer enables the court to award reliefs supported by the complaint or
other pleadings even if these are reliefs nor specifically prayed for in the complaint.
Every pleading shall be dated.

(RULE 7)
ADDITIONAL CONTENTS OF THE PLEADING (R7,S6)
Every pleading stating a party’s claims or defenses shall, in addition to those mandated
by Section 2, Rule 7, state the following:
(a) Names of witnesses who will be presented to prove a party’s claim or defense;
(b) Summary of the witnesses’ intended testimonies, provided that the judicial
affidavits of said witnesses shall be attached to the pleading and form an integral part
thereof. Only witnesses whose judicial affidavits are attached to the pleading shall be
presented by the parties during trial. Except if a party presents meritorious reasons as
basis for the admission of additional witnesses, no other witness or affidavit shall be
heard or admitted by the court; and
(c) Documentary and object evidence in support of the allegations contained in the
pleading.
(RULE 7)
B. SIGNATURE AND ADDRESS (R7, S3)
(i) EFFECTS OF THE SIGNATURE OF COUNSEL IN A PLEADING
The signature of counsel constitutes as:
1. Certificate by him or her that he or she has read the pleading and document;
2. That to the best of his or her knowledge, information, and belief formed after an
inquiry reasonable under the circumstances;
3. It is not being presented for any improper purpose, such as to harass, cause
unnecessary delay, or needlessly increase the cost of litigation;
4. The claims, defenses, and other legal contentions are warranted by existing law or
jurisprudence, or by a non-frivolous argument for extending, modifying, or reversing
existing jurisprudence;
(RULE 7)
(i) EFFECTS OF THE SIGNATURE OF COUNSEL IN A PLEADING
The signature of counsel constitutes as:
5. The factual contentions have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, will
likely have evidentiary support after availment of the modes of discovery under these
Rules; and
6. The denials of factual contentions are warranted on the evidence or, if specifically
so identified, are reasonably based on belief or a lack of information.
(RULE 7)
CONSEQUENCES OF THE VIOLATION OF THE RULE
If the court determines, on motion or motu proprio and after notice and hearing, that
this Rule has been violated, it may:
1. Impose an appropriate sanction or
2. Refer such violation to the proper office for disciplinary action, on any attorney, law
firm, or party that violated the rule, or is responsible for the violation.
(RULE 7)
SANCTIONS THAT MAY BE IMPOSED AGAINST THE LAW FIRM
Absent exceptional circumstances, a law firm shall be held jointly and severally liable
for a violation committed by its partner, associate, or employee which may include the
following, to wit:
1. non-monetary directive or sanction;
2. an order to pay a penalty in court; or
3. if imposed on motion and warranted for effective deterrence, an order directing
payment to the movant of part or all of the reasonable attorney’s fees and other
expenses directly resulting from the violation, including attorney’s fees for the filing of
the motion for sanction.
(RULE 7)
C. VERIFICATION (R7, S4)
Verification is a statement under oath. It includes both the actual swearing to the truth
of the statements by the subscriber and also the certification thereto by the notary or
other officer authorized to administer oath.
RULE:
Pleadings need not be under oath or verified EXCEPT when otherwise
specifically required by law or rule.
HOW WILL BE THE PLEADING BE VERIFIED?
Pleading is verified by an affidavit of an affiant duly authorized to sign said
verification.
(RULE 7)
PURPOSE OF VERIFICATION
The policy behind the requirement of verification is to guard against the filing of
fraudulent pleadings. Litigants run the risk of perjury if they sign the verification
despite knowledge that the stated allegations are not true or are products of mere
speculation: Verification is not an empty ritual or a meaningless formality [...] For
what is at stake is the matter of verity attested by the sanctity of an oath to secure an
assurance that the allegations in the pleading have been made in good faith or are true
and correct and not merely speculative. (Hubilla v. HSY Marketing, Ltd. Co)
(RULE 7)
WHO MAY SIGN THE VERIFICATION OTHER THAN THE PLEADER
A party’s representative, lawyer or any person who personally knows the truth
of the facts alleged in the pleading.
EFFECT IF THE PERSON WHO SIGNED THE VERIFICATION HAS NO AUTHORITY
Dismissal of the complaint since the court has no jurisdiction over the
complaint and the plaintiff.
EFFECT OF A DEFECTIVE VERIFICATION
A pleading required to be verified that contains a verification based on “information
and belief” or upon “knowledge, information and belief.” or lacks a proper
verification, shall be treated as an unsigned pleading.
(RULE 7)
Case law provides that non-compliance with the verification requirement does not
render the pleading defective since it is only affects the form of the pleading.
Non-compliance with verification does not necessarily render it fatally defective (Vda.
De Formoso v. PNB)
The Court may order its submission or correction or act on the pleading if the
attending circumstances are such that strict compliance with the Rule may be
dispensed with in order that the ends of justice may be served thereby (Id.)
However, verification is merely a formal, not jurisdictional requirement. It will not
result in the outright dismissal of the case since courts may simply order the correction
of a defective verification. (Hubilla v. HSY Marketing, Ltd. Co.)
(RULE 7)
HEIRS OF JOSEFINA GABRIEL V. CEBRERO CITING ALTRES, ET AL. V. EMPLEO, ET AL.
As to verification, non-compliance therewith or a defect therein does not necessarily
render the pleading fatally defective. The court may order its submission or correction
or act on the pleading if the attending circumstances are such that strict compliance
with the Rule may be dispensed with in order that the ends of justice may be served
thereby.
Verification is deemed substantially complied with when one who has ample knowledge
to swear to the truth of the allegations in the complaint or petition signs the
verification, and when matters alleged in the petition have been made in good faith or
are true and correct.
(RULE 7)
A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC (RULE ON DECLARATION OF ABSOLUTE NULLITY OF VOID
MARRIAGES AND ANNULMENT OF VOIDABLE MARRIAGES)
Section 8. Answer.
(1) The respondent shall file his answer within fifteen days from service of summons,
or within thirty days from the last issue of publication in case of service of summons by
publication. The answer must be verified by the respondent himself and not by counsel
or attorney-in-fact.
(2) If the respondent fails to file an answer, the court shall not declare him or her in
default.
(3) Where no answer is filed or if the answer does not tender an issue, the court shall
order the public prosecutor to investigate whether collusion exists between the
parties.
(RULE 7)
A.M. No. 02-11-11-SC (RULE ON LEGAL SEPARATION)
Section 5. Answer.
(a) The respondent shall file his answer within fifteen days from receipt of summons,
or within thirty days from the last issue of publication in case of service of summons by
publication. The answer must be verified by respondent himself and not by counsel or
attorney-in-fact.
(b) If the respondent fails to file an answer, the court shall not declare him in default.
(c) Where no answer is filed/or if the answer does not tender an issue the court shall
order the public prosecutor to investigate whether collusion exists between the
parties.
(RULE 7)
D. CERTIFICATE AGAINST FORUM SHOPPING (R7, S5)
The certification against forum shopping is a sworn statement in which the plaintiff or
principal party certifies in a complaint or initiatory pleading to the following matters:
(a) that he or she has not commenced any action or filed any claim involving the same
issues in any court, tribunal, or quasi-judicial agency and, to the best of his or her
knowledge, no such other action or claim is pending therein;
(b) that if there is such other pending action or claim, a complete statement of the
present status thereof; and
(c) that if he or she should therefore learn that the same or similar action or claim has
been filed or is pending, he shall report that fact within five (5) calendar days
therefrom to the court wherein his aforesaid complaint or initiatory pleading has been
filed.
(RULE 7)
(i) INITIATORY PLEADING

A pleading which commences an action containing plaintiff’s cause or causes of action.
• It is required to be verified
• It should contain a certification of non-forum shopping
•Payment of docket and other lawful fees are required (Rule 141)
(RULE 7)
(ii) CERTIFICATE MADE BY A NATURAL PERSON
As a rule, the plaintiff or principal party shall sign the certification against forum
shopping since he / she has the personal knowledge of the existence of cases filed
before the court.
The authorization of the affiant to act on behalf of a party, whether in the form of a
secretary’s certificate or a special power of attorney, should be attached to the
pleading.
Generally, a counsel cannot sign the certificate of non-forum shopping since the
attestation contained in the certificate of non-forum shopping requires personal
knowledge by the party who executed the same.
(RULE 7)
(ii) CERTIFICATE MADE BY A JURIDICAL PERSON
Board Resolution is required in signing the certificate of non-forum shopping in case of
a corporation.
The physical act of signing may be performed, on behalf of the corporate entity, only
by specifically authorized individuals for the simple reason that corporations, as
artificial persons, cannot personally do the task themselves.
By way of exception based on the merits of the case and compelling reason, corporate
counsel can sign the certification of non-forum shopping for and in behalf of the
corporation.
(RULE 7)
COLEGIO MEDICO-FARMACEUTICO DE FILIPINAS, INC. V. LIM
A corporation exercises its powers and transacts its business through its board of
directors or trustees. Accordingly, unless authorized by the board of directors or
trustees, corporate officers and agents cannot exercise any corporate power pertaining
to the corporation. A board resolution expressly authorizing the officers and agents is
therefore required. However, in filing a suit, jurisprudence has allowed the president
of a corporation to sign the verification and the certification of non-forum shopping
even without a board resolution as said officer is presumed to have sufficient
knowledge to swear to the truth of the allegations stated in the complaint or petition.
(RULE 7)
EFFECTS OF FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE CERTIFICATION ON NON-FORUM SHOPPING
Failure to comply with the requirements shall have the following effects:
1. It shall not be curable by mere amendment of the complaint or other initiatory
pleading;
2. It shall cause for the dismissal of the case without prejudice, unless otherwise
provided, upon motion and after hearing.
As to certification against forum shopping, non-compliance therewith or a defect
therein, unlike in verification, is generally not curable by its subsequent submission or
correction thereof, unless there is a need to relax the Rule on the ground of
“substantial compliance” or presence of “special circumstances or compelling
reasons.” (Heirs of Josefina Gabriel v. Cebrero citing Altres, et al. v. Empleo, et al.)
(RULE 7)
E. FORUM SHOPPING
Forum shopping is the institution of two or more actions involving the same parties for
the same cause of action, either simultaneously or successively, on the supposition that
one or the other court would come outwith a favorable disposition (Brown-Araneta v.
Araneta, G.R. 190814, October 09, 2013)
Forum shopping is the act of a litigant who repetitively availed of several judicial
remedies in different courts, simultaneously or successively, all substantially founded
on the same transactions and the same essential facts and circumstances, and all
raising substantially the same issues, either pending in or already resolved by some
other court, to increase the chances of obtaining a favorable decision if not in one
court, then in another. (Ma. Victoria m. Galang vs. Peakhold Finance Corporation and
the Register of Deeds of Caloocan City, G.R. No. 233922, January 24, 2018)
(RULE 7)
E. FORUM SHOPPING
Forum shopping can be committed in three (3) ways:
(1) by filing multiple cases based on the same cause of action and with the same
prayer, the previous case not having been resolved yet (where the ground for dismissal
is litis pendentia);
(2) by filing multiple cases based on the same cause of action and with the same
prayer, the previous case having been finally resolved (where the ground for dismissal
is res judicata); and
(3) by filing multiple cases based on the same cause of action but with different
prayers (splitting of causes of action, where the ground for dismissal is also either litis
pendentia or res judicata
(Ma. Victoria M. Galang vs. Peakhold Finance Corporation and the Register of Deeds of Caloocan
City, G.R. No. 233922, January 24, 2018)
(RULE 7)
E. FORUM SHOPPING
To determine whether a party violated the rule against forum shopping, it is essential
to ask whether a final judgment in one case will amount to res judicata in another or
whether the following elements of litis pendentia are present:
(a) identity of parties, or at least such parties as representing the same interests in
both actions;
(b) identity of rights asserted, and reliefs prayed for, the relief being founded on the
same facts; and
(c) the identity of the two (2) preceding particulars, such that any judgment rendered
in the other action will, regardless of which party is successful, amount to res judicata
in the action under consideration.
(Ma. Victoria M. Galang vs. Peakhold Finance Corporation and the Register of Deeds of Caloocan
City, G.R. No. 233922, January 24, 2018)

Rules 4,5,6,7

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Rules 4,5,6,7

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

RULES 4,5,6,7

b. Legal separation (A.M. No. 02-11-11- SC)

c. Adoption (A.M. No. 02-6- 02- SC)

a. RESIDENCE OF A JURIDICAL ENTITY

LEY CONSTRUCTION vs SEDANO

ii. Negative Pregnant

The affirmative defenses include the following, to wit:

iii. Affirmative Defenses

All new matters alleged in the answer are deemed controverted.

The caption sets forth the:

Headings in the pleadings shall be made as follows:

Every pleading shall be dated.

(i) INITIATORY PLEADING

You might also like