-
7/28/2019 Rule 62 - Interpleader.doc
1/3
Rule 62 - Interpleader
Section 1
Concept of Interpleader:
It is a remedy afforded to protect him against a double vexation
in respect of one
liability (NOT against a double liability)
A person who has property in his possession OR an obligation to
render
Without claiming any right OR claims an interest but is not
disputed by both
parties
Asks the claimants be required to litigate among themselves to
determine in
finality who is entitled to the thing or right.
Possessor or has an obligation: Plaintiff
Claimants: Interpleaders
Action: Complaint of Interpleader
Under the present Rules, the remedy is available REGARDLESS of
the nature of
the subject matter of the controversy. (ex. real AND
personal)
As opposed to the old rules that states that interpleader suit
is proper if the
subject matter is personal property only or the performance of
an obligation.
Essence:
Disavowal of the petitioner on the interest in the property
Deposit the property or funds in controversy with the court
(consignation)
Rule on Justice and Equity: the plaintiff may not continue to
benefit from the
property or funds in litigation during the pendency of the suit
at the expense of
whoever will ultimately be decided as entitled thereto.
Jurisdiction in Interpleader cases
Jurisdiction the authority to try & decide a case
Determined by the nature and value of the subject matter
IF to determine ownership of real property (real action) RTC
IF personal liability - depends on the amount, MTC (below 10K)
or RTC
VenueSubject matter is real object where the property is
located
Subject matter is personal object residence of plaintiff, OR
election of plaintiff
Requisites: (PECS)
1. Plaintiff claims no interest in the subject matter or his
claim is not disputed
2. at least two or more Conflicting claims
3. parties must make Effective claims
4. Subject matter must be one and the same
Case: Vda de Camilo vs Arcamo
Facts:
-Adjacent lots owned by De Camilo and Franciscos respectively, a
bldg was built
by Ong Peng Kee and Adelia Ong in the middle thus encroaching
both land
-Separate cases of Unlawful Entry filed by petitioners against
defendant thus
causing him to file an action of interpleader
Held:
- interpleader was not proper: no conflicting claims and subject
matter was not
one and the same
- plaintiff had interest in the subject matter: prolongation of
their occupancy
- assuming that an inerpleader action is proper, jurisdiction is
with CFI, not
Justice of the Peace
- if ownership -> RTC
- if incapable of pecuniary estimation -> RTC
- if possession (forcible entry and unlawful detainer) ->
MTC
-
7/28/2019 Rule 62 - Interpleader.doc
2/3
Case: Makati Devt Corp. vs Tanjuatco
Facts:
- Makati Devt did not pay due to the unresolved issue of who
should be entitled
to the P5K, alleging that the amount is insignificant but to
compel defendants to
litigate among themselves
Held:- amount is significant in determining jurisdiction: which
is P5000+
- which court had jurisdiction over the claim
- RA 296: MTC shall have exclusive and original jurisdiction in
all civil cases, in
which the demand or value of property amounts to not more than
P10K
- MTC had jurisdiction because of the amount involved
Comparison: Since the procedure with RTC and MTC is the same,
could an
interpleader be brought to either MTC or RTC? - there are
exceptions (Rule 5,
ROC)
Case: Ramos vs Ramos
Facts:
- daughter of one of the co-owners of the land sold the land to
defendants
causing issues of ownership between the previous co-owners in
determining who
owns the land
Held:
- what was involved was a real action, because the interpleader
forced the heirs
to decide the ownership of the land
- the complaint was brought to the estate of the deceased
owners
-petitioners were asserting their right as heirs which is merely
inchoate
- distinguish action in personam vs action in rem in terms of
subject matter
- personam: personal liability
- in rem: real property
- why the need to distinguish? to be able to determine which
court has
jurisdiction
- personam: depends on whether capable of pecuniary estimation;
if capable,
MTC or RTC depending on the amount; if not capable, RTC
- in rem: if ownership, RTC
Case: Ocampo vs Tirona
Facts:
-Tirona didnt want to pay the increased rentals of Ocampo until
it was
determined who was the real owner of the land.
Held:
- Tirona should have filed IMMEDIATELY an interpleader action to
determine
who was the real owner and has the right to the rentals
- lost the character of good faith due to the delay
Cases where interpleader was held improper:
1. Not available to one whomwas already held liable
- an action for interpleader is too late when filed after
judgment has been
rendered against him in favor of one of the contending
claimants, especially if
he had notice of the conflicting claims prior to the rendition
of judgment
- it would be, in effect, a collateral attack upon the final
judgment in the civil
case
Section 2
*There must be a order requiring defendants to litigate between
themselves
- it is necessary that there be declaration to this effect
before the defendants may
litigate among themselves
- the order of the trial court requiring the parties to file
their answers is to all
intents and purposes an order to interplead, substantially and
essentially, and
-
7/28/2019 Rule 62 - Interpleader.doc
3/3
therefore in compliance with the ROC (Mesina vs IAC, 1986)
Section 3
Section 4
* The filing of a MTD of an interpleader is allowed on the
ground of improprietyof the action or other appropriate grounds
(Rule 16, ROC)
- if denied, must file answer within he remaining period, not
less than 5 days
from notice of denial
Section 5
* If the claimant fails to plead within 15 days from service of
summons upon
him, the court may, on motion, declare him in default. The court
shall render
judgment barring him from any claim with respect to the subject
matter
* Additional pleadings arenalso expressly authorized under ths
section:
counterclaims, cross claims, third-party claims and other
responsive pleadings
Section 6
* The present rule contemplates a Pre-trial in accordane with
the rules before the
court proceeds wihpth the determination of their respective
rights and adjudicate
their several claims
Section 7
*Costs, docket fees, and other lawful fees, as well as
reasonable
expenses of litigation are now a lien or charge upon the subject
matter
