UP 2012 Remedial Law (Civil Procedure).pdf

8/12/2019 UP 2012 Remedial Law (Civil Procedure).pdf

1/127

RRREEEMMMEEEDDDIIIAAALLL

LAWAR OPERATIONS COMMISSION 2012EXECUTIVE COMMITTEERamon Carlo Marcaida |CommissionerRaymond Velasco Mara Kriska Chen |Deputy CommissionersBarbie Kaye Perez |SecretaryCarmen Cecilia Veneracion |TreasurerHazel Angeline Abenoja|Auditor

COMMITTEE HEADSEleanor Balaquiao Mark Xavier Oyales|AcadsMonique Morales Katleya Kate Belderol Kathleen Mae Tuason D) RachelMiranda D) |Special LecturesPatricia Madarang Marinella Felizmenio |SecretariatVictoria Caranay |Publicity and PromotionsLoraine Saguinsin Ma. Luz Baldueza |MarketingBenjamin Joseph Geronimo Jose Lacas|LogisticsAngelo Bernard Ngo Annalee Toda|HRAnne Janelle Yu Alyssa Carmelli Castillo |MerchandiseGraciello Timothy Reyes |LayoutCharmaine Sto. Domingo Katrina Maniquis |Mock BarKrizel Malabanan Karren de Chavez |Bar CandidatesWelfareKarina Kirstie Paola Ayco Ma. Ara Garcia |EventsOPERATIONS HEADS

Charles Icasiano Katrina Rivera |Hotel OperationsMarijo Alcala Marian Salanguit |Day-OperationsJauhari Azis |Night-OperationsVivienne Villanueva Charlaine Latorre|FoodKris Francisco Rimban Elvin Salindo |TranspoPaula Plaza |Linkages

Civil Procedure

UPLAWBAROPERATIONSCOMMISSION

BAR REVIEWERUP

LAW

2012

REMEDIAL LAW TEAM 2012Subject Head|EdenCatherine MopiaCiv Pro Subject Heads|Gianna De Jesus SamanthaSy Subject Writers | MarijoAlcala Jian Boller AltheaOaminal Giselle Mauhay Zharmai Garcia Tina ReyesJoseph Go II Marie CristineReyes Nickie Bolos MaeAnn Acha Ma-anne RosalesJill Hernandez Gene LopezJoanne BatimanaLAYOUT TEAM 2012Layout Artists | AlyannaApacible Noel Luciano RMMeneses Jenin Velasquez Mara Villegas NaomiQuimpo Leslie Octaviano Yas Refran Cris BernardinoLayout Head|GracielloTimothy Reyes


2/127

REMEDIAL LAW REVIEWER

Civil ProcedureREMEDIAL LAW

riminal ProcedureCivil Procedure

Evidencepecial Proceedings

General PrinciplesJurisdiction

I. ActionsII. Cause of Action

III. Parties to Civil ActionsIV. VenueV. PleadingsVI. SummonsVII. MotionsVIII. Dismissal of ActionsIX. Pre-TrialX. InterventionXI. SubpoenaXII. Modes of DiscoveryXIII. TrialXIV. Demurrer to EvidenceXV. Judgments and Final OrdersXVI. Post-Judgment RemediesXVII. Execution, Satisfaction and

Effect of JudgmentsXVIII. Provisional RemediesXIX. Special Civil Actions

GENERAL PRINCIPLESA. Concept of Remedial LawB. Substantive Law as Distinguished fromRemedial LawC. Rule-making Power of the Supreme CourtD. Nature of Philippine Courts

A. Concept of Remedial Law

ConceptRemedial statute or statutes:(1) relating to remedies or modes of procedure;(2) do not take away or create vested rights;(3) BUT operate in furtherance of rights already

existing. [Riano citing Systems FactorCorporation v NLRC (2000)]

The Rules of Court, promulgated by authority of law,have the force and effect of law, if not in conflictwith positive law [Inchausti & Co v de Leon(1913)].The rule is subordinate to the statute, and in case of

conflict, the statute will prevail. [Shioji v Harvey(1922)].

ApplicabilityThe Rules of Court is applicable in ALL COURTS,except as otherwise provided by the SC [Rule 1, Sec.2].

It governs the procedure to be observed in civil orcriminal actions and special proceedings [Rule 1,Sec. 3]. It does not apply to the following cases:[ELCINO](1) Election cases,

(2) Land registration cases,(3) Cadastral cases,(4) Naturalization cases,(5) Insolvency proceedings(6) Other cases not herein provided forExcept by analogy or in a suppletory character andwhenever practicable and convenient [Rule 4, Sec.4]

Prospectivity/RetroactivityThe Rules of Court are not penal statutes and cannotbe given retroactive effect [Bermejo v Barrios(1970)].

Rules of procedure may be made applicable toactions pending and undetermined at the time oftheir passage, and are deemed retroactive in thatsense and to that extent. [In the Matter to Declarein Contempt of Court Hon. Simeon Datumanong(2006)].

B. Substantive Law as Distinguishedfrom Remedial Law

Remedial law or Procedural law provides a method of enforcing the rights

established by substantive law; prescribes the method of enforcing rights or

obtaining redress for their invasion. [Bustos vLucero(1948)]

Judicial process for enforcing rights and dutiesrecognized by substantive law and for justlyadministering remedy and redress for a disregardor infraction of them. [Fabian v Desierto(1998)]

Substantive law is that part of the law which creates, defines and

regulates rights concerning life, liberty, orproperty, or the powers of agencies orinstrumentalities for the administration of publicaffairs [Bustos v Lucero(1948)]

C. Rule-making Power of the SupremeCourt

The Rules of Court was adopted andpromulgated by the Supreme Court pursuant tothe provisions of Sec 5(5) of Art. VIII of theConstitution, vesting in it the power to:- Promulgate rules concerning the protection

and enforcement of constitutional rights,

pleading, practice and procedure in allcourts, the admission to the practice oflaw, the Integrated Bar, and legalassistance to the underprivileged.

The power to promulgate rules of pleading,practice, and procedure is no longer shared bythe Supreme Court with Congress, more so withthe executive [Riano citing Echegaray vSecretary of Justice (1999)]


3/127


78

1. Limitations on the rule-making powerof the Supreme Court

Sec 5(5) of Art. VIII of the Constitution sets forththe limitations to the power: [SUS]- that the rules shall provide a simplified and

inexpensive procedure for speedy dispositionof cases;

- that the rules shall be uniform for courts ofthe same grade; and- that the rules shall not diminish, increase ormodify substantive rights.

2. Power of the Supreme Court to amendand suspend procedural rules

Power to amend remedial laws The constitutional faculty of the Court to

promulgate rules of practice and procedurenecessarily carries with it the power to overturnjudicial precedents on points of remedial lawthrough the amendment of the Rules of Court.[Pinga v Heirs of Santiago (2006)].

The SC has the sole prerogative to amend, repeal,or even establish new rules for a more simplifiedand inexpensive process, and the speedydisposition of case [Neypes v CA (2005)]

Power to suspend remedial laws It is within the inherent power of the Supreme

Court to suspend its own rules in a particular casein order to do justice [De Guia v De Guia(2001)].

When the operation of rules will lead to aninjustice or if their application tends to subvertand defeat instead of promote and enhancejustice, their suspension is justified [Republic v CA(1978)].

There is no absolute rule as to what constitutesgood and sufficient cause that will meritsuspension of the rules. The matter isdiscretionary upon the Court [Republic v ImperialJr.(1999)].

The bare invocation of "the interest of substantialjustice" is not a magic wand that willautomatically compel this Court to suspendprocedural rules [Ramos v Sps Lavendia (2008)].

Procedural rules are not to be belittled ordismissed simply because their non-observancemay have resulted in prejudice to a party'ssubstantive rights. Like all rules, they are requiredto be followed except only for the most persuasive

of reasons when they may be relaxed to relieve alitigant of an injustice not commensurate with thedegree of his thoughtlessness in not complyingwith the procedure prescribed. [Polanco v Cruz(2009)].

NOTE: Although not laws in the technical sense ofthe term, Rules of Court, promulgated by authorityof law, have the force and effect of law. [Rianociting Shioji v Harvey(1922)]

Applicability: ProspectiveThe Rules of Court shall govern cases brought afterthey take effect, and also all further proceedings

then pending, EXCEPT to the extent that in theopinion of the Court their application would not befeasible or would work injustice. [Riano citing Rule114]

D. Nature of Philippine Courts

1. Meaning of a court

Definition A court is an organ of the government belonging to

the judicial department, the function of which isthe application of the laws to controversiesbrought before it (and) as well as the publicadministration of justice.

Generally, the term describes an organ of thegovernment consisting of one person or of severalpersons, called upon and authorized to administerjustice. It is also the place where justice isadministered. [Riano citing Blacks and Am. Jur.and C. J. S.]

2. Court as distinguished from a judgeCourt Judge

Tribunal officiallyassembled underauthority of law

Simply an officer of suchtribunal

An organ of thegovernment with apersonality separate anddistinct from judge

Person who sits in court

An office A public officer [Riano]

The circumstances of the court are not affected bythe circumstance that would affect the judge. Thecontinuity of a court and the efficacy of itsproceedings are not affected by the death,resignation, or cessation from the service of the

judge presiding over it. In other words, the judgemay resign, become incapacitated, or be disqualifiedto hold office, but the court remains. The death ofthe judge does not mean the death of the court[Riano citingABC Davao Auto Supply v. CA (1998)].

3. Classification of Philippine courts

NOTE: Please see succeeding subsections fordiscussions on a to d.a. Courts of law and equityb. Courts of Original and Appellate jurisdictionc. Courts of General and Special jurisdictiond. Constitutional and statutory courtse. Superior and Inferior courts

Superior courts Courts which have the powerof review or supervision over another and lowercourt.

Inferior courts Those which, in relation toanother court, are lower in rank and subject toreview and supervision by the latter. [Regalado]

f. Courts of record and not of record


4/127

REMEDIAL LAW REVIEWER Courts of record Those whose proceedings are

enrolled and which are bound to keep a writtenrecord of all trials and proceedings handled bythem. [Regalado] One attribute of a court ofrecord is the strong presumption as to theveracity of its records that cannot becollaterally attacked except for fraud. AllPhilippine courts, including inferior courts, arenow courts of record. [Riano]

Courts not of record Courts which are notrequired to keep a written record or transcriptof proceedings held therein.

4. Courts of original and appellatejurisdiction

Courts of original jurisdiction Those courts inwhich, under the law, actions or proceedingsmay be originally commenced.

Courts of appellate jurisdiction Courts whichhave the power to review on appeal thedecisions or orders of a lower court. [Regalado]

5. Courts of general and special

jurisdiction

Courts of general jurisdiction Those competentto decide their own jurisdiction and to takecognizance of all kinds of cases, unlessotherwise provided by the law or Rules.

Courts of special or limited jurisdiction Thosewhich have no power to decide their ownjurisdiction and can only try cases permitted bystatute. [Regalado]

6. Constitutional and statutory courts

Constitutional courts Those which owe theircreation and existence to the Constitution and,therefore cannot be legislated out of existenceor deprived by law of the jurisdiction andpowers unqualifiedly vested in them by theConstitution. e.g. Supreme Court;Sandiganbayan is a constitutionally-mandatedcourt but created by statute.

Statutory courtsThose created, organized andwith jurisdiction exclusively determined by law.[Regalado]

7. Courts of law and equity

Philippine courts are both courts of law and equity.

Hence, both legal and equitable jurisdiction isdispensed with in the same tribunal [U.S. v.Tamparong(1998)]

8. Principle of judicial hierarchy

The judicialsystem follows a ladderized schemewhich in essence requires that lower courtsinitially decideon a case before it is consideredby a higher court. Specifically, under thejudicial policy recognizing hierarchy of courts, ahigher court will not entertain direct resort to itunless the redress cannot be obtained in the

appropriate courts. [Riano citing Santiago v.Vasquez]

The principle is an established policy necessaryto avoid inordinate demands upon the Courtstime and attention which are better devoted tothose matters within its exclusive jurisdiction,and to preclude the further clogging of theCourts docket[Lim v. Vianzon(2006)].

When the doctrine/principle may bedisregarded: A direct recourse of the Supreme

Courts original jurisdiction to issue writs(referring to the writs of certiorari, prohibition,or mandamus) should be allowed only whenthere are special and important reasonstherefor, clearly and specifically set out in thepetition. [Mangahas v. Paredes (2007)]. TheSupreme Court may disregard the principle ofhierarchy of courts if warranted by the natureand importance of the issues raised in theinterest of speedy justice and avoid futurelitigations [Riano].

9. Doctrine of non-interference ordoctrine of judicial stability

The principle holds that courts of equal andcoordinate jurisdiction cannot interfere witheach others orders [Lapu-lapu Developmentand Housing Corp. v. Group Management Corp.]The principle also bars a court from reviewing orinterfering with the judgment of a co-equalcourt over which it has no appellate jurisdictionor power of review [Villamor v. Salas].

The doctrine of non-interference applies withequal force to administrative bodies. When thelaw provides for an appeal from the decision ofan administrative body to the SC or CA, it meansthat such body is co-equal with the RTC in termsof rank and stature, and logically beyond the

control of the latter [Phil Spinster Corp. v.Cagayan Electric Power].

JURISDICTIONA. Jurisdiction over the partiesB. Jurisdiction over the subject matterC. Jurisdiction over the issuesD. Jurisdiction over the res or property in

litigationE. Jurisdiction of CourtsF. Jurisdiction over small claims, cases

covered by the rules on SummaryProcedure and Barangay Conciliation

G. Totality Rule

JurisdictionJurisdiction is defined as the authority to try, hearand decide a case [Tolentino v. Leviste(2004)].

Judicial power includes the duty of the courts ofjustice: [Art 8, Sec. 1, Consti]

To settle actual controversies involving rightswhich are legally demandable and enforceable;


5/127


80

To determine WON there has been a grave abuseof discretion amounting to lack or excess ofjurisdiction on the part of any governmentbranch/ instrumentality.

All courts exercise judicial power. Only the SupremeCourt is the court created by the Constitution [Art 8,Sec. 1, Consti]. The Sandiganbayan is aConstitutionally mandated court, but it is created bystatute. [PD 1486]

Jurisdiction in general

A. Jurisdiction over the parties

NOTE: The mode of acquisition of jurisdiction overthe plaintiff and the defendant applies both toordinary and special civil actions.

1. How jurisdiction over the plaintiff isacquired

Jurisdiction over the plaintiff is acquired by filing of

the complaint or petition. By doing so, he submitshimself to the jurisdiction of the court [Davao Light& Power Co., Inc. v CA].

2. How jurisdiction over the defendant isacquired

Acquired by the (1) voluntary appearance orsubmission by the defendant or respondent tothe court or (2) by coercive process issued bythe court to him, generally by the service ofsummons [de Joya v Marquez (2006), citingRegalado]

In an action in personam, jurisdiction over theperson is necessary for the court to validly tryand decide the case, while in a proceeding inremor quasi in rem, jurisdiction over the personof the defendant is not a prerequisite to conferjurisdiction on the court provided the latter hasjurisdiction over the res[Alba v. CA].

B. Jurisdiction over the subjectmatter

1. Meaning of jurisdiction over thesubject matter

Jurisdiction over the subject matter is the power to

deal with the general subject involved in the action,and means not simply jurisdiction of the particularcase then occupying the attention of the court butjurisdiction of the class of cases to which theparticular case belongs (Rianociting CJS).

It is the power to hear and determine cases of thegeneral class to which the proceedings in questionbelong [Reyes v. Diaz (1941)]

How conferred and determined It is conferred only by the Constitution or the

law. Jurisdiction CANNOT be:

- fixed by agreement of the parties;- cannot be acquired through, or waived,

enlarged or diminished by, any act or omissionof the parties;

- neither can it be conferred by theacquiescence of the court [Regalado citing DeJesus v Garcia (1967)].

- cannot be subject to compromise (Civil Code,Art 2035)

Jurisdiction over the subject matter isdetermined by the allegations of the complaint.It is not affected by the pleas set up by thedefendant in the answer or in the answer or in amotion to dismiss. [Sindico v. Diaz(2004)].

Once attached to a court, it cannot be oustedby subsequent statute.- Exception: The statute itself conferring new

jurisdiction expressly provides for retroactiveeffect. [Southern Food v. Salas(1992)]

The filing of the complaint or appropriateinitiatory pleading and the payment of theprescribed docket fee vest a trial court withjurisdiction over the subject matter or thenature of the action [CB v. CA(1992)](2008 BarExam).- Exception: Non-payment of docket fee does

not automatically cause the dismissal of thecase on the ground of lack of jurisdiction aslong as the fee is paid within the applicableprescriptive or reglementary period, more sowhen the party involved demonstrates awillingness to abide by the rules prescribingsuch payment. [Go v. Tong(2003)]

2. Jurisdiction versus the exercise ofjurisdiction

Jurisdiction: the authority to hear anddetermine a cause the right to act in a case.

[Arranza v. BF Homes (2000)].- Exercise of Jurisdiction.: the exercise of this

power or authority Jurisdiction is distinct from the exercise

thereof. Jurisdiction is the authority to decide acase and not the decision rendered therein.When there is jurisdiction over the subjectmatter, the decision on all other questionsarising in the case is but an exercise ofjurisdiction. [Herrera v Baretto et al(1913)]

3. Error of jurisdiction as distinguishedfrom error of judgment

Error of jurisdiction Error of judgmentIt is one where the actcomplained of was issuedby the court without or inexcess of jurisdiction[Cabrera v. Lapid(2006)].

It is one which the courtmay commit in theexercise of itsjurisdiction [Cabrera v.Lapid].

It includes errors ofprocedure or mistakes inthe courts mistakes inthe courts findings[Banco Filipino Savingsv. CA (2000)]


6/127


7/127


82

Specific jurisdiction

E. Jurisdiction of Courts

1. Supreme Court

The judicial power shall be vested in one SC and insuch lower courts as may be established by law.[Art. 8, Sec. 1, Consti]

Powers of the Supreme Court [Art. 8, Sec. 5,Consti]

a. EXERCISE original jurisdiction over: Cases affecting ambassadors and other public

ministers and consuls;- RTC also has concurrent jurisdiction

Petitions for certiorari, prohibition, mandamus,quo warranto, and habeas corpus.

b. Review/revise/reverse/modify/affirm on appealor certiorari, final judgments/orders of lowercourts In:

All cases in which the constitutionality/validityof any treaty, international or executiveagreement, law, presidentialdecree/proclamation/order/ instruction,ordinance or regulation is in question;- NOTE: power of review contemplates the ff

courts: CA, Sandiganbayan, CTA, RTC, andother courts authorized by law.

All cases involving the legality of any tax/impost /assessment /toll, or any penaltyimposed in relation thereto;

All cases in which the jurisdiction of any lowercourt is in issue;

All criminal cases in which the penalty imposedis reclusion perpetua or higher;

All cases in which only errors/questions of laware involved.

Exceptions:[Josefa v. Zhandong(2003)]- The conclusion is grounded on speculations/

surmises /conjectures;- The inference is manifestly

mistaken/absurd/impossible;- There is grave abuse of discretion;- The judgment is based on a misapprehension

of facts;- The findings of fact are conflicting;- There is no citation of specific evidence on

which the factual findings are based;

- The finding of absence of facts is contradictedby the presence of evidence on record;

- The findings of the CA are contrary to those ofthe trial court;

- The CA manifestly overlooked certain relevantand undisputed facts that, if properlyconsidered, would justify a differentconclusion;

- The findings of the CA are beyond the issuesof the case;

- Such findings are contrary to the admissionsof both parties.

Distinction between Questions of Law and Fact[Mendoza vs Salinas (2007)]

Question of lawexists when the doubt orcontroversy concerns the correct application oflaw or jurisprudence to a certain set of facts;when the issue does not call for an examinationof the probative value of the evidencepresented, the truth or falsehood of facts beingadmitted.

Question of factexists when the doubt or queryinvites calibration of the whole evidenceconsidering mainly the credibility of thewitnesses, and the existence and relevancy ofspecific surrounding circumstances, as well astheir relation to each other and to the whole,and the probability of the situation

c. Assign temporarily judges of lower courts toother stations as public interest may require,which shall not last 6 six months without theconsent of the judge concerned.

d. Order a change of venue or place of trial toavoid a miscarriage of justice.

e. Promulgate rules on: Protection and enforcement of constitutional

rights;

Pleading/practice/procedure in all courts; Admission to the practice of law; The Integrated Bar; Legal assistance to the under-privileged.

Guidelines on the rules:- Provide a simplified and inexpensive

procedure for the speedy disposition of cases;- Uniform for all courts of the same grade;- Not diminish/increase/modify substantive

rights.

- Rules of procedure of special courts andquasi-judicial bodies shall remain effectiveunless disapproved by the SC.

f. Appoint all Judiciary officials/employees inaccordance with the Civil Service Law.

Constitutional commissions COMELEC and COA Unless otherwise provided

by this Constitution or by law, anydecision/order /ruling of each Commission maybe brought to the SC on certiorari by theaggrieved party, within 30 days from receipt ofa copy thereof. [Art. 9-A, Sec. 7, Consti]

CSC - Judgments/decisions/orders are withinthe exclusive appellate jurisdiction of the CAthrough Rule 43. [BP 129, as amended by RA7902]

Sandiganbayan- Decisions and final orders of the

Sandiganbayan shall be subject to review oncertiorari by the SC in accordance with Rule45 of the Rules.

- Whenever, in any case decided, the deathpenalty shall have been imposed, the recordsshall be forwarded to the SC whether theaccused shall have appealed or nor, forreview and judgment. [PD 1606 Sec 7]


8/127

REMEDIAL LAW REVIEWER2. Court of Appeals [Sec. 9, BP 129]

a. ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

To issue writs of mandamus, prohibition, certiorari,habeas corpus and quo warranto, and auxiliarywrits/processes, whether or not in aid of itsappellate jurisdiction.

Note: former rule only allowed the CA to issueauxiliary writs and processes in aid of jurisdiction.

- The power is concurrent with the SC.b. EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

Annulment of RTC judgments.

c. EXCLUSIVE APPELLATE JURISDICTION

Finaljudgments/decisions/resolutions/orders/awardsof:- RTCs;- Quasi-judicial agencies/instrumentalities/

boards/commissions including:oSEC;oSocial Security Commission;oECC;oCSC.

Exception: Those falling within the SCsappellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court inaccordance with:- The Constitution;- Labor Code;- BP 129;- Sec. 17, Par. 3(1) and Par. 4(4) of the

Judiciary Act of 1948.

Review of decisions by the NLRC: [St. MartinsFuneral Home vs NLRC (1998)]

Supposed appeals from the NLRC to the SC areinterpreted and hereby declared to mean andrefer to Petitioners for Certiorari under Rule 65.

All such petitions should be initially filed in theCA in strict observance of the doctrine on thehierarchy of courts.

All special civil actions arising out of anydecision or final resolution or order of the NLRCfiled with the SC after June 1, 1999 shall notlonger be referred to the CA, but shall forthwithbe dismissed.

Powers of the Court of Appeals Try cases and conduct hearings; Receive evidence Perform any and all acts necessary to resolve

factual issues raised, including the power togrant and conduct new trials or furtherproceedings.

Trials or hearings must be continuous and must becompleted within 3 months, unless extended by theChief Justice.

3. Court of Tax Appeals [Sec. 7, RA 1125,as amended by RA 9282]

a. Exclusive appellate jurisdiction to reviewby appeal

Decisions of the Commissioner of InternalRevenue in cases involving disputedassessments, refunds of internal revenue taxes,

fees or other charges, penalties in relationthereto, or other matters arising under theNational Internal Revenue or other lawsadministered by the BIR;

Inaction by the Commissioner of InternalRevenue in cases involving disputedassessments, refunds of internal revenue taxes,fees or other charges, penalties in relationsthereto, or other matters arising under theNational Internal Revenue Code or other lawsadministered by the BIR, where the NationalInternal Revenue Code provides a specific periodof action, in which case the inaction shall bedeemed a denial;

Decisions, orders or resolutions of the RTCS inlocal tax cases originally decided or resolved bythem in the exercise of their original orappellate jurisdiction;

Decisions of the Commissioner of Customs incases involving liability for customs duties, feesor other money charges, seizure, detention orrelease of property affected, fines, forfeituresor other penalties in relation thereto, or othermatters arising under the Customs Law or otherlaws administered by the Bureau of Customs;

Decisions of the Central Board of AssessmentAppeals in the exercise of its appellatejurisdiction over cases involving the assessmentand taxation of real property originally decided

by the provincial or city board of assessmentappeals; Decisions of the Secretary of Finance on customs

cases elevated to him automatically for reviewfrom decisions of the Commissioner of Customswhich are adverse to the Government underSection 2315 of the Tariff and Customs Code;

Decisions of the Secretary of Trade and Industry,in the case of nonagricultural product,commodity or article, and the Secretary ofAgriculture in the case of agricultural product,commodity or article, involving dumping andcountervailing duties under Sec 301 and 302,respectively, of the Tariff and Customs Code,and safeguard measures under RA 8800, where

either party may appeal the decision to imposeor not to impose said duties.

b. Jurisdiction over cases involving criminaloffenses:

General rule: Exclusive original jurisdiction over allcriminal offenses arising from violations of theNational Internal Revenue Code or Tariff andCustoms Code and other laws administered by theBIR or the Bureau of Customs


9/127


84

BUT! Offenses or felonies where the principalamount of taxes and fees, exclusive of charges andpenalties, claimed is less than P1,000,000.00 orwhere there is no specified amount claimed shall betried by the regular Courts and the jurisdiction ofthe CTA shall be appellate.

Any provision of law or the Rules of Court to thecontrary notwithstanding, the criminal action andthe corresponding civil action for the recovery of

civil liability for taxes and penalties shall at all timesbe simultaneously instituted with, and jointlydetermined in the same proceeding by the CTA, thefiling of the criminal action being deemed tonecessarily carry with it the filing of the civil action,and no right to reserve the filling of such civil actionseparately from the criminal action will berecognized.

c. Exclusive appellate jurisdiction in criminaloffenses:

Over appeals from the judgments, resolutions ororders of the RTCs in tax cases originally

decided by them, in their respected territorialjurisdiction.

Over petitions for review of the judgments,resolutions or orders of the RTCs in the exerciseof their appellate jurisdiction over tax casesoriginally decided by the MeTCs, MTCs andMCTCs in their respective jurisdiction.

d. Jurisdiction over tax collection cases asherein provided:

General rule: Exclusive original jurisdiction in taxcollection cases involving final and executoryassessments for taxes, fees, charges and penalties:

BUT! collection cases where the principal amount oftaxes and fees, exclusive of charges and penalties,claimed is less than P1,000,000.00 shall be tried bythe proper MTC, MeTC and RTC

e. Exclusive appellate jurisdiction in taxcollection cases:

Over appeals from the judgments, resolutions ororders of the RTCs in tax collection cases originallydecided by them, in their respective territorialjurisdiction.

Over petitions for review of the judgments,

resolutions or orders of the RTCs in the Exercise oftheir appellate jurisdiction over tax collection casesoriginally decided by the MeTCs, MTCs and MCTCs, intheir respective jurisdiction."

NOTE: RA9282 elevated CTAs rank to the level ofthe Court of Appeals with special jurisdiction.

4. Sandiganbayan [Sec.4 of RA 8249]

Decisions and final orders of the Sandiganbayanshall be subject to review on certiorari by theSupreme Court in accordance with Rule 45 ofthe Rules.

Whenever, in any case decided, the deathpenalty shall have been imposed, the recordsshall be forwarded to the SC whether theaccused shall have appealed or nor, for reviewand judgment. [PD 1606 Sec 7]

a. Original Exclusive Jurisdiction

Violations of RA 3019 (Anti-graft and CorruptPractices Law);

RA 1379 (Forfeiture of Illegally AcquiredWealth);

Crimes by public officers or employeesembraced in Ch. II, Sec.2 Title VII, Bk. II of theRPC (Crimes committed by Public Officers)namely:- Direct Bribery under Art. 210 as amended by

BP 871, May 29, 1985;- Indirect Bribery under Art. 211 as amended by

BP 871, May 29, 1985;- Qualified Bribery under Art. 211-A as

amended by RA 7659, Dec. 13, 1993;- Corruption of public officials under Art. 212

where one or more of the accused are

officials occupying the following positions inthe government whether in a permanent,acting or interim capacity, at the time of thecommission of the offense:oOfficials of the executive branch occupying

the positions of regional director andhigher, otherwise classified as Grade 27 andhigher, of the Compensation and PositionClassification Act of 1989 Republic Act No.6758) specifically including:

oProvincial governors, vice-governors,members of the sangguniang panlalawigan,provincial treasurers, assessors, engineersand other provincial department heads;

oCity mayors, vice-mayors, members of thesangguniang panglungsod, city treasurers,assessors, engineers and other departmentheads;

oOfficials of the diplomatic service occupyingthe position of consul and higher;

oPhilippine Army and Air force colonels,naval captains and all officers of higherrank;

oOfficers of the PNP while occupying theposition of Provincial Director and thoseholding the rank of Senior Superintendentor higher;

oCity and provincial prosecutors and theirassistants; officials and the prosecutors inthe Office of the Ombudsman and specialprosecutor ;

oPresident, directors or trustees or managersof government owned or controlledcorporations, state universities oreducational institutions or foundations;

- Members of Congress and Officials thereofclassified as Grade 27 and up under theCompensation and Classification Act of 1989;

- Members of the Judiciary without prejudice tothe provision of the Constitution;

- Chairmen and members of ConstitutionalCommissions, without prejudice to theprovision of the Constitution;


10/127

REMEDIAL LAW REVIEWER- All other national and local officials classified

as Grade 27 and higher under theCompensation and Position Classification Actof 1989.

Other offenses or felonies whether simple orcomplexed with other crimes committed inrelation to their office by the public officialsand employees mentioned above;

Civil and Criminal Cases filed pursuant to and inconnection with EO 1, 2, 14 & 14-A issued in

1986 Petitions for issuance of Writ of mandamus,

prohibition, certiorari, habeas corpus,injunction and other ancillary writs andprocesses in aid of its appellate jurisdiction;- Provided, jurisdiction is not exclusive of the

Supreme Court Petitions for Quo Warranto arising or that may

arise in cases filed or that may be filed underEO 1, 2, 14 & 14- A

OTHERS provided the accused belongs to SalaryGrade 27 or higher:- Violation of RA 6713 - Code of Conduct and

Ethical Standards- Violation of RA 7080 The Plunder Law- Violation of RA 7659 - The Heinous Crime Law- RA 9160 - Violation of The Anti-Money

Laundering Law when committed by a publicofficer

- PD 46 referred to as the gift-giving decreewhich makes it punishable for any official oremployee to receive directly or indirectly andfor the private person to give or offer to giveany gift, present or other valuable thing onany occasion including Christmas, when suchgift, present or valuable thing is given byreason of his official position, regardless ofwhether or not the same is for past favors orthe giver hopes or expects to receive a favor

or better treatment in the future from thepublic official or employee concerned in thedischarge of his official functions. Includedwithin the prohibition is the throwing ofparties or entertainment in honor of theofficial or employee or his immediaterelatives.

- PD 749 which grants immunity fromprosecution to any person who voluntarilygives information about any violation ofArt.210, 211 or 212 of the RPC, RA 3019,Sec.345 of the NIRC, Sec. 3604 of the Customsand Tariff Code and other provisions of thesaid Codes penalizing abuse or dishonesty onthe part of the public officials concerned and

other laws, rules and regulations penalizinggraft, corruption and other forms of officialabuse and who willingly testifies against thepublic official or employee subject to certainconditions.

NOTE: Private individuals can be sued in casesbefore the Sandiganbayan if they are alleged to be inconspiracy with the public officer.

b. Appellate Jurisdiction

Over final judgments, resolutions or orders of theRTC whether in the exercise of their original orappellate jurisdiction

over crimes and civil cases falling within theoriginal exclusive jurisdiction of theSandiganbayan but which were committed bypublic officers below Salary Grade 27.

5. Regional Trial Courts

a. Exclusive Original Jurisdiction in CivilCases [Sec. 19, BP 129, Asked in the 2002Bar Examinations]

Incapable of pecuniary estimation (2000 BarExam);- If the action is primarily for the recovery of a

sum of money, the claim is consideredcapable of pecuniary estimation, andjurisdiction over the action will depend on theamount of the claim. [RCPI v. CA(2002)]

- If the basic issue is something other than theright to recover a sum of money, if the moneyclaim is purely incidental to, or aconsequence of, the principal relief sought,the action is one where the subject of thelitigation may not be estimated in terms ofmoney. [Soliven v. Fastforms(1992)]

- If the thing sought to be deposited orconsigned is a sum of money, the amount ofthe debt due is determinable and capable ofpecuniary estimation. [Ascue v. CA (1991)]

- Action for support is incapable of pecuniaryestimation because the court is asked todetermine first WON the plaintiff is indeed

entitled to support. [Baito v. Sarmiento(1960)]- Action for specific performance is incapable

of pecuniary estimation. [ManufacturersDistributors v. Yu Siu Liong (1966)]

- The jurisdiction of the respective courts isdetermined by the value of the demand andnot the value of the transaction out of whichthe demand arose.

- The alternative prayer for specificperformance is also of the same value, for thealternative prayer would not have been madein the complaint if one was more valuablethan the other.[Cruz v. Tan (1950)]

- Rescission is a counterpart of specificperformance therefore also incapable ofpecuniary estimation. [Lapitan v. Scandia(1968)]

- Action for declaration of nullity of a deed ofpartition is incapable of pecuniary estimation.[Russel v. Vestil (1999)]

- An action for expropriation is incapable ofpecuniary estimation. [Bardillon v. Masili(2003)]

Title to, or possession of, real property(or anyinterest therein) where the propertys assessed


11/127


86

value exceeds P20K or P50K (for civil actions inMetro Manila);

Exception: Forcible entry into and unlawfuldetainer of lands/buildings

Admiralty and maritime jurisdictionwhere thedemand/claim exceeds P300K or P400K (inMetro Manila);

-Maritime and admiralty cases involve tradeand transactions in the sea. Maritime

jurisdiction includes maritime tort. [Negre v.Cabahug (1966)]

Probate (testate and intestate) where the grossvalue of the estate exceeds P300K or P400K (inMetro Manila);

Marriage contractand marital relations;b. General Original Jurisdiction

All cases not within the exclusive jurisdiction ofany court/tribunal/person/ body exercisingjudicial or quasi-judicial functions;

Within the exclusive original jurisdiction of aJuvenile and Domestic Relations Court and ofthe Court of Agrarian Relations;

All other cases where the demand (exclusive ofinterest, damages of whatever kind, attorney'sfees, litigation expenses and costs) or the valueof the property in controversy exceeds P300K orP400K in Metro Manila.- The exclusion of the term damages of

whatever kind in determining thejurisdictional amount under Sec. 19(8) andSec. 33 (1) of BP 129, as amended by RA7691,applies to cases where the damages are

merely incidental to or a consequence of themain cause of action. However, if the claimfor damages is the main cause of action, orone of the causes of action, the amount ofsuch claim shall be considered in determiningthe jurisdiction of the court.[Admin Circ. 09-94]

- Actions for damages based on quasi-delictsare primarily and effectively actions for therecovery of a sum of money for the damagessuffered because of the defendants allegedtortious acts. This money claim is theprincipal relief sought, and is not merely

incidental thereto or a consequence thereof.[Iniego v. Purganan (2006)]

c. Original Jurisdiction [Sec. 21, BP 129]

Certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quowarranto, habeas corpus and injunction whichmay be enforced in any part of their respectiveregions;

- CONCURRENT jurisdiction with SC and CA Actions affecting ambassadors and other public

ministers and consuls.- CONCURRENT jurisdiction with SC

d. Exclusive Appellate Jurisdiction [Sec. 22,BP 129]

All cases decided by MeTCs/MTCs/MCTCs in theirrespective territorial jurisdictions. Metropolitan,Municipal and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts

6. Family Courts

a. Exclusive Original Jurisdiction

Petitions for guardianship, custody of children,habeas corpus in relation to the latter;

Petitions for adoption of children and revocationthereof;

Complaints for annulment of marriage,declaration of nullity of marriage and thoserelating to marital status and property relationsof husband and wife or those living togetherunder different status and agreements, andpetitions for dissolution of conjugal partnershipof gains;

Petitions for support and/ or acknowledgement; Summary judicial proceedings brought under the

Family Code; Petitions for declaration of status of children as

abandoned, dependent or neglected children,for voluntary or involuntary commitment ofchildren, and for suspension, termination orrestoration of parental authority under PD 603,EO 56 s. 1986 and other related laws;

Cases for domestic violence against women andchildren, as defined therein but which do notconstitute criminal offenses subject to criminalprosecution and penalties.

7. Metropolitan Trial Courts/Municipal

Trial Courts

a. Exclusive Original Jurisdiction [Sec. 33, BP129]

Civil actions and probate proceedings (testateand intestate), including the grant of provisionalremedies, where the value of the personalproperty, estate or amount of the demand doesnot exceed P300K or P400K (in Metro Manila)(value excludes of interest, damages ofwhatever kind, attorneys fees, litigationexpenses, and costs);- Interest, damages of whatever kind,

attorney's fees, litigation expenses and costsshall be included in the determination of thefiling fees.

- If there are several claims or causes of actionsbetween the same/different parties in thesame complaint, the amount of the demandshall be the totality of the claims in all thecauses of action, WON the causes of actionarose out of the same/different transactions.

Forcible entry and unlawful detainer- If the defendant raises the question of

ownership in his pleadings and the question ofpossession cannot be resolved without


12/127

REMEDIAL LAW REVIEWERdeciding the issue of ownership, the issue ofownership shall be resolved only to determinethe issue of possession.

- That the MeTC has jurisdiction even in caseswhere the issue of possession is closelyintertwined with the issue of ownership is nowa settled doctrine in ejectment proceedings.[Heirs of B. Hernandez v. Vergara (2006)]

All civil actions that involve title to, orpossession of, real property (or any interesttherein) where the assessed value of theproperty (or interest therein) does not exceedP20K or P50K (in civil actions in Metro Manila).- Value excludes interest, damages of whatever

kind, attorneys fees, litigation expenses andcosts

- If land is not declared for taxation purposes,the value of such property shall bedetermined by the assessed value of theadjacent lots.

All civil cases subject to summary procedure.

b. Delegated Jurisdiction in Cadastral andLand Registration Cases [Sec. 34, BP 129]

Lots where there is no controversy/ opposition;or

Contested lots the value of which does notexceed P100K.- The value is to be ascertained:oBy the claimants affidavit;oBy agreement of the respective claimants,

if there are more than one;oFrom the corresponding tax declaration of

the real property.- MTC decisions in cadastral and land

registration cases are appealable in the same

manner as RTC decisions.

8. Shariah Courts

a. Original Jurisdiction (Article 143, CMPL)

All cases involving custody, guardianship,legitimacy, paternity and filiation arising underthe Code of Muslim Personal Laws;

All cases involving disposition, distribution andsettlement of estate of deceased Muslims,probate of wills, issuance of letters ofadministration or appointment of administratorsor executors regardless of the nature or

aggregate value of the property; Petitions for the declaration of absence and

death for the cancellation or correction ofentries in the Muslim Registries mentioned inTitle VI, Book Two of the Code of MuslimPersonal Laws;

All actions arising from the customary contractsin which the parties are Muslims, if they havenot specified which law shall govern theirrelations; and

All petitions for mandamus, prohibition,injunction, certiorari, habeas corpus, and all

other auxiliary writs and processes in aid of itsappellate jurisdiction.

b. Concurrent Jurisdiction with Civil Courts

Petitions by Muslim for the constitution of afamily home, change of name and commitmentof an insane person to an asylum;

All other personal and legal actions notmentioned in paragraph 1 (d) wherein the

parties involved are Muslims except those forforcible entry and unlawful detainer, which shallfall under the exclusive jurisdiction of theMunicipal Circuit Court; and

All special civic actions for interpleader ordeclaratory relief wherein the parties areMuslims or the property involved belongsexclusively to Muslims

Sharia Circuit Courts are courts where Muslims canfile cases involving the following:

Offenses defined and punished under PD 1083 Disputes relating to :

- Marriage-

Divorce- betrothal or breach of contract to marry- customary dower (mahr)- disposition and distribution of property upon

divorce- maintenance and support and consolatory

gifts (muta)- restitution of marital right- Disputes relative to communal properties

NOTE: The Sharia District Court or the ShariaCircuit Court may constitute an Agama ArbitrationCouncil to settle certain cases amicably and withoutformal trial.

The Council is composed of the Clerk of Court asChairperson and a representative of each of theconflicting parties.

F. Jurisdiction over small claims,cases covered by the rules onSummary Procedure and BarangayConciliation

[A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC, the Rule of Procedure for SmallClaims Cases effective October 1, 2008]

1. Definition

Small claims courts are courts of limited jurisdictionthat hear civil cases between private litigants[Rationale of Proposed Rule].

2. Purpose

The purpose of small claims process is to provide aninexpensive and expeditious means to settle disputesover small amounts [Riano].


13/127


88

3. Scope

This rule governs the procedure in actions before theMetropolitan trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts inCities, Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal CircuitTrial Courts for payment of money where the valueof the claim does not exceed One Hundred ThousandPesos (P100,000.00) exclusive of interest and costs. [Sec. 2, Scope]

4. Applicability

The Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courtsin Cities, Municipal Trial Courts, and MunicipalCircuit Trial Courts shall apply this Rule in all actionswhich are:

purely civil in nature where the claim or reliefprayed for by the plaintiff is solely for paymentor reimbursement of sum of money, and

the civil aspect of criminal action, or reservedupon the filing of the criminal action in court,pursuant to Rule of 111 of the Revised Rules ofCriminal Procedure.

These claims or demands may be:

For money owed under any of the following;- Contract of Lease;- Contract of Loan;- Contract of Services;- Contract of Sale; or- Contract of Mortgage;

For damages arising from any of the following;- Fault or negligence;- Quasi-contract; or- Contract;

The enforcement of a barangay amicablesettlement or an arbitration award involving amoney claim covered by this Rule pursuant toSec. 417 of Republic Act 7160, otherwise knownas the Local Government Code of 1991. [Sec. 4,Applicability]

5. Prohibited Pleadings

The following pleadings, motions, and petitions shallnot be allowed in the cases covered by this Rule:

Motion to dismiss the compliant except on theground of lack of jurisdiction;

Motion for a bill of particulars; Motion for new trial, or for reconsideration of a

judgment, or for reopening of trial; Petition for relief from judgment; Motion for extension of time to file pleadings,

affidavits, or any other paper;

Memoranda; Petition for certiorari, mandamus, or prohibition

against any interlocutory order issued by thecourt;

Motion to declare the defendant in default; Dilatory motions for postponement; Reply; Third-party complaints; and Interventions. [Sec. 14, Prohibited pleadings and

motions]

G. Totality Rule

Where there are several claims or causes of actionsbetween the same or different parties, embodied inthe same complaint, the amount of the demand shallbe the totality of the claims in all the causes ofaction, irrespective of whether the causes of actionarose out of the same or different transaction [Rianociting Pantranco North Express v Standard Insurance(2005)]

CIVIL PROCEDURE

I. ACTIONS

Actions, in general: An ordinary suit in a court ofjustice by which one party prosecutes anotherfor the enforcement/ protection of a right orthe prevention/redress of a wrong [Santos vs.Vda. De Caparas, (1959)]

Action vs Cause of action(Asked in the 1999 Bar Exam)

Cause of action Action

A cause of action isthe basis of the actionfiled [Rule 2, Sec.1]

Fact or combination offacts which affords aparty a right tojudicial interference inhis behalf. [Into vs.Valle (2005)]

Ordinary suit in a courtof justice, by which oneparty prosecutes anotherfor the enforcement orprotection of a right, orthe prosecution orredress of a wrong

1. Meaning of ordinary civil actions

An ordinary civil action is one that is governed bythe rules for ordinary civil actions [Rule 1, Sec. 3(a)par 2]

2. Meaning of special civil actions

A special civil action is one that is subject to thespecific rules prescribed for a special civil action; itis also governed by the rules for ordinary civilactions[Rule 1, Sec. 3(a) par 2]

3. Meaning of criminal actions

A criminal action is one by which the Stateprosecutes a person for an act or omission

punishable by law. [Rule 1, Sec. 3(b)]

4. Civil actions versus specialproceedings

A civil action is one by which a party sues anotherfor the enforcement or protection of a right, or theprevention or redress of a wrong. [Rule 1, Sec. 3(a)par 1]

A special proceeding is a remedy by which a partyseeks to establish a status, a right, or a particularfact. [Rule 1, Sec. 3 (c)]


14/127


Distinctions between Civil Actions and SpecialProceedings

(Asked in the 1998 Bar Exam)Action Special

Proceeding

As to parties Involves 2 or moreparties

Involves atleast 1 party or2 or moreparties in

proper casesAs to causeof action

Involves a rightand a violation ofsuch right by thedefendant whichcauses somedamage/prejudiceupon the plaintiff

May involve aright, but thereneed not be aviolation of thisright

As toformalities

Requires theapplication oflegal remedies inaccordance withthe prescribedrules

Requires nosuchformalities, asitmay be grantedupon

application

As togoverningrules

Ordinary rules ofprocedure

Special rules ofprocedure

As to appealfrom aninterlocutoryorder

Cannot bedirectly andimmediatelyappealed to theappellate courtuntil after finaljudgment on themerits

Can beimmediatelyand directlyappealed tothe appellatecourt

5. Personal actions and real actions

Real Actions:Actions affecting title to orpossession of real property, or interest therein.[Rule 4, Sec. 1 par 1]

Personal Actions:All other actions are personalactions. [Rule 4, Sec.2]

Importance of Distinction:for purposes ofdetermining the venue of the action (Riano)

Real actions shall be commenced and tried n theproper court which has jurisdiction over thearea wherein the real property involved, or aportion thereof, is situated. [Rule 4, Sec.1]

Personal actions may be commenced and triedwhere the plaintiff or any of the principalplaintiffs resides, or where the defendant or anyof the principal defendants resides, or in thecase of a non-resident defendant, where he maybe found, at the election of the plaintiff. [Rule4, Sec.2]

NOTE:Not every action involving a real property is areal action because the realty may only beincidental to the subject matter of the suit. To be areal action, it is not enough that the action mustdeal with real property. It is important that the

matter in litigation must also involve any of thefollowing issues: title to, ownership, possession,paritition, foreclosure or mortgage or any interest inreal property. (Riano)

Real action Personalaction

Mixed action

Ownership orpossession ofreal property isinvolved

Personalproperty issought to berecovered ordamages forbreach ofContract or theenforcement ofa contract aresought

Both real andpersonalproperties areinvolved

Founded onprivity of realestate

Founded onprivity ofcontract

Founded onboth

Filed in thecourt where theproperty (or anyportion thereof)

is situated

Filed in thecourt where theplaintiff or anyof the

defendantsresides, at theplaintiffsoption

The rules onvenue of realactions govern

6. Local and transitory actions

Local action Transitory action

One that could beinstituted in onespecific place [2011Reviewer]

Venue depends uponthe location of the

property involved inthe litigation (Riano)

One that could beprosecuted in any oneof several places[2011 Reviewer]

Its venue dependsupon the residence of

the plaintiff or thedefendant at theoption of the plaintiff(Riano)

7. Actions in rem, in personam and quasiin rem

[Riano citing Domagas v. Jensen,(2005) and Biaco v.Philippine Countryside Rural Bank, (2007)]

Action in rem Action inpersonam

Actionquasi in rem

Directed

against thething itself

Directed

againstparticularpersons

Directed

againstparticularpersons

Jurisdictionover the personof thedefendant isNOT required

Jurisdictionover the personof thedefendant isrequired

Jurisdictionover the personof thedefendant isnot required aslong asjurisdictionover the res isacquired


15/127


90

Action in rem Action inpersonam

Actionquasi in rem

A proceeding todetermine thestate/conditionof a thing

An action toimposeresponsibilityor liability upona persondirectly

A proceedingto subjectthe interestof a nameddefendantover aparticularproperty to

anobligation/lien burdeningit

Deal with thestatus,ownership orliability of aparticularproperty butwhich areintended tooperate onthese

questionsonly asbetween theparticularparties to theproceedingsand not toascertain orcut-off therights orinterest of allpossibleclaimants[Domagas v.Jensen

(2005)]Judgment isbinding on thewhole world

Judgment isbinding onlyupon partiesimpleaded ortheir successorsin interest

Judgment isbinding uponparticularpersons

Ex: Accionreivindicatoria;annulment ofmarriage;naturalizationproceedings

Ex: Action forspecificperformance;action torecover moneyor property(real or

personal)

Ex: Action forpartition;action toforeclose realestatemortgage

The question of whether the trial court hasjurisdiction depends on the nature of the action,i.e., whether the action is in personam, in rem, orquasi in rem. [Riano citing Biaco v. PhilippineCountryside Rural Bank (2007)]

The distinction is important to determine whether ornot jurisdiction over the person of the defendant isrequired and consequently to determine the type ofsummons to be employed. [Riano citing Gomez v.Court of Appeals (2004)]

II. CAUSE OF ACTION

1. Meaning of cause of action

A cause of action is the act or omission by which aparty violates a right of another. [Rule 2, Sec.2]

Elements of a Cause of Action [cited in Riano] Plaintiffs legal right; Defendants correlative obligation to respect

plaintiffs right; Defendants act/omission in violation of

plaintiffs right [Ma-ao Sugar Central v. Barrios(1947)] (Asked in the 1997 Bar Exam).

Every ordinary civil action must be based on a causeof action [Rule 2, Sec. 1]

A cause of action stems from the sources ofobligations under Art. 1156, CC - Law, Contract,Quasi-contract, Acts and omissions punishable by lawand Quasi-delict. [Sagrada Orden etc v. National

Coconut Corporation(1952)]

2. Right of action versus cause ofaction[Regalado]

Right of action Cause of actionThe remedial right orright to relief granted bylaw to a party toinstitute an actionagainst a person who hascommitted a delict orwrong against him

The delict or wrongfulact or omissioncommitted by thedefendant in violation ofthe primary rights of theplaintiff

Right to sue as a

consequence of thedelict

The delict or wrong

Whether such acts givehim right of actiondetermined bysubstantive law

Determined by theaverments in thepleading regarding theacts committed by thedefendant

NOTE: There can be no right of action without acause of action being first established [Regaladociting Espaol v. The Chairman of PVA(1985)]

3. Failure to state a cause of action

There is a failure to state a cause of action ifthe pleading asserting the claim states no causeof action. This is a ground for a motion todismiss. [Rule 16, Sec.1(g)]

It is submitted that the failure to state a causeof action dos not mean that the plaintiff has nocause of action. It only means that theplaintiffs allegations are insufficient for thecourt to know that the rights of the plaintiffwere violated by the defendant. (Riano)

There is a failure to state a cause of action ifallegations in the complaint taken together, donot completely spell out the elements of aparticular cause of action. (Riano)


16/127

REMEDIAL LAW REVIEWER A failure to state a cause of action is not the

same as an absence or a lack of cause of action.The former refers to an insufficiency in theallegations of the complaint while the latterrefers to the failure to prove or to establish byevidence ones stated cause of action. (Riano)

4. Test of the sufficiency of a causeof action

Whether or not admitting the facts alleged, thecourt could render a valid verdict in accordance withthe prayer of the complaint [Santos v. de Leo (2005)]

5. Splitting a single cause of actionand its effects

Definition:The act of instituting two or more suitson the basis of the same cause of action. [Rule 2,Sec.4]

The act of dividing a single or indivisible cause ofaction into several parts or claims and bringing

several actions thereon. (Regalado)

Effects of splitting a cause of action: [Taken from2011 Reviewer]

The filing of one or a judgment upon the meritsin any one is available as a ground for thedismissal of the others. [Rule 2, Sec.4]

Filing of the 1st complaint may be pleaded inabatement of the 2nd complaint, on the groundof litis pendentia; or

A judgment upon the merits in any of thecomplaints is available as ground for dismissal ofthe others based on res judicata.

A MTD under Rule 16 Sec. 1(e) or (f) may befiled in order that the complaint may be

dismissed.

Basis:A party may not institute more than one suitfor a single cause of action. [Rule 2, Sec. 3]

Purpose[City of Bacolod v. SM Brewery (1969)] To prevent repeated litigation between the

same parties in regard to the same subject orcontroversy;

To protect the defendant from unnecessaryvexation. Nemo debet vexare pro una et eademcausa(No man shall be twice vexed for one andthe same cause);

To avoid the costs and expenses incident tonumerous suits.

A single act/omission can be violative of variousrights at the same time, as when the act constitutesjuridically a violation of several separate anddistinct legal obligations. However, where there isonly one delict/wrong, there is but a single cause ofaction regardless of the number of rights that mayhave been violated belonging to one person. Thesingleness of a cause of action lies in the singlenessof the delict/wrong violating the rights of a person.If only 1 injury resulted from several wrongful acts,

only 1 cause of action arises. [Joseph v. Bautista(1989)]

For a single cause of action or violation of a right,the plaintiff may be entitled to several reliefs. It isthe filing of separate complaints for these severalreliefs that constitutes splitting up of the cause ofaction which is proscribed by Rule 2, Sec. 3 and 4.[City of Bacolod v. SM Brewery (1969)]

6. Joinder and misjoinder of causes ofaction

Joinder of Cause of Action:It is the assertion of asmany causes of action as a party may have againstanother in one pleading alone. It is also the processof uniting 2 or more demands or rights of action inone action. [Riano citing Rule 2, Sec. 5 and CJS]

Purpose:promote the policy on avoiding multiplicityof suits.

The rule however is purely permissive as the plaintiffcan always file separate actions for each cause of

action. [Baldovir vs. Sarte, 36 Phil. 550]

Requisites[Rule 2, Sec. 5]: The party joining the causes of action must

comply with the rules on joinder of parties; The joinder shall not include special civil actions

or actions governed by special rules;

Where causes of action are between the sameparties but pertain to differentvenues/jurisdictions, the joinder may beallowed in the RTC provided one of the causesof action are within the RTCs jurisdiction andthe venue lies therein;

TOTALITY RULE - Where the claims in all thecauses of action are principally for recovery ofmoney, the aggregate amount claimed shall bethe test of jurisdiction.

Misjoinder of causes of action [Rule 2, Sec. 6] Misjoinder of causes of action is not a ground for

dismissal of an action.

A misjoined cause of action may, on motion ormotu propio, be severed and proceeded withseparately.

There is no sanction against non-joinder ofseparate causes of action since a plaintiff needsonly a single cause of action to maintain anaction (Regalado).

III. PARTIES TO CIVIL ACTIONS

Requirements for a person to be a party to a civilaction:

HE MUST BE EITHER [Rule 1, Sec.3]:- A natural person;- A juridical person;oThe State and its political subdivisions;oOther corporations, institutions and entities

for public interest or purpose, created bylaw; and


17/127


92

oCorporations, partnerships and associationsfor private interest or purpose to which thelaw grants a juridical personality, separateand distinct from that of each shareholder,partner or member [Art. 44, CC]

- An entity authorized by law.oThe estate of a deceased person [Limjoco

vs. Intestate Estate of Fragante (1948)];oA political party incorporated under Act

1459 [now BP 68 (Corporation Code)];

oA corporation by estoppel is precludedfrom denying its existence and themembers thereof can be sued and be heldliable as general partners. [Riano citingSec. 21, BP68, The Corporation Code ofthe Philippines]

oA contract of partnership having a capitalof P3,000.00 or more but which fails tocomply with the registrationrequirements is nevertheless liable as apartnership to third persons. [Riano citingArt. 1772 in rel. to Art. 1768, Civil Code]

oA registered labor union [Sec. 243, PD 442(Labor Code)], with respect to itsproperty.

oA legitimate labor organization may sueand be sued in its registered name.[Riano citing Art. 2429(e), Labor Code]

oThe Roman Catholic Church has legalcapacity to sue. As to its properties, thearchbishop or diocese to which theybelong may be a party. [Barlin v. Ramirez(1906); Riano citing Barlin v. Ramirez andVersoza v. Fernandez(49 Phil. 627)].

oA dissolved corporation may prosecuteand defend suits by or gainst it providedthat the suits (i) occur within three yearsafter its dissolution, and (ii) the suits arein connection with the settlement and

closure of its affairs. [Riano citing Sec.122, Corporation Code]

HE MUST HAVE THE LEGAL CAPACITY TO SUE; HE MUST BE THE REAL PARTY IN INTEREST.

[Berman v. Cheng (2005)]- Only natural or juridical persons or entities

authorized by law may be parties in a civilcase.

- A sole proprietorship is not vested withjuridical personality and cannot sue or file ordefend an action.

- There is no law authorizing sole proprietorshipto file a suit.

- A sole proprietorship does not possess ajudicial personality separate and distinct fromthe personality of the owner of theenterprise. [Rimbunan v. Oriental (2005)]

- An unlicensed foreign corporation isnonetheless permitted to bring suit in thePhilippines if it is suing on an isolatedtransaction.

- Thus, the ascertainment of whether a foreigncorporation is merely suing on an isolatedtransaction or is actually doing business in thePhilippines requires the elicitation of at leasta preponderant set of facts.

Note:A foreign corporation may be party to anaction in Philippine courts:

If licensed to engage in business in thePhilippines, it may sue or be sued in our courts;

If not licensed, it cannot sue, but it may be suedin our courts;

If not engaged in business in the Philippines, itmay sue in courts on a single isolatedtransaction, but it cannot be sued in our courtson such transaction.

Lack of legal capacity tosue

Lack of legalpersonality to sue

The plaintiffs generaldisability to sue, such ason account of minority,insanity, incompetence,lack of juridicalpersonality or any othergeneral disqualifications

The plaintiff is not thereal party in interest

It can be a ground for aMTD [Rule 16 (1) (d)]

It can be used as groundfor a MTD based on thefailure of complaint tostate a cause of action.

[Rule 16 (1) (g)]

Parties to a civil action PLAINTIFF One having interest in the matter

of the action or in obtaining the reliefdemanded; the claiming party or the originalclaiming party and is the one who files thecomplaint [Riano]; does not exclusively apply tothe original plaintiff [Rinao]; may refer to theclaiming party, the counter-claimant, the cross-claimant, or the third (fourth, etc.)-partyplaintiff [Rule 3, Sec.1]

DEFENDANT One claiming an interest in thecontroversy or the subject thereof adverse tothe plaintiff. The term may also include [Rule 3,

Sec 1):- UNWILLING CO-PLAINTIFF A party who

should be joined as plaintiff but whoseconsent cannot be obtained. He may be madea defendant and the reason therefore shall bestated in the complaint. [Rule 3, Sec. 10]

- The original plaintiff becoming a defendant tothe original defendants counterclaim; alsorefers to the corss-defendant, or the third(fourth, etc.)-party defendant. [Rule 3, Sec 1]

1. Real parties in interest;indispensable parties; representativesas parties; necessary parties; indigentparties; alternative defendants

Real party in interest [Rule 3, Sec.2]- The party who stands to be benefited/injured

by the judgment in the suit;- The party entitled to the avails of the suit.

Rules:oEvery action must be prosecuted or

defended in the name of the real party ininterest. [Rule 3, Sec.2]


18/127

REMEDIAL LAW REVIEWERoThe partys interest must be direct,

substantial and material [Sumalo v. Litton(2006)].

oHusband and wife shall sue and be suedjointly, except as provided by law [Rule 3,Sec. 4]

oA minor or a person alleged to beincompetent may sue or be sued, with theassistance of his father, mother, guardian,or if he has none, a guardian ad litem. [Rule

3, Sec. 5]oMinors (represented by their parents) are

real parties in interest under the principleof intergenerational responsibility. [Oposav. Factoran (1993)] Note: This doctrine isinconsistent with Rule 3, Sec. 1 whichprovides that only natural or juridicalpersons may be parties in a civil action.

o If a party becomes incompetent/incapacitated during the pendency of theaction, the action survives and may becontinued by/against the incompetent/incapacitated assisted by his legal guardianor guardian ad litem [Rule 3, Sec. 18]

Indispensable parties- An indispensable party is a real party-in-

interest without whom no final determinationcan be had of an action. [Rule 3, Sec.7]

- A party who has such an interest in thecontroversy or subject matter that a finaladjudication cannot be made, in his absence,without injuring or affecting that interest.(Riano)

- The joinder of a party becomes compulsorywhen the one involved is an indispensableparty. [Riano citing Rule 3, Sec.7]

- A person is NOT an indispensable party if hisinterest in the controversy or subject matter

is separable from the interest of the otherparties, so that it will not necessarily bedirectly or injuriously affected by a decreewhich does not complrete justice betweenthem. (Riano)

Representative as parties [Rule 3, Sec. 3]- Those acting in fiduciary capacity, such as a

trustee/guardian/executor/administrator or aparty authorized by law or ROC.

- The beneficiary shall be included in the titleof the case and shall be deemed to be thereal party in interest.

- An agent acting in his own name and for thebenefit of an undisclosed principal may sue or

be sued without joining the principal.

Exception: If the contract involves thingsbelonging to the principal. [Art. 1883, CC]

Necessary Party [Rule 3, Sec. 8]- One who is not indispensable but ought to be

joined as a party if complete relief is to beaccorded as to those already parties, or for acomplete determination or settlement of theclaim subject of the action

- Indispensable parties v. Necessary parties[taken from 2011 Reviewer and Riano]

Indispensable parties[Rule 3, Sec. 7]

Necessary parties [Rule3, Sec. 8]

Must be joined underany and all conditions,his presence being asine qua non for theexercise of judicialpower

Should be joinedwhenever possible; theaction can proceed evenin their absence becausetheir interest is separablefrom that of theindispensable party

No valid judgment ifindispensable party isnot joined.

The case may bedetermined in court butthe judgment therein willnot resolve the entirecontroversy if a necessaryparty is not joined

They are those withsuch an interest in thecontroversy that a finaldecree wouldnecessarily affect theirrights so that the courtcannot proceed withouttheir presence.

They are those whosepresence is necessary toadjudicate the wholecontroversy but whoseinterests are so farseparable that a finaldecree can be made intheir absence without

affecting them.

- Whenever in any pleading in which a claim isasserted a necessary party is not joined, thepleader is under obligation to: (i) set forth thename of the necessary party, if known, and(ii) state the reason why the necessary partyis omitted. [Riano citing Rule 3, Sec. 9 par 1]

- The non-inclusion of a necessary party doesnot prevent the court from proceeding in theaction, and the judgment rendered thereinshall be without prejudice to the rights ofsuch necessary party [Rule 3, Sec. 9 par 3]

Indigent Party [Rule 3, Sec. 21]- INDIGENT One who has no money or

property sufficient and available for food,shelter and basic necessities.

- While the authority to litigate as an indigentparty may be granted upon an ex parteapplicationand hearing, it may be contestedby the adverse party at any time beforejudgment is rendered.o If the court determines after hearing that

the party declared indigent has sufficientincome or property, the proper docket andother lawful fees shall be assessed andcollected by the clerk of court.

- The authority to litigate as an indigent shallinclude an exemption from:oPayment of docket fees and other lawful

fees;oPayment of TSN.

- The amount of docket and other lawful fees isa lien on any judgment rendered in favor ofindigent party, unless court otherwiseprovides.

Alternative Defendants [Rule 3, Sec. 13]- Where the plaintiff is uncertain against whom

of several persons he is entitled to relief, hemay join any or all of them in the alternative,


19/127


94

although a right to relief against one may beinconsistent with a right to relief against theother.

2. Compulsory and permissive joinderof parties

Compulsory joinder of indispensable parties[Rule 3, Sec 7]

- Parties in interest without whom no finaldetermination can be had of an action shallbe joined either as plaintiffs or defendants

Permissive joinder [Rule 3, Sec. 6]- Parties can be joined, as plaintiffs or

defendants, in one single complaint or maythemselves maintain or be sued in separatesuits.

Requisites(Regalado):- Right to relief arises out of the same

transaction or series of transactions;Note: SERIES OF TRANSACTIONSTransactionsconnected with the same subject matter ofthe suit.

- There is a question of law or fact common toall the plaintiffs or defendants;

- Such joinder is not otherwise proscribed bythe rules on jurisdiction and venue.

3. Misjoinder and non-joinder ofparties

A party is misjoinedwhen he is made a party tothe action although he should not be impleaded.A party is not joined when he is supposed to bejoined but is not impleaded in the action.(Riano)

Neither misjoinder nor non-joinder of parties isa ground for dismissal of an action. [Rule 3, Sec.11]

Parties may be dropped or added by order of thecourt on motion of any party or on its owninitiative at any stage of the action and on suchterms as are just. [Rule 3, Sec.11]

Any claim against a misjoined party may besevered and proceeded with separately. [Rule 3,Sec. 11]

Non-joinder of an indispensable party is not aground for outright dismissal. Reasonableopportunity must be given for his inclusion byamendment of the complaint [Cortez v Avila(1957)].

Objections to defects in parties should be madeat the earliest opportunity.

The moment such defect becomes apparent, amotion to strike the names of the parties mustbe made.

Objections to misjoinder cannot be raised forthe first time on appeal [Regalado citing Garciav Chua].

The rule on misjoinder or non-joinder of partiesdoes not comprehend whimsical and irrationaldropping or adding of parties in a complaint.What it really contemplates is erroneous ormistaken non-joinder and misjoinder or parties.The rule presupposes that the original inclusion

had been made in the honest conviction that itwas proper and the subsequent dropping isrequested because it has turned out that suchinclusion was a mistake. [Riano citing Lim TanHua v. Ramolete(1975)]

4. Class suit

Requisites [Rule 3, Sec. 12]- Subject matter of the controversy is one of

common/general interest to many persons;- The persons are so numerous that it is

impracticable to join them all as parties (i.e.impracticable to bring them all before thecourt);

- Parties bringing the class suit are sufficientlynumerous and representative of the class andcan fully protect the interests of allconcerned;

- The representative sues/defends for thebenefit of all.

Any party in interest shall have the right tointervene to protect his individual interest.

[Rule 3, Sec. 12]

If a class suit is improperly brought, the actionis subject to dismissal regardless of the cause ofaction [Rule 16, Sec 1 (d)].

A taxpayer's suit or a stockholder's derivativesuit is in the nature of a class suit, althoughsubject to the other requisites of thecorresponding governing law especially on theissue of locus standi. [Regalado]

There is no class suit in an action filed byassociations of sugar planters to recoverdamages in behalf of individual sugar planters

for an allegedly libelous article in aninternational magazine. There is no common orgeneral interest in reputation of a specificindividual. Each of the sugar planters has aseparate and distinct reputation in thecommunity not shared by the others. [Rianociting Newsweek, Inc. v. Intermediate Appellatecourt (1986)]

A class suit does not require a commonality ofinterest in the questions involved in the suit.What is required by the Rules is a common orgeneral interest in the subject matter of thelitigation. [Riano citing Mathay v. Consolidated

Bank &Trust Company (1974)]

Class Suit Permissive Joinder ofParties

There is a single cause ofaction pertaining tonumerous persons.

There are multiplecauses of actionseparately belonging toseveral persons.

CLASS SUIT AND DERIVATIVE SUIT, COMPARED(Asked in the 2005 Bar Examination)

CLASS SUIT DERIVATIVE SUIT


20/127

REMEDIAL LAW REVIEWERWhen the subject matterof the controversy is oneof common or generalinterest to manypersons, and the partiesare so numerous that itis impracticable to bringthem all before thecourt, one or more maysue or defend for the

benefit of all. [Rule 3,Sec. 12]

An action brought byminority shareholders inthe name of thecorporation to redresswrongs committedagainst it, for which thedirectors refuse to sue.

It is a remedy designedby equity and has been

the principal defense ofthe minorityshareholders againstabuses by the majority.

In a derivative action,the real party in interestis the corporation itself,not the shareholders whoactually instituted it[Lim vs. Lim Yu (2001))

5. Suits against entities withoutjuridical personality

Requisites [Rule 3, Sec.15] There are 2 or more persons not organized as a

juridical entity; They enter into a transaction; A wrong is committed against a 3rd person in

the course of such transaction.

Effect: Persons associated in an entity withoutjuridical personality may be sued under the name bywhich they are generally/commonly known, but theycannot sue under such name. [Rule 3, Sec. 15]

The service of summons may be effected upon all

the defendants by serving upon any of them, or uponthe person in charge of the office or place ofbusiness maintained under such name. [Rule 14, Sec.8]

6. Effect of death of party litigant[thissection is taken from the 2011 Reviewer]

Substitution of parties Death of a party, where the claim is not

extinguished by the death of the party (e.g.cases involving property and property rights[Bonilla v Barcena (1976)]); [Rule 3, Sec. 16](Asked in the 1998 and 1999 Bar Exams)- Counsels duty:o Inform court within 30 days after such

death of the fact thereof;oGive the name and address of the legal

representatives.

Note:Failure to comply with this duty is aground for disciplinary action.

- The heirs may be substituted for the deceasedwithout requiring the appointment of anexecutor or administrator.

- The court may appoint a guardian ad litem forthe minor heirs.

- The court shall order the legalrepresentative(s) to appear and besubstituted within 30 days from notice.

- If no legal representative is named or if theone so name shall fail to appear within thespecified period, the court may order theopposing party to procure the appointment of

an executor or administrator for the estate.

- The substitute defendant need not besummoned. The order of substitution shall beserved upon the parties substituted for thecourt to acquire jurisdiction over thesubstitute party [Ferreria v Vda de Gonzales(1986].

Death or separation of a party who is a publicofficer[Rule 3, Sec. 17]Requisites:- Public officer is a party to an action in his

official capacity;- During the pendency of the action, he either

dies/resigns or otherwise ceases to holdoffice;

- It is satisfactorily shown to the court by anyparty, within 30 days after the successor takesoffice,o that there is a substantial need to

continue/maintain the action andoThe successor adopts/continues (or

threatens to do so) his predecessors action- The party or officer affected was given

reasonable notice of the application thereforeand accorded an opportunity to be heard.

Action on contractual money claims [Rule 3, Sec.

20] Requisites:

- The action must primarily be for recovery ofmoney/debt or interest thereon;

- The claim arose from express/impliedcontract;

- Defendant dies before the entry of finaljudgment in the court in which the action waspending.

The defendants death will not result in thedismissal of the action.

The deceased shall be substituted by his legalrepresentatives in the manner provided for inRule 3, Sec. 16, and the action will continueuntil the entry of final judgment (Asked in the

2000 Bar Exam) However, execution shall not issue in favor of

the winning plaintiff. It should be filed as aclaim against the decedents estate withoutneed of proving the claim.

Transfer of interest during the pendency of theaction[Rule 3, Sec. 19]

General rule: The rule does not consider thetransferee an indispensable party. Hence, theaction may proceed without the need toimplead him.


21/127


96

Exception:When the substitution by or joinderof the transferee is ordered by court.- The case will be dismissed if the plaintiffs

interest is transferred to defendant unlessthere are several plaintiffs, in which case theremaining plaintiffs can proceed with theirown cause of action.

IV. VENUEVenue is the place, or the geographical are where anaction is to be filed and tried. In civil cases, itrelates only to the place of the suit and not to thejurisdiction of the court. [Riano citing ManilaRailroad Company v. Attorney General, (1911)]

1. Venue versus jurisdiction[Riano]

Distinctions between Venue and Jurisdiction(Asked in the 2006 and 2008 Bar Exams)

Venue Jurisdiction

Place where the action is

instituted

Power of the court to

hear and decide a caseMay be waived Jurisdiction over the

subject matter and overthe nature of the actionis conferred by law andcannot-be waived

Procedural Substantive

May be changed by thewritten agreement of theparties

Is fixed by law andcannot be the subject ofthe agreement of theparties

Establishes a relationbetween plaintiff anddefendant, or petitioner

and respondent

Establishes a relationbetween the court andthe subject matter

Not a ground for a motupropio dismissal (exceptin cases of summaryprocedure; Rule 4, Ruleon Summary Procedure)

Lack of jurisdiction overthe subject matter is aground for a motuproprio dismissal.

2. Venue of real actions

Shall be commenced and tried in the propercourt which has jurisdiction over the areawherein the real property involved, or a portionthereof is situated. [Rule 4, Sec. 1, par 1]

Forcible entry and detainer actions shall becommenced and tried in the municipal court ofthe municipality or city wherein the realproperty involved, or a portion thereof, issituated. [Rule 4, Sec. 1 par 2]

If the property is located at the boundaries of 2places, file the case in either place (at theplaintiffs option).

If the case involves 2 properties located in 2different places:- If the properties are the object of the same

transaction, file it in any of the 2 places;- If they are the objects of 2 distinct

transactions, separate actions should be filedin each place unless properly joined.

3. Venue of personal actions

At the plaintiffs election:[Rule 4, Sec. 2] Where the plaintiff or any of the principal

plaintiffs resides;

Where the defendant or any of the principaldefendants resides;

In case of a non-resident-defendant, where hemay be found.

4. Venue of actions against non-residents [Rule 5, Sec. 3][also takenfrom 2011 Reviewer]

Non-residentfoundin the Philippines - For personal actions Where the plaintiff

resides;- For real actions Where the property is

located. Non-resident not found in the Philippines An

action may be filed only when the case involves:- Personal status of plaintiff - Where plaintiff

resides;- Any property of said defendant located in thePhil. - Where the property (or any portionthereof) is situated/found.

5. When the rules on venue do notapply[Rule 4, Sec. 4]

If a specific rule/law provides otherwise (e.g.action for damages arising from libel);

Stipulations as to Venue is permitted if theparties have validly agreed- in writing- before the filing of the action- on the exclusive venue

In the absence of qualifying restrictive words (e.g.only/solely/exclusively in such court), venuestipulation is merely permissive; that is, thestipulated venue is in addition to the venue providedfor in the rules. [Polytrade Corp. v. Blanco (1969)]

The mere stipulation on the venue of an action,however, is not enough to preclude parties frombringing a case in other venues. The parties must beable to show that such stipulation is exclusive. In theabsence of qualifying or restrictive words, thestipulation should be deemed as merely anagreement on an additional forum, not as limiting

venue to the specified place. [Riano citing SpouseLantin v. Lantion, (2006)]

6. Effects of stipulations on venue

To be binding, the parties must have agreed onthe exclusive nature of the venue of anyprospective action between them. Theagreement of parties must be restrictive and notpermissive. [Regalado]

In the absence of qualifying restrictive words(e.g. only/solely/exclusively in such court),venue stipulation is merely permissive; that is,


22/127

REMEDIAL LAW REVIEWERthe stipulated venue is in addition to the venueprovided for in the rules. [Polytrade Corp. v.Blanco (1969)]

The court may declare agreements on venue ascontrary to public policy if such stipulationunjustly denies a party a fair opportunity to filesuit in the place designated by the Rules[Regalado, citing Hoechst Philippines v Torres(1978)].

Other rules on venue

IMPROPER VENUE: The Court may not motupropio dismiss an action on the ground ofimproper venue. [Dacoycoy v. IAC (1991)]

- Exception: In summary procedures. CHANGE OF VENUE: The SC has the power to

change the venue to prevent a miscarriage ofjustice. [Art. 8, Sec. 5, Consti]

WAIVER OF VENUE:- Until and unless the defendant objects to the

venue in a motion to dismiss prior to aresponsive pleading, the venue cannot trulybe said to have been improperly laid since forall intents and purposes, the venue thoughtechnically wrong may yet be consideredacceptable to the parties for whoseconvenience the rules on venue had beendevised. Although venue is mandatory, it iswaivable. [

Documents

UP 2012 Remedial Law (Civil Procedure).pdf