Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer

Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1

GENERAL PRINCIPLES SUBSTANTIVE LAW distinguished Recall too that, under the Revised Penal Code,
from REMEDIAL LAW a person who shall kill another with evident
I. REMEDIAL LAW AND premeditation or in consideration of a price,
THE RULES OF COURT 1. Remedial law is not substantive law. reward or promise, shall be guilty of murder
Substantive law creates, defines, and and shall be punished by reclusion Perpetua.
CONCEPT OF REMEDIAL LAW:
regulates rights and duties concerning life, The Revised Penal Code, however, does not lay
SOURCES
liberty, or property. Remedial law does not down the procedure for the punishment of the
1. Remedial law, as commonly understood, create rights or obligations but lays down perpetrator. For this, recourse has to be made
refers to the rules which provide the the methods by which the rights and to the provisions of the rules on criminal
system for the protection of rights, the obligations arising from substantive law procedure, another part of remedial law.
prevention of the violation of such rights are protected, enforced and given effect.
and the means of redress for such Remedial law, in other words, is that MAJOR ASPECTS OF REMEDIAL
violations. Such rules also provide the aspect of law which provides a method for LAW
methods for the enforcement of enforcing rights, preventing the violation of
Remedial law has the following major
obligations recognized by law and lay out such rights and obtaining redress for their
aspects:
the procedure by which suits are filed, violations. Remedial law, also known as
tried, and decided upon by the courts of adjective law, prescribes the practice, (a) Civil Procedure,
justice. method, and procedure by which
substantive law is enforced and made (b) Criminal Procedure,
2. Sated in some other way, remedial law
provides the “means and methods effective. (c) Special Proceedings, and
whereby causes of action may be 2. Recall that, under the Civil Code, those
who, in the performance of their (d) Evidence
effectuated, wrongs redressed and reliefs
obtained”. obligations are guilty of, among others, In addition to these aspects, there are
3. The Rules of Court, as amended by A.M. fraud or negligence, are liable for damages some special rules of procedure emanating ng
No. 1910-20-SC, promulgated by the in favor of the persons aggrieved by such from various circulars issued by the Supreme
Supreme Court, constitutes the main acts. While this provisions clearly creates Court.
source of remedial law in the Philippines. a right to damages on the part of the victim
It is not, however, the only source. Rules of of fraud or negligence, it does not outline
procedure may come from circulars and the means by which damages may be
administrative issuances of the Supreme obtained from the erring party. It is
Court. Procedural rules are also embodied remedial law, specifically civil procedure,
in some provisions of the Philippine which provides the methods by which the
Constitution and even in some statutes aggrieved party may recover damages.
passed by the legislature.
1
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1

SCOPE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE IN work injustice, in which event, the former all pending proceedings, except to the extent
THE RULES OF COURT procedure shall apply. that in the opinion of the court, their
application would not be feasible or would
Civil procedure includes: Rules of procedure, may be made
work injustice, in which case the procedure
applicable to actions pending and
under which the cases were filed shall govern.
(a) ordinary civil actions (Rules 1-56); undetermined at the time of their passage, and
are deemed retroactive in that sense and to WHEN PROCEDURAL RULES DO
(b) provisional remedies (Rules 57-61); and
that extent. The rules are retroactive only in NOT APPLY TO PENDING ACTIONS
(c) special civil actions (Rules 62-71). this sense.
While a procedural rule may be made
The Rules of Court, as amended by It need be mentioned that Rule 144 applicable to actions pending and
A.M. No. 19-10-20SC, as a whole, has expressly makes the rules under the Rules of undetermined at the time of their passage and
reference to the body of rules governing Court applicable also to “further proceedings is retroactive in that sense, the rule does not
pleading, practice and procedure in cases then pending" when the Rules of apply:
promulgated by the Supreme Court pursuant Court took effect. For instance, the Court
to its rule-making powers under the applied to pending actions, a rule (a) where the statute itself or by
Constitution, Since such rules do not originate promulgated through a case which necessary implication provides that
from the legislature, they cannot be called standardized the period for appeal by allowing pending actions are excepted from its
laws in the strict sense of the word. However, a ‘fresh period’ of 15 days within which to file operation:
since they are promulgated by authority of law, the notice of appeal with the Regional Trial (b) if applying the rule to pending
they have the force and effect of law if not in Court, counted from receipt of the order proceedings would impair vested
conflict with positive law. The Rules are dismissing a motion for a new trial or motion rights;
subordinate to statute, and in case of conflict, for reconsideration. (c) When to do so would not be feasible or
the statute will prevail. would work injustice; or
Declared the Court: (d) if doing so would involve intricate
PROSPECTIVE EFFECT OF THE problems of due process or impair the
“x x x Being procedural in nature, Neypes is
RULES OF COURT deemed to be applicable to actions pending independence of the courts
1. The rules embodied in the Rules of Court and undetermined at the time of its effectivity
are not penal laws and are not to be given and is thus, retroactive in that sense and to
retroactive effect. that extent”.
2. The rules shall govern cases brought after 3. The Administrative Matter No. 19-10-20-SC
they take of or the 2019 Amendments to the 1997 Rules of
3. effect, and also to pending cases, except Civil Procedure shall govern all cases filed
if, in the opinion of the court, their after their effectivity on May 1, 2020, and also
application would not be feasible or would
2
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1

ACTIONS OR PROCEEDINGS 3. It has also been held that rules of compliance with technicalities contrary to the
GOVERNED BY THE RULES OF procedure imposed in judicial demands of substantial justice.
proceedings are unavailing in cases before
COURT An earlier labor case held that although
administrative bodies. Accordingly,
mere affidavits are hearsay, when used in
The Rules of Court shall govern the procedure administrative bodies are not bound by the
court proceedings, the argument that the
to be observed in civil actions, criminal technical niceties of law and procedure
affidavits attached to the case are hearsay
actions, and special proceedings and shall and the rules obtaining in the courts of law.
because the affiants were not presented in the
also apply in Even the COMELEC, a quasi-judicial body,
labor case for cross-examination, was
is not bound to strictly adhere to the
all courts, except as otherwise provided by the deemed not Persuasive. This io bene the rules
technical rules of procedure in the
Supreme Court. on evidence are not strictly observed in
presentation of evidence. It has similarly
proceedings before administrative bodies like
ACTIONS OR PROCEEDINGS NOT been declared that the rules on evidence
the NLRC where decisions may be reached on
are not strictly applied in proceedings
GOVERNED BY THE RULES OF the basis of position papers only. Rules that
before administrative bodies such as the
COURT prevail in judicial proceedings are not
Board of Medicine.
controlling before es Sa arbiter and the NLRC.
1. Sec. 4, Rule 1 of the Rules of Court, as
Even in appeals in labor cases, the
amended by AM. No. 19-10-20-SC. clearly 4. Jurisprudence has actually long affirmed
requirement of proof of service may be
provides that the Rules shall not apply to the principle that the judicial rules of
dispensed with since, in such appeals, non-
the following cases: procedure do not apply to non-judicial
service of copy of the appeal or appeal
proceedings, among others, labor
(a) election cases; memorandum to the adverse party is not a
disputes.
jurisdictional defect which calls for the
(b) land registration cases; Labor disputes are not governed by the dismissal of the appeal.
(c) cadastral cases; strict and technical rules on evidence and
5. Ina much earlier case, the petitioner
procedure observed in the regular courts of
(d) naturalization cases; and argued against the order of the appellate
law. Technical rules of procedure are not
court admitting a documentary evidence
(e) insolvency proceedings. applicable in labor cases, but may apply only
not formally offered in evidence in the trial
by analogy or in a suppletory character, as
2. The use of the Rules of Court is not totally court. The petitioner, invoking Sec. 84 of
when there is a need to attain substantial
prohibited in the cases enumerated in the Rule 132, argued that only evidence which
justice and an expeditious, practical and
preceding number. The Rules may apply to has been formally offered shall be
convenient solution to a labor problem. That is
the above cases by: (a) analogy, or (b) in a considered by the court and that such
why a reliance on the technical ules on
suppletory character and whenever formal offer is made in the trial court and
evidence in labor cases is misplaced. To apply,
practicable and convenient. not for the first time in the appellate court.
for instance, the concept of judicial
The contention, however, was ruled by the
admissions in such cases, is to exact
3
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
Supreme Court as bereft of merit. The II. RULE MAKING POWER “x x x The rule-making power of th[e] Court has
Court emphasized that the rule on formal OF THE SUPREME COURT expanded. Th[e] Court for the first time, was
offer of evidence is not applicable to a given the power to disapprove rules of
case involving a petition for naturalization. CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY TO procedure of special courts and quasi-judicial
PROMULGATE RULES bodies. But most important, the 1987
6. In another case of a more recent vintage, Constitution took away the power of Congress
1. Sec. 5(5), Art. VI, Constitution of the
the Court brushed aside the respondent’s to repeal, alter or supplement rules
Philippines expressly confers upon the
objection to the submission of mere concerning pleading, practice and procedure.
Supreme Court the power to:
photocopies in a quasi-judicial In fine, the power to promulgate rules of
proceeding involving issues in intellectual “x x x Promulgate rules concerning the pleading, practice and procedure is no longer
property. The Court reiterated the rule that protection and enforcement of constitutional shared by th[e] Court with Congress, more so
quasi-judicial and administrative bodies rights, pleading, practice, and procedure in all with the executive xx x.”” (Echegaray v.
are not bound by the technical rules of courts, the admission to the practice of law, Secretary of Justice)
procedure, that technicalities should the integrated bar, and legal assistance to the
The Court, in further describing its
never be used to defeat the substantive underprivileged. Such rules shall provide a
rule-making power, also held that “It has the
rights of a party, and that every litigant simplified and inexpensive procedure for the
sole prerogative to amend, repeal or even
should be afforded the opportunity for the speedy disposition of cases, shall be uniform
establish new rules for a more simplified and
proper and just determination of his for all courts of the same grade, and shall not
inexpensive process, and the speedy
cause, free from the constraints of diminish, increase, or modify substantive
disposition of cases”.
technicalities. rights. Rules of procedure of special courts
and quasi-judicial bodies shall remain 3. The other branches of government are
THE NEED TO FOLLOW effective unless disapproved by the Supreme said to trespass upon the rule-making
FUNDAMENTAL EVIDENTIARY Court.”. power of the Supreme Court if they enact
RULES laws or issue orders that effectively
2. The rule-making power of the Supreme
repeal, alter or modify any of the
The Supreme Court, however, emphasized Court specifically includes the
procedural rules promulgated by the
that “While administrative or quasi-judicial constitutional power to promulgate rules
Court.
bodies x x x, are not bound by the technical concerning pleading, practice, and
rules of procedure, this rule cannot be taken procedure (Sec. 5/5], Art. VIII,
as a license to disregard fundamental Constitution of the Philippines).
evidentiary rules; the decision of the Describing its rulemaking power under
administrative agencies and the evidence it the 1987 Constitution, the Supreme
relies upon must, at the very least be Court explained:
substantial”

4
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1

LIMITATIONS ON THE RULE- procedure ag a necessary complement suspend a rule, From the point of view of
MAKING POWER OF THE SUPREME to its power to promulgate the same the Court, “[T]he power to suspend or
2. “The courts have the power to relax or even disregard rules can be so pervasive
COURT
suspend technical or procedural rules or and compelling as to alter even that
The following limitations are imposed by the to except a case from their operation which the Court itself had already
Constitution on the rule-making power of the when compelling reasons so warrant or declared to be final.
Supreme Court: when the purpose of justice requires it.
What constitutes food and sufficient 4. The power to suspend procedural rules
(a) The rules shall provide a simplified and
cause that would merit suspension of or relax the application of such rules, has
inexpensive procedure for the speedy the rules is discretionary upon the also been exercised in criminal cases,
disposition of cases: courts”. Thus, it is within the power of the Note that under Sec. 23, Rule 119 of the
Supreme Court to make exceptions to Rules of Court, an order denying a
(b) The rules shall be uniform for courts of the the Rules of Court. It may permit the full demurrer to evidence shall not be
same grade; and and exhaustive ventilation of the parties’ reviewable by certiorari or appeal before
(c) The rules shall not diminish, increase, or arguments and positions despite the judgment. However, when the
modify substantive rights. supposed technical infirmities of a Sandiganbayan, in one celebrated case,
petition or its alleged procedural flaws. denied a demurrer to evidence filed by
POWER TO AMEND AND SUSPEND the accused, a petition for certiorari was
THE RULES 3. The power to suspend technical rules is entertained by the Supreme Court. It
observed to be broader and more granted the petition and set aside the
1. The SC has the power to amend, repeal pervasive when exercised by the resolution of the Sandiganbayan denying
or even establish new rules for a more Supreme Court. For instance, one the demurrer to evidence as having been
simplified and inexpensive process, and jurisprudential rule that has been issued with grave abuse of discretion.
the speedy disposition of cases. The followed with remarkable consistency is The Court, in the case, declared that the
constitutional power of the Supreme the principle that when a decision “exercise of this power to correct grave
Court to promulgate rules of practice and becomes final, the same can, and abuse of discretion amounting to lack or
procedure and to amend or repeal the should, never be disturbed. The rule is excess of jurisdiction on the part of any
same necessarily carries with it the grounded on the fundamental principle branch or instrumentality of the
power to overturn judicial precedents on of public policy and sound practice that, Government cannot be thwarted by rules
points of remedial law through the at the risk of occasional error, the of procedure to the contrary or for the
amendment of the Rules of Court. The judgment of courts must become final at sake of the convenience of one side"
Court is invested with the power to some definite date fixed by law.
suspend the application of the rules of Nevertheless, the rule has not been
spared from the Court's power to
5
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
The Court, on April 18, 2017, in denying the 6. The suspension of the Rules by the Court 8. It has been consistently held that
prosecution's motion for reconsideration in is not based on whim, caprice or flimsy litigations should, as much as possible,
the same case held that “[T]he prohibition reasons. Jurisprudence cite important be decided on the merits and not on
contained in See. 23, Rule 119 of the Rules of factors that would warrant such technicalities. For example, in one case,
Court is not an insuperable obstacle to the suspension, like: the Court allowed the perfection of the
review by the Court of the denial of the (a) the existence of special or compelling appeal of the Republic, despite the delay
demurrer to evidence through certiorari.” circumstances; of six days, since the Republic stands to
(b) the merits of the case; lose hundreds of hectares of land
5. Another principle, that has guided trial
(c) a cause not entirely attributable to the already titled in its name. This was done
courts on the matter of bail, is that a
fault or negligence of the party favored by in order to prevent a gross miscarriage of
person charged with an offense
the suspension of rules; justice. Also, in another case, the Court
punishable by reclusion perpetua or life
(d) a lack of any showing that the review suspended the rule that a motion for
imprisonment shall not be admitted to
sought is merely frivolous and dilatory; extension of time to file a motion for
bail when evidence of guilt is strong (See
and reconsideration in the CA does not toll
Sec. 7, Rule 114, Rules of Court). The
(e) the rights of the other party will not be the 15-day period to appeal. The Court
tenor of the provision, which merely
unjustly prejudiced thereby held that the procedural infirmity was not
echoes the Constitution, allows the
entirely attributable to the fault of the
denial or the granting of bail on the basis
7. The Court could take cognizance of a petitioner and there was lack of any
of the evidence. The accused is not
petition despite its procedural showing that the review sought is merely
entitled to bail when the evidence of guilt
infirmities, as when the petitioner has no frivolous and dilatory. Similarly, in a later
is strong: otherwise, he may be allowed
legal standing to file the same. Being a case, the Court permitted the delay of
bail. In one case, however, the Court
mere procedural technicality, the seven days in the filing of the motion for
granted bail to the accused, not
requirement of locus standi may be reconsideration in view of the CA's
necessarily on the basis of the evidence,
waived by the Court in the exercise of its erroneous application of legal principles
but on the basis, among others, of his
discretion given the transcendental to prevent the resulting inequity that
age and fragile health. The decision was
importance of the constitutional issues it might arise from the outright denial of the
guided, not only by the principal purpose
raises as when the petition challenges petition.
of bail, which is to guarantee the
the constitutionality of the manner by
appearance of the accused at the trial,
which the President of the Philippines
but also by what the Court described as
makes appointments to the judiciary.
the “national commitment to uphold the
fundamental human rights as well as the
value and dignity of every person xxx"

6
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1

PRO HAC VICE RULE justice, The higher objective of procedural GENERA RULE ON COMPLIANCE
rules is to ensure that the substantive WITH PROCEDURAL RULES;
• When the Court, in certain exceptional rights of the parties are protected.
circumstances, suspends a procedural EXCEPTIONS
Litigations should, as much as possible,
rule in a particular cage, the decision be decided on the merits and not on 1. Although the Court has invariably relaxed
therein cannot be relied on as a technicalities. the rule on technicalities in order to afford
precedent since the ruling is for that litigants their day in court, liberal
particular case only or pro hac vice. 3. A fundamental rule recognized by the application of procedural rules is still the
Jurisprudence has described pro hac Court with Court with consistency, hence, exception. In other words, the zealous
vice as a Latin term meaning “for this one worth remembering, is that “Procedural observance of the rules is still the general
only.” When the ruling is qualified as rules are set not to frustrate the ends of course of action as it serves to guarantee
such, the same cannot be used as a substantial justice but are tools to the orderly, just and speedy disposition of
precedent to govern other cases. expedite the resolution of cases on the cases.
merits". Hence, matters of procedure 2. It has been emphasized that “invocation of
normally take a backseat when issues of substantial justice is not a magical
THE RULE ON LIBERAL
substantial or transcendental importance incantation that will automatically
CONSTRUCTION; PURPOSE
are present. The rule on liberal compel” the Court to suspend procedural
1. The rule is expressed in Sec. 6 of Rule 1 of construction involves a relaxation of the rules, Such rules “are not to be belittled or
the Rules of Court, thus: procedural rules when their rigid dismissed simply because their non-
application would hinder substantial observance may have resulted in
“SEC. 6. Construction. — These Rules shall be justice. This is because the rules of prejudice to a party's substantive rights”.
liberally construed in order to promote their procedure are mere tools designed to The phrase, “in the interest of justice” is
objective of securing a just, speedy and facilitate the attainment of justice. In sum, not "a magic wand that would
inexpensive disposition of every action and the rule means that a strict and rigid automatically compel the suspension of
proceeding.” application of the rules of procedure, procedural rules”.
especially on technical matters, which
2. While jurisprudence recognizes the It needs to be reiterated that compliance
tend to frustrate rather than promote
importance of procedural rules in ensuring with the procedural rules is still the general
substantial justice, must be avoided.
effective enforcement of substantive rule, and abandonment thereof should only be
rights, the law abhors technicalities that done in the most exceptional circumstances.
impede the cause of justice Hence, the Earlier, the Court cautioned litigants that there
rule is that courts should not be unduly should be an effort on the part of the party
strict on procedural lapses that do not invoking liberality to explain his failure to abide
really impair the proper administration of by the rules. In other words, parties praying for

7
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
the liberal interpretation of the rules must be Because venue, in criminal cases, is an not jurisdictional, and hence may be
able to hurdle that heavy burden of proving essential element of jurisdiction, where the waived. It is meant to provide
that they deserve an exceptional treatment. It information is filed in a place where the convenience to the parties, rather than
was never the Court's intent “to forge a bastion offense was not committed, the information restrict their access to the courts as it
for erring litigants to violate the rules with may be quashed for “lack of jurisdiction” over relates to the place of trial”;
impunity” the offense charged and not merely “improper (d) Jurisdiction is fixed by law and cannot
venue.” Also, because venue is jurisdictional in be conferred by the parties; venue may
VENUE a criminal case, it cannot be waived by the be conferred by the act or agreement
RULE 4 parties. This is not so in a civil case where of the parties.
improper venue is not equivalent to lack of (e) Jurisdiction over the subject matter
Meaning of venue jurisdiction. Because it is merely procedural, may be raised at any stage of the
the parties to a civil case can waive the venue proceedings since it is conferred by
Venue is the place, or the geographical area,
of a cage. law, although a party may be barred
in which a court with jurisdiction may hear
from raising it on the ground of
and determine a case, or the place where a SOME SPECIFIC DISTINCTIONS estoppel.
case is to be tried.
BETWEEN JURISDICTION (over
Before, subject to the omnibus motion
Venue in Civil Cases vs Venue in subject matter) AND VENUE
rule, the objection to an improper venue must
Criminal Cases 1. Jurisprudence differentiates jurisdiction be raised either in a motion to dismiss or in the
• Venue relates only to the place of trial or from venue as follows: answer because, as a rule, under Sec. 1 of
the geographical location in which an (a) Jurisdiction refers to the authority of Rule 9, defenses and objections not pleaded
action or proceeding should be brought. It the court to hear and determine a either in a motion to dismiss or in the answer
is intended to accord convenience to the case; venue refers to the place where are deemed waived. Where the improper
parties, as it relates to the place of trial. It the case is to be heard or tried; venue was already apparent at the time the
does not equate to the jurisdiction of the (b) Jurisdiction is a matter of substantive motion to dismiss was filed, the objection to
court. law; venue, of procedural law. A wrong venue should be raised in the motion to
• Venue is procedural and not substantive. venue is a mere procedural infirmity, dismiss pursuant to the omnibus motion rule:
In civil cases, venue is not a matter of not a jurisdictional defect. otherwise, such objection shall be deemed
jurisdiction. In essence, venue concerns a (c) Jurisdiction, being a matter of waived. The defense of improper venue is not
rule of procedure. substantive law, cannot be waived by one of those defenses which are not waived
the parties; venue may be waived if not even if not raised in a motion to dismiss or in
• Venue, however, is treated differently in a
invoked either in a motion to dismiss or the answer.
criminal case. Jurisprudence holds that
in the answer. One Court decision
venue in criminal cases is jurisdictional.
clearly declares: “Venue is procedural,

8
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
The 2019 Amendments to the 1997 Rules Rule 4 of the Rules of Court, a real action the degree of interest in actively participating
of Civil Procedure now prohibits motion to is one that affects title to or possession of in the litigation.
dismiss based on the ground of improper real property, or an interest therein x x x, In
• If the defendant is. a non-resident, the
venue. The rule now is to raise the improper contrast, the Rules of Court declares all
venue is where the plaintiff or any of the
venue as an affirmative defense in the answer. other actions as personal actions. Such
principal plaintiffs resides, or where the
Failure to raise the improper venue at the actions may include those brought for the
non-resident defendant may be found, at
earliest opportunity shall constitute a waiver recovery of personal property, or for the
the election of the plaintiff.
thereof. The court shall motu proprio resolve enforcement of some contract or recovery
the same within 30 calendar days from the of damages for its breach, or for the Example: Thomas Reed, a Canadian tourist,
filing of the answer. recovery of damages for the commission billeted in a hotel in Quezon City, is sued for
of an injury to person or property x x x" damages by a restaurant owner residing in
Basic venue analysis
Manila. Quezon City is a possible venue. It is
VENUE IN: Personal Actions
• The rules on venue do not give a plaintiff the place where the defendant may be found.
the freedom to bring suits wherever he • The venuein personal actions is where the The other possible venue is Manila, the
chooses. The venue of a case is plaintiff or any of the principal plaintiffs residence of the plaintiff.
circumscribed by specific and definite resides, or where the defendant or any of
• The term “resides” as employed in the rule
rules to ensure a fair procedure by the principal defendants resides, at the
on venue on personal actions means the
preventing undue harassment of a election of the plaintiff. Personal actions
place of abode, whether permanent or
defendant by the plaintiff, Such rules are are often referred to as transitory because
temporary, of the plaintiff or the
neither circuitous nor complicated. In its venue ‘moves’ depending on the
defendant, as distinguished from
order to know the venue of a particular residences of the parties.
“domicile” which denotes a fixed
action, the basic and initial step is to
There are cases in which there are several permanent residence to which, when
determine if the action is personal or real.
parties and some of them are merely formal or absent, one has the intention of returning.
If it is personal, the venue is deemed
nominal. Sec. 2 of Rule 4 instructs that when
transitory and thus, generally depends Example: Mr. DD was born in Cebu City. It is in
there is more than one plaintiff or defendant in
upon the residences of the parties. the same place where he raised a family, He
a personal action, the residences of the
If it is real, the venue is local and, thus, applied for a job and was hired by a company
principal parties should be the basis for
generally, the venue is the place where the in Manila where he lives in an apartment
determining the proper venue. The word,
property or any portion of the same is adjacent to his place of work. For purposes of
‘principal’ has been used in order to prevent
situated. venue, in an action for a sum of money, Manila
the plaintiff from choosing the residence of a
• “The determinants of whether an action is is his residence.
minor plaintiff or defendant as the venue.
of a real or personal nature have been fixed
Such party would not be expected to exhibit
by the Rules of Court and relevant
jurisprudence. According to Section 1,
9
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
• The residence of a domestic corporation is of San Fernando, La Union, may be filed in and must be filed in the place where the
the place, within the Philippines, where its either place, at the option of the plaintiff. real property is located. Actions for
principal office is located. unlawful detainer, forcible entry, accion
• Assume that two cars, Car AA and Car AA, publiciana, accion reivindicatoria, and for
Jurisprudence holds: “A corporation has no
collided in a highway within the territorial reconveyance of real property, are real
residence in the same sense in which this term
jurisdiction of Mandaluyong City. The actions and must be filed in the place
is applied to a natural person. But for practical
owner of Car AA, a resident of Makati City where the subject property is situated. The
purposes, a corporation is In 8 metaphysical
wants to file a complaint for damages same applies to partition of real property
sense a resident of the place where its
against the owner of Car BB, a resident of and judicial foreclosure of real estate
principal office is located as stated in the
Manila. The complaint may be filed either mortgage.
articles of incorporation. The Corporation
in Makati City or Manila at the election of
Code precisely requires each corporation to
the plaintiff. The action cannot be
specify in its articles of incorporation the
instituted in Mandaluyong City since it is Example: Mr.DD, a resident of Manila, files an
“place where the principal office of the
not the residence of either the plaintiff or action for reconveyance of a real property
corporation is to be located which must be
the defendant. located in Makati City, against Mr. DD, a
within the Philippines” (See. 14/3/). The
resident of Pasay City. The proper venue is
purpose of this requirement is to fix the VENUE IN: Real Actions
Makati City, the place where the property,
residence of a corporation in a definite place,
• Actions affecting title to, or possession of, subject of the action, is located. Manila and
instead of allowing it to be ambulatory”. Thus,
real property, or interest therein, shall be Pasay City are not proper venues.
if the principal office of ABC Corporation is
located in Makati City, but its branch offices commenced and tried in the proper court An action to recover possession of the leased
are situated in Manila and Quezon City, the which has jurisdiction over the area real property and for the payment of accrued
latter two places cannot be proper venues in a wherein the real property involved, or a rentals must be filed in Davao City where the
suit by or against the corporation, such places portion thereof, is situated. property is located because the action is a real
not being the locations of the principal office. The rule, in its simplified form, means that action, The primary purpose of the action is
if the action is real, the action is local, as the recovery of possession of the real property
• Actions for damages and actions to collect
opposed to transitory, and the venue is the and the payment of accrued rentals is merely
a sum of money must be filed in either the
place where the real property involved, or any incidental to the main case.
residence of the plaintiff or the residence
of the defendant, at the election of the portion thereof, is situated (Sec. I, Rule 4, Forcible entry and detainer actions shall be
plaintiff. Such actions are personal Rules of Court). In a real action, the residences commenced and tried in the municipal court
actions. Hence, an action for the of the parties are irrelevant to the choice of of the municipality or city wherein the real
collection of P1 million filed by a resident venue. property involved, or a portion thereof, is
of Lingayen, Pangasinan against a resident • Actions to recover possession or situated
ownership of real property are real actions
10
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
• In determining venue, one must inquire is deemed a real action. The venue of the Complaint itself, rather than by its title or
into the primary purpose of the action, not action, therefore, is the place where the heading. It is also a settled rule that what
the title or heading given agar: Thus, where real property involved is situated. determines the venue of a case is the
the complaint was captioned as for the • An action to recover the deficiency after primary objective for the filing of the case
“declaration of the nullity” of a deed of the extrajudicial foreclosure of the real x x x"
absolute sale involving a real property property mortgaged is a personal action, • An action to annul a deed of real estate
located in Makati City, the venue for such for it does not affect title to, possession of mortgage filed by the mortgagor is a
action is unquestionably the proper court or any interest in real property. The action personal action. Since the mortgagor is
of Makati City if the action is instituted is for the recovery of money, hence, a the owner of the property mortgaged,
primarily for the recovery of the subject personal action. The venue is the there is no claim of ownership involved.
property. However, where the action for residence of the plaintiff or the residence The venue of the action is the residence of
the nullification of a deed of sale is not of the defendant at the election of the the plaintiff or that of the defendant at the
intended for the recovery or reconveyance plaintiff. election of the plaintiff. Where the
of real property, since title to the property • In a case, the plaintiff sought the return of property has already been sold on
has not passed the respondent, but solely the portion of the subject property or its foreclosure and there has been a change
for the annulment of a contract, is a value on the basis of his co-ownership in the ownership of the land, an action to
personal action that may be filed in the thereof. The Court held that while the annul the foreclosure sale is obviously to
court where the plaintiff or the defendant complaint of the petitioner was recover ownership of the property. Hence,
resides. denominated as one for recovery of the the action becomes a real action. The
• Where the action is for specific property or its value, the said complaint is venue to annul the foreclosure sale is the
performance and does not involve actually anchored on his claim of place where the real property is located.
recovery of real property, the action is a ownership over a portion of the subject
personal action. The action, therefore, property. Hence, his alternative claim for VENUE OF: actions against non-
may be commenced and tried where the the value of the property is still dependent residents affecting the personal
plaintiff resides, or where the defendant or on the determination of ownership, which status of the plaintiff; actions
any of the principal defendants resides, at is an action affecting title to or possession affecting property of the non-
the election of the plaintiff. Where, of real property or an interest therein. resident in the Philippines
however, a complaint is denominated as Clearly, petitioner's claim is a real action
one for specific performance but, which should be filed in the court where 1. The rule on venue under Sec. 3 of Rule 4 of
nonetheless, prays for the issuance of a the property lies, which in this case, is the the Rules of Court, applies when:
deed of sale for a parcel of land, to enable RTC of Morong, Rizal. In this jurisdiction, a. any of the defendants is a non-resident
the plaintiff to acquire ownership thereof, emphasized the Court, “we adhere to the and, at the same time, not found in the
its primary objective and nature is one to principle that the nature of an action is Philippines; and
recover the parcel of land itself and, thus, determined by the allegations in the
11
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
b. the action affects the personal status any property of a non-resident defendant who Examples: (i) A quo warranto proceeding
of the plaintiff; or is not found in the Philippines — would well commenced by the Solicitor General and filed,
c. the action affects any property of the serve the interest of a resident plaintiff, rather not with the Court of Appeals or the Supreme
nonresident defendant located in the than of a possible absconding non-resident Court, is to be filed with the Regional Trial
Philippines. defendant. Court of Manila. This particular rule does not
consider the residence of the respondent
Take the example of a plaintiff: a resident of
2. The action in the above situations may be (Sec. 7, Rule 66, Rules of Court). (ii) A petition
Manila, who files an action to foreclose a real
commenced and tried in the court of the for a continuing writ of mandamus if filed with
estate mortgage, instead of filing an action for
place where the plaintiff resides, or where the Regional Trial Court, other than with the
a sum of money, against the defendant, a
the property or any portion thereof is Court of Appeals or Supreme Court, shall be
former Philippine resident and now a
situated or found. filed with the Regional Trial Court exercising
permanent U.S. resident. The defendant, who
jurisdiction over the territory where the
refuses to pay the debt, leaves the country
actionable neglect or omission occurred (Sec.
with no intent of personally submitting himself
3. Under Sec. 3 of Rule 4, if an action for 2, Rule & Rules of Procedure for Environmental
to the jurisdiction of the court. Assume that
partition of real property is filed by the Cases).
the property mortgaged is situated in the most
plaintiff, a resident of Manila, naming his
southern part of the Philippines. A liberal (ii) The civil (as well as criminal) action for
co-owner brothers, all residents of Los
interpretation of the rule would save the damages in written defamation shall be filed
Angeles, California, as defendants, and
plaintiff from going through the rigors of with the RTC of the province or city where the
involving a property located in Makati City,
travelling to a distant place just to file and libelous article is printed and first published or
the plaintiff may file the action in Makati
prosecute the action. A contrary interpretation where any of the offended parties actually
City, the place where the property is
would lead to an unfortunate situation in resides at the time of the commission of the
situated. However, the tenor of the rule, as
which a defendant, who refuses to pay a just offense. However, where one of the offended
written, appears to give the plaintiff a
debt, would have the capacity to cause so parties is a public officer, whose office is in the
choice of venue. This may be liberally
much inconvenience to an aggrieved plaintiff. City of Manila at the time of the commission of
interpreted to allow the plaintiff to
the offense, the action shall be filed with the
commence and have the action tried WHEN THE RULES ON VENUE DO RTC of the City of Manila or of the city or
either in Manila, the place where he NOT APPLY province where the libelous article is printed
resides, or in Makati City, the place where
and first published. In case such public officer
the property is situated. The rules on venue are not applicable in any of
does not hold office in the City of Manila, the
the following cases:
Comment: Unless the Court declares action shall be filed with the RTC of the
otherwise, it is submitted that a liberal a. Where a specific rule or law provides province or city where he held office at the
interpretation of Sec. 3 of Rule 4 — giving the otherwise. time of the commission of the offense or
plaintiff a choice of venue in actions affecting where the libelous article is printed and first
published. In case one of the offended parties
12
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
is a private individual, the action shall be filed place agreed upon or merely City which, by the terms of the said
with the RTC of the city or province where he permissive in that the parties may file agreement, is not exclusive, the venue
actually resides at the time of the commission their suits not only in the place agreed of the action may be Quezon City,
of the offense or where the libelous matter is upon but also in the places fixed by the Makati City or Pasay City, at the
printed and first published. rules. In other words, where the venue election of the plaintiff. Pasay City
stipulated upon is restrictive or would simply be considered as an
b. Where the parties have validly agreed
mandatory, the complaint is to be filed additional, not an exclusive, venue.
in writing before the filing of the action
only in the stipulated venue.
on the exclusive venue thereof (See. 4, On the other hand, a stipulation that “any
Rule 4, Rules of Court). Where the stipulated venue is merely suit arising from this contract shall be filed
permissive, the complaint may be filed in the only in Quezon City,” is exclusive in character
STIPULATIONS ON VENUE place designated by the Rules or in the place and clear enough as to preclude the fling of the
1. The parties may agree on a specific stipulated. The latter place, thus, becomes a action in any other place. In this case, the rule
venue which could be in a place where permissible venue in addition to those that the residences of the parties are to be
neither of them resides. In real provided for by the Rules. This means that “in considered in determining the venue of
actions, like unlawful detainer, the the absence of qualifying or restrictive words, personal actions will not apply because of the
parties may stipulate on a venue other the stipulation should be deemed as merely restrictive tenor of the stipulated venue.
than the place where the real property an agreement on an additional forum, not as
4. How about a stipulation that the “parties
is situated. limiting venue to a specified place”
agree to sue and be sued in the courts of
The parties may stipulate on the venue as 3. It must be emphasized that the mere Manila"?
long as the agreement is (a) in writing, (b) stipulation on the venue of an action,
This was actually the stipulation in a suit
made before the filing of the action, and (c) however, 1s not enough to preclude
subject of the landmark case of Polytrade
exclusive as to the venue (Sec. 4[b] Rule 4, parties from bringing a case in other
Corporation v. Blanco, 30 SCRA 187, 191. This
Rules of Court). While the first two requisites venues. The parties must be able to
stipulation was held not to be reais exclusive
rarely pose a problem, the third has been the show that such stipulation is
to prevent the filing of the suit in the places
source of controversy in the past. exclusive. In the absence of qualifying
provided a for by the rules, i.e., in the
or restrictive words, the stipulation
2. Written stipulations as to venue, residence of the plaintiff or of t defendant,
should be deemed as merely an
according to the Court, are either According to the Court, the plain meaning ae
agreement on an additional forum, not
restrictive (mandatory) or permissive, said provision is that the parties merely
as limiting venue to the specified
In interpreting stipulations, inquiry consented to be sued in the courts of Manila
place. Thus, if the plaintiff, in an action
must be made as to whether or not the considering that there are no qualifying or
for damages, resides in Quezon City
agreement is restrictive in the sense restrictive words which would indicate that
while the defendant resides in Makati
that the suit may be filed only in the Manila, and Manila alone, is the agreed venue.
City, and the agreed venue is Pasay
13
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
It simply is permissive and the parties did not property 18 within the territorial litigation arising out of this agreement, the
waive their right to pursue the remedy in the jurisdiction of the province venue of action shall be in the competent
places specifically mentioned in the Rules of concerned, or shall be held in the courts of the Province of Rizal.
Court. city, if the property is within the
territorial jurisdiction of the city
5. The Polytrade doctrine was further applied
concerned” The Supreme Court construed this
in the case of Unimasters
d. “All court litigation procedures agreement as sufficient to limit the venue to
Conglomeration, Inc. Appeals, 267 SCRA
shall be conducted in the the proper court of Rizal and, thus, exclusive in
759, 776, v. Court of 777, which analyzed
appropriate courts of Valenzuela its import. However, in Supena v. De la Rosa,
the various jurisprudence rendered after
City, Metro Manila” 267 SCRA I, J4, it was ruled that Hoechst had
the Polytrade case. In Unimasters, it was
7. Examples of words with restrictive been rendered obsolete by recent
ruled that a stipulation stating that “oll
meanings are: “only,” “solely,” “exclusively jurisprudence applying the doctrine
suits arising out of this Agreement shall be
in this court," “in no other court save —," enunciated in Polytrade.
filed within the proper Courts of Quezon
“particularly,” “nowhere else but/except —
City" is only permissive and does not limit 8. Where the venue stipulated in the deed of
, OT words of equal import.
the venue to the Quezon City courts. real estate mortgage provides for a venue
Another example is: “In the event of suits different from a subsequent restructuring
6. The following stipulations were, likewise, arising out of or in connection with this agreement of the loan subject of the
treated as merely permissive and did not mortgage and/or the promissory note/s mortgage, and the subsequent agreement
limit the venue to the stipulated place: secured by this mortgage, the parties hereto was entered into to modify the entire loan
a. “x x x The agreed venue for such agree to bring their causes of action obligation, including the mortgage, the
action is Makati, Metro Manila, exclusively in the proper court of Makati, Metro restrictive venue in the restructuring
Philippines” Manila or at such other venue chosen by the agreement should prevail. Since Makati
b. “In case of litigation hereunder, Mortgagee, the Mortgagor waiving for this was the exclusive venue agreed upon,
venue shall be in the City Court or purpose any other venue”. Makati is the proper venue
Court of First Instance of Manila as
Cases like Hoechst Philippines, Inc. v.
the case may be for determination
Torres, 83 SCRA 297 and Bautista v. De Borja,
of any and all questions arising
18 SCRA 474, and other rulings contrary to the
thereunder”
Polytrade doctrine must be deemed
c. “It is hereby agreed that in case of
superseded by current decisions on venue.
foreclosure of this mortgage under
Act 3195, as amended, and In particular, the 1978 case of Hoechst
Presidential Decree No. 385, the Philippines, Inc. v. Torres, 89 SCRA 297, 201,
auction sale shall be held at the involved the stipulation that “in case of any
capital of the province, if the
14
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1

A restrictive stipulation on venue is should not be bound by the exclusive venue basis of this rule is Art. 1874 of the Civil Code
not binding when the validity of the stipulation contained therein and should be which provides that, “The various stipulations
filed in accordance with the general rules on of a contract shall be interpreted together,
contract is assailed
venue. To be sure, it would be inherently attributing to the doubtful ones that sense
The instant case arose from a consistent for a complaint of this nature to which may result from all of them taken
complaint for nullity of a mortgage contract, recognize the exclusive venue stipulation jointly.”
promissory note, loan agreement, foreclosure when it, in fact, precisely assails the validity of
The rule is exemplified by one case
of mortgage, cancellation of a transfer the instrument in which such stipulation is
where the plaintiff sought to foreclose the
certificate of title, and damages against a contained. The plaintiff, therefore, ruled the
chattel mortgage by filing a complaint for
lending company. In his complaint, filed in Court, is not bound to file the action in Makati
replevin with damages against the defendants
Manila, the plaintiff alleged that he is the City.
before the Regional Trial Court of Dagupan
owner of a real property which was sought to
VENUE IN: Contract of Adhesion City. After service of summons, the
be foreclosed by the defendant despite his not
defendants moved to dismiss the complaint
having contracted any loans from the 1. The Court had ruled that contracts of on the ground of improper venue based on a
defendant. He claimed that he has been adhesion might be occasionally struck provision in the promissory note which states
working and living in Vietnam since 2007. down only if there was 4 showing that that, “all legal actions arising out of this note
Essentially, he assailed the validity of the the dominant bargaining party left the or in connection with the chattels subject
foregoing contracts claiming his signature to weaker party without any choice as to hereof shall only be brought in or submitted to
be forged. The defendant filed a motion to be “completely deprived of an the proper court in Makati City, Philippines."
dismiss on the ground of improper venue. The opportunity to bargain effectively”
motion relied on the venue stipulation in the 2. Venue stipulations in a contract of The plaintiff opposed the motion to
assailed contracts that all legal actions arising adhesion follow the above rule. At dismiss and argued that venue was properly
out of the same shall be brought only in the issue in an early case was the validity laid in Dagupan City where it has a branch
proper courts of Makati City. of the condition written on a passenger office based on a provision in the deed of
ticket issued by a shipping company. chattel mortgage which states that “in case of
The Court held that in cases where the
litigation arising out of the transaction that
complaint assails only the terms, conditions, Complementary-Contracts- gave rise to this contract, complete
and/or coverage of a written instrument and
Construed-together rule jurisdiction is given the proper court of the city
not its validity, the exclusive venue stipulation
of Makati or any proper court within the
contained therein shall still be binding on the “complementary-contracts-construed-
province of Rizal, or any court in the city, or
parties, and thus, the complaint may be together” rule: is one which mandates that
province where the holder/mortgagee has a
properly dismissed on the ground of improper the provisions of an accessory contract must
branch office, waiving for this purpose any
venue. However, a complaint directly assailing be read in its entirety and together with the
proper venue.”
the validity of the written instrument itself principal contract between the parties. The

15
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
The controversy stems from the not barred from filing the case in Dagupan City 2. In small claims cases, after the court
conflicting provisions on venue in the where private respondent has a branch office determines that the action falls under the
promissory note and the deed of chattel as provided for in the deed of chattel rules for such cases, it may, from an
mortgage. Consequently, the decisive issue is mortgage. (Adopted Illustration: slide 109) examination of the allegations in the
the correct interpretation of the venue Statement of Claim and such evidence
provisions in the two contracts. WHEN THE COURT MAKE A motu attached thereto, by itself, dismiss the
propio DISMISSAL BASED ON: case outright on any of the following
The defendant argues that the
Improper Venue grounds:
promissory note should prevail over the deed
(a) The court has no jurisdiction over the
of chattel mortgage because this is the 1. The court may, however, effect a motu
subject matter;
principal contract being sued upon while the proprio dismissal of the complaint based
(b) There is another action pending
deed of chattel mortgage merely on improper venue in an action covered by
between the same parties for the same
accompanies the promissory note. The the rules on summary procedure, In this
cause,
plaintiff counters that the alternative venues type of action, the court may motu proprio
(c) The action is barred by prior judgment;
provided under the deed of chattel mortgage dismiss a case, from (a) an examination of
(d) The claim is barred by the statute of
may not be disregarded as meaningless the allegations in the complaint, and (b)
limitations;
verbiage. such evidence as may be attached
(e) The court has no jurisdiction over the
thereto, on any of the grounds apparent
The Court, in deciding the case, person of the defendant;
therefrom for the dismissal of a civil
conceded that there is no dispute that the (f) Venue is improperly laid;
action. The dismissal may be made
words “shall only” preceding the designation (g) Plaintiff has no legal capacity to sue;
outright, which means that the court may
of venue in the promissory note, standing (h) The Statement of Claim/s states no
do so without need for waiting for the filing
alone, is mandatory and restrictive. However, cause of action;
of a motion to dismiss, These grounds
the deed of chattel mortgage executed to i) That a condition precedent for filing the
include lack of subject matter jurisdiction,
secure the loan obligation provides alternative claim has not been complied with, and
improper venue, lack of legal capacity to
venues. The Court posed a question: “Should Plaintiff failed to submit the required
sue, litis pendentia, res judicata,
we disregard the venue provision in the deed of affidavits.
prescription, failure to state a cause of
chattel mortgage a3 mere surplusage as
action, non-submission of a certification
contended by petitioners?”
against forum shopping, and lack of
The Court answered its question in the compliance with a condition precedent
negative holding that the provisions of an such as absence of barangay conciliation,
accessory contract mist be read in its entirety among others.
and together with the principal contract
between the parties, The plaintiff, hence, is

16
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
3. In actions for forcible entry and unlawful be dismissed by the court on the ground of
detainer, the court may dismiss the case improper venue but mot on the ground of lack RULE 2: CAUSES OF ACTION,
outright after examination of the of jurisdiction because every MTC has ACTIONS, AND PARTIES
complaint and such evidence attached jurisdiction over cases of unlawful detainer. It
thereto. The dismissal may be based on would be error to inject the concept of CAUSE OF ACTION
any of the grounds for the dismissal of a territorial jurisdiction in the analysis of the
civil action, A motion to dismiss is not case. Jurisdiction over the territory IMPORTANCE OF A CAUSE OF
required. (Sec. 5 Rule 70, ROC ) ACTION
is irrelevant in a civil case. Territorial
DENIAL OF MOTION TO DISMISS jurisdiction applies only in criminal cases In ordinary civil actions, having a
BASED ON: Improper Venue; No where venue is also jurisdictional. It is cause of action would be vital if one were to
important to remember that, in a civil case, the seek the aid of the courts. Without a cause of
Appeal
concept of venue is entirely distinct from the action, one cannot, as a rule, seek judicial
Improper venue when raised as an affirmative concept of jurisdiction. relief for a violation of one’s rights. This is
defense, if denied, shall not be the subject of a because Sec. 1, Rule 2 of the Rules of Court
motion for reconsideration or petition for AUTHORITY OF THE SC in Relation requires that every ordinary civil action must
certiorari, prohibition or mandamus, but may to Venue of Cases be based on a cause of action.
be among the matters to be raised on appeal
• To avoid a miscarriage of justice, the MEANING AND ELEMENTS OF A
after a judgment on the merits.
Supreme Court may order a change of CAUSE OF ACTION
IMPROPER VENUE IS NOT venue (Sec, 5/4), Art. VIII, Constitution of
the Philippines). Since the constitutional 1. A cause of action is the act or omission by
JURISDICTIONAL; Waiver of
provision does not distinguish, this rule which a party violates the rights of another.
Improper Venue
could refer to both civil and criminal 2. As applied to ordinary civil actions, the
Be reminded that if the facts of the problem cases. following are the elements of a cause of
show that the venue is improper, it would not action:
be procedurally correct to file a motion to (a) A legal right in favor of the plaintiff:
dismiss anchored on lack of jurisdiction (b) A correlative legal duty of the
because venue has nothing to do with defendant to respect such rights; and
jurisdiction in a civil case. Hence, if a case for (c) An act or omission by such defendant
unlawful detainer is filed with MTC San Pablo in violation of the right of the plaintiff
City, Laguna when it should have been filed with a resulting injury or damage to the
with MTC Cavite City because the property plaintiff for which the latter may
subject of the action is located in Cavite City, maintain an action for the recovery of
the action filed in San Pablo City, Laguna may relief from the defendant.
17
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
3. Although the first two elements may exist, vulnerable to a motion to dismiss on the In actions for forcible entry, for instance,
a sins of action pt only upon the ground of failure to state & cause of action”. three requisites have to be alleged for the
occurrence of the last element, giving the complaint to state a cause of action and for
Take note that the 2019 Amendments to
plaintiff the right to maintain an action in the municipal trial court to acquire
the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure now
court for recovery of damages or other jurisdiction. First, the plaintiff must allege his
prohibits motion to dismiss based on the
appropriate relief. ‘The last element, as prior physical possession of the property,
ground that the pleading asserting the claim
emphasized by jurisprudence, is the Second, he must also assert that he was
states no cause of action. The rule now is to
violation of the right of the plaintiff. deprived of the possession of the property
raise the said ground as an affirmative defense
Without such a violation, a cause of action either by force, intimidation, threat, strategy,
in the answer. Failure to raise the ground of
as defined in Sec. 1 of Rule 2 will not arise. or stealth, Third, he must file the action within
failure to state a cause of action at the earliest
one year from the deprivation of possession or
THE NEED TO STATE THE CAUSE opportunity shall constitute a waiver thereof.
from the time he learned of his deprivation of
OF ACTION The court shall motu propria resolve the same
physical possession of the land or building.
within 30 calendar days from the filing of the
Bar 2013 Even if it be true that the plaintiff has
1. For a complaint to be procedurally answer.
a cause of action for forcible entry, if he, in his
acceptable, merely having a cause of
2. Put simply, the complaint should complaint, fails to allege the essential
action against the defendant is not
completely spell out the elements of a elements of a forcible entry case, his
sufficient. The complaint must also clearly
particular cause of action. For instance, if complaint will fail to state a cause of action.
state that cause of action. This means that
all the elements of the cause of action in an action for a sum of money arising
A complaint for unlawful detainer, in
required by substantive law must clearly from a loan, the complaint fails to allege
order to sufficiently allege a cause of
appear from a reading of the complaint. To that the debt is due and demandable,
action, should recite the following in the
avoid a possible early dismissal of the there 15 a failure to state a cause of action.
complaint:
complaint, the simple dictum to be Even if it so alleged that the debt has
followed is: “If you have a cause of action, become due and demandable, if the (a) the defendant's initial possession of
then by all means, state it! State all complaint contains no allegation that the property was lawful, either by
elements of your cause of action in your there was a prior demand upon the debtor contract with or by tolerance of the
complaint!” to pay and such demand went unheeded, plaintiff;
there is also a failure to state a cause of (b) eventually, such possession became
Jurisprudence holds that, “A complaint action. This is so, even if the plain truth is illegal upon the plaintiff's notice to the
states a cause of action if it sufficiently avers that the debt is due, a demand to pay has defendant of the termination of the
the existence of the three o essential elements been made, and was not heeded. latter's right of possession;
of a cause of action x x x. If the allegations of (c) thereafter, the defendant remained in
the complaint do not state the concurrence of possession and deprived the plaintiff
these elements, the complaint becomes of the enjoyment of the property; and
18
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
(d) the plaintiff instituted the complaint the Regional Trial Court which has jurisdiction THE TEST ON WON: The Complaint
for ejectment within one year from the over the amount demanded. States a CAUSE OF ACTION
last demand to vacate the property
On the other hand, if the demand is “to 1. In determining whether an initiatory
Be reminded that: what determines pay and vacate,” the cause of action is one for pleading states a cause of action, "the test
whether the cause of action is one for forcible unlawful detainer and should be filed with the is as follows: Admitting the truth of the
entry or unlawful detainer, is the nature of Municipal Trial Court. Thus, even if the facts alleged, can the court render a valid
defendant's entry to the land. If the entry is complaint is captioned, “Collection of a Sum judgment in accordance with the prayer?”
illegal, then the cause of action is one for of Money with Damages.” the action is actually To be taken in to account are only the
forcible entry. If, on the other hand, the entry is for unlawful detainer where the demand made material allegations in the complaint;
legal, but thereafter possession becomes by the complaint is for the defendant “to pay extraneous facts and circumstances or
illegal, the cause of action is one for unlawful and vacate”. Note that, at the time the action other matters aliunde are not considered.
detainer. It must be added that the actions for was filed, the amount is still within the In determining whether or not a cause of
unlawful detainer and forcible entry are jurisdiction of the RTC. Bar 2011 action is sufficiently stated in the
governed by the rules on summary procedure. complaint, the statements in the
Similarly, if the unlawful detainer case is
Their summary character is designed to complaint are to be considered, It is error
anchored upon the failure of the defendant to
quicken the determination of possession de for the court to take cognizance of external
comply with the conditions of the lease, the
facto. They are not proper to resolve facts or to hold preliminary hearings to
demand must not be “to comply. . . or vacate,”
ownership of the property and if an issue on determine its existence. The sufficiency of
but should be “to comply… and vacate”. The
ownership arises in such actions, any the statement of the cause of action must
first type of demand is not one for unlawful
pronouncement ma on ownership is appear on the face of the complaint and its
detainer but one for specific performance.
provisional in nature and only provisionally to existence may be determined only by the
resolve the issue of possession. Sec, 2 of Rule 70 (Forcible Entry and allegations in the complaint,
Unlawful Detainer) declares: consideration of other facts being
If the unlawful detainer case is based on
the alleged violation of the terms and “SEC. 2.... Unless otherwise stipulated, such proscribed and any attempt to prove
conditions of the lease agreement or failure action by the lessor shall be commenced only extraneous circumstances not being
to pay the rentals, the demand should not be after demand to pay or comply with the allowed.
“to pay or vacate,” but should be to pay and conditions of the lease AND to vacate is made 2. The principle, that other matters aside
vacate. The first type of demand does not give upon the lessee . . .” (Emphasis ours). from the allegations in the complaint are
rise to an unlawful detainer case since it 16, In not to be considered, is not, however, a
essence, an action for a sum of money. So if hard and fast rule.
the amount of rentals to be collected is In some cases, the Court considered the
P900,000.00, the action should be filed with documents attached to the complaint to truly
determine sufficiency of the cause of action.
19
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
The reason is that such annexes are FAILURE TO STATE A CAUSE OF state a cause of action refers to the
considered parts of the complaint. ACTION & LACK OF CAUSE OF insufficiency of the pleading, and is an
affirmative defense under Rule 8 of the
The case of Alberto v. Court of Appeals, ACTION
Rules of Court, as amended by A.M. No,
ibid., 768-769 is enlightening:
1. A fair reading of jurisprudence shows that 19-10-20-8C, On the other hand, lack of a
“It is only logical for the lower court to a failure to state a cause of action is not cause of action refers to a situation where
consider all these pleadings in determining the same as an absence or lack of a cause the evidence does not prove the cause of
whether there was a sufficient cause of action of action. Note that under Rule 8 as action alleged in the pleading. The remedy
x x x So long as those attached pleadings are amended by A.M. No. 19-10-20-SC, the in the first is to move for the dismissal of
procedurally responsive to the complaint, ground for dismissal, in relation to a cause the pleading, while the remedy in the
then they may be considered in evaluating the of action, is not “lack or absence of a second is to demur to the evidence. The
sufficiency of the cause of action in the cause of action.” The ground is that “the terms are not interchangeable.
complaint. x x x Strictly limiting the evaluation pleading asserting the claim states no
of the merits of the complaint to its averments cause of action”. This provision points
A more recent pronouncement explains
or allegations would be too constricting an merely to a ‘failure to state a cause of
that failure to state a cause of action refers to
interpretation of the rule. It must be action’ and not a ‘lack or absence of a
the insufficiency of the allegations in the
remembered that the complaint itself is cause of action.”
pleading. Lack of a cause of action refers to
accompanied by documentary evidence 2. The failure of a complaint to state a cause
the insufficiency of the factual basis for the
attached as annexes. The responsive of action does not mean that the plaintiff
action.
pleadings, in addition, though not “lacks a cause of action.” It only means
attachments to the complaint, clarify its that the complaint's allegations are An earlier case more clearly declares:
merits since they are already part of the insufficient for the court to know that the
rights of the plaintiff were violated by the “Failure to state a cause of action is not the
records of the case and should, therefore, be
defendant. Thus, even if it be actually true game as lack of cause of action; the terms are
considered.
that the defendant violated the rights of not interchangeable. It may be observed that
3. The consideration of the documents the plaintiff, causing the latter to incur lack of cause of action is not among the
attached to the complaint is echoed in the damage or injury, if the elements grounds that may be raised in a motion to
2019 Amendments to the 1997 Rules of constituting such violation are not set dismiss under Rule 16 of the Rules of Court.
Civil Procedure. The judicial determination forth in the complaint, the pleading will be The dismissal of a Complaint for lack of cause
now shifts its consideration from ultimate deemed to have state no cause of action. of action is based on Section 1 of Rule 33 xxx
facts to evidentiary facts.
“If the Complaint fails to state a cause of
3. Jurisprudence aptly explains that failure action, a motion to dismiss must be made
to state a cause of action is DIFFERENT before a responsive pleading is filed; and the
from lack of a cause of action. Failure to issue can be resolved only on the basis of the
20
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
allegations in the initiatory pleading. On the IMPORTANCE OF THE nature of an action is not determined by
other hand, if the Complaint lacks a cause of ALLEGATIONS IN THE COMPLAINT the caption of the complaint, but by the
action, the motion to dismiss must be filed allegations therein together with the reliefs
after the plaintiff has rested its case. 1. The cause of action in a complaint is not prayed for.
what the designation of the complaint
“In the first situation, the veracity of the states, but what the allegations in the body EFFECT OF A FINDING THAT THE
allegations is immaterial; however, in the of the complaint define and describe, The COMPLAINT STATES A CAUSE OF
second situation, the judge must determine designation or caption is not controlling ACTION
the veracity of the allegation based on the for it is not even an indispensable part of
evidence presented”. the complaint. A finding that the complaint states no cause of
action is a ground for the dismissal of the said
4. The pronouncements above were based For instance, a complaint captioned as an complaint. However, “x x x A finding that the
on the Rules of Court before its unlawful detainer case could actually be an complaint sufficiently states a cause of action
amendment brought by A.M. No. 19-10- action for forcible entry where the complaint does not necessarily mean that the complaint
20SC. The differences between failure to alleges that the plaintiff was deprived of the is meritorious; it shall only result in x x x the
state a cause of action and lack of a cause possession of the premises by force, hearing of the case for presentation of
of action still hold true, however, failure to intimidation, stealth, threat or strategy. evidence by the parties”. In other words, when
state a cause of action cannot be raised in
the court finds that the complaint states a
a motion to dismiss. The rule now is to 2. Similarly, a petition denominated as a
cause of action, this means that the same
raise the said ground as an affirmative petition for review on certiorari under Rule
cannot be dismissed for failure to state a
defense in the answer. 45 (which is supposed to raise only pure
cause of action, but the claiming party has the
5. As previously stated, a motion to dismiss questions of law) may be considered by
obligation to offer evidence to support the
grounded on failure to state a cause of the Court as a petition for certiorari under
allegations constituting the elements of his
action refers only to the insufficiency of Rule 65 because the petition alleged grave
cause of action.
the pleading. Hence, when the affirmative abuse of discretion amounting to lack of
defense of dismissal is grounded on failure jurisdiction. CAUSE OF ACTION AS APPLIED TO
to state a cause of action, a ruling thereon 3. Where, from a reading of the allegations in
ADMINISTRATIVE CASES
should be based on the facts alleged in the the complaint and the reliefs prayed for,
complaint. The veracity of the allegations the ultimate objective of the plaintiffs is to • While the concept of a cause of action is
would be material only when the motion to obtain title to real property, it should be one that is essential to the existence of an
dismiss is based on lack of a cause of filed with the proper court having ordinary civil action, in administrative
action in a demurrer to evidence under jurisdiction over the assessed value of the cases, however, the issue is not whether
Rule 33. property subject thereof even if the the complainant has a cause of action
complaint is denominated as an action to against the respondent, but whether the
annul a deed of sale to real property. The
21
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
respondent has breached the norms and words, the mere proof of the existence of the CAUSE OF ACTION BASED ON THE
standards of the office. contract, and the failure of its compliance VICARIOUS LIABILITY OF AN
justify, prima facie, a corresponding right of
CAUSE OF ACTION ARISING FROM EMPLOYER
relief. Bar 2004
LAW 1. As a rule, negligence, as an element of a
Thus, if a carrier is sued based on a
quasi-delict, must be alleged and proved
• A cause of action may arise from the breach of contract if like the father, mother,
but the negligence of those persons
violation of a law or a rule, For example, in guardian, owners and managers of an
described under Art, 2180 of the Civil
illegal strikes, the cause of action arises establishment or enterprise, employers, the
Code, although based on a quasi-delict, is
from the failure of the labor organization to State. and teachers or heads of
presumed.
comply with the statutory requirements for establishments of arts and trades are, under
a legal strike. In illegal dismissals of specified conditions, liable for the acts of
2. Under Art. 2180 of the Civil Code, following
employees, the cause of action arises persons for whom they are responsible.
the well-recognized doctrine of vicarious
from dismissals without just or valid
Thus, an employer, for instance, is liable liability, certain persons like the father,
causes.
for the damage caused by his employees and mother, guardian, owners and managers
CAUSE OF ACTION BASED ON household helpers acting within the scope of of an establishment or enterprise,
CONTRACTS their assigned tasks. The employer's employers, the State. and teachers or
negligence in the selection and supervision of heads of establishments of arts and trades
Does a cause of action for breach of contract his employee is presumed, and his liability are, under specified conditions, liable for
require an allegation and proof of the shall only cease if he successfully proves his the acts of persons for whom they are
negligence of the defendant? observance of the diligence required of a good responsible.
Jurisprudence consistently answers in the father of a family to prevent damage.
Thus, as an employer, for instance, is liable
negative. A cause of action based on breach Thus, it has been ruled that when an injury for the damage caused by his employees and
of contract merely requires the following is caused of carriage, negligence need not be household helpers acting within the scope of
elements: proven by the plaintiff, negligence not being an their assigned tasks. The employer's
element of the cause of action of a suit negligence in the selection and supervision of
(a) the existence of a contract, and
predicated upon a breach of contract of his employee is presumed, and his liability
(b) the breach of the contract. carriage. This is true, whether or not the shall only cease if he successfully proves his
defendant is a public or private carrier. observance of the diligence required of a good
In breach of contract of carriage, for
However, where the defendant is a common father of a family to prevent damage.
instance, the action can be prosecuted merely
carrier there is an additional reason for
by proving the existence of the contract, and Thus, it has been ruled that when an injury
dispensing with proof of negligence, ie.,
the fact that the obligor failed to transport the is caused to another by the negligence of the
negligence of the common carrier is presumed
passenger safely to his destination. In other employee, there instantly arises a juris tantum
22
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
presumption of law that there was negligence • An action is the suit filed in court for the primary objective is to avoid unduly burdening
on the part of the employer, either in the enforcement or (Bar 1999) protection of a the dockets of the court”
selection or supervision, or both, of the right, or the prevention or redress of a
3. The rule against splitting a single cause of
employee. The presumption, however, may be wrong. A cause of action is the basis of the
action applies not only to complaints but
rebutted by a clear showing on the part of the action filed. Under the Rules of Court
also to counterclaims and cross-claims.
employer that it had exercised the care and “every ordinary civil action must be based
Thus, it was held that to interpose a cause
diligence of a good father of a family in the on a cause of action”.
of action in a counterclaim, and again
selection and supervision of his employee.
SPLITTING A SINGE CAUSE OD invoke it in a complaint against the same
Hence, to escape solidary liability for quasi-
ACTION; REASON FOR person or party, would be splitting a cause
delict committed by an employee, the
of action not sanctioned by the Rules
employer must adduce sufficient proof that it PROHIBITION
4. A cause of action may give rise to several
exercised such degree of care.
1. Splitting a single cause of action is the act reliefs, but only one action can be filed, not
CAUSE OF ACTION IN of instituting two or more suits on the basis one action for each relief. For instance,
ENVIRONMENTAL CASES of the same cause of action (Sec. 4, Rule when one files a complaint for unlawful
2, Rules of Court). In splitting a cause of detainer on the ground of non-payment of
• In environmental cases, “[T]he complaint action, the pleader divides a single cause rentals, the complaint must include the
shall state that it is an environmental case, of action, claim or demand into two or recovery of the rentals in arrears, such
and the law involved”. more parts and brings a suit for each part. recovery being an integral part of the cause
This cannot be done because splitting a of action for unlawful detainer.
CAUSE OF ACTION FOR PARTITION
single cause of action is expressly
ARAISING ISSUE OF OWNERSHIP An action for the recovery of taxes should also
prohibited by the Rules of Court which
include the demand for surcharges resulting
• A cause of action for partition does not specifically mandates that, “A party may
from the delinquency in the payment of said
preclude the settlement of the issue of not institute more than one suit for a single
taxes. The non-payment of taxes gives rise to
ownership. An action for partition is cause of action”.
two reliefs:
premised on the existence or non- 2. The practice of splitting a single cause of
existence of co-ownership between the action is discouraged because: it breeds (a) the recovery of the unpaid taxes; and
parties. Unless and until the issue of multiplicity of suits, clogs the court
(b) the recovery of the surcharges resulting
coownership is definitely resolved, it dockets, leads to vexatious litigation,
from non-payment of the taxes. These two
would be premature to effect a partition of operates as an instrument of harassment,
reliefs are results of a single cause of action
an estate. and generates unnecessary expenses to
which should be pursued in a single
the parties. As jurisprudence puts it:
complaint.
ACTION DISTINGUISED FROM
“Splitting of a single cause of action violates
CAUSE OF ACTION
the policy against multiplicity of suits, whose
23
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
5. The act of a defendant in taking In one case, the defendant forcible and the negligent driving of the defendant, two
possession of the plaintiff's land by means unlawfully entered the leased properties of the rights of the plaintiffs have been violated,
of force and intimidation constitutes a plaintiff. Once inside, he barricaded the namely, his personal right to be safe in his
single act of dispossession but gives rise entrance to the fishponds and set up a barbed person, and his property right to have his
to two reliefs: (a) recovery of possession, wire fence along the road going to the car intact and free from any damage.
and (b) damages arising from the loss of fishponds. Then, after occupying the
possession. Both of these reliefs result premises, he harvested several tons of
from a single wrong, hence, constituting milkfish, fry and fingerlings owned by the Under the circumstances, may the plaintiff file
but a single cause of action. Each of them plaintiffs, ransacked and destroyed a chapel acomplaint for the recovery of damages to his
cannot be the subject of two separate built in the premises, stole religious icona and person and another complaint later to recover
actions. Hence, an action for forcible entry even decapitated the heads of some of them. damages to his car? He could not because to
should include not only the plea for All these happened after the act of do so would be to split a single cause of
restoration of possession, but also claims dispossession occurred. The plaintiff filed a action. If, however, a passenger in the same
for damages arising out of the forcible complaint for forcible entry and another car was also injured, the injuries to the
entry. The claim for damages cannot be complaint for damages against the defendant. passenger gives rise to a cause of action
filed separately. This rule presupposes, An issue which arose from the cases filed is separate and distinct from those sustained by
however, that the damages claimed whether, during the pendency of the the car owner because distinct rights
directly arose from the act of complaint for forcible entry, the plaintiff can belonging to different persons have been
dispossession such as the deprivation of independently institute and maintain an violated. The injured passenger may file a suit
the use of the property and other action for damages which arose from against the defendant separate from the suit
consequential damages. incidents occurring after the act of filed by the car owner.
dispossession by the defendant. The Court
It must be emphasized that the claim for 7. A tenant illegally ejected from the land is
sustained the separate action for damages
damages in a forcible entry case refers to the entitled to two reliefs — one for
and ruled that there was no litis pendencia
damages sustained by the plaintiff in depriving reinstatement and another for damages.
involved. The Court explained that the claim
him of the use and possession of the property, Since both reliefs arose from the same
for damages has no direct relation to the loss
and not the damages which he may have cause of action, they should be alleged in
of possession of the premises but resulted
suffered by acts which have no direct relation one complaint.
from acts separatee from the forcible entry.
to the loss of material possession. In other 8. A cause of action for the reconveyance of
words, where the claim for damages arose out 6. A single act may sometimes violate title over property does not include a
of separate acts committed by the defendant several rights of a person, Nevertheless, cause of action for forcible entry or
after the occupancy of the premises subject of the plaintiff has only one cause of action unlawful detainer. They are distinct causes
the action, such claim constitutes a separate regardless of the number of rights violated. of action. Hence, the pendency of an
cause of action and not an integral part of a If a car owner sustains injuries to his action for reconveyance of title does not
cause of action based on forcible entry. person and damage to his car as a result of
24
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
divest the Municipal Trial Court of its Under the contract, the lessee was “Generally, a suit may only be instituted for a
jurisdiction to try an ejectment case of allowed to use the leased property as a single couse of action. — If two or more suits
either forcible entry or unlawful detainer. parking apace for light vehicles and as a are instituted on the basis of the same cause
What is involved in an ejectment case is site for a amall drivers’ canteen — but may of action, the filing of one or a judgment on the
possession de facto or material not utilize the subject premises for other merits in any one is ground for the dismissal of
possession. In an action for reconveyance, purposes without the respondents prior the others.
the issue is ownership. written consent. The lessee, however,
“Several teats exist to ascertain whether two
allegedly in violation of the lease contract,
suite relate to a single or common cause of
constructed restaurant buildings and
action, such ins whether the same evidence
9. A bank cannot file a civil action against the other commercial establishments on the
would support and sustain both the first and
debtor for the collection of the debt and, lot and also subleased the property to
second causes of action (also known as the
then, subsequently file an action to various tenants.
same evidenece test), or whether the
foreclose the mortgage. This would be
The MTC decided the ejectment cage in defenses in one case may be used to
splitting a single cause of action. Bar
favor of the lessee. On appeal, the RTC substantiate the complaint in the other. Also
1999;2017
affirmed in toto the MTC decision but another fundamental is the teat of determining
In loan contracts, secured by a real estate RTC, to which the lessor’s motion for whether the cause of action in the second
mortgage, the creditor-mortgagee has a single reconsideration was assigned, granted the case existed at the time of the filing of the first
cause of action against the debtor-mortgagor lessor's motion thereby reversing and setting complaint.
with two alternative remedies to recover the aside the MTC decision. Interestingly, during
“Of the three tests cited, the third one is
debt — to file a personal action to collect a the pendency of the petition for review before
especially applicable to the present case, t¢.,
sum of money or to file a real action to the CA, the lessor filed another case for
whether the cause of action in the second
foreclose on the mortgage security. A remedy unlawful detainer against the lessee. This
case existed at the time of the filing of the first
is deemed chosen upon the filing of the suit for time, the respondent used as a ground for
complaint and to which we answer in the
collection or upon the filing of the complaint ejectment the expiration of the lease contract.
negative. The facts clearly show that the filing
for foreclosure. If the plaintiff had already Does the second case for ejectment
of the first ejectment case was grounded on
instituted foreclosure proceedings, he is now constitute a splitting of a single cause of
the petitioners violation of stipulations in the
barred from availing of an ordinary action for action and hence, dismissible on the ground of
lease contract, while the filing of the second
collection of a sum of money and vice versa. litis pendencia?
case was based on the expiration of the lease
10. In one case, before the lease contract The Court categorically ruled that the contract. At the time the respondent filed the
expired, the lessor filed an unlawful two unlawful detainer cases involved firet ejectment complaint x x x the lease
detainer case against the lessee allegedly different causes of action. The Court contract between the parties was still in
for violation of stipulations in the lease explained, thus: effect. x x x It was only at the expiration of the
contract regarding the use of the property. lease contract that the cause of action in the
25
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
second ejectment complaint accrued and (P300,000.00) representing the balance of relation to the lessee's refusal to vacate the
made available to the respondent as a ground annual rentals due him before the action for property. Such damages must be claimed in
for ejecting the petitioner. Thus, the cause of unlawful detainer was filed. The lessee filed a an ordinary action. In the instant case, the
action in the second case was not yet in motion to dismiss based on litis pendencia sum sought to be recovered in the second
existence at the time of filing of the first alleging a splitting of a single cause of action. action refers to the deficiency in the amount of
ejectment case x x x” Should the second complaint be dismissed on rentals prior to the lessee's unlawful detention
the ground invoked by the lessee? of the property and has no direct connection
11. In a case of a more recent vintage, the
to the loss of material possession that gave
lessee of a sugarland continued to use the The question was answered by the Court in
rise to the action for unlawful detainer.
property for several years even after the the negative. While conceding that the two
expiration of the lease contract without actions involved the same parties and the 12. Does a previous final judgment denying a
any express renewal or extension of the same property, the filing of a complaint for petition for declaration of nullity on the
contract. The lessee, however, paid the collection of a gum of money, other than that ground of psychological incapacity bar a
lessor the annual compensation for the sustained as a result of the dispossession or subsequent petition for declaration of
use and occupancy of the premises. The that caused by the loss of the use and nullity on the ground of lack of marriage
lessor, on his part, contended that he was occupation of the property, could not be license?
never apprised of how the annual rentals considered as splitting of a cause of action.
One early case answered this question in
were determined by the lessee. He also There is no splitting because the complaint for
the affirmative. Here, the petitioner filed a
pointed out that the payments were often collection prays for the payment of the
petition seeking a declaration of nullity of his
delayed. differential amount representing the unpaid
marriage to respondent citing respondent's
balance of the rental fees. The complaint to
In March 2012, the lessor sent to the alleged psychological incapacity. The trial
recover the deficiency has no direct relation to
lessee a final demand to vacate the property court denied the petition for failure to prove
the loss or possession of the premises and
but the lessee, ignoring the demand, the material allegations in the petition. After
had nothing to do with the issue of the
continued to use and occupy the land. This the dismissal became final, the petitioner filed
unlawfulness of the occupancy or possession
prompted the lessor to file a complaint for another petition for declaration of nullity of
in the unlawful detainer case. There is,
unlawful detainer against the lessee. During marriage, this time alleging that his marriage
therefore, no identity of causes of action.
the pendency of the case, the leasor with respondent was null and void due to the
discovered that, based on the statistics and In unlawful detainer cases, the Court fact that it was celebrated without a valid
information provided by the Sugar Regulatory further explained, the recoverable damages marriage license. The respondent filed an
Administration, the previous payments made are reckoned from the time the possession of answer with a motion to dismiss praying for
to him by the lessee were less than what he the property became unlawful. Prior to the the dismissal of the petition on the ground of
should have received, Feeling shortchanged, lapse of the period to vacate the property, as res judicata and forum shopping. In its barest
the lessee filed an action for collection of the stated in the demand letter, the damages essentials, the motion to dismiss was
sum of more than three hundred thousand sustained by the plaintiff bear no direct predicated on the splitting of a single cause of
26
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
action. The trial court granted the motion to is another action pending between the same of action, C may file a single suit against D for
dismiss. parties for the same cause. If a final judgment the collection of both debts, despite the
had been rendered in the first action when the claims being actually separate causes of
When the case reached the Supreme
second action is filed, the latter may be action and having arisen out of different
Court, the petitioner argued that while the
dismissed based on res judicata, i.e., that the transactions.
reliefs prayed for in the two cases were the
cause of action is barred by a prior judgment.
same, that is, the declaration of nullity of his 2. When the causes of action accrue in favor
marriage to respondent, the cause of action in 2. Note that it need not be the second action of the same plaintiff and against the same
the earlier case was distinct and separate filed that should be dismissed. The defendant, i.e., there is only one plaintiff
from the cause of action in the present case phraseology of the present rule (Sec. 4, and one defendant, it is not necessary to
because the operative facts upon which they Rule 2, Rules of Court) does not ask whether or not the causes of actions
were based were different. Also, the evidence necessarily confine the dismissal to the arose out of the same transaction or series
necessary to sustain the first petition which second action. A defendant may move for of transactions and that there exists a
was anchored on the alleged psychological the dismissal of the first case and as to question of law or fact common to all the
incapacity of respondent is different from the which action should be dismissed would plaintiffs or defendants. This question is
evidence necessary to sustain the present depend upon judicial discretion and the only relevant when there are multiple
petition which is anchored on the purported prevailing circumstances of the case. plaintiffs or multiple defendants. In the
absence of a marriage license. Hence, there hypothetical just discussed in par. 1, is C
was no violation of the rule on forum shopping JOINDER OF CAUSES OF ACTION obliged to join the causes of action against
or of the rule which proscribes the splitting of 1. Joinder of causes of action is the assertion D? Answer: No. C is not obliged to do so.
a cause of action. of as many causes of action as a party may He may file a single suit for each of the
have against another in one pleading alone claims, if he desires, because each debt is
EFFECT OF SPLITTING A SINGLE a separate cause of action. Joinder of
(Sec. 5, Rule 2, Rules of Court). It is the
CAUSE OF ACTION causes of action is not compulsory. It is
process of uniting two or more demands or
rights of action in one action merely permissive, Bar 1999 The rule uses
1. If two or more suits are instituted for a
the word “may, not “shall” (See. 6, Rule 2,
single cause of action, “the filing of one or
Example: D is the debtor of C for P350,000.00 Rules of Court).
a judgment upon the merits in any one is
due on January 5, 2018. D likewise owes C
available as a ground for the dismissal of In the example, in case C decides in favor
P350,000.00 due on February 13, 2018. Both
the others” (Sec. 4, Rule 2, Rules of Court). of a joinder, the suit shall be filed with the
debts are evidenced by distinct promissory
The remedy then of the defendant is to file Regional Trial Court because the total amount
notes and incurred for different reasons. D has
a motion to dismiss. of the debts is within that court's jurisdiction.
not paid the debts despite demand. Each debt
is a separate cause of action because each is Under the Rules, where the claims in all the
Hence, if the first action is pending when the
the subject of a different transaction, causes of action are principally for the
second action is filed, the latter may be
However, under the rule on joinder of causes recovery of money, the aggregate amount
dismissed based on litis pendentia, ie., there
27
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
claimed shall be the test of jurisdiction. This 6. An action for collection of a sum of money does not apply when there is only one plaintiff
situation follows the so-called totality test for cannot be properly joined with an action and one defendant.
purposes of jurisdiction. for forcible entry or unlawful detainer, The
There are multiple parties, for instance, if
former is an ordinary civil action requiring
3. Assume that aside from the above claims, C is the creditor of D for P350,000.00 and also
a full-blown trial, while the latter two are
C, as lessor, also wants to eject D from the of E for P375,000.00. Both debts are due and
special civil actions which require a
apartment occupied by D as his lessee. these debts have been contracted separately.
summary procedure.
May the action be joined with the claims May C join D and E as defendants in the same
for money? Answer: No. An action for JOINDER WHEN THERE ARE complaint? Answer: No, Where a party sues
ejectment is a apecial civil action. This MULTIPLE PARTIES two or more defendants, it is necessary for the
kind of action cannot be joined with causes of action to arise out of the same
ordinary civil actions. The rule is clear: If there is only one plaintiff and one transaction or series of transactions and that
“The joinder shall not include special civil defendant, the rule on joinder of parties does there should be a question of law or fact
actions or actions governed by special not apply. The reason is simple. There are no common to them. The debt of D is a
rules”. Confusion in the application of parties to be joined. It is when the fact pattern transaction different from the debt of E.
procedural rules would certainly arise of the cage indicates the presence of multiple Hence, they cannot be sued under a single
from the joinder of ordinary and special parties (like two or more plaintiffs or two or complaint. Each cause of action should be the
civil actions in a single complaint. more defendants or both) that the joinder of subject of a separate complaint.
4. An action for injunction and quieting of causes of action becomes subject to the rule
title to real property cannot be joined in a on joinder of parties under Sec. 6 of Rule 3 of JOINDER OF CLAIMS IN SMALL
single complaint. While injunction is an the Rules of Court. CLAIMS CASES
ordinary civil action quieting of title is
Specifically, before causes of action and • The plaintiff may join, in a single statement
governed by Rule 63, making it a special
parties can be joined in a compiaint involving of claim, one or more separate small
civil action.
multiple parties, the following must be claims against a defendant provided that
5. Assume that C has the following causes of
complied with: (a) the right to relief must arise the total amount claimed, exclusive of
action against D: (a) P1 million based on a
out of the same transaction or series of interests and costs, does not exceed the
note; (b) Pl million based on torts; and (c)
transactions and (b) there must be a question jurisdictional amount of the concerned
foreclosure of a real estate mortgage. May
of law or fact common to all parties (Central court.
the causes of action be joined? They can
Bank Board of Liquidators v. Banco Filipino
be joined except the action for foreclosure
Savings and Mortgage Bank, G.R. No. 173393,
of real estate mortgage which is a special
February 21, 2017). To reiterate, this rule
civil action.
applies only when there are two or more
plaintiffs and/or two or more defendants. It

28
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1

REMEDY IN CASE OF MISJOINDER ACTIONS Actions distinguished from special

OF CAUSES OF ACTION proceedings
DEFINITION
1. When there is a misjoinder of causes of 1. The purpose of an action is either to
1. An action is the legal and formal protect a right or prevent or redress a
action, the erroneously joined cause of
demand of one's right from another wrong if the action is civil. If it is a
action can be severed and proceeded with
person made and insisted upon in a criminal action, the purpose is to
separately upon motion by a party or upon
court of justice. prosecute a person for an act or an
the court's own initiative. Misjoinder of
2. In this jurisdiction, it is settled that the omission punishable by law.
causes of action is not a ground for
terms “action” and “suit” are 2. The purpose of a special proceeding is
dismissal of an action.
synonymous but the operative act to establish a status, a right or a
For example, if an action for forcible entry is which converts a claim into an particular fact
joined in one complaint with the causes of “action” or “suit” is the filing of the
action based on several promissory notes, the same with a court of justice. Filed The special proceedings under the Rules of
complaint should not be dismissed based on elsewhere, as with some other body or Court; applicability of rules in ordinary civil
the misjoinder of the forcible entry case. office not a court of justice, the claim actions
Instead, the cause of action predicated on may not be properly categorized under 1. Rules of special proceedings are
forcible entry merely needs to be severed from either term provided for in the following cases
the complaint upon motion of a party or by the under Sec. 1 of Rule 72 of the Rules of
Civil actions and criminal actions
court motu proprio and proceeded with Court:
separately in another action. 1. A civil action “is one by which a party a. Settlement of estate of deceased
sues another for the enforcement or persons;
2. While a misjoinder of causes of action is
protection of a right, or the prevention b. Escheat;
not a ground for dismissal, yet if the
or redress of a wrong” (Sec.3 [a], Rule c. Guardianship and custody of
plaintiff refuses to sever the misjoined
1, ROC). A criminal action “is one by children;
cause of action as ordered by the court,
which the State prosecutes a person d. Trustees:
the complaint may be dismissed
for an act or omission punishable by e. Adoption
conformably with the mandate of Sec. 3 of
law" (Sec. 3/b/, Rule 1, Rules of Court). f. Rescission and revocation of
Rule 17 which authorizes the dismissal of
2. It has been ruled that “. . . proceedings adoption;
a complaint for, among others, failure to
are to be regarded as criminal when g. Hospitalization of insane persons;
comply with the order of the court.
the purpose is primarily punishment, h. Habeas corpus;
and civil when the purpose is primarily i. Change of name;
compensatory or remedial …” j. Voluntary dissolution of
corporations;

29
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
k. Judicial approval of voluntary c. Review of judgements and final orders litigation must also involve or affect any of the
recognition of minor natural or resolutions of the Commission on following issues: “title to or possession of real
children; Elections and the Commission on property, or interest therein” (Sec. J, Rule 4,
l. Constitution of family home; Audit; Rules of Court). Sec. 2 of Rule 4 of the 1964
m. Declaration of absence and death: d. Certiorari, prohibition, and Rules of Court was more specific, and referred
and mandamus; to real actions as those “affecting title to, or for
n. Cancellation or correction of e. Quo warranto; recovery of Possession, or for partition or
entries in the civil registry f. Expropriation; condemnation of, or foreclosure of mortgage,
2. The rules of ordinary civil actions have g. Foreclosure of real estate mortgage; on real property.” Hence, an action for
suppletory application in special h. Partition damages to real property, while involving
proceedings. The rule is clear: “In the i. Forcible entry and unlawful detainer; realty, is a personal action because, although
absence of special provisions, the and it involves real property, it does not involve any
rules provided for in ordinary actions j. Contempt of the issues mentioned.
shall be, as far as practicable,
REAL AND PERSONAL ACTIONS - An action to recover possession of real
applicable in special proceedings”
property plus damages (like accion publiciana
(Sec. 2, Rule 72, Rules of Court), A - An action is ‘real’ when it affects title to or
and damages) is fundamentally a real action
demurrer to evidence in Rule 33 may possession of real property, or an interest
because possession of real property is
apply to special proceedings. therein
involved. This is true even if the recovery of
3. The enumeration of special
Examples: Actions for unlawful detainer, damages is, in itself, a personal action. The
proceedings in the Rules of Court, as
forcible entry, accion publiciana, accion aspect of damages is merely an incidental part
amended by A.M. No. 19-10-20-SC, is
reinvindicatoria, quieting of title or removal of of the main action, i.e., recovery of possession
not exclusive. Special proceedings are
a cloud on a title. of real property. Hence, in determining the
also provided for in cages aside from
venue of the action, the rule on venue of real
those mentioned in the Rules. - An action is real when it is founded upon the actions shall be applied even if the recovery of
Special civil actions in the Rules of Court privity of real estate. That means that realty, or damages is included in the recovery of
an interest therein, is the subject matter of the possession of the realty. However, an action to
The following are the special civil actions as action. recover possession of a personal property is a
presently embodied in the Rules of Court as
Not every action, however, involving a personal action.
amended by A.M. No. 19-10-20-SC:
real property is a “real action” because the - An action for a declaration of the nullity of
a. Interpleader realty may only be incidental to the subject marriage is a personal action. As such, it may
b. Declaratory relief and similar matter of the suit. To be a “real” action, it is not be commenced and tried where the plaintiff or
remedies; enough that the action must deal with real any of the principal plaintiffs resides, or where
property. It is important that the matter in
30
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
any of the principal defendants resides, at the same, but, instead, merely seeks for the recognition of the validity of the previous
election of the plaintiff execution of a deed of sale by the defendants award by seeking a declaration that the
in favor of the plaintiff, the action is a personal cancellation is null and void.
- An action for specific performance with
action
damage is a personal action as long as it does - An action to foreclose a real estate mortgage
not involve a claim of or recovery of ownership - Where it is alleged in the complaint that the is a real action, but an action to compel the
of or title to real property defendant breached the contract so that the mortgagee to accept payment of the mortgage
plaintiff prays that the contract be rescinded, debt and release the mortgage is a personal
Where a complaint is denominated as
and that the defendant be ordered to return action
one for specific performance but,
possession of the hacienda to the ultimate
nonetheless, prays for the issuance of a deed - An action to annul a contract of loan, and its
purpose or end of the action is to on ae session
of sale for a parcel of land, to enable the accessory real estate mortgage, is a personal
of real property, and not a mere breach of
plaintiff to acquire ownership thereof, its action. i rail action, the plaintiff seeks the
contract.
primary objective and nature is one to recover recovery of personal property, the
the parcel of land itself and, thus, is deemed a - Where the action, captioned as one to annul enforcement of a contract or the recovery of
real action. or rescind a sale of real property has, as its damages. In contrast, in a real action, the
fundamental and prime objective, the plaintiff seeks the recovery of real property, or,
An action for specific performance to
recovery of real property, the action is real. The as indicated in Sec. 2(a), Rule 4 of the then
enforce a right to repurchase lots previously
venue, therefore, of the action is where the real Rules of Court, a real action is an action
sold to the buyer in accordance with the Public
property subject of the action is situated. affecting title to real property, or for the
Land Act is an action incapable of pecuniary
Hence, in Emergency Loan Pawnshop, Inc. v. recovery of possession, or for partition or
estimation (Heirs of Bautista v. Lindo, G.R. No.
Court of Appeals, 353 SCRA 89, 91 the Court condemnation of, or foreclosure of mortgage
208232, March 10, 2014), In an earlier case,
sustained the Court of Appeals in dismissing a on, real property.
although the end result of the plaintiff's claim
complaint for annulment of sale of real
was the transfer of the subject property to his - Although the main relief sought in the action
property and damages filed in Davao City
name, the suit was still essentially for specific is the delivery of the certificate of title, said
involving a property located in Bagui City, the
performance, a personal action, because it relief, in turn, depends upon who, between the
place where the proper venue lies.
sought from the defendant the execution of a parties, has a better right to the lot in question.
deed of absolute sale based on a contract - Where an award of a house and lot to the It is not possible for the court to decide the
which they had previously made. Here, the plaintiff Was unilaterally cancelled, an action main relief without passing upon the claim of
action 1s primarily to enforce the contract to that seeks annul the cancellation of the award the parties with respect to the title to and the
execute a deed of sale. over the said house and lot, is a personal possession of the lot in question. The action is
action. The action does not involve title to, a real action
- Where the allegations, as well as the prayer,
ownership or possession of real property. The
in the complaint do not claim ownership of the
nature of the action is one to compel the
lots in question or ask for possession of the
31
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
- Where the sale is fictitious, with absolutely Significance of the distinction between a principal defendants resides, or in the
no consideration, it should be regarded as a personal action and a real action case of a non-resident defendant,
non-existent contract. There being no contract where he may be found, at the election
1. The distinction between a real action
between the parties, there is nothing in truth to of the plaintiff"
and personal action is important for
annul by action. The action, therefore, cannot 4. If the question involves the venue of an
the purpose of determining the venue
be an action for annulment of a sale of a action, the analysis will necessarily
of the action. Questions involving the
fishpond but one for the recovery of a involve the following steps:
propriety or impropriety of a particular
fishpond, a real action
venue are resolved by initially
(a) a determination whether the
- An action to annul a real estate mortgage determining the nature of the action,
action is real or personal: and
foreclosure sale is a real action because the i.e., if the action is personal or real.
(b) an application of the rules on
action is closely intertwined with the issue of Knowing whether or not an action is
venue under Rule 4 of the Rules of
ownership, the recovery of which is the real is also important to know which
Court,
primary objective of the plaintiff. “The court has jurisdiction over a
prevalent doctrine is that the annulment or complaint, As discussed in an earlier Thus, if the action is one for a sum of
rescission of a sale of real property does not chapter, jurisdiction over real actions money, it is a personal action. If it is instituted
operate to efface the fundamental and prime will involve determination of the by a resident of Manila against a resident of
objective and nature of the case, which is to assessed value of the property. Quezon City, the venue of the action is either
recover said real property”. The case should be 2. A real action is “local,” i.e., its venue Manila or Quezon City, at the election of the
construed to operate under the theory that depends upon the location of the plaintiff.
ownership has already been transferred. property involved in the litigation
If the action is one for forcible entry,
Hence, the primary purpose of the action because “Actions affecting title to or
the action is real. If it is instituted by a resident
becomes the recovery of said ownership. possession of real property, or interest
of Manila against a resident of Quezon City,
However, where the action is merely to annul a therein, shall be commenced and tried
the venue of the action is neither of these
deed of real estate mortgage, the action is a in the proper court which has
places if the property subject of the action is
personal action if ownership has not yet jurisdiction over the area wherein the
located in Makati City, in which case, Makati
passed to another. real property involved, or a portion
City is the venue. “Forcible entry and detainer
thereof, is situated”
actions shall be commenced and tried in the
3. A personal action is ‘transitory,’ i.e, its
municipal trial court of the municipality or city
venue depends upon the residence of
wherein the real property involved, or a portion
the plaintiff or the defendant. A
thereof, is situated”
personal action “may be commenced
and tried where the plaintiff or any of
the principal plaintiffs resides, or
where the defendant or any of the
32
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
5. An action for the recovery of affect title to or possession of real impose personal responsibility or lability upon
possession of the leased premises property, or any interest therein (BPI a person.”
located in Davao City, and the Family Savings Bank v. Yujuico, G.R.
2. Actions in rem are actions against the
payment of accrued rentals, is a real No. 175796, July 22, 2014), Hence, the
thing itself. They are binding upon the
action. The venue of the action is venue is the residence of the plaintiff
whole world. The phrase, “against the
Davao City. or that of the defendant, at the option
thing,” to describe in rem actions is a
6. An action to annul a sale of a land of the plaintiff, not the location of the
metaphor. It is not the “thing” that is
located in Baguio City, where recovery property mortgaged.
the party to an action in rem: only legal
of ownership is essentially the
IN PERSONAM, IN REM AND QUASI IN REM or natural persons may be parties even
material issue in the case, must be
ACTIONS in in rem actions.
filed in Baguio City. The action is & real
action, and must be filed in the place 1. “An action in personam is a The following are examples of actions in
where the property 1s situated, proceeding to enforce personal rights rem:
regardless of the residence of the and obligations brought against the
parties. “x x x petitions x x x which concern the status
person and is based on the jurisdiction
7. Where an award of a house and lot to of a person like a petition for adoption,
of the person x x x. Its Purpose is to
the plaintiff was unilaterally cancelled, correction of entries in the birth certificate or
compose, through the judgment of the
an action that seeks to annul the annulment of marriage, nullity of marriage,
court, some responsibility or liability
cancellation of the award over the said petition to establish illegitimate filiation;
directly upon the person of the
house and lot is a personal action, The registration of land under the torrens system;
defendant x x x."
action does not involve title to, and forfeiture proceedings” (Frias uv. Aleayde,
ownership or possession of real The following are some of the examples of GR, No, 194262, February 28, 2018). A land
property. The nature of the action is actions in personam: registration case or probate of a will is also an
one to compel the recognition of the action in rem.
Actions for collection of a sum of money
validity of the previous award by and damages; action for unlawful detainer or Traditional jurisprudence referred to
seeking a declaration that the forcible entry; action for specific an action in rem as one brought against the
cancellation 1s null and void. The performance; action to enforce a foreign whole world. An example of this action is a
venue is the residence of the plaintiff judgment in a complaint for breach of probate of a will. Thus, it has been held that
or that of the defendant, at the option contract” (Frias v. Aleayde, G.R. No, 194262, the probate of a will being a proceeding in rem,
of the plaintiff. February 28, 2018). Frias v. Alceayde further with the corresponding publication of the
8. An action to recover the deficiency instructs: “In actions in personam, the petition, the court's jurisdiction extends to all
after the extrajudicial foreclosure of judgment is for or against a person directly. persons interested in said will or in the
the real property mortgage is a Jurisdiction over the parties is required in settlement of the estate of the decedent.
personal action because it does not actions in personam, because they seek to
33
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
Another example is: a land registration One case of note, likewise, held: “x x x [An] affection the defendant’s interest in the
proceeding. Hence, by virtue of compliance action in personam is lodged against a person property and not to render a judgement
with the publication requirement, all based on personal liability; an action in rem is against him.
claimants and occupants of the subject directed against the thing itself instead of the
In another case, the Court similarly
property are deemed to be notified of the person; while an action quasi In rem names a
held that attachment and foreclosure
existence of a cadastral case involving the person as defendant, but its object is to
proceedings are both actions quasi in rem. As
property. Since a land registration proceeding subject that person's interest in a property to a
such, jurisdiction over the person of the non-
is an action in rem, the failure to give a corresponding lien or obligation (Lucas v.
resident defendant is not essential. Service of
personal notice to the owners or claimants of Lucas, G.R. No. 190710, dune 6, 2011).
summons on a non-resident defendant who is
the land is not a jurisdictional defect. It is the
not found in the country is required, not for the
publication of such notice that brings in the
purpose of physically acquiring jurisdiction
whole world as a party in the case, and vests 3. “A proceeding quasi in rem is one
over his person, but simply in pursuance of the
the court with jurisdiction. brought against persons seeking to
requirements of fair play, so that he may be
subject the property of such persons in
A petition for the correction of an entry informed of the pendency of the action against
the discharge of x x x claims x x x. In an
in the birth certificate, like date of birth, is an him and the possibility that property belonging
action quasi in rem, an individual is
action in rem, an action against a thing and not to him or in which he has an interest may be
named as a defendant and the
against a person. The proceeding is validated subjected to a judgment in favor of a resident,
purpose of the proceedings is to
essentially by publication of the proceeding to and that he may thereby be accorded an
subject his interest therein to the
give notice to the whole world and to those opportunity to defend in the action, should he
obligation or loan burdening the
who might be minded to make objections of be so minded.
property x x x. Unlike suits in rem, a
any sort to the right sought to be established.
quasi in rem judgment is conclusive - An action for annulment of certificate of
It is this publication which brings in the whole
only between the parties. The title is quasi in rem. It is not an action
world as a party. The decision of the court,
following are some of the examples of “against a person on the basis of his
after having attained finality, binds not only the
actions quasi in rem: suits to quiet personal liability”, but an action that
parties, but the whole world. Everyone is now
title, actions for foreclosure: and subjects a person's interest over a
legally bound to acknowledge and give effect
attachment proceedings. In an action property to a burden. The action for
to the judgment. Thus, when the order to
quasi in rem, an individual is named as annulment of a certificate of title threatens
correct an entry in the birth certificate is
a defendant” petitioner's interest in the property.
ordered under a final judgment, a government
agency is bound to give effect to the said Additional examples of actions quasi in rem
judgment. are:

Action for partition an d action for accounting.

Such actions are essentially for the purpose of
34
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
4. An in personam or an in rem action is 5. An action for the declaration of nullity 8. An action for reconveyance is an
a classification of actions according to of a marriage is a personal action action In personam available to a
the object of the action. A personal because it is not founded on real person whose property has been
and real action is a classification estate. It is, at the same time, an in rem wrongfully registered under the
according to foundation. It is in rem action because the issue of the status Torrens system in another's name.
when directed against the whole of a person is one directed against the
world, and in personam when directed whole world, One's status is a matter 9. An action for injunction is a personal
against a particular person. Hence, an that can be set up against anyone in action, as well as an action in
action in personam is not necessarily the world. On the other hand, an personam, not an action in rem or
a personal action. Nor is a real action, action for damages is both a personal quasi in rem (Kawasaki Port Service
necessarily an action in rem. For action and an action in personam, Corporation v. Amores, 199 SCRA 290,
instance, an action to recover title to or 237). Mufioz v. Yabut, Jr., 650 SCRA
possession of real property is a real 6. An action for specific performance is 344, also ruled that a suit for injunction
action, but it is an action in personam. an action in personam (Jose v. Boyon, partakes of an action in personam.
It is not brought against the whole did SCRA 216, 225). It is not an action
world, but against the person upon in rem. 10. The proceedings under the Financial
whom the claim is made. Rehabilitation Rules of Procedure of
- An action to recover a parcel of land is a 7. Cases involving an auction sale of land 2012 are proceedings in rem as
real action, but it is an action in personam, for the collection of delinquent taxes provided for under Sec. 4 thereof.
for it binds a particular individual only, are actions in personam, Mere Examples of the proceedings under
although it concerns the right to a tangible publication of the notice of the Financial Rehabilitation Rules of
thing. delinquency does not suffice. Notice Procedure are petitions for
by publication, although sufficient in rehabilitation of corporations,
proceedings in rem, does not satisfy partnerships and sole proprietorships
the requirements of proceedings in as well as proceedings in suspension
personam. Because it is in personam, of payment.
it is still necessary to send the notice
of tax delinquency directly to the 11. A petition for annulment of a judgment
taxpayer in order to protect his is in personam. The court's decision in
interests. this petition will not be enforceable
against the whole world. Any judgment
therein will eventually bind only the
parties properly impleaded.

35
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
SIGNIFICANCE person and, therefore, cannot validly “In an action in personam, jurisdiction over
try the case against him” the person of the defendant is necessary for
OF DISTINCTION BETWEEN ACTIONS:
the court to validly try and decide the case. In
Following the ruling in Asiavest, because
IN REM, IN PERSONAM, AND QUASI IN REM a proceeding in rem or quasi in rem,
an action for specific performance is in
jurisdiction over the person of the defendant is
1. The distinction is important to personam, service of summons upon him in
not a prerequisite to confer jurisdiction on the
determine whether or not jurisdiction person, while he is within the territory, is
court provided that the court requires
over the person of the defendant 1s essential for the court to acquire jurisdiction
jurisdiction over the res. Jurisdiction over the
required and consequently to over him. In an action for specific performance
res is required either (1) by the seizure of the
determine the type of summons to be against a non-resident who is not found in the
property under legal process, whereby it is
employed. Philippines, summons by publication will not
brought into actual custody of the law; or (2) as
enable the court to acquire jurisdiction over
Against a resident defendant in an action a result of the institution of legal proceedings,
him.
in personam, this jurisdiction is acquired by in which the power of the court is recognized
service in person on the defendant (Sec. 5, 3. The Supreme Court sums up the basic and made effective.”
Rule 14, Rules of Court, ag amended by ALM, rules on the matter, in the following
“Nonetheless, summons must be served
No, 19-10-20-8C) or, in case he cannot be words, thus:
upon the defendant not for the purpose of
served in person within a reasonable time, by vesting the court with jurisdiction but merely
“The question of whether the trial court
substituted service of summons. Without a for satisfying the due process requirements.”
has jurisdiction depends on the nature of the
valid service of the summons, the court
action, Lt., whether the action is in personam,
cannot obtain jurisdiction over the person of “A resident defendant who does not
in rem, or quasi in rem. The rules on service of
the defendant, unless he voluntarily appears voluntarily in court, must be personally served
summons under Rule 14 of the Rules of Court,
in the action. This voluntary appearance is with summons as provided under Sec. 6, Rule
likewise, apply according to the nature of the
equivalent to service of summons. 14 of the Rules of Court”
action,”
2. “In an action in personam against a Note: Now Sec. 5, Rule 14 of the Rules of
“An action in personam is an action
non-resident who does not voluntarily Court, as amended by A.M. No. 19-10-20-5C).
against a person on the basis of his personal
submit himself to the authority of the
liability. An action in rem is an action against
court, personal service within the
the thing itself instead of against the person.
state is essential to the acquisition of
An action quasi in rem is one wherein an
jurisdiction over his person. This
individual is named as defendant and the
method, is possible, if such defendant
purpose of the proceeding is to subject his
is physically present in the country. If
interest therein to the obligation or lien
he is not found therein, the court
burdening the property.”
cannot acquire jurisdiction over his
36
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
If she cannot be personally served with REQUIREMENT OF NOTICE OR SUMMONS action is, in rem, quasi in rem or in
summons, substituted service may be personam.
- A proceeding which is rem or quasi in rem,
effected (Note: There must be at least 3
as earlier mentioned does not, as a rule
attempts on 2 different dates before - Only the manner by which the notice is
require jurisdiction over the person of the
substituted service may be resorted te under made may differ, depending on the nature
defendant, and this rule becomes very
Section 6, Rule 14, as amended by A.M. No, of the action, but such notice or summons
apparent when the defendant is a non-
1910-20-80): need be sent. Hence, in in rem or quasi in
resident and is not found in the
rem actions, where the defendant is a non-
(a) by leaving copies of the summons at Philippines. For instance, as earlier
resident and is not found in the
the defendant's residence to a person at least discussed, his property found in the
Philippines, this notice is effected through
eighteen (18) al age and of sufficient discretion Philippines may be attached and, by so
extraterritorial service of summons under
then residing therein; doing, the court acquires jurisdiction over
Sec. 17, Rule 14 of the Rules of Court, as
the property or res, even if it has no
(b) By leaving copies of the summons at the amended by A.M. No. 19-10-20-8C. In
personal jurisdiction over the defendant. A
defendant's office or regular place of business actions against residents of the
Philippine court, thus, will have the
with some competent person in charge Philippines, the rule mandates the use of
jurisdiction to hear and decide the ease
thereof. A competent person. includes, but is service in person on the defendant in Sec.
because it has jurisdiction over the res by
not limited to, one who customarily receives 5, Rule 14, Rules of Court, as amended by
virtue of the attachment.
correspondences for the defendant: A.M. No. 19-10-20-5C, and in default
thereof, substituted service of summons
(c) By leaving copies of the summons, if - This should not be taken to mean,
under Sec. 6, Rule 14 of the Rules of Court,
refused entry upon making his or her authority however, that notice or summons to the
as amended by A.M. No. 19-10-20-5C. For
and purpose known, with any of the officers of parties interested in the action is not
instance, in a probate of a will, a
the homeowners’ association or necessary. Due process requires that
proceeding in rem, while no person is
condominium corporation, or its chief security those with interests in the thing in litigation
sought to be held liable by the proceeding
officer in charge of the community or the be notified and given an opportunity to
and the rule does not mention the term,
building where the defendant may be found; defend those interests. Their rights to be
‘summon,’ the rule requires that the heirs,
and heard cannot be denied. This means that
devisees, legatees and executors be
jurisdiction over the res is not sufficient for
(d) By sending an electronic mail to the notified by mail or personally. If the
a valid judgment. Such judgment also
defendant's electronic mail address, if testator asks for the allowance of his own
requires notice or service of summons to
allowed by the court (Biaco vu. Philippine will, notice shall be sent only to his
all interested parties to satisfy the due
Countryside Rural Bonk, 515 SCRA 106: compulsory heirs.
process requirement of the fundamental
underscoring and notes ours). law. Hence, notice to those interested in
the action is necessary whatever the

37
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
One pronouncement even declares: effect of which is to subject the property RULE 3
attached to the payment of the defendant
“Hence, regardless of the nature of the action, PARTIES
which the court may And to be due to the
proper service of summons is imperative. A
plaintiff” TO CIVIL ACTIONS
decision rendered without proper service of
summons suffers a defect in jurisdiction. WHEN SUMMONS BY PUBLICATION MAY BE Parties to a civil action
Respondent's institution of a proceeding for MADE IN AN ACTION IN PERSONAM
annulment of petitioner's certificate of title is 1. It is inconceivable to have a civil action
Summons by publication, as a general rule, without parties to the same. The rule gives two
sufficient to vest the court with jurisdiction
will not enable the court to acquire jurisdiction main categories of parties to a civil action
over the res, but it is not sufficient for the court
over the person of the defendant. This namely, the plaintiff and the defendant (Sec. 1,
to proceed with the case with authority and
jurisprudential rule is, however, subject to the Rule 3, Rules of Court).
competence” (De Pedro v. Romasan
exceptions laid down under the amended 2. The plaintiff is the claiming party and is the one
Development Corporation, GR. No. 194741],
rules which took effect on July 1, 1997. who files the complaint. The term, however,
November 26, 2074)
(a) In Sec. 16 of Rule 14, as amended by A.M. does not exclusively apply to the original
No. 19-10-20-SC if the identity of the plaintiff. It may also apply to a defendant who
EXAMPLE OF WHEN AN ACTION IN REM OR defendant is unknown or whose whereabouts files a counterclaim, a cross-claim or a third-
QUASI IN REM IS TREATED AS IN are unknown, service may, with leave of court, party complaint. The rule (Sec. J, Rule 3)
PERSONAM be effected upon him by publication in a defines the term ‘plaintiff,’ as the claiming
newspaper of general circulation. Note the party, the counter-claimant, the cross-
An action in rem or quasi in rem is treated as claimant or the third (fourth, etc.)-party
words “in any action” in See. 16 of Rule 14, as
an action in personam if the defendant plaintiff (Sec. J, Rule 3, Rules of Court).
amended.
presents himself in the action. This has been 3. The defendant does not only refer to the
clarified by jurisprudence, thus: (b) In See. 18 of Rule 14, as amended by A.M. original defending party. Ifa counterclaim is
No. 19-10-20-SC, if the resident defendant ia filed against the original plaintiff, he becomes
“If the defendant appears, the cause becomes
temporarily out of the country, he may be a defendant and the original defendant, a
mainly a suit in personam, with the added
served by publication with leave of court. plaintiff in the counterclaim. Under the Rules
incident, that the property attached remains
(Sec. I, Rule 3, Rules of Court), the term
liable, under the control of the court, to While the phrase “summons by publication”
‘defendant’ refers also to a defendant in a
answer to any demand which may be does not appear in Sec. 18, the way it
counterclaim, the cross-defendant, or the
established against the defendant by the final expressly appears in Sec. 16, the rule makes
third (fourth, etc.)-party defendant.
judgment of the court. But, if there is no reference to Sec. 17 of Rule 14 which allows
appearance of the defendant, and no service summons by publication. Note also the words
of process on him, the case becomes, in its “any action” in Sec. 18 of Rule 14 making the
essential nature, a proceeding in rem, the only rule applicable even to actions in personam.
38
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
Who may be Parties? 2. Juridical persons have personalities the corporate president was not authorized to
separate and distinct from those of the enter into the loan agreement with the bank
The following may be parties to a civil
natural persons that compose them. Thus, and that there was a collusion between the
action:
a suit against a stockholder of a bank and the corporation. The stockholders
(a) natural person, corporation is not a suit against the latter. argued that their right to intervene is based on
A judgment in a suit for recovery of ill- their right to protect their interests as
(b) juridical persons, and gotten. Wealth against a corporate stockholders.
(c) entities authorized by law (See. J, Rule 3, shareholder, is not a judgment against the
The Court denied the intervention and
Rules of Court, Association of Flood Victims v. corporation and the enforcement of the
held: “[T]he interest which entitles a person to
Commission on Elections, GR. No. 203775, judgment against the latter is a violation of
intervene in a suit, between other parties,
August 5, 2014). its right to due process and a disregard of
must be in the matter in litigation and of such
its distinct and separate personality.
Judicial persons as parties direct and immediate character that the
The converse is also true. A judgment intervenor will either gain or lose by direct legal
1. The juridical persons who may be parties rendered against the corporation is not a operation and effect of the judgment.” The
to a civil action are those enumerated in judgment rendered against a corporate interest of the stockholders, ruled the Court, is
Art. 44 of the Civil Code of the stockholder. “indirect, contingent, remote, conjectural,
Philippines, namely: consequential and collateral. At the very least,
When the corporate offices have been
(a) The State and its political subdivisions: their interest is purely inchoate, or in sheer
illegally searched, the right to contest the
expectancy of a right in the management of the
(b)Other corporations, institutions and transgression does not belong to any
corporation x x x.” The Court, in the same case
entities for public interest or purpose, created corporate officer. It belongs to the
went on to explain that while a share of stock
by law; and corporation alone which has a personality of
represents a proportionate or aliquot interest
its own separate and distinct from that of an
in the corporation, it does not vest the owner
(c)Corporations, partnerships and officer or a stockholder. The objection to an
thereof with any legal right or title to any of the
associations for private interest or purpose to unlawful search and seizure is purely personal
corporate property. This is because
which the law grants a juridical personality, and cannot be availed of by third persons.
shareholders are not the owners of such
separate and distinct from that of each
One early famous case, aptly property which is owned by the corporation as
shareholder, partner or member.
demonstrates the separate personality of a a distinct legal person (Saw v. Court of
Where the complaint is commenced corporation particularly well. Here, a Appeals, 195 SCRA 740, 745, citing
by a plaintiff not authorized to be a party to a collection suit was filed by a bank against a Magsaysay-Labrador v. Court of Appeals, 180
case, because it is not a natural person or a corporation and its president. Some SCRA 266).
juridical person or an entity authorized by law, stockholders of the corporation filed a motion
it becomes dismissible on the ground of lack for leave to intervene in the case, alleging that
of legal capacity to sue.
39
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
However, even if the cause of action (c) The estate of a deceased person is a Entity without a juridical personality as a
belongs to the corporation, if the board juridical entity that has a personality of its defendant
refuses to sue despite demand by the own. Since it has a personality of its own,
1. An example of an entity that is neither a
stockholders to sue and protect or vindicate it may be a party to an action.
natural nor juridical person but is allowed
corporate rights, a stockholder is allowed by (d) A legitimate labor organization may sue
by the Rules of Court to be a party to an
law to file a derivative suit in the corporate and be sued in its registered name.
action, although as a defendant, is the one
name. In such a suit, the real party in interest (e) The Roman Catholic Church may be a
treated in Sec. 15 of Rule 3 of the Rules of
is actually the corporation and the party and as to its properties, the
Court.
stockholder filing the action i8 a mere nominal archbishop or diocese, to which they
2. Under Sec. 15, “when two or more persons
party (Asset Privatization Trust v. Court of belong, may be a party.
not organized as an entity with juridical
Appeals, 200 SCRA 579, 614). (f) A dissolved corporation may prosecute
personality enter into a transaction, they
and defend suits by or against it provided
Entities authorized by law to be parties may be sued under the name by which
that the suits (i) occur within three years
they are generally or commonly known."
One need not be a natural or juridical person after its dissolution, and (ii) the suits are in
Under the same provision, the responsive
to be a party to a civil action. Sec. 1 of Rule 4 connection with the settlement and
pleading of the entity sued must disclose
adds a third possible party to al civil action closure of its affairs.
the names and addresses of its members
aside from natural persons and juridical (g) “[A] partnership for the practice of law,
since they are the persons ultimately
persona. Said provision recognizes “entities (h) constituted in accordance with the Civil
liable to the plaintiff.
authorized by law.” As long as an entity is Code of the Philippines acquires a juridical
authorized by law to be a party, such entity personality by operation of law. Having a Effect when a party impleaded is not
may sue or be sued or both. Consider the juridical personality distinct and separate authorized to be a party
following examples: from its partners, such partnership is the
real party-in-interest in connection with a 1. Where the plaintiff is not a natural or a
(a) Under Sec, 21 of the Corporation Code of contract entered into in its name and by a juridical person or an entity authorized by
the Philippines, a corporation by estoppel person authorized to act in its behalf x x x law, a motion to dismiss may be filed on
is precluded from denying its existence [O]ur law on partnership does not exclude the ground that “the plaintiff has no legal
and the members thereof can be sued and partnerships for the practice of law from capacity to sue" (Sec. 12 [a] 3, Rule &
be held liable as general partners. its coverage xxx Under Article 1771, a Rules of Court, as amended by A.M. No,
(b) A contract of partnership having a capital partnership may be constituted in any 19-10-20-5C), Where the plaintiff has a
of three thousand pesos or more but which form x x x" legal capacity to sue but is not the person
fails to comply with the registration who should sue because he is not the real
requirements is, nevertheless, liable as a party in interest, the complaint is
partnership to third persons. dismissible on the ground that the
complaint “states no cause of action.”

40
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
2. Where it is the defendant who is not a Real party In Interest 3. The rule on real party in interest ensures
natural or a juridical person or an entity that the party with the legal right to sue
1. “A real party in interest is the party who
authorized by law, the complaint may be brings the action and to bring to court a
stands to be benefited or injured by the
dismissed on the ground that the party rightfully interested in the litigation
judgment in the suit, or the party entitled
“pleading asserting the claim states no so that only real controversies shall be
to the avails of the suit”
cause of action” or “failure to state a cause presented to the court.
of action” (See. 12 [a{4}), Rule 8, Rules of To be a real party in interest, the interest
Determining the real party in Interest
Court, as amended by A.M. No, 19-10-20- must be ‘real,’ which is a present substantial
5C), because a complaint cannot possibly interest as distinguished from a mere 1. The determination of who the real party in
state a cause of action against one who expectancy or a future, contingent interest is, requires going back to the
cannot be a party to a civil action. subordinate or consequential interest. elements of a cause of action, A cause of
action involves the existence of a right and
Averment of capacity to sue or be sued 2. Unless otherwise authorized by law or by
a violation of such right. Evidently, the
the Rules, “every action must be
Facts showing the capacity of a party to sue or owner of the right violated stands to be the
prosecuted or defended in the name of the
be sued, or the authority of a party to sue or be real party in interest as plaintiff and the
real party in interest”. If a suit is not
sued in a representative capacity, or the legal person responsible for the violation is the
brought in the name of or against the real
existence of an organized association of real party in interest as defendant. Thus, in
party in interest, a motion to dismiss may
persons that is made a party, must be averred a suit for violation of a contract, the parties
be filed on the ground that the complaint
(Sec. 4, Rule 4, Rules of Court, as amended by in interest would be those covered by the
states no cause of action. Like the need for
A.M. No. 19-10.20-SC). operation of the doctrine of relativity of
a cause of action in ordinary civil actions,
contracts under Art. 1311 of the Civil Code
Minor or incompetent as a party this requirement is not a mere technical
of the Philippines, namely, the parties,
matter because it goes into the very
A minor or an incompetent may sue or be their assignees and heirs.
substance of the suit, If either of the
sued. He can be a party, not through, but with
parties is not the real party in interest, the The basic principle of relativity of
the assistance of his father, mother, guardian,
court cannot grant the relief prayed for contracts is that contracts can only bind the
or if he has none, a guardian ad litem (Sec. §,
because that party has no legal right or parties who entered into it, and cannot favor or
Rule 3, Rules of Court).
duty with respect to the other. Litigation prejudice a third person x x x. Hence, one who
then becomes a mere academic exercise is not a party to a contract, and for whose
that eventually settles nothing and thus, a benefit it was not expressly made, cannot
waste of time maintain an action on it”. Bar 2011 for
example: in a suit for annulment of a contract,
the rea] parties in interest would be those who
are principally or subsidiarily bound by the

41
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
contract. A third party, who has not taken part “The power to collect and receive owner/lessor is the real party In interest as
in a compromise agreement, has no right to payments on behalf of the principal is an plaintiff.
ask for the enforcement of the agreement. ordinary act of administration covered by the
5. In an action for ejectment, any one of the
Neither can such person seek the amendment general powers of an agent. On the other hand,
co-owners may bring the action.
or modification of the same. the filing of suits is an act of strict dominion.
6. Under Art, 1768 of the Civil Code of the
Under Article 1878 (16) of the Civil Code, a
2. While, ordinarily, one who is not privy to a Philippines, a partnership has a juridical
duly appointed agent has no power to exercise
contract may not bring an action to personality separate and distinct from that
any act of strict dominion on behalf of the
enforce it, there are recognized exceptions of each of the partners. Hence, if the
principal unless authorized by a special power
to this rule. For example, if a contract contract was entered into by the
of attorney. An agent's authority to file suit
contains a stipulation pour autrui (a partnership in its name, it is the
cannot be inferred from his authority to collect
stipulation expressly conferring benefits to partnership, not its officers or agents,
or receive payments; the grant of special
a third person), such person, in whose which should be impleaded in any
powers cannot be presumed from the grant of
benefit the stipulation was conferred by litigation involving property registered in
general powers, Moreover, the authority to
the parties, may demand the fulfillment of the name. A violation of this rule will result
exercise special powers must be duly
the contract, and even sue under such in dismissal of the complaint.
established by evidence, even though it need
contract, provided he accepted and 7. The real party in interest in a criminal
not be in writing”.
communicated his acceptance of the prosecution is the “People of the
beneficial stipulation prior to its 4. Should a lawful possessor be disturbed in Philippines.” The interest of the private
revocation. his possession, it is the possessor, not offended party is only in the civil aspect of
3. A mere agent, who is not an assignee of the necessarily the owner of the property, who the case.
principal, cannot bring suit under a deed of can bring the action to recover the 8. The condominium unit owners and
sale entered into in behalf of his principal possession. The argument that the residents of a condominium building,
because it is the principal, not the agent, complaint states no cause of action affected by an oil leak in the pipelines of
who is the real party in interest. If a because the suit was filed by a mere the defendant, which made the place
complaint filed by an agent for and in possessor and not by the owner is not inhabitable for them, are real parties in
behalf of the principal, the agent is not real correct. interest.
party in interest 9. Where the cause of action is based on a
In an action for forcible entry, the
breach of contract of carriage, the liability
Where an agent acts in his own name and possessor/lessee is the real party in interest as
of the common carrier is direct and
for the benefit of an undisclosed principal, the plaintiff and not the owner/lessor. The issue in
primary since the contract is between the
agent may sue or be sued in his own name, an action for forcible entry is mere possession.
carrier and the passenger, The driver of the
without joining the principal, except when the But in an action to recover damages for injury
carrier cannot be made liable since he is
contract involves things belonging to the caused by the deforciant on the property, the
not a party to the contract of carriage. [t 1s
principal (Sec. 3, Rule 3, RC).
42
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
erroneous to hold the carrier and the driver “(a) For taxpayers, there must be a claim of person would be benefited or injured by
jointly and severally liable. illegal disbursement of public funds or that the the judgment or whether or not he is
tax measure is unconstitutional; entitled to the avails of the suit. While
Doctrine of Locus Standi
standing is a constitutional law concept,
(b) For voters, there must be a showing of
• The doctrine of locus standi or legal in private suits, locus stand requires a
obvious interest in the validity of the law in
standing refers to a personal and litigant to be a “real party-in-interest”. In
question;
substantial interest in a case such that the other words, in private suits, standing is
party has sustained or will sustain direct c) For concerned citizens, there must be a governed by the “real parties in interest”
injury because of the challenged showing that the issues raised are of rule found in Sec. 2, Rule 3 of the Rules of
governmental act. transcendental importance which must be Court.
• Asa rule, locus standi requires a personal settled early; and
Plaintiff in environmental cases
stake in the outcome of the controversy.
(d) For legislators, there must be a claim that
Hence, a party will be allowed to litigate Any real party in interest, including the
the official action complained of infringes on
only when he can demonstrate that (a) he government and juridical entities authorized
their prerogatives as legislators” “Otherwise
has personally suffered some actual or by law, may file a civil action involving the
stated, whenever the acts affect the powers,
threatened injury because of the allegedly enforcement or violation of any environmental
prerogatives and privileges of Congress,
illegal conduct of the government; (b) the law (Sec. 4, Rule 2, Rules of Procedure for
anyone of its members may validly bring an
injury is fairly traceable to the challenged Environmental Cases).
action to challenge the same to safeguard and
action; and (c) the injury is likely to be
maintain the sanctity thereof" Affirmative defense when a party is not the
redressed by the remedy being sought.
real party in interest
Otherwise, he/she would not be allowed to • The concept of legal standing or focus
litigate. standi has been broadened more by 1. It will be observed that Rule 8 does not
• The rule on locus standi is a mere recent Court pronouncements. provide for an affirmative defense which
procedural technicality, hence, the Court, • The concept of ‘standing,’ because of its directly states that ‘the plaintiff or the
in a catena of cases, has waived or relaxed constitutional underpinnings, is very defendant is not the real party in interest.’
the same rule, allowing persons who may different from questions relating to Instead, the ground provided for in Sec. 12
not have been personally injured by the whether or not a particular party is a real [a]4, Rule 8, Rules of Court, as amended
operation of a law or any governmental party in interest. Although both are by A.M. No. 19-10-20-SC) is:
act. The Court, therefore, has laid out the directed towards ensuring that only
bare Minimum norm to extend the certain parties can maintain an action, the “That the pleading asserting the claim
standing to sue to the so-called “non- concept of standing requires an analysis states no cause of action.”
traditional suitors,” thus: of broader policy concerns. The question,
as to who the real party in interest is,
involves only a question on whether a
43
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
2. It must, Likewise, be reiterated that the Representative parties Citizen suit under the Rules of Procedure for
rule does not consider ‘lack’ of a cause of Environmental Cases
1. Some actions may be allowed to be
action or ‘absence’ of a cause of action,
prosecuted or defended by a 1. A citizen suit may be filed by any Filipino
What it supplies is that the pleading
representative or someone acting in a citizen in representation of others,
asserting the claim “states no cause of
fiduciary capacity like a trustee of an including minors or generations yet
action.” It is the failure to state the cause
express trust, a guardian, an executor or unborn, to enforce rights or obligations
of action, not its absence or lack, which
administrator, or a party authorized by law under environmental laws. This is a unique
could be invoked as an affirmative
or by the Rules (Sec. 3, Rule 3, Rules of rule which authorizes a suit in
defense.
Court). representation of generations yet unborn
3. Thus, if the plaintiff, for instance, has
2. Even where the action is allowed to be even if those represented are, at the time
capacity to sue but he is not the ‘real party-
prosecuted or defended by a of the filing of the suit, neither conceived
in-interest,’ the ground for dismissal is a
representative party or someone acting in nor born.
‘failure to state a cause of action’ or that
a fiduciary capacity (like the trustee of an 2. When the suit is filed, the court shall issue
the complaint ‘states no cause of action.’
express trust, an executor, or an order which shall contain the following:
4. The foregoing pronouncements were
administrator), the beneficiary shall be (a) a brief description of the cause of
issued before the 2019 Amendments to
included in the title of the case and shall action; (b) a brief description of the reliefs
the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure. A
be deemed to be the real party in interest prayed for, and (c) an order requiring all
motion to dismiss based on the ground
(Sec. 3, Rule 3, Rules of Court, Aron v. interested parties to manifest their interest
that the pleading asserting the claim
Realon, 450 SCHA 372, 384). The to intervene in the case within 15 days
states no cause of action is now a
phraseology of Sec. 3, Rule 3 leaves no from notice thereof.
prohibited pleading under Sec. 12 of Rule
doubt as to what the rule is. Impleading
15 of the Rules of Court, ag amended by Note that: under the Rules of Court, in
the beneficiary as party is mandatory
A.M. No. 19-10-20-SC, Such ground must ordinary civil actions, the court does not issue
since said beneficiary is deemed to be the
be raised as an affirmative defense in the an order requiring interested parties to
real party in interest.
answer pursuant to Sec, 12, Rule 8 of the manifest their intention to intervene. Instead,
3. In derivative suits, the corporation
Rules of Court, as amended. it is the intervenor who asks for leave of court
concerned must be impleaded. It is
to intervene and his intervention rests on
actually its cause of action that is being
judicial discretion.
litigated.
3. The order mentioned in the preceding
number may be published, by the plaintiff,
once in a newspaper of general circulation
in the Philippines or copies of said order

44
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
may be furnished to all affected affected by the judgment and without because the credit or debt is presumed to be
barangays. them, no final determination of the case divided into ag many equal shares as there are
can be had. creditors or debtors. Hence, a suit against one
Indispensable parties
6. In a petition for a substantial correction or debtor does not make the other an
1. An indispensable party is a real party in change of entry in the civil registry under indispensable party to the suit.
interest without whom no final Rule 108, it is mandatory that the civil
Compulsory joinder of indispensable
determination can be had of an action. registrar, as well as all other persons who
parties
have or claim to have any interest that
An indispensable party is one whose would be affected thereby be made 1. “x x x [Tjhe joinder of indispensable parties
interest in the subject matter of the suit and respondents because they are is mandatory and the responsibility of
the relief sought are so inextricably indispensable parties. impleading all the indispensable parties
intertwined with the other parties that his legal 7. In action for partition of real property, all rests on the plaintiff. Without the presence
presence as a party to the proceeding is an persons who are co-heirs and persons of indispensable parties to the suit, the
absolute necessity. On the contrary, a party is having an interest in the property are judgment of the court cannot attain real
not indispensable to the suit if his interest in indispensable parties, An action for finality. Otherwise stated, the absence of
the controversy or subject matter is distinct partition will not lie without their joinder. an indispensable party renders all
and divisible from the interest of the other 8. A transferee of a property pendente lite is subsequent actions of the court null and
parties and will not necessarily be prejudiced not an indispensable party, as he would, in void for want of authority to act not only as
by a judgment which does complete justice to any event, be bound by the judgment to the absent party but even as to those
the parties in court. against his predecessor. present”
2. In a suit based on breach of contract, the 9. The person whose right to the office is
challenged is an indispensable party. No It is only the joinder of indispensable
contract are indispensable parties.
action can proceed unless he is joined. parties which is mandatory (See Sec. 7, Rule 3,
3. The registered owner of a lot whose title
10. In an action for reconveyance of a Rules of Court). Clearly, the rule directs a
the plaintiff seeks to nullify is an
property, the persons against whom compulsory joinder of indispensable parties
indispensable party.
reconveyance is asserted are The joinder of other parties is merely
4. The one who holds legal title to the
indispensable parties. permissive (See Sec. 6, Rule 3, Rules of Court).
property is not an indispensable party in a
suit between parties to an unlawful From the above jurisprudence, it may be 2. One decision of the Court declares that
detainer suit where the issue is mere inferred that a person is not an indispensable whenever it appears to the court in the
possession and not ownership. party if his interest in the controversy or course of a proceeding that an
5. Also, where the persons who built a subject matter is separable from the interest indispensable party has not been joined, it
structure, like a church, are sought to be of the other parties. In a joint obligation, for is the duty of the court to stop the trial and
prohibited to use the same, the builders instance, the interest of one debtor is separate order the inclusion of such party. The
are indispensable parties. They will be and distinct from that of his co-debtor. This is absence of an indispensable party renders
45
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
all subsequent actuations of the court null ground for dismissal of an action. Instead, initiative of the tribunal concerned. If the
and void, for want of authority to act, not parties may be dropped or added by the plaintiff refuses to implead an
only as to the absent parties, but even as court on motion of any party or on its own indispensable party despite the order of
to those present. Accordingly, the initiative at any stage of the action and on the court, that court may dismiss the
responsibility of impleading all the such terms as are just. complaint for the plaintiff's failure to
indispensable parties rests on the 2. The rule is consistent with the options comply with the order
plaintiff. The defendant does not have the available to the court when faced with
Misjoinder and non-joinder of parties
right to compel the plaintiff to prosecute failure to implead an indispensable party.
the action against a party if he does not The court may order the amendment of the 1. A party is misjoined when he is made a
wish to do so, but the plaintiff will have to pleading. It is when the order of the court party to the action although he should not
suffer the consequences of any error he to implead an indispensable party goes be impleaded. A party 1s not joined when
might commit in exercising his option unheeded may the case be dismissed. The he is supposed to be joined but is not
court is clothed with the authority to impleaded in the action.
Effect of non-joinder of indispensable
dismiss a complaint due to the fault of the 2. To reiterate, neither misjoinder nor non-
parties
plaintiff as when, among others, he does joinder of parties is a ground for the
The inclusion of indispensable parties is a not comply with any order of the court. dismissal of an action. Parties may be
jurisdictional requirement. Any decision 3. Failure to implead an indispensable party dropped or added by order of the court on
rendered by a court without first obtaining the is not a ground for the dismissal of an motion of any party or on its own initiative
required jurisdiction over indispensable action, as the remedy in such a cage is to at any stage of the action and on such
parties is null and void for want of jurisdiction, implead the party claimed to be terms as are just. If there is any claim
not only as to the absent parties but even as to indispensable, considering that parties against a party misjoined, the same may
those present. The reason is not difficult to may be added by order of the court, on be severed and proceeded with
see. Indispensable parties are those without motion of the party or on its own initiative separately.
whom no final determination can be had of an at any stage of the action. t is error for the 3. Even if neither misjoinder nor non-joinder
action (See Sec. 7, Rule 3, Rules of Court). court to order the dismissal of the case. is a ground for dismissal of the action, the
The Court definitively explained that in failure to obey the order of the court to
Failure to implead an indispensable party; instances of non-joinder of indispensable drop or add a party is a ground for the
not a ground for dismissal parties, the proper remedy is to implead dismissal of the complaint under Sec. 3,
1. If a complaint or petition is not brought in them and not to dismiss the case. The non- Rule 17 of the Rules of Court, as amended
the name of or against an indispensable joinder of indispensable parties is not a by A.M. No. 19-10-20-SC. One case holds:
party, outright dismissal 13 not the ground for the dismissal of an action. At “It is only upon the plaintiffs refusal to
immediate remedy authorized by the any stage of a judicial proceeding and/or at comply with the order to join
Rules because, under the Rules, the non- such terms as are just, parties may be indispensable parties that the case may
joinder (or misjoinder) of parties is not a added on the motion of a party or on the be dismissed”.
46
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
Necessary party. Duty of pleader If a necessary party Is not without prejudice to the rights of such
joined; effect necessary party
— A necessary party is one who is not
indispensable but who ought to be joined as a • Whenever, in any pleading in which a claim Unwilling co-plaintiff
party if complete relief is to be accorded as to is asserted, necessary party is not joined,
- An unwilling co-plaintiff is a party who is
those already parties , or for a complete the pleader shall set forth the name of the
supposed to be a plaintiff but whose consent
determination or settlement of the claim necessary party, if his name is known, and
to be joined as a plaintiff cannot be obtained
subject of the action. state why such party is omitted (Sec. 9,
as when he refuses to be a party to the action.
Rule 3, Rules of Court).
— The non-inclusion of a necessary party does Under Sec. 10 of Rule 3 of the Rules of Court,
not prevent the court from proceeding in the When court may order joinder of a said unwilling co-plaintiff (a) may be made a
action (See Sec. 9. Rule 3, Rules of Court). necessary party defendant, and (b) the reason therefor shall be
Hence, a final determination of the case can stated in the complaint.
be had but only among the parties already • If the reason given for the non-joinder of
the necessary party is found by the court to Alternative defendants
impleaded even if a necessary party, for some
justifiable reason, is not joined. But it would be be unmeritorious, it may order the pleader
- Where the plaintiff cannot definitely identify
better that all necessary parties are joined so to join the omitted party if jurisdiction over
who among two or more persons should be
the parties may obtain complete relief. his person may be obtained (Sec. 9, Rule
impleaded as a defendant, he may join all of
3, Rules of Court).
them as defendants in the alternative. Under
Distinction between an indispensable and
Effect of failure to comply with the order of Sec, 13 of Rule 3, “where the plaintiff is
a necessary party
the court uncertain against who of several persons he is
• An indispensable party must be joined entitled to relief, he may join any or all of them
under any and all conditions while a • The failure to comply with the order of the as defendants in the alternative, although a
necessary party should be joined court to include a necessary party, without right to relief against one may be inconsistent
whenever possible. justifiable cause, shall be deemed a with a right of relief against the other" (Sec. 13,
waiver of the claim against such party Rule 3, Rules of Court). Just as the rule allows
• Stated otherwise, an indispensable party
(See. 9, Rule 3, Rules of Court). a suit against defendants in the alternative, the
must be joined because the court cannot
proceed without him. Hence, his presence Effect of a justified non-inclusion of a rule also allows alternative causes of action
is mandatory, the presence of a necessary necessary party and alternative defenses
party is not mandatory because his
interest is separable from that of the • The non-inclusion of a necessary party
indispensable party. He has to be joined does not prevent the court from
only whenever possible to afford complete proceeding in the action, and the
relief to the parties and to avoid multiple judgment rendered therein shall be
litigations.
47
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
Unknown Identity or name of the defendant action. Note that this duty is imposed held that an heir does not need to first secure
upon the counsel of the deceased party, the appointment of an administrator of the
- Whenever the identity or name of the
not upon the counsel of the surviving party. estate of the deceased because, from the very
defendant is unknown, he may be sued as the
moment of death, he steps into the shoes of
unknown owner, heir, devisee, or by such other Action of court upon notice of death; effect
the deceased and acquires his rights as
designation as the case may require; when his of death on the case
devisee/legatee.
identity or true name is discovered, the
• Upon receipt of the notice of death, the
pleading must be amended accordingly (See. It is, however, possible that any of the
court shall determine whether or not the
14, Rule 3, Rules of Court). following may occur: (a) the counsel for the
claim is extinguished by such death. If the
deceased does not name a legal
Effect of death of a party on the attorney- claim survives, the court shall order the
representative, or (b) there is a representative
client relationship: duty of counsel legal representative or representatives of
named but he fails to appear within the
the deceased, named in the information
• The death of the client extinguishes the specified period. When any of the above
given by counsel, to appear and be
attorney. client relationship and divests happens, the court may order the opposing
substituted for the deceased within 30
the counsel of his authority to represent party to procure the appointment of an
days from notice (See. 16, Rule 3, Rules of
the client. Accordingly, a dead client has executor or administrator for the estate of the
Court). The substitution of the deceased
no personality and cannot be represented deceased, within a specified time. All court
would not be ordered by the court in cases
by an attorney (Laviiig v. Court of Appeals, charges in procuring such appointment, if
where the death of the party would
17] SCRA 691, CAUSES OF ACTION, defrayed by the opposing party, may be
extinguish the action because substitution
ACTIONS, AND PARTIES CHAPTER Ill 2. recovered as costs (Sec. 6, Rule 3, Rules of
is proper only when the action survives.
203 Under the present rule, the heirs of the Court).
• Under the present rule, the heirs of the
deceased 702). Neither does he become
deceased may be allowed to be Importance of substitution of the deceased
the counsel of the heirs of the deceased
substituted for the deceased, without
unless his services are engaged by said • The purpose of the rule on substitution,
requiring the appointment of an executor
heirs. when proper, is to apprise the heir or
or administrator and the court may
• Whenever a party to a pending action dies, substitute that he is being brought to the
appoint guardian ad litem for the minor
it is the duty of the counsel of the jurisdiction of the court in lieu of the
heirs (Sec. 16, Rule 3, Rules of Court).
deceased party to inform the court of such deceased party by operation of law, It is for
fact within 30 days after such death. The The above rule is plain and explicit. The the protection of the right of every party to
counsel has also the obligation to give the heirs may be allowed to be substituted for the due process. Prior substitution is effected
name and address of the legal deceased. Where an heir appears as for the trial court to obtain jurisdiction over
representative of the deceased. This duty substitute for the deceased, there is no more the persons and to obviate any future
is mandatory and failure to comply need to require the appointment of an claim that he or she was not apprised of
therewith is a ground for disciplinary executor or administrator. Thus, it has been the litigation.

48
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
No requirement for amendment of would continue to be properly represented Appeals, 250 SCRA 305, 309). In the
complaint or service of summons in the suit through the duly appointed legal absence of a formal substitution, the court
representative of the estate (Vda. de can acquire jurisdiction over the person of
• The court, under Sec. 16 of Rule 3 is not
Salazar v. Court of Appeals, 250 SCRA 305, the decedent's representative if he
required to issue an order to amend the
308). Bar 2014 Non-compliance with the voluntarily submits himself to said
complaint upon being notified of the death
rules on substitution of a deceased party jurisdiction
of a party but to issue an order requiring
renders the proceedings of the trial court
the legal representative to appear and be Examples of actions which survive the
infirm because the court has no
substituted for the deceased. It is not the death of a party:
jurisdiction over the person of the legal
amendment of the pleading, but the order
representative or heirs of the deceased 1. Sec. 1, Rule 87 of the Rules of Court
of substitution and its service, that are the
(Brioso v. Rili-Mariano, 396 SCRA 549, 556- enumerates actions that survive against
steps towards the substitution of the
557). A party to be affected by a personal administrators, and they are:
deceased by his representative or heir,
judgment must have a day in court and an
neither is the issuance and the service of (a) actions to recover real and personal
opportunity to be heard
summons required. Nothing in Sec. 16 of property from the estate;
• However, in a case involving ejectment, it
Rule 3 mandates service of summons.
was ruled that the non-substitution of the (b) actions to enforce a lien thereon; and
Instead of issuing summons, the court
deceased by his legal representatives,
shall, under the authority of the same (c) actions to recover damages for an injury to
because of the failure of counsel to inform
provision, order the legal representative of person or property.
the court of the death of his client, does
the deceased to appear and be
not deprive the court of jurisdiction. The Hence, an action for damages filed
substituted for the said deceased within
decision of the court is, nevertheless, against the defendant should not be
20 days from notice. It is the service of the
binding upon the successors-in-interest of dismissed upon his death. The action against
order of substitution upon the substitute
the deceased. A judgment in an ejectment such defendant survives since it is one to
that enables the court to acquire
case may be enforced not only against recover damages for an injury to the plaintiff.
jurisdiction over said substitute.
defendants therein but also against the
Purpose and importance of substitution of members of their family, their relatives, or 2. Actions to recover personal property like
the deceased privies who derived their right of replevin and actions to recover real property
possession from the deceased defendant. like forcible entry, unlawful detainer, accion
• The purpose behind the rule on • Formal substitution is, however, not publiciana, accion reivindicatoria, are
substitution of the deceased is to apprise necessary when the heirs themselves examples of actions that survive. So are
the heir or substitute that he is being voluntarily appeared in the action, actions to enforce a lien on the property, like
brought to the jurisdiction of the court in participated therein and presented foreclosure of mortgages. Also, an action for
lieu of the deceased party by operation of evidence in defense of the deceased quieting of title with damages is an action
law. It is to ensure that the deceased defendant (Vda. de Salazar v, Court of involving real property. It survives and the
49
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
claim is not extinguished by the death of a Actions for the recovery of money arising Action for recovery of money arising from
party. from contractual obligations contract expressed or implied

An ejectment case survives the death • When the action is for the recovery of The action need not literally arise from
of a party. It continues until judgment because money arising from contract, express or contracts. The term, “implied” accordingly,
the issue concerning the illegality of the implied, and the defendant dies before may mean a claim arising from law or a quasi
defendant's possession is still alive, and upon entry of final judgment in the court in contract (Regalado, Remedial Law
its resolution depends the corollary issue of which the action was pending at the time Compendium, Volume Hf, 2008 Ed., pp. 76-77,
whether and how much damages may be of such death, the court shall not dismiss citing Leung Ben v. O'Brien, 38 Phil. 182). The
recovered. the suit. The case shall be allowed to term does not include money claims arising
continue until entry of final judgment (Sec. from a crime or a quasi-delict.
3. The action to recover damages arising from
20, Rule 2, Rules of Court). “Before entry of
delicts also survives, Under the last paragraph Incompetency or Incapacity of a party
final judgment’ means the case is on trial
of Sec. 4 of Rule 111, if the accused dies during the pendency of the action
or on appeal. In any of these situations,
before arraignment, while the criminal case
there is yet no final judgment to be • In case a party becomes incapacitated or
shall be dismissed, such dismissal is without
entered. incompetent during the pendency of the
prejudice to any civil action the offended party
action, the court, upon motion with notice,
may file against the estate of the deceased. If If the plaintiff obtains a favorable
may allow the action to be continued by or
the accused dies after arraignment and during judgment, said judgment shall be enforced
against the incompetent or incapacitated
the pendency of the criminal action, the civil following the procedure provided for in the
party with the assistance of his legal
liability arising from the crime is extinguished Rules for prosecuting claims against the
guardian or guardian ad litem.
but any independent civil action (that action estate of a deceased person (Sec. 20, Rule 3,
arising from other sources of obligations) may Rules of Court). Because of the rule Transfer of interest
be continued against the estate or legal mandating compliance with the rule for
representative of the accused upon proper prosecuting claims against the estate, the • In case of transfer of interest, the action
substitution, or against said estate, ag the prevailing plaintiff is not supposed to file a may be continued by or against the original
case may be. motion for the issuance of an order and writ of party, unless the court, upon motion,
execution of the judgment. Since the action is directs the person to whom the interest is
Actions based on the tortious conduct transferred to be substituted in the action
a claim for money, the judgment for money
of the defendant survive the death of the latter. or joined with the original party (Sec. 19.
favorable to the plaintiff shall be filed as a
4. If the action does not survive like legal money claim against the estate of the Rule 3, Rules of Court). A transferee
separation, the proper action of the court is to decedent pendente lite is a proper party that stands
simply dismiss the case. It follows then that exactly in the shoes of the transferor, the
substitution will not be required. original party.

50
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
• Transferees are bound by the proceedings transcripts of stenographic notes, which Role of the ‘Solicitor General’
and judgment in the case, such that there the court may order to be furnished him
1. The rule is that only the Solicitor
is no need for them to be included or (Sec. 21, Rule 3, Rules of Court).
General can bring and defend actions
impleaded by name. The Court has even
However, the amount of the docket and on behalf of the Republic of the
gone further by saying that the transferee
other lawful fees, which the indigent was Philippines and that actions filed in the
is joined or substituted in the pending
exempted from paying, shall be lien on the name of the Republic or its agencies
action by operation of law from the exact
judgment rendered in the case favorable to the and instrumentalities, if not initiated
moment when the transfer of interest is
indigent. A lien on the judgment shall not arise by the Solicitor General, will be
perfected between the original party and
if the court provides otherwise (Sec. 21, Rule summarily dismissed, The authority of
the transferee. The Court has, likewise,
3, Rules of Court). the Solicitor General is embodied in
recognized that the trial court is given wide
Sec. 35(1), Chapter 12, Title III, and
discretion and enough leeway to 3. While the rule allows an ex parte
Book IV of the Administrative Code of
determine who may be joined in a application and hearing to litigate as an
1987 (Cooperative Development
proceeding, or whether a party may indigent, at any time before judgment is
Authority v. Dolefil Agrarian Reform
properly be substituted by another due to rendered by the trial court, any adverse
Beneficiaries Cooperative, 382 SCRA
a transfer of interest (Cameron Granville 3 party may contest the grant of the
552, 565).
Asset Management, Inc. ¥Chua, G.R. No. authority to a party to litigate as an
2. Also, in any action involving the validity
191170, September 14, 2016). indigent. If the court should determine
of any treaty, law, ordinance, executive
that the party, declared as an indigent is in
Indigent parties order, presidential decree, rule or
fact a person with sufficient income and
regulations, the court, in its discretion,
1. A party may be authorized to litigate as an property, the proper docket and lawful
may require the appearance of the
indigent if the court is satisfied that the fees shall be assessed and collected by
Solicitor General who may be heard in
party is one who has no money or property the clerk of court (Sec. 21, Rule 3, Rules of
person or through a representative
sufficient and available for food, shelter Court).
duly designated by him (See. 22, Rule
and basic necessities for himself and his
In case the grant of the authority to litigate 3, Rules of Court).
family (Sec. 21, Rule 3, Rules of Court).
as an indigent is contested by any party, the 3. In criminal actions brought before the
The application and hearing to litigate as determination of the court on whether or not Court of Appeals or the Supreme
an indigent litigant is made ex parte (Sec. 21, the grant of the earlier authority 1s proper 15 Court, the authority to represent the
Rule 3, Rutes of Court). to be made after hearing, not ex parte (Sec. 21, State is solely vested in the OSG. This
Rule 3, Rules of Court). is pursuant to Sec. 35/1), Chapter 12,
2. If one is authorized to litigate as an Title If, Book III of the Administrative
indigent, such authority shall include an Code of 1987, as amended, providing
exemption from the payment of (a) docket that the OSG shall represent the
fees; (b) other lawful fees; and (c) Government in the Supreme Court and
51
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
the Court of Appeals in all criminal CLASS SUIT; REQUISITES COMMONALITY OF INTEREST IN THE
proceedings. Only the Solicitor SUBJECT MATTER
1. A class suit is an action where one or
General may bring or defend actions
more may sue for the benefit of all if • A class suit does not require a
on behalf of the People of the
the requisites for said action are commonality of interest in the questions
Philippines once such actions are
complied with. involved in the suit. What is required by the
brought before the Court of Appeals or
2. An action does not become a class Rules is a common or general interest in
Supreme Court (Cooperative
suit merely because it is designated as the subject matter of the litigation. The
Development Authority v. Dolefil
such in the pleadings. Whether the suit ‘subject matter’ of the action 1s meant the
Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries
is or is not a class suit depends upon physical, the things real or personal, the
Cooperative, supra).
the attendant facts money, lands, chattels, and the like, in
Suit by or against spouses 3. For a class suit to prosper, the relation to the suit which is prosecuted
following requisites must concur: and not the delict or wrong committed by
• Husband and wife shall sue or be sued
the defendant. It is not also a common
jointly, except as provided by law (Sec. 4, (a) The subject matter of the controversy
question of law that sustains a class suit
Rule 3, Rules of Court), An instance when must be of common or general interest to
but a common interest in the subject
a spouse need not be joined in a suit many persons,
matter of the controversy
involving the other is when the litigation
(b) The persons are so numerous that • There is no class suit in an action filed by
pertains to an exclusive property of a
impracticable to join all as parties; 400 residents, initiated through a former
spouse. In such a case, the owner-spouse
mayor, to recover damages sustained due
may appear alone in court to litigate with (c) The parties actually before the
to their exposure to toxic wastes and
regard to the same (Art, JJ 1, Family Code sufficiently numerous and
fumes emitted by the cooking gas plant of
of the Philippines). representative as court it is are to fully
a corporation located in the town. Each of
• There may be instances when, despite the protect the interests of all concerned;
the plaintiffs has a separate and distinct
separation of property, one spouse may and
injury not shared by other members of the
end up being sued and held answerable for (d) There representatives sue or defend
class. Each supposed plaintiff has to prove
the liabilities incurred by the other spouse for the benefit of all (Sec. 12, Rule 3,
his own injury. There is no common or
because “The liability of the spouses to Rules of Court, Sulo ng Bayan, Inc. v.
general interest in the injuries allegedly
creditors for family expenses shall, Araneta, 72 SCRA 347, 856-357).
suffered by the members of the class.
however, be solidary” (Art. 146, Family
• There is no class suit in an action for
Code of the Philippines). Under a solidarity
damages filed by the relatives of the
liability, each one of the spouses is bound
fatalities in a plane crash. There is no
to render entire compliance with the
common or general interest in the injuries
obligation (Arts, 1207 and 1216, Civil Code
or death of all passengers in the plane.
of the Philippines).
52
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
Each has a distinct and separate interest showing of interests, a corporation has no No class suit to recover damages for
which must be proven individually. personality to bring an action for the personal reputation
• There could possibly be a class suit in the purpose of recovering property, which
• There is no class suit in an action filed by
closure of a road, In one case, residents of belongs to the members, in their personal
associations of sugar planters to recover
various subdivisions instituted a class suit capacities. Moreover, “a class suit does
damages in behalf of individual sugar
against a developer and its affiliates. not lie in actions for the recovery of
planters for an allegedly libelous article in
property where several persons claim
No class suit when interests are conflicting an international magazine. There is no
ownership of their respective portions of
common or general interest in the
• When the interests of the parties in the property, as each one could allege and
reputation of a specific individual. Each of
subject matter are conflicting, a class suit prove his respective right in a different way
the sugar planters has a separate and
will not prosper. Hence, an action brought for each portion of the land, so that they
distinct reputation in the community not
by 17 residents of a town with a population cannot all be held to have identical title
shared by the others.
of 2,460 persons to recover possession of through acquisitive prescription
a holy image was held not to qualify as a Common or general interest in the
No class suit to recover real property
class suit because the plaintiffs did not environment and natural resources
individually held
represent membership of the churches
• There is a class suit in an action filed by
they purport to represent and that the • A class suit would not lie where each of the
minors, represented by their parents, in
interests of the plaintiffs conflict with parties has an interest only in the
behalf of themselves and others who are
those of the other inhabitants who were particular portion of the land he is
equally concerned about the preservation
opposed to the recovery. occupying and not in the portions
of the country's resources, their
individually occupied by the other
No class suit by a corporation to recover generation, as well as generations yet
defendants.
property of its members unborn, to compel the Secretary of the
• A class suit does not lie in an action for
Department of Environment and Natural
• A non-stock corporation may not institute recovery of real property where separate
Resources to: (1) cancel all existing timber
an action, in behalf of its individual portions of the same parcel of land were
license agreements in the country; and (2)
members, for the recovery of certain occupied and claimed individually by
cease and desist from receiving,
parcels of land allegedly owned by its different parties to the exclusion of each
accepting, processing, renewing or
members and for the nullification of the other, such that the different parties had
approving new timber license agreements,
transfer of certificates of title issued in determinable, though undivided, interest
The Court agreed that the subject matter
favor of defendants. The corporation, in the property in question since they do
of the complaint is of common and general
being an entity separate and distinct from not have a common or general interest in
interest not just to several, but to all
its members, has no interest in the the subject matter of the controversy.
citizens of the Philippines. Consequently,
individual property of its members, unless
since the parties are so numerous, it
transferred to the corporation. Absent any
53
 Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1
becomes impracticable, if not totally the beneficiary is deemed to be the real
impossible, to bring all af them before the party in interest, not the representative
court. Hence, the Court found that all the (Sec, 8, Rule 3, Rules of Court).
requisites for the filing of a valid class suit
under Sec. 12, Rule 4 of the Rules of Court
are present in the action.

Dismissal or compromise of a class suit

• A class suit shall not be dismissed or

compromised without the approval of the
court (Sec, 2, Rule 7, Rules of Court, as
amended by A.M. No. 19. 10-20-S(C). This
provision is obviously intended to protect
the common interests those who initiated
the class suit.

Class suit distinguished from

representative suit

• Representative suits are not the same as

class suits, A class suit is a representative
suit only insofar as the persons who
institute it represent the entire class of
persons who have the same interest or
who suffered the same injury. However,
unlike representative suits, the persons
instituting a class suit are not suing merely
as representatives. They themselves are
real parties in interest directly injured by
the acts or omissions complained of.
There is a common cause of action in a
class. The group collectively — not
individually — enjoys the right sought to be
enforced (Paje v. Casifio, G.R. No. 207257,
February 3, 2015), In representative suits,
54
Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1

55
Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1

56
Intro to Civil procedure Reviewer
Civil Procedure by Dean Willard Riano vol 1

57