Civil Procedure – Tubay, Rian Paul Lecture 1 Digest

Title of the case Primicias V. Ocampo (G.R. No. L- 6120)

When promulgated June 30, 1953
Parties Cipriano P. Primicias
Felicismo Ocampo, Judge-at-large and
Eugenio Angeles, City Fiscal of Manila
Brief Background This is a petition which seeks to prohibit
the respondent Judge from proceeding
with the trial of two criminal cases
which were then pending against the
petitioner without the assistance of
assessors in accordance with the
provisions of section 49 of republic act
409 in relation to section 154 of Act no.
59, and is auxiliary remedy, to have
preliminary injunction issued so that the
trial may be held pending until further
orders of this court.
Claims of People Petitioner – Under the revise charter of
Manila City, aid of assessor is an
absolute substantive right and is
mandatory. The right to trial with the
aid of assessor is a substantive law and
cannot be impaired by the rule making
power of the court.

Respondent – Upon the effectivity of the

Rules of Court on July 1, 1940, aid of
assessor and other existing procedural
statutes are deemed superseded,
expressly repealed and eliminated.
Relevant Issue 1. The right to trial with the aid of
assessors, being a substantive
right, cannot be impaired by this
court in the exercise of its rule-
making power.
2. Section 154 of the Code of Civil
Procedure and Section 2477 of
the Old Charter of Manila,
creating the right to trial with the
aid of assessors, are substantive
law and were not repealed by
Rules of Court.
Ruling Court On April 28, 1952, the court issued an
order denying the motion holding in
effect that with the promulgation of the
Rules of Court by the Supreme Court,
which became effective on July 1, 1940,
all rules concerning pleading, practice
 and procedure in all courts of the
Philippines previously existing were not
only superseded but expressly
repealed, that the Supreme Court,
having been vested with the rule-
making power, expressly omitted the
portions of the Code of Civil Procedure
regarding assessors in said Rules of
Court, and that the reference to said
statute by section 49 of Republic Act
No. 409 on the provisions regarding
assessors should be deemed as a mere
surplusage. Believing that this order is
erroneous, petitioner now comes to this
court imputing abuse of discretion to
the respondent Judge.
Ruling of Supreme Court In view of the foregoing, we hold that
the provisions on assessors embodied
in the Code of Civil Procedure are still in
force and that the same may still be
invoked in the light of the provisions of
section 49 of the Republic Act No. 409.
It is therefore our opinion that the
respondent Judge acted with abuse of
discretion in denying petitioner his right
to the aid of assessors in the trial of the
two criminal cases now pending in the
Court of First Instance of Manila.
Reasoning Ubi jus ibi remedium – if there is a right
there is a remedy

Remedial measures are but

implementary in character and they
must be appended to the portion of the
law to which they belong. Mention
should be made here that not all of the
provisions appearing in the Code of Civil
Procedure are remedial in nature, such
as those pertaining to prescription, the
requisites for making a will, and the
succession of the estate of an adopted
child, which are admittedly substantive
in character and for that reason were
not incorporated in the Rules of Court.
To this group belong the provisions
under consideration.
Relevant Doctrine from the case Substantive Law v. Remedial Law
"Rules of procedure should be
distinguished from substantive law. A
substantive law creates, defines or
regulates rights concerning life, liberty
or property, or the powers of agencies
or instrumentalities for the
administration of public affairs, whereas
rules of procedure are provisions
prescribing the method by which
substantive rights may be enforced in
courts of justice."

Bustos v. Lucero

Substantive law creates substantive

rights and the two terms in this respect
may be said to be synonymous.
Substantive rights in a term which
includes those rights which one enjoys
under the legal system prior to the
disturbance of normal relations.

Substantive law is that part of the law

which creates, defines and regulates
rights, or which regulates the right and
duties which give rise to a cause of
action; that part of the law which courts
are established to administer; as
opposed to adjective or remedial law,
which prescribes the method of
enforcing rights or obtain redress for
their invasions