CIVIL PROCEDURE

By:

Dean Joseph Randi C. Torregosa

I. GENERAL PRINCIPLES:

(a) DOCTRINE OF HEIRARCHY OF COURTS

 in cases where the subject matter of the

controversy falls within the concurrent
jurisdiction of two or more courts, litigants
are required to initially seek relief from
the lower-ranked court before a higher-
ranked court.

 Direct resort to a higher-ranked court is

prohibited
• ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLES:
 The Supreme Court, the Court of
Appeals, and the Regional Trial
Courts exercise concurrent
original jurisdiction to issue writs
of certiorari , prohibition, and
mandamus against Metropolitan
Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Court
In Cities, Municipal Trial Courts,
and Municipal Trial Circuit Courts
 The Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals
exercise concurrent original jurisdiction to issue
writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus
against the Regional Trial Courts, Civil Service
Commission, Central Board Assessment
Appeals, National Labor Relations Commission,
and other quasi-judicial agencies (BP 129).

 The Supreme Court and the Regional Trial

Courts exercise concurrent original jurisdiction
over cases affecting ambassadors, public
ministers and consuls (Section 21(2), B.P. 129;
Section 5, Article VIII, 1987 Constitution.
• PURPOSE AND RATIONALE OF THE
PRINCIPLE:

 To avoid/prevent imposition upon the

limited time of the Supreme Court as “Court
of Last Resort.”

 To avoid/prevent delay in the adjudication of

cases, in instances where, under the rules
of procedure, it is necessary to remand the
case to the lower court as better equipped
to resolve the issues because the Supreme
Court is not a “trier of facts.”
(b) DOCTRINE OF NON-INTERFERENCE OR
JUDICIAL STABILITY

 This doctrine holds that courts of equal

or co-ordinate jurisdiction cannot
interfere with each other’s orders,
processes or proceedings
• PURPOSE AND RATIONALE OF THE
DOCTRINE:

To ensure stability of court orders,

decisions, proceedings, and processes
• ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLE:
One RTC branch cannot interfere with the
orders, proceedings or processes of another RTC
branch
The RTC has no authority to review the decision
or interfere with the proceedings and processes
of the Civil Service Commission or the Labor
Arbiter. When the law provides for an appeal
from the decision of an administrative body to
the Supreme Court or the Court of Appeals, it
means that such body is co-equal with RTC in
terms of rank and stature, and logically beyond
the control of the RTC.
• EXCEPTION:

 when a right of a third-party is involved,

such as a third-party claimant over a
property seized by a writ of attachment
(c) DOCTRINE OF ADHERENCE TO JURISDICTION
means that once jurisdiction is attached, it
continues until the finality of the proceedings,
regardless of any circumstances or events that
normally would have prevented jurisdiction from
attaching.
ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLES:
(a) Death of a party during the pendency of the case;
(b) Subsequent law that places a particular case under the jurisdiction
of another court, unless the law itself provides retroactive
application
(c) Jurisdiction remains vested irrespective
of whether or not plaintiff is entitled to
recover upon all or some of the claims
asserted, meaning what is only alleged,
not what is actually proved by evidence
and awarded by the court, determines
jurisdiction.
(d) RESIDUAL JURISDICTION
Refers to the authority of the court to issue orders for the protection
and preservation of the rights of the parties which do not involve any
matter litigated on appeal.
ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLES:
(a) Approve compromises
(b) Order execution pending appeal
(c) Allow withdrawal of appeal, provided it is done prior to transmittal
of the records on appeal
II. JURISDICTION

 Generally refers to the power and

authority of the court to hear, try and
decide a case.

 This definition refers only to

“jurisdiction” over the subject matter of
the case, and not to other aspects of
jurisdiction.
1. Jurisdiction distinguished from
Exercise of Jurisdiction

 Jurisdiction is the power of the court to

hear, try and decide a case; the exercise
of such power is called exercise of
jurisdiction.
(2) CLASSIFICATION OF JURISDICTION
(a) Original jurisdiction
Is the power of the court to take judicial cognizance of a case
instituted for judicial action for the first time under the conditions
provided by law
(b) Appellate jurisdiction
is the authority of a court higher in rank to re-examine the final order
or judgment of a lower court which tried the case now elevated for
judicial review.
(c) General jurisdiction
the power of a court to adjudicate all controversies except those
withheld from the plenary powers of the court.
the RTC is a court of general jurisdiction because all cases, the
jurisdiction of which is not specifically provided by law to be within
the jurisdiction of other tribunal, are cognizable by it.
(d) Special or limited jurisdiction
One which restricts the court’s jurisdiction only to
particular cases and subject to such limitations as
may be provided by the governing law.
Sandiganbayan, Court of Tax Appeals, Family
Courts, and Special Commercial Courts are
examples of courts of special/limited jurisdiction.
(e) Exclusive jurisdiction
The power or authority of the court to hear and determine cases to
the exclusion of all other courts.
All courts are courts of exclusive jurisdiction, although such exclusive
jurisdiction could either be original or appellate in character
(f) Concurrent jurisdiction
It is the power conferred upon different courts,
whether or the same or different ranks, to take
cognizance at the same stage of the same case in
the same or different judicial authorities.
Concurrent jurisdiction is exercised by the
Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, and RTC over
interlocutory orders issued or judgments rendered
by the MTC with grave abuse of discretion, but
subject to the doctrine of hierarchy of courts.
3. Aspects of Jurisdiction

 Jurisdiction over the subject matter

 Jurisdiction over the parties

 Jurisdiction over the issues

 Jurisdiction over the res or thing involved

in the litigation
(A) JURISDICTION OVER THE SUBJECT
MATTER:

Refers to the power of a particular court to

hear and decide a particular class or type of
cases to which a particular case belongs.
(b) JURISDICTION OVER THE PARTIES
The power of the court to bind a party to the judgment that may be
rendered in the case.
(C) JURISDICTION OVER THE ”RES”

 “Res” refers to a thing, an object of a

right; it includes an object, subject
matter or status.
 Jurisdiction over the “res” refers to the
authority of the court to render
judgment that binds the thing subject of
the action.
(D) JURISDICTION OVER THE ISSUE

 Refers to the power of the court to try

and decide the issue/s raised in the
pleadings of the parties and defined in
the pre-trial order.
(6) JURISDICTION OF VARIOUS COURTS

(A) JURISDICTION OF THE SUPREME COURT

(a) Exclusive original jurisdiction in petitions

for certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus
under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court
against:
(1) Court of Appeals (Judiciary Act of
1948)
(2) Commission on Elections (Article IX,
Constitution; Rule 64, Rules of Court)
(3) Commission on Audit (Article IX,
Constitution; Rule 64, Rules of Court);
(4) Sandiganbayan (P.D. 1606);
(5) Court of Tax Appeals
(b) Concurrent original jurisdiction with the
Court of Appeals in petitions for
certiorari, prohibition and mandamus
against:

(1) Regional Trial Court (Section 21, B.P.

Bilang 129)
(2) Civil Service Commission (R.A.
7902)
(3) Central Board of Assessment
Appeals (P.D. 464; B.P 129; R.A. 7902)
(4) National Labor Relations Commission
(NLRC) (Saint Martin Funeral Homes vs.
NLRC, 295 SCRA 494; R.A. 7902)

(5) Other quasi-judicial agencies (B.P. 129;

R.A. 7902; Heirs of Hinog vs. Melicor, G.R.
No.140954, 12 April 2005)
(c) Concurrent original jurisdiction with the
Regional Trial Court and Court of
Appeals in petitions for certiorari,
prohibition and mandamus against
lower courts and bodies, and in
petitions for quo warranto and habeas
corpus
(d)Concurrent original jurisdiction with the
Regional Trial Court in cases affecting
ambassadors, public ministers and consuls
(Section 21(2), B.P. 129; Section 5, Article
VIII, Constitution)
(e) Appellate jurisdiction, by way of petition
for review on certiorari (Rule 45)
against:

(1) Court of Appeals

(2) Sandiganbayan
(3)Regional Trial Court on pure questions
of law (Section 1, Rule 45)
(4) Regional Trial Court in cases involving the
constitutionality or validity of a law or
treaty, international or executive
agreement, law, presidential decree,
proclamation order, instruction, ordinance
or regulation, legality of a tax, impost,
assessment, toll or penalty, jurisdiction of
lower court (Section 5, Article VIII,
Constitution); and

(5) Court of Tax Appeals in its Decision

rendered en banc
(f) Petition for Writ of Amparo (Rule on the
Writ of Habeas Data, Section 3)
(B) JURISDICTION OF THE COURT OF
APPEALS

(a) Exclusive original jurisdiction in actions

for annulment of the judgments of the
Regional Trial Courts (Section 9(2), B.P.
129)
(b) Concurrent and original jurisdiction
with the Supreme Court to issue writs of
certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus
against:

 The Regional Trial Court

 Civil Service Commission
Central Board of Assessment Appeals
Other quasi-judicial agencies mentioned in
Rule 43; and
National Labor Relations Commission (St.
Martin Funeral Homes vs. CA, 295 SCRA
494)
(c) Concurrent and original jurisdiction with
the Supreme Court and the Regional Trial
Court to issue writs of certiorari,
prohibition, and mandamus against lower
courts and bodies; and also writs of quo
warranto and habeas corpus
(d) Exclusive appellate jurisdiction by way of
ordinary appeal from the judgments of
the Regional Trial Court in the exercise of
its original jurisdiction.

(e) Exclusive appellate jurisdiction by way of

petition for review from the judgment of
the Regional Trial Court in the exercise of
its appellate jurisdiction (Rule 42, Rules of
Court)
(f) Exclusive appellate jurisdiction by way of
petition for review from the decisions,
resolutions, orders or awards of the Civil
Service Commission and other quasi-
judicial bodies mentioned in Rule 43.

(g) Appellate jurisdiction from the decisions of

the Ombudsman in administrative
disciplinary cases (Enemecio vs. Office of
the Ombudsman, G.R. No.146731, 13
January 2004)
(h) Appellate jurisdiction over decisions of
the Municipal Trial Courts in cadastral or
land registration cases pursuant to its
delegated jurisdiction (Section 34, B.P.
129, as amended by R.A. 7691)
(C) JURISDICTION OF THE MUNICIPAL
TRIAL COURTS

(a) Exclusive original jurisdiction over civil

actions and probate proceedings
where the value of the personal property,
estate or amount of the demand does
not exceed P2,000,000.00, exclusive of
interest, damages of whatever kind,
attorney’s fees, litigation expenses and
costs (as amended by R.A. 115761,
which took effect on 21 August 2021)
Types of actions covered by paragraph
(a) above:

Civil actions involving personal property,

such as recovery of personal property or
replevin;
Probate proceedings, whether testate or
intestate; and
Civil actions for recovery of money or
damages.
JURISDICTIONAL FACT IN ANY OF
THESE TYPES OF ACTIONS

The value of the personal property sought to

be recovered, assessed value of the gross
estate subject of probate, and total amount
of the money claims must be alleged in the
complaint or petition
ITEMS NOT INCLUDED IN THE
DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION
(SECTION 33, B.P. 129):
 Interests
 Damages of whatever kind
 Attorney’s fees
 Litigation expenses
 Costs
NOTE:

Although the foregoing items are excluded

in determining jurisdiction of the court,
these are included in the computation of
filing fees.
RULE WHEN CLAIM FOR DAMAGES IS
THE MAIN CAUSE OF ACTION:
 The exclusion of the term “damages of
whatever kind” in determining
jurisdictional amount applies only to cases
where the damages are merely incidental
to or a consequence of the main cause of
action.
In cases where the claim for damages is the
main cause of action or one of the causes of
action, the amount of such claim for
damages shall be considered in determining
the jurisdiction of the court (Supreme Court
Administrative Circular No.09-94)
ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLES:
(i) Civil action to recover liquidated damages
arising from breach of contract (Spouses
Pajares vs. Remarkable Laundry, G.R.
No.212690, 20 February 2017). Remarkable
Laundry and Dry Cleaning filed a complaint
denominated as Breach of Contract and
Damages against Sps. Pajares, when the
latter ceased the dealer outlet operations for
lack of personnel. It sought recovery of 200K
as liquidated damages, 30K as legal
expenses, 30K as exemplary damages, and
20K costs of suit or a total of 280K.
The RTC dismissed the complaint for lack of jurisdiction given that the
total monetary claim is below its jurisdictional limit (Php400,000).
The CA reversed, holding that the action is one incapable of
pecuniary estimation arising from breach of contract and the
damages prayed for is only incidental to the principal action.
The Supreme Court reversed the CA decision, holding that breach of
contract is a cause of action, but not an action in itself. Where the
cause of action is predicated on a breach of contract, the aggrieved
party may file an action for specific performance, rescission of the
contract, or for recovery of damages.
Here, Remarkable Laundry and Dry Cleaning does
not seek specific performance neither does it pray
for rescission of the contract. Instead, it seeks to
recover the amount of liquidated damages as
stipulated in the penalty clause. This being an
action for damages, the total amount of all the
claims, i.e. Php280,000 determines the jurisdiction
of the court. Accordingly, RTC has no jurisdiction.
(ii) Civil action for damages arising from defamation or
tort or quasi-delict (Sante vs. Claravall, G.R.
No.173915, 22 February 2010; Mendoza vs. Soriano,
G.R. No.164012, 8 June 2007)
NOTE:
In an action for collection of sums of money
arising from a contract of loan or promissory note,
only the principal amount sought is considered in
the determination of the jurisdictional amount.
The incidental claims for interests, damages,
litigation expenses, and attorney’s fees are
excluded.
(b) Cases of forcible entry and unlawful
detainer, irrespective of the assessed
value of the property involved
(c) Civil actions which involve title to, or
possession of, real property or any
interest therein, where the assessed
value of the property or interest therein
does not exceed P400,000.00, exclusive
of interest, damages of whatever kind,
attorney’s fees, litigation expenses and
costs (as amended by R.A. No.115761
which took effect on 21 August 2021)
MEANING OF REAL ACTION:

An action “involving title to, or possession

of, real property or interest therein” means
that the plaintiff’s cause of action is based
on a claim that he or she owns the property
or that he or she has the legal rights to have
exclusive control, possession, enjoyment or
disposition of the subject real property.
• IMPORTANT DOCTRINES/PRINCIPLES
RELATING TO REAL ACTIONS FOR
PURPOSES OF JURISDICTION AND
FILING FEES:

For purposes of jurisdiction, the determining

factor is the assessed value of the real
property involved.
(d) Delegated jurisdiction over cadastral or
land registration proceedings involving
uncontested lots and contested lots the
value of which does not exceed
P100,000.00 as may be determined by
the affidavit of the claimant, or by their
agreement, or from the corresponding tax
declarations (B.P. 129, Section 4, as
amended by R.A. 7691; Supreme Court
Administrative Circular6-93 dated 15
November 1995)
(e) Exclusive original jurisdiction in
admiralty and maritime actions where
the demand or claim does not exceed
P2,000,000.00 (as amended by R.A.
115761 which took effect on 21 August
2021).
(f) Jurisdiction over civil cases subject of
summary procedure

 The Rules on Summary Procedure, as amended by

A.M. No.08-8-7-Sc otherwise known as the “Rules
on Expedited Procedures in the First Level Courts”
which took effect on 11 April 2022, govern the
procedure in the Municipal Trial Court in the
following cases:

(a) All cases of forcible entry and unlawful detainer,

regardless of the amount of damages or
unpaid rentals sought to be recovered. Where
attorney’s fees are awarded, the same shall not
exceed One Hundred Thousand Pesos.
(b) All civil actions, except probate
proceedings, admiralty and maritime
actions, and small claims, where the total
amount of the plaintiff’s claim does not
exceed Two Million Pesos
(Php2,000,000.00), exclusive of interest,
damages of whatever kind, attorney’s fees,
litigation expenses and costs.
 covers purely monetary claims, such as
collection suit or recovery of damages
Thus, as a general rule, all actions for recovery of sums of money
falling under the jurisdiction of the MTC (not exceeding Two Million
Pesos) are governed by the Rules on Summary Procedure.
 EXCEPTIONS:
(i) Probate proceedings where the value of the estate does not exceed
Two Million Pesos fall within the jurisdiction of the MTC but shall be
governed by the regular rules of procedure.
(ii) Admiralty and maritime actions where the demand or claim does
not exceed Two Million Pesos fall within the jurisdiction of the MTC
but shall be governed by the regular rules of procedure.
(iii) Small claims cases fall within the jurisdiction of the MTC but shall
be governed by the Rule on Small Claims.
(c) Complaints for damages where the claim does
not exceed Two Million Pesos (Php2,000,000.00),
exclusive of interest and costs.
Thus, all civil actions for damages falling under
jurisdiction of MTC not exceeding Two Million
Pesos are governed by the Rules on Summary
Procedure, except probate proceedings, maritime
cases, and small claims cases.
(d) Cases for enforcement of Barangay amicable
settlement agreements and arbitration awards
where the money claim exceeds One Million
Pesos, provided that no execution has been
enforced by the barangay within six (6) months
from the date of the settlement or date of
receipt of the award or from the date the
obligation stipulated or adjudged in the
arbitration award becomes due and
demandable.
NOTE:
Where the money claim subject of the enforcement of barangay
amicable settlement or arbitration awards does not exceed One
Million Pesos (One Million Pesos or below), the action for
enforcement shall be governed by the Rule on Small Claims.
QUERY:
(1) Does the Municipal Trial Court have jurisdiction over action for
enforcement of barangay amicable settlement or arbitration
award exceeding Two Million Pesos (P2,000,000.00)?
NOTE:
Under Section 417 of the Local Government Code,
the amicable settlement or arbitration award may
be enforced by execution by the lupon within six
(6) months from the date of the settlement. After
the lapse of such time, the settlement may be
enforced by action in the appropriate city or
municipal court.
(2) If so, what rule shall govern the action for enforcement of barangay
amicable settlement or arbitration award where the amount of the
claim exceeds Two Million Pesos (Php2,000,000.00)
3. What rule shall govern in the execution of barangay amicable
settlement or arbitration award in non-monetary disputes?
(e) Cases solely for the revival of judgment of any Metropolitan Trial
Court, Municipal Trial Court In Cities, Municipal Trial Court, and
Municipal Circuit Trial Court, pursuant to Rule 39, Section 6 of the
Rules of Court.
NOTE:
The ruling in Douglas F. Anama vs. Citibank (G.R.
No.192048, 13 December 2017) that an action for
revival of judgment falls within the jurisdiction of
the RTC being an action incapable of pecuniary
estimation has been reconfigured, in that where
the judgement sought to be revived was rendered
by the MTC, the action for revival of such judgment
falls within the jurisdiction of the MTC and
government by summary procedure.
(f) The civil aspect of a violation of Batas Pambansa
Bilang 22, if no criminal action has been
instituted therefor. Should a criminal action be
later instituted for the same violation, the civil
aspect shall be consolidated with the criminal
action and shall be tried and decided jointly
under the Rules on Summary Procedure.
QUERY:
Does the Rule on Summary Procedure apply where the amount of the
check involved exceeds Two Million Pesos (php2,000,000.)?
NOTE:
All other cases not mention in paragraphs (a), (b), (c), (d) and (e) shall
be governed by the regular rules of procedure.
Cases falling under the jurisdiction of the MTC, but
governed by the regular rule of procedure:
(a) real action other than forcible entry or unlawful
detainer where the assessed value does not
exceed Php400,000.00.
(b) Probate proceedings where the value of the estate does not exceed
Php2,000,000.00.
(c) Admiralty or maritime cases where the amount of the claim does
not exceed Php2,000,000.00.
NOTE:
The rules on summary procedure do not apply to cases where the
plaintiff’s cause of action is pleaded in the same complaint with
another cause of action subject to the regular procedure.
ILLUSTRATIVE CASE:
A cause of action for collection for sum of money in the amount of
2M and a cause of action for recovery of possession of, or title to, real
property with an assessed value not exceeding Four Hundred
Thousand
NOTE:
Cross refer this to rule on joinder of causes of action, which expressly
prohibits joinder of causes of action where one of the causes of
action is governed by special civil action or special rules.
• REMEDY AGAINST THE JUDGMENT OF
THE MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT IN CASES
GOVERNED BY THE RULES ON
SUMMARY PROCEDURE:
 Any judgment, final order, or final
resolution in a summary procedure case
maybe appealed to the appropriate
Regional Trial Court exercising jurisdiction
over the territory under rule 40 for civil
cases and Rule 122 for criminal cases, of
the Rules of Court.
The appeal shall be taken by filing a notice of appeal, together with
proof of payment of the appeal fees, with the court that rendered the
judgment, within fifteen (15) calendar days from receipt of the same.
A Motion for Reconsideration is a prohibited pleading.
o REMEDY FROM JUDGMENT ON APPEAL
The judgment of the Regional Trial Court on
the appeal shall be final, executory, and
unappealable.
QUERY:
(a) May the judgment of the RTC on appeal be subject of a petition for
certiorari?
ANSWER:
Since no appeal is allowed and there being no
other plain and speedy remedy available in the
ordinary course of law, petition for certiorari under
Rule 65 may be resorted to, on the ground of grave
abuse of discretion amounting to lack or in excess
of jurisdiction.
BASIS:
Apply by analogy the ruling in A.L. Ang
Network vs. Mondejar, G.R. No.200804,
22 January 2014), involving a small
claims case where it was ruled that the
proscription against appeal does not
preclude petition for certiorari under
Rule 65, there being no appeal or any
other plain, speedy or other adequate
remedy in the ordinary course of law.
(g) Jurisdiction over small claims cases
 The Rule on Small Claims are governed
by A.M. No. 08—8-7-SC or the Rules on
Expedited Procedures in the First Level
Courts which took effect on 11 April
2022.
(I) CONCEPT/NATURE OF ACTION:
A “small claim” is an action that is purely civil in
nature where the claim or relief raised by the
plaintiff is solely for the payment or
reimbursement of a sum of money. It excludes
actions seeking other claims or reliefs aside from
payment of money or reimbursement of sum of
money and those coupled with provisional
remedies.
(ii) CASES COVERED:
The claim or demand may be:
(a) For money owed under any of the following:
(1) Contract of Lease
(2) Contract of Loan and other Credit
Accommodations.
 (3) Contract of Services
(4) Contract of Sale of personal property, excluding the recovery of the
personal property, unless it is made the subject of a compromise
agreement between the parties.
(b) The enforcement of barangay amicable
settlement agreements or arbitration awards, where
the money claim does not exceed One Million
Pesos, provided that no execution has been
enforced by the barangay within six (6) months from
the date of the settlement or date of the receipt of
the award or from the date the obligation stipulated
or adjudged in the arbitration award becomes due
and demandable.
(iii) Venue
 The regular rule on venue will apply
(personal action)
 However, if the plaintiff is engaged in
the business of lending, banking and
similar activities, and has a branch
within the municipality or city where the
defendant resides, the Statement of
Claims shall be filed with the MTC where
that branch is located
(iv) Joinder of Claims

 Plaintiff may join in a single Statement

of Claim one or more separate small
claims against a defendant provided that
the total amount claimed, exclusive
of interest and costs, does not exceed
One Million Pesos.
NOTE:
The rule applies only if plaintiff has two or
more separate causes of action against one
and the same defendant, not when the
separate causes of action pertain to two or
more different defendants, as the latter case
is governed by the rule on joinder of parties.
(v) Procedure
(a) A small claim action is commenced by
filing with the court an accomplished and
verified Statement of Claims in duplicate,
to be accompanied by:
(a) A Certification Against Forum-
Shopping, Splitting a Single Cause of
Action, and Multiplicity of Suits;
(b) Two (2) duly certified photocopies of
actionable document/s subject of the
claim;

(c) Affidavits of witnesses and other

evidence in support of the claim
NOTE:
The non-submission of the required
documents/affidavits will cause the
immediate dismissal of the claim or
counterclaim.
(b) Payment of filing fees prescribed under Rule 141 of
the Rules of Court, unless claimant is allowed
by the Supreme Court as an indigent litigant
(c) Dismissal of the claim
(i) After the court determines that the
case falls under the Rules on Small
Claims cases, it may, from an
examination of the allegations of the
Statement of Claims and such
evidence attached thereto, by itself,
dismiss the case outright on any of
the grounds for the dismissal of the
case.
The order of dismissal shall state if it is
with or without prejudice.

However, if plaintiff misrepresents that

he/she/it is not engaged in the business of
banking, lending or similar activities when
he/she/it in fact is so engaged, the
Statement of Claim shall be dismissed
WITH PREJUDICE and plaintiff be meted
with appropriate sanctions, such as direct
contempt.
(ii) If the court determines that the case
does not fall under the Rules on Small
Claims cases, the case shall not be
dismissed. Instead, it shall be re-docketed
under appropriate procedure and returned
to the court where it was assigned subject
to payment of deficiency of filing fees.
(iii) If a case is filed under summary or regular
procedure, but actually falls under small claims action
rules, the case shall be referred to the Executive Judge
for appropriate assignment.
(iv) Summons and Notice of Hearing
If no ground for dismissal is found, the
court shall forthwith issue summons on
the day of receipt of the Statement of
Claims.
The summons shall be accompanied by
the following:
(a) the Statement of Claims and
supporting documents; and
b) a Notice of Hearing which shall contain:

 The date of hearing which shall not be more than

thirty (30) days from filing of the Statement of
Claim; and
 The express prohibition against the filing of a Motion
to Dismiss or any other motion
(v) Service of Summons
(a)The summons and Notice of Hearing
must be issued within twenty-four (24)
hours from receipt of the Statement of
Claims;
(b)The summons shall be served within
ten (10) calendar days from issuance.
Within five (5) days from such service,
the Officer’s Return of Service must be
filed with the court.
(c) If summons is returned without being
served on any or all of the defendants, the
court shall order the plaintiff to cause the
service of summons.
(d) If plaintiff is a juridical entity, it shall
notify the court, in writing, and named its
authorized representative therein, attaching
a board resolution or secretary’s certificate
thereto, as the case maybe, stating that
such representative is duly authorized to
serve summons on behalf of plaintiff.
(d) If summons is to be served outside of the judicial region, the court
may order the plaintiff to serve or cause the service of summons.
(e) If the plaintiff misrepresents that the defendant
was served with summons, and it is later proved
that no summons was served, the case shall be
dismissed with prejudice, the proceedings shall be
nullified, and the plaintiff shall be declared in
indirect contempt under Rule 71 of the Rules of
Court.
(f) In both instances under paragraphs (b) and (c),
the plaintiff shall inform the court within thirty (30)
days from notice if said summons was served;
otherwise, the Statement of Claim shall be dismissed
without prejudice as to those who were not served
with summons. This is not a ground to archive the
case. The case, however, may be refiled within one
(1) year from notice of dismissal, subject to payment
of reduced filing fees.
• MODE OF SERVICE OF COURT ISSUANCES AND
FILINGS OF PLEADINGS:
The service of court issuances and filings by
plaintiff/s and defendant/s may be made through:
(a) email;
(b) Facsimile; and
(c) Other electronic means
MODE OF SERVICE OF NOTICES:
Notices may also be served through:
(a)email;
(b) facsimile;
(c) Other electronic means;
(d) Short messaging service (SMS) or instant
messaging (IM) software applications.
(vi) Filing of Verified Response
 Within a non-extendible period of (10)
calendar days from receipt of
summons, the defendant shall file with
the court and served upon the plaintiff
a duly accomplished and verified
Response, which shall be accompanied
by:
(a) certified photocopies of supporting
documents
(b) Affidavits of witnesses; and
(c) Other evidence in support of the Response
 No evidence shall be allowed during the hearing
which was not attached to or submitted together
with the Response, unless good cause is shown for
admission of additional evidence
(vii) Effect of Failure to File Response.
 Should the defendant fail to file a
Verified Response within the
required period, and likewise fail to
appear on the date set for
hearing, the court shall render
judgment within twenty-four (24)
hours from the termination of the
hearing, as may be warranted by
the facts alleged in the Statement
of Claims and its attachments.
(viii) Ascertainment of defense, hearing
and adjudication
 Should the defendant fail to file
his/her/its Verified Response but
appears on the date of hearing, the
court shall ascertain what defense
he/she/it has to offer which shall
constitute his/her/its Response,
and proceed to hear or adjudicate
the case on the same day as if a
Response has been filed.
The court may then render judgment within
twenty-four (24) hours from the termination of the
hearing.
If the defendant relies on documentary evidence
to support his defense, the court shall order the
defendant original copies of such documents
within three (3) calendar days from termination of
the hearing. Upon receipt or expiration, judgment
shall be rendered within twenty-four (24) hours.
COMPULSORY COUNTERCLAIM IN A SMALL CLAIMS ACTION:
A compulsory counterclaim must:
(a) Within the coverage of the Small Claims Cases rules, exclusive of
interests and costs;
(b) Arises out of the same transaction or event that is the subject
matter of the plaintiff’s claim;
(c) does not require for its adjudication the joinder of third parties; and
(d) is not subject of a pending action.
NOTE:
Any compulsory counterclaim not pleaded in the Verified Response is
deemed waived.
PERMISSIVE COUNTERCLAIM:
One that does not arise out of the transaction or occurrence,
provided the amount and nature thereof are within the coverage of
the Small Claims Cases rules.
Not deemed waived if not raised in the Verified Response.
NOTE:
Any amount pleaded in a counterclaim
(compulsory or permissive) in excess of One
Million (Php1,000,000.00), excluding interests and
cost, shall be deemed waived.
c) Prohibited pleadings and motions
(1) Motion to Dismiss the Statement of
Claim/s, except on the ground of lack of
jurisdiction over subject matter and non-
compliance with barangay conciliation;
 The same as applied in the Rules on
Summary Procedure
(2) Motion to hear and/or resolve affirmative
defenses.
(3) Motion for Bill of Particulars
(4) Motion for New Trial , Reconsideration
of a Judgment on the merits, or for
Reopening of Trial
(5) Petition for Relief from Judgment
(6) Motion for Extension of Time to
File pleadings, affidavits or any other
paper
(7) Memoranda
(8) Petition for Certiorari,
prohibition or mandamus against any
interlocutory order
(9) Motion to Declare Defendant In
Default
(10) Dilatory Motion for
Postponement
(11) Rejoinder
(12) Third-Party Complaints
(13)Motion for and Complaint in
Interventions
(14) Motion to admit late judicial affidavits, position
paper, or other evidence, except on the ground of
force majeure or acts of God.
(ix) Appearance at the Hearing
(a) The parties shall personally appear on the
designated date of hearing.
(b) Appearance through a representative must be for a
valid cause. The representative of an individual
party must not be a lawyer. Juridical party must not
be represented by a lawyer in any capacity.
(c) No attorney shall appear in behalf of or represent a
party at the hearing,. If the court determines that a
party cannot properly unless the attorney is the
plaintiff or defendant present his/her claim or
defense and needs assistance, the court may, in its
discretion, allow another individual who is not an
attorney to assist that party upon the latter’s
consent
(d) Failure of the plaintiff to appear shall
be cause for the dismissal of the
Statement of Claim without prejudice

(e) The defendant who appears in the

absence of the plaintiff shall be
entitled to judgment on the
counterclaim
(f) Failure of the defendant to appear shall
have the same effect as failure to file
a Response.
 This shall not apply where one of
two or more defendants who are
sued under a common cause of
action and have pleaded a common
defense appears at the hearing
(g) Failure of both parties at the hearing
shall cause the dismissal with
prejudice of both the Statement of
Claims and Counterclaims

(h) A request for postponement of hearing

may be granted only upon proof of the
physical inability of the party to appear.
A party may avail of one (1)
postponement
(x) HEARING
At the hearing, the judge shall first exert
effort to bring the parties to an amicable
settlement of their dispute.
 Any settlement or resolution shall be
reduced into writing, signed by the
parties, and submitted to the court
for approval, within twenty-four (24)
hours.
 If settlement fails, the hearing shall
immediately proceed in an informal
If during the hearing, the court is able to
determine that there exists a ground for
dismissal of the Statement of Claims, the court
may, by itself, dismiss the Statement of Claim
even if such ground is not pleaded in the
defendant’s Response
 Compare with the rule on civil action
governed by regular procedure (Section 1,
Rule 9), which provides that the court can
only dismiss a complaint mutu proprio on
the grounds of lack of subject matter
jurisdiction, litis pendentia, res judicata,
and prescription.
(x) Decision
After the hearing, the court shall render
its decision based on the facts
established by the evidence within
twenty-four (24) hours from the
termination of the hearing.
The decision shall be final, executory,
and unappealable
(xi) Post-decision remedy
 Considering the final nature of small
claims case decision, the remedy of
appeal is not allowed and thus the
prevailing party may immediately
move for its execution.
The proscription against appeal does not
preclude petition for certiorari under
Rule 65, there being no appeal or any
other plain, speedy or other adequate
remedy in the ordinary course of law
(A.L. Ang Network vs. Mondejar, G.R.
No.200804, 22 January 2014)
(xii) Execution
 When decision is rendered,
execution shall issue upon ex parte
motion of the prevailing party.
 Decision based on Compromise
Agreement shall not be covered by
the requirement of proof of receipt.
(xiii) Non-applicability of Mediation and JDR
The rules on mediation and judicial dispute
resolution shall not apply, as the parties may enter
into compromise agreement at any stage of the
proceeding.
(h) JURISDICTION OVER
BARANGAY CONCILIATION
PROCEEDINGS
 Barangay conciliation proceedings are
governed by the Revised Katarungang
Pambarangay Law under Sections 399-
422 of R.A. 7160, otherwise known as
the Local Government Code of 1991,
effective on January 1, 1992
(a) Subject matters for settlement

(a) Who are covered:

 parties actually residing in the
same city or municipality
(b) Disputes covered
General rule:
All disputes are subject to barangay
conciliation and prior recourse thereto is a
pre-condition before filing a complaint in
court or any government offices.
• EXCEPTIONS:
(1) Where one party is the government, or
any subdivision or instrumentality thereof;
(2) Where one party is a public officer or
employee and the dispute relates to the
performance of his or her official
functions;
(3) where the dispute involves real
properties located in different cities or
municipalities, unless the parties thereto
agree to submit their differences to
amicable settlement by an appropriate
lupon;

(4) Any complaint by or against

corporations, partnerships of juridical
entities, since only individuals shall be
parties to barangay conciliation
proceedings;
(5) disputes involving parties who are
actually residents of barangays of different
cities or municipalities, except where
such barangay units adjoin each other
and the parties thereto agree to submit their
differences to amicable settlement by an
appropriate lupon;

(6) Offenses for which the law prescribes a

maximum penalty of imprisonment exceeding
one (1) year or a fine of over Five Thousand
Pesos (P5,000.00)
(7) Offenses where there is no private
offended party;
(8) Disputes where urgent legal action is
necessary to prevent injustice from
being committed or further continued,
specifically the following:
 Criminal cases where the accused is
under police custody or detention
Petitions for habeas corpus by a person
illegally deprived of his rightful custody over
another or a person illegally deprived of his
liberty or acting in his behalf;
Actions coupled with provisional remedies
such as preliminary injunction, attachment,
delivery of personal property, and support
during the pendency of the action; and
Actions which may be barred by the Statute
of Limitations.
NOTE:
The prescriptive periods for offenses or cause of
action shall be interrupted, and shall resume upon
receipt of the certificate of repudiation or
certificate to file action, provided that the
interruption shall not exceed sixty (60) days from
the filing of the complaint with the punong
barangay(Section 410 (c), R.A. 7160)
 (9) any class of dispute which the President
may determine in the interest of justice or
upon the recommendation of the Secretary
of Justice;
(10) Where the dispute arises from the
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law
(Section 46 and 47, R.A. 6657)
(11) Labor disputes or controversies
arising from employer-employee
relationship;
(12) Actions to annul judgment upon a
compromise which maybe filed directly in
court.
(c) Venue of barangay conciliation
proceedings:

(a) Disputes between persons actually

residing in the same barangay shall be
brought for amicable settlement before the
lupon of the said barangay;
(b) Those involving actual residents of
different barangays within the same city
or municipality shall be brought in the
barangay where the respondent or any of
the respondents actually reside, at the
election of the complainant.
(c) those arising at the workplace where the
contending parties are employed or at
the institution where such parties are
enrolled for study, shall be brought in the
barangay where such workplace or institution
is located;
(d) Real actions shall be brought in the
barangay where the property involved is
located.
(d) Effect of Amicable Settlement and
Arbitration Award
 The amicable settlement and arbitration
award shall have the force and effect of a
final judgment of a court upon the
expiration of ten (10) days from the date
thereof, unless repudiation of the
settlement has been made or a petition
to nullify the award has been filed before
the proper city or municipal court.
(e) Repudiation of the Amicable Settlement
or Arbitration Award
 Within ten (10) days from the
settlement, any party to the dispute
may repudiate the same by filing with
the Lupon Chairman a Statement to
that effect, sworn to before him, where
the consent was vitiated by fraud,
violence, or intimidation.
 Such repudation is sufficient for
issuance of a Certification To File
Action.
Where no repudiation is made within the
ten (10) day period, the amicable
settlement or arbitration award attains the
status of finality and it becomes the
ministerial duty of the Punong barangay or
the court to implement and enforce it.
(e) Execution of Amicable Settlement or
Arbitration Award
 The amicable settlement or arbitration
award may be enforced:
(a) By execution by the Lupon within
six (6) months from the date of the
amicable settlement or arbitration
award or from the date the party is
obliged to perform the obligation
under the settlement or
award/obligation becomes due (Vidal
vs. Escueta, 417 SCRA 617)
Under this mode of enforcement, the
Punong Barangay is called upon solely to
determine the fact of non-compliance with
the settlement or the award and to give the
party another chance at voluntary
compliance
(b) By court action in the appropriate city or
municipal court after the lapse of
the six- month period, following the
Rules on Expedited Procedures in the
First Level Courts (Summary Procedure,
Small Claims Cases, or the regular
procedure, as the case may be).
NOTE:
The foregoing two (2) remedies (execution
by the lupon and execution by court),
usually apply only to amicable settlement or
arbitration award which was not repudiated
by either party.
(c) By court action based on the original
demand
If the amicable settlement or arbitration
award was repudiated, expressly or
impliedly, by one party, the other party may
resort to the two (2) preceding remedies
(execution by lupon or execution by court),
as the case may be, or consider the amicable
settlement or arbitration award rescinded
and insist upon the original demand (Miguel
vs. Montanez, G.R. No.191336, 25 January
2012)
(iv) JURISDICTION OF THE REGIONAL
TRIAL COURT
(a)Exclusive original jurisdiction over the
following:
(1) Civil actions in which the subject of the
litigation is incapable of pecuniary
estimation;
(2) Civil actions which involve title to, or
possession of, real property, or any
interest therein, where the assessed
value exceeds P400,000.00 (as
amended by R.A. No. 115761 which took
effect on 21 August 2021)
Under OCA Circular No.256-2022, real actions shall
comprise of actions affecting title to, or possession
of, real property, or any interest therein, which
includes but not limited to:
(a) Accion Reivindicatoria or Accion Reivindicacion;
(b) Accion publiciana;
(c) Recovery of possession or ownership;
(d) Cancellation or annulment of Deed of Sale and
Transfer Certificate of Title/Land Titles, or Tax
Declarations, involving real property under the name
of another.
ILLUSTRATIVE CASE:
5) Rudy L. Racpan vs. Sharon Barroga-Haigh (G.R.
No.234499, 06 June 2018)
Involves an action for “declaration of nullity of
deed of sale with right to repurchase” of his wife in
favor of the defendant which was filed with the
RTC of Davao involving a piece of land located in
Davao Del Norte.
Plaintiff claims that the Deed of Sale with Right to
Repurchase is a forgery as he never signed it
neither did he sign any SPA authorizing his wife to
sell the property. At the time of the filing of the
complaint, the plaintiff was in possession of the
subject property.
Upon motion of the defendant, the action was
dismissed on the ground of improper venue on the
premised that the complaint is a real action.
It was ruled that where the action is not intended
for recovery of real property but solely for the
annulment of contract, it is a personal action. Here,
plaintiff sought nullification of the Deed of Sale with
Right to Repurchase on the strength of his claim that
he did not sign the contract neither did he execute
an SPA in favor of his wife. As there was no
allegation that the possession and title of the
property have been transferred to the defendant,
plaintiff did not pray for recovery of reconveyance
of the real property as he is still in possession
thereof.
As the complaint is not concerned with the title to or recovery of the
real property, it is a personal action and the venue is properly laid.
(e) Judicial Foreclosure of Mortgage;
(f) Expropriation Proceedings;
NOTE:
Insofar as expropriation proceedings involving real
property, OCA Circular No.256-2022 has
reconfigured the doctrine in Barangay San Jose,
Talisay City vs. Heirs of Pastor which held that
expropriation case is incapable of pecuniary
estimation.
• EXCEPTIONS TO THE RULE THAT REAL
ACTION FALLS WITHIN JURISDICTION OF RTC
WHERE ASSESSED VALUE DOES NOT EXCEED
PHP400,000.00:

 Action for Forcible Entry or Unlawful

Detainer falls within jurisdiction of MTC
regardless of the assessed value
 (3) Actions in admiralty and maritime
jurisdiction where the demand or claim
exceeds P2,000,000.00 (as amended by
R.A. NO. 115761 which took effect on 21
August 2021)
Admiralty and maritime disputes are
governed by A.M. No.19-08-14-SC, otherwise
known as the “Rules of Procedure for
Admiralty Cases.”
These rules shall govern the procedure in civil actions before the
designated Admiralty courts involving claims and cases in Admiralty
filed on the basis of shipping and other related laws, such as, but not
limited to:
(a) The Spanish Code of Commerce of 1888, Book III
on Maritime Commerce;
(b) An Act on Salvage and Rendering of Assistance to
Vessels and Cargoes (Act No.2616)
(c) Carriage of Goods by Sea Act (C.A.65)
(d) The New Civil Code of the Philippines on
Common Carriers (Title VIII, Chapter 3, Section 3)
(e) Maritime Industry Decree of 1974 (P.D. No.474)
(f) Insurance Code (Chapter II, Title I on Marine
Insurance)
(g) Revised Charter of the Philippine Ports Authority
(P.D. No. 857)
(h) Maritime Pollution Decree as to Ships (P.D.
No.979)
(i) Ship Mortgage Decree of 1978 (P.D. No.1521)
(j) Philippine Overseas Shipping Development Act
(R.A. No.7471)
(k) Domestic Shipping Development Act of 2004
(R.A. No.9295)
(l) Oil Spill Compensation Act of 2007 (R.A. No.9483)
(m) Philippine Coast Guard Law (R.A. No.9993)
(n) Single Maritime Administration for STCW (R.A.
No. 10635)
(o) Liberalization of Cabotage Law (R.A. No.10668)
(p) Naval Architecture and Maritime Engineering
Law (R.A. No.10698)
(4) Probate proceedings, both testate or
intestate, where the gross value of the
estate exceeds P2,000,000.00 (as
amended by R.A. No. 115761 which
took effect on 21 August 2021)
(5) Action involving contract of marriage
and marital relations
(6) Cases not falling within the exclusive
jurisdiction of any court, tribunal, person
or body exercising judicial or quasi-
judicial functions (Section 19 (6), BP
Bilang 129).
Unlike other courts which exercise limited
jurisdiction as expressly conferred by law,
the RTC is a court of general jurisdiction,
because all cases the jurisdiction of which is
not specifically provided by law to be within
the jurisdiction of any other court falls within
the jurisdiction of the RTC.
(7) Civil actions and special proceedings that
used to fall within the jurisdiction of the
juvenile and domestic relations court and
of the court of agrarian relations;
(8) All other cases in which the
demand, exclusive of interest,
damages of whatever kind,
attorney’s fees, litigation
expenses, and costs or the value
of the property in controversy
exceeds P2,000,000.00 (as
amended by R.A. No. 115761
which took effect on 21 August
2021);
(9) Intra-corporate disputes or
controversies
(b) Original and concurrent jurisdiction

(a) with the Supreme Court and the Court of

Appeals to issue writs of certiorari,
prohibition, mandamus against the MTC, and
in petitions for quo warranto and habeas
corpus;
VENUE

DISTINGUISHED VENUE FROM JURISDICTION:

Venue is the place or geographical area, in which a
court with jurisdiction may hear and determine a
case. The query is which station of a particular
court having jurisdiction should the action be
instituted.
Not jurisdictional, except in criminal cases.
Jurisdiction is the power to hear and decide a case belonging to a
particular class. The query is which court has the authority in law to
take cognizance of a particular action.
Venue depends on the nature of the action, i.e., whether it is
personal, real, quasi-in rem, or in rem, or whether specific venue is
provided for by law or rules, or whether it is stipulated upon by the
parties.
GENERAL RULE:
The parties to a contract may mutually stipulate on exclusive venue,
in which case the venue stipulated shall bind the parties.
EXCEPTION TO THE EXCLUSIVE VENUE
STIPULATION RULE:
Briones vs. CA (G.R. No.204444, 14
January 2015)
Involves a complaint for nullity of
mortgage contract, promissory notes,
loan agreement, foreclosure of mortgage
before the RTC of Manila where the
foreclosed property is located, but the
subject contracts stipulated courts of
Makati City as the exclusive venue.
Where the complaint assails only the terms,
conditions, coverage of a written instrument and
not its validity, the exclusive venue stipulated
therein shall be binding upon the parties.
Conversely, a complaint directly assailing the
validity of the written instrument itself should not
be bound by the exclusive venue stipulation, in
which case the ordinary rule on venue applies
It would be inherently inconsistent to recognize
the exclusive venue stipulation when it precisely
assails the written instrument where such
stipulation is contained.
Here, the plaintiff sought the nullification of the
subject documents on the ground of forgery.
Venue lies in the RTC of Manila where the subject
property is located.
ACTIONS
Kinds of Actions
(a) As to foundation or privity
(1) Real action – is an action affecting
title to, or possession of real property, or
any interest therein.
 It is founded on the privity of real
estate, where the realty or interest
therein is the subject matter of
litigation.
• EXAMPLES OF REAL ACTIONS:

 Unlawful detainer or forcible entry

 Accion publiciana
 Accion reinvindicatoria
Quieting of title
Action for partition of real property
Foreclosure of real estate mortgage
(2) Personal action – is an action where
the plaintiff seeks the recovery of
personal property, the enforcement
(specific performance) or rescission of
contract, or the recovery of damages.
 It is founded upon the privity of personal
property, contract or claim for damages.
 Significance of the distinction between a real
action and a personal action
(1)For purposes of determining jurisdiction
(2)For purposes of determining venue
(3)For purposes of determining filing/docket
fee
(4)For purposes of determining prescription of
action (Specified Contractors vs. Pobocan,
G.R. No.212472, 11 January 2018)
(b) As to object and binding effect of
the action
(1) Action in personam- is an action to
establish a claim against a particular
person on the basis of his or her
personal liability. It is directed
against a particular person
 The judgment rendered in an action
in personam is binding on the
defendant only, and not on another
person or the whole world.
ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLE:
Bobie Rose Frias vs. Rolando Alcayde (G.R.
No.194262, 28 February 2018)
o Involves an action for annulment of judgment
of the MTC in an unlawful detainer case, on
the ground of lack of jurisdiction over the
person of the defendant because the
substituted service of summons was invalid.
o The petition for annulment of judgment was
dismissed by the RTC on the ground of
improper service of summons, as it was not
shown that the person who received the
summons was authorized by the respondent
to receive it.
o The petitioner contended that a petition for annulment of
judgment is not an action in personam and, therefore,
jurisdiction over the person is not necessary, as it is enough
that the court acquired jurisdiction over the “res” upon the
filing of the petition.
o It was ruled that an action for annulment of judgment is an
action in personam, which requires jurisdiction over the
person of the defendant because it seeks to impose
personal liability upon a person.
(2) Action in rem – is an action
directed against the “res”, instead
of a particular person. The “res”
could refer to a thing, object or
status.
 The judgment rendered therein is
binding against the whole world,
meaning against all who might be
minded to make any objection of
any sort against the right sought
to be established in the action or
proceedings.
NOTES:
Given the different and distinct basis for the
classification of the various types of actions,
an action in personam is not necessarily a
personal action. Nor is a real action
necessarily an action in rem. This is so
because, an action in personam or in rem
action is a classification of actions according
to the object and binding effect of the action;
while personal or real action is a
classification according to foundation or
privity.
(3) Action quasi in rem – is one
wherein an individual is named as
defendant and the purpose of the
action or proceeding is to subject
his or her interest in a particular
property to the obligation or lien
burdening the property.
This type of action is brought
against a particular person in
order to subject the property of
such person to the discharge or
satisfaction of the claims asserted
in the action.
An action quasi in rem deals with the status,
ownership or liability of a specific property,
but operates only as between particular
parties to the action or proceeding.
It is not intended to ascertain or cut-off the
rights or interest of all possible claimants.
EXAMPLES OF ACTIONS QUASI IN REM:
Attachment
Foreclosure of mortgage
Action for partition
Jurisdiction over the parties is required regardless of the nature of
the action. Jurisdiction over the party is required in action in
personam because it seeks to impose personal liability upon a person.
o Courts need not acquire jurisdiction over the
parties on this basis in actions in rem or quasi in
rem, because these are not directed against the
person based on his/her personal liability.
o However, to satisfy due process, jurisdiction over
the parties in in rem and quasi in rem actions is
required.
Splitting a Single Cause of Action and
Joinder of Causes of Action:
Splitting a single cause of action is
proscribed; while joinder of causes of
action is permissive
ILLUSTRATIVE CASES ON SPLITTING A SINGLE CAUSE OF ACTION:
(a) Riviera Golf Club, Inc. vs. CCA Holdings, B.V. (G.R. No.173783, 17 June
2015)
(b) City of Bacolod vs. San Miguel Brewery, Inc. (G.R. No.L-25134, 30
October 1969), involving recovery of unpaid taxes levied on every soft
drink bottles manufactured by SMS and recovery of surcharges
(c) Progressive Development Corporation vs. Court of Appeals and Westin
Seafood Market, Inc. (G.R. No.123555, 22 January 1999), involving a
complaint for forcible entry and a complaint to recover actual damages
for losses due to deterioration of perishable foodstuff and unrealized
profits
TWO INSTANCES WHERE JOINDER OF CAUSES OF
ACTION MAY APPLY:
(a) Where the causes of action pertain to the same
plaintiff or defendant;
(b) Where the causes of action pertain to one
plaintiff against two or more defendants or two
or more plaintiffs against one defendant or two
or more plaintiffs against two or more
defendants.
LIMITATIONS OF THE RULE ON JOINDER OF CAUSES OF ACTION:
(a) Joinder of parties (where there are two or more plaintiffs or
defendants)
arose from the same transaction or series of transactions and
common question of fact or law
ILLUSTRATIVE CASE:
(b) (Pantranco North Express, Inc. vs.
Standard Insurance, G.R. No.140746, 16
March 2005).
Involves an action for recovery of sums of
money arising from a vehicular accident
when the bus owned by Pantranco hit a
jeepney, which was filed with the RTC.
The total cost of the repair is P21,415.00,
but Standard Insurance paid only P8,000.00.
The owner shouldered the balance of
P13,415.00.
The complaint was filed by both the insurance
company and the owner of the jeepney to recover
the sum of P21,415.00. The defendant moved for
dismissal on the ground of lack of subject matter
jurisdiction contending that since the plaintiffs’
respective claims are below P20,000.00 and their
causes of action arose from different transaction
and no question of fact or law common to all of
them, it is the MTC which has jurisdiction.
It was ruled that there is a single transaction common to all, that is,
Pantranco’s bus hitting the rear side of the jeepney. There is also a
common question of fact, that is, whether the owner and driver of
the bus were negligent. Plaintiffs have the same cause of action
against the defendant.
Since plaintiffs’ cause of action arose from the
same transaction and there being a question of
fact common to both, the totality of all the claims
(P21,415.00) confers upon the RTC the jurisdiction
over the action .
Compare with Flores vs. Mallare-Phillips
(G.R. No.L-66620, 24 September 1986)
Where the causes of action in favor of
one plaintiff against two (2) or more
defendants did not arise of the same
transaction or series of transactions and
no question of fact or law common to all
the defendants.
(2) Joinder of causes of action shall not
include special civil actions or actions
governed by special rules.
Joinder of causes of action applies only to
causes of actions governed by ordinary civil
procedure, and not when one of the causes
of action sought to be joined with others is
governed by the rules on special civil action
or special rules.
ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLES:
(a) Santos Ventura Hocorma Foundation vs. Mabalacat
Institute, Inc. (G.R. No.211563, 29 September 2021),
where the land owner filed a civil action to collect rentals
for the use and occupancy of its property occupied by the
defendant by mere tolerance. During the pendency of the
collection case, the land-owner filed an unlawful detainer
case.
The collection Case requires a full-blown trial for the
parties to show evidence on the propriety of paying rent
and its rightful amount. These may not be accomplished
in an ejectment proceeding which is summary in nature.
An action for collection of unpaid rentals may not be properly joined
with an action for ejectment. The former is an ordinary civil action
requiring full blown trial, while an action for unlawful detainer is a
special civil action action which requires a summary procedure.
There is also no forum-shopping when the plaintiff filed an ejectment
case subsequent to the collection case, while the latter is still pending.
In both cases, there is no identity of rights asserted and reliefs prayed
for, and that any judgment on any of these cases would not amount
to res judicata on the other.
(b) Lajave Agricultural Management vs. Sps. Javellana (G.R. No.223785,
7 November 2018)

An action for collection of money representing deficiency rentals that

accrued before the expiration of the term of the lease cannot be
joined with an action for forcible entry or unlawful detainer. The
former is an ordinary civil action while the latter are special civil
actions requiring a summary procedure.
NOTE:
(a) cross-refer to Section 2 of the Rules on Summary Procedure which
provides that “where plaintiff’s cause of action is governed by the
Rules on Summary Procedure is pleaded in the same complaint
with a cause of action governed by regular procedure, the Rules on
Summary Procedure will not apply.
QUERY:
Does it mean that these two causes of action may be joined, only that
the case shall be governed by regular procedure?
(b) Cross-refer to the proscription against splitting a
single cause of action and Rule 1, Section 1 of
the Expedited Rules which provides that forcible
entry and unlawful detainer cases, regardless of
the amount of damages or unpaid rentals sought
to be recovered are governed by the Rules on
Summary Procedure.
(3) where the causes of action are between
the same parties but pertain to different
venues or jurisdiction, the joinder may be
allowed in the RTC, provided one of the
causes of action falls within the RTC and
the venue lies therein (RTC).
ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLE:
A real action involving title to or
possession of real property with an
assessed value of P300,000.00 may be
joined with an action for collection of
sums of money amounting to
P3,000,000.00. The complaint has to be
filed with the RTC, and the venue is the
RTC of the place where the plaintiff or
the defendant resides.
where the claims in all the causes of action
are principally for recovery of money, the
aggregate amount claimed shall be the test
of jurisdiction.
This is otherwise known as the “Totality
Rule.”
Applies only where there is valid joinder of
causes of action.
PLEADING
Body of the pleading, which shall set forth the following:
(a) designation of the pleading, such as complaint, answer, reply,
etc.
(b) the allegations of the party’s claims or defenses;
(c) the names and witnesses who will be presented to prove a
party’s claim or defense
(d) summary of the witnesses’ intended testimonies, with judicial
affidavits to the pleadings and form an integral part
thereof.
Only witnesses whose Judicial Affidavits are attached to the
pleading shall be presented during trial, except if a party presents
meritorious reasons as basis for the admission of additional
witnesses.

(e) statement of the documentary and object evidence is support

of the allegations contained in the pleading;
By necessity, the documentary and object evidence shall be
attached to form part of the pleading or Judicial Affidavit of the
witness who will identify and authenticate the evidence.
only documentary or object evidence attached to the pleading
shall be allowed during the trial, except if a party presents
meritorious reasons as basis for the admission of additional
evidence.
(3) Signature and address of the plaintiff or lawyer
(a) Significance of the signature of the lawyer
- it certifies that the lawyer:
(1) has read the pleading and document;
(2) that to the best of the lawyer’s knowledge, information
and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under
the circumstances:
It is not being presented for any improper purpose, such as to
harass, cause unnecessary delay, or needlessly increase the cost of
litigation;
The claims, defenses, and other legal contentions are warranted by
existing law or jurisprudence, or by a non-frivolous argument for
extending, modifying, or reversing existing jurisprudence;
The factual contentions have evidentiary support or, if specifically so
identified, will likely have evidentiary support after availment of the
modes of discovery; and
The denials of factual contentions are warranted by the evidence or,
if so specifically identified, are reasonably based on belief or a lack of
information.
(4) Verification
(a) When verification is required
 Except when specifically required by law or rule, pleadings
need not be under oath or verified.
(b) Examples of pleadings required by law to be verified:
 Pleadings filed in cases governed by the Rules on Summary
Procedure and Small Claims Cases Rules;
 Answer which specifically denies the genuineness and due
execution of an actionable document
Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45;
Petition for Certiorari under Rule 64;
Petition for Certiorari, mandamus, and prohibition under Rule 65;
Petition for Quo Warranto under Rule 66;
Complaint for Expropriation or Eminent Domain under Rule 67;
(c) Verification how made
By an affidavit of an affiant duly authorized to sign said
verification
The authorization of the affiant may either be in the form of
Secretary Certificate or Special Power of Attorney (SPA) which
shall be attached to the pleading
(f) Contents of the verification
The verification shall attest that:
(a) the allegation in the pleading are true and correct based
on his or her personal knowledge, or based on authentic
records;
(b) The pleading is not filed to harass, cause unnecessary
delay, or needlessly increase the cost of litigation; and
(c) The factual allegations therein have evidentiary support, or
if specifically so identified, will likewise have evidentiary
support after a reasonable opportunity for discovery.
(5) Certification of Non-Forum Shopping
(a) Concept
 The Certification against forum-shopping is a sworn
statement in which the plaintiff or principal party certifies in
a complaint or initiatory pleading to the following matters:
(1) that he has not commenced any action or filed any claim
involving the same issues in any court, tribunal or quasi-
judicial agency and, to the best of his or her knowledge, no
such other action or claim is pending therein;
(2) that if there is such other pending action or claim, a
complete statement of the present status thereof;
(3) that if he should thereafter learn that the some or similar
action or claim has been filed or is pending, he shall report
that fact within five (5) days therefrom to the court wherein
his aforesaid complaint or initiatory pleading has been filed.
MANNER OF MAKING
ALLEGATIONS IN THE
PLEADING
• (e) HOW TO CONTEST AN ACTIONABLE DOCUMENT

The party who does not intend to admit the genuineness and
due execution of an actional document, he or she must contest
the same by:
(i) specifically denying the genuineness and due execution of the
document under oath; and
(ii) Setting forth what he or she claims to be the facts.
• (f) CONSEQUENCE OF FAILURE TO DENY UNDER OATH THE
GENUINENESS AND DUE EXECUTION OF ACTIONABLE
DOCUMENT
Such failure will result in the implied admission of the due
execution and genuineness of the actional document, which
means that the party against whom the actionable document is
pleaded admits that:
(1) he or she signed it willingly and voluntarily; or
(2) That it was signed by another for him or her and under his or
her authority; or
• (3) at the time he or she signed it, it was in the words and
figures exactly as set out in the pleading of the party
relying upon it; and that

• (4) the formal requirements of the law, such as swearing and

acknowledgement, are waived by him or her.
 Thus, at the trial, the party who relies upon such implied
admissions should not present evidence on these matters
anymore, because facts already admitted need not be proved.
 On the other hand, the party who made such implied
admissions cannot set up the defense inconsistent with due
execution and genuineness, such as
(1) forgery
(2) lack of authority to execute the document;
(3) that the party charged signed the document in some
other capacity than than alleged in the pleading;
(4) that the document was never delivered;
(5) that the document was not in words and figures as
set out in the pleading.
• (g) DEFENSES NOT CUT-OFF BY THE IMPLIED ADMISSION OF
GENUINENESS AND DUE EXECUTION

Defenses not inconsistent with genuineness and due execution

are not cut-off, such as:
(1) payment or non-payment;
(2) Want of consideration;
(3) Illegality of consideration;
(4) Fraud
(5) prescription
 (6) release
• (7) waiver
• (8) statute of frauds
• (9) estoppel
• (10) former recovery
• (11) discharge in bankruptcy
• (12) mistake
• (13) insanity
• (14) novation
(h) EXCEPTIONS TO THE REQUIREMENT OF AN OATH IN
SPECIFIC DENIAL OF AN ACTIONABLE DOCUMENT
(1) When the adverse party does not appear to be a party to the
actionable document;
(2) When compliance with an order for an inspection of the original
document is refused;
(3) When the instrument is not really an actionable document, but is
only evidentiary of the claim or of the existence of the actionable
document; and
(4) When the party who has the benefit of the implied admission
waives such benefit, as when:
(a) he or presents evidence to prove the genuineness and due
execution of the document; or
(b) When he or she does not object to the evidence of the adverse
party showing that the document is a forgery.
• AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
• (a) WHERE TO RAISE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
 in the answer to a pleading asserting a claim

(b) AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

(1) fraud
(2) Statute of limitations
(3) Release
(4) Payment
(5) Illegality
(6) Statute of frauds
(7) estoppel
(8) former recovery
(9) discharge in bankruptcy
(10) lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter
(11) litis pendentia
(12) res judicata
• (13) improper venue
• (14) lack of jurisdiction over the person
• (15) plaintiff has no legal capacity to sue
• (16) failure to state a cause of action
• (17) non-compliance with condition precedent; and
• (18) any other matter by way of confession and avoidance
• (k) EFFECT OF FAILURE TO RAISE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES IN
THE ANSWER

Shall constitute a waiver of the affirmative defenses

• (l) EXCEPTION TO THE RULE ON WAIVER
• (1) lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter
• (2) litis pendentia
• (3) res judicata
• (4) statute of limitation

 Provided these matters appear from the pleadings or evidence

on records.
• (m) AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES WHICH CAN BE GROUNDS FOR A
MOTION TO DISMISS

(a) lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter

(b) litis pendentia
(c) res judicata
(d) statute of limitations
• REMEDY IF AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE IS DENIED
 The denial of an affirmative defense shall not be a subject of a
motion for reconsideration or petition for certiorari, prohibition
or mandamus
 It shall be raised as an error on appeal after an adverse
judgment on the merits.
 AMENDMENT OF PLEADINGS
(A) HOW IS AMENDMENT OF PLEADING MADE:
 By adding or striking out an allegation or the name of any party;
 By correcting a mistake in the name of a party or a mistaken or
inadequate allegation or description in any other respect.
(B) TWO KINDS OF AMENDMENT
(1) Amendment as a matter of right
(a) once as a matter of right before a responsive
pleading is served by the other party or in case of a reply, at
any time within ten (10) after it is served.
(b) the right to amend a pleading as a matter of right may
be exercised only once. Hence, even if no responsive pleading
has yet been filed, if the amendment is subsequent to a
previous amendment as a matter of right, such
subsequent amendment must be with leave of court.
(c) Before the service of a responsive pleading, a party has the
absolute right to amend his pleading, regardless of whether a new
cause of action or change in theory is introduced. But this can only be
exercised once.
(d) Since a motion to dismiss is not a responsive pleading, a plaintiff
may file an amended complaint even after the original complaint was
ordered dismissed, provided the order of dismissal is not yet final
(Bautista vs. Maya-Maya Cottages, 476 SCRA 416)
(e) REMEDY IN CASE OF REFUSAL OF COURT TO ADMIT AMENDED
PLEADING FILED AS A MATTER OF RIGHT

The party whose amended pleading is denied admission even if it is

filed as a matter of right may file a petition for mandamus, because the
trial court’s duty to admit an amended pleading filed as a matter of right
is purely ministerial (Alpine Lending Investors vs. Corpuz, 508 SCRA 45)
(2) Amendment with leave of court

(a) Leave of court is required for substantial amendment

made after service of responsive pleading,
except formal amendments, i.e., defect in the designation of parties and
other clearly clerical or typographical error which may be summarily
corrected at any stage of the proceedings upon motion or at the court’s
initiative.
(c) REMEDY IF LEAVE OF COURT IS DENIED

Certiorari under Rule 65 on the ground of grave abuse of discretion

(d) LIMITATIONS TO SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT MADE AFTER SERVICE
OF RESPONSIVE PLEADING

(1) If the purpose of the amendment is to confer

jurisdiction upon the court
 amendment to correct a jurisdictional error cannot be done
after a responsive pleading is served, because by then, leave of court
is required which necessitates the exercise of sound discretion or
performance of a positive act which presupposes jurisdiction,
otherwise, the court would then be acting without jurisdiction.
Where amendment is a matter of right, the court does not act, and the
admission of the amended pleading is a ministerial duty of the court
that requires no positive action; hence, it could not be deemed as acting
without jurisdiction.
(2) If the purpose is to cure the defect of a non-existing cause of
action
A complaint whose cause of action has not yet accrued cannot be cured
or remedied by an amendment alleging the existence or accrual of a
cause of action while the case is pending. Such an action is prematurely
filed, and is, therefore, a groundless suit which must be dismissed.
EXCEPTION TO AMENDMENT TO CONFORM TO EVIDENCE

Amendment to conform to evidence is not possible when the

defendant is declared in default because Section 3(d), Rule 9 limits the
relief that may be granted by the courts to what has been prayed for in
the complaint, i.e., shall not exceed the amount or be different in kind
from that prayed for nor award liquidated damages (Diona vs. Balangue,
et. al., G.R. No.173559, 7 January 2013)
PERIODS TO FILE
RESPONSIVE
PLEADINGS
(a) Answer to the complaint/third (fourth, etc.)-party
complaint – 30 calendar days, unless a different period is fixed
by the court (Section 1, Rule 6)
EXCEPTIONS:

(i) Where the defendant is a foreign private juridical entity and

service of summons is made on the government official
designated by law to receive summons on its behalf- 60 calendar
days after receipt of summons by such entity (Section 2, Rule 11)
(ii) Where the service of summons was effected through
publication, the order granting leave of court shall specify a
reasonable time, which shall not be less than sixty (60) calendar
days from receipt of such order, within which to file the answer
(Rule 14, Sections 16, 17, & 18)
(b) ANSWER TO AN AMENDED COMPLAINT AND OTHER
SIMILAR PLEADINGS

(1) where the filing of the amended complaint is a matter

of right – 30 calendar days from service of copy of the
amended complaint
(2) Where the filing is not a matter of right – 15 days from
notice of the order admitting the amended complaint
The foregoing rules on the period to file Answer to amended
complaint shall apply to answer to:

(a) Amended counterclaim;

(b) Amended cross-claim;
(c) Amended third (fourth, etc.)-party complaint; and
(d) Amended complaint-in-intervention
RULE IF MOTION TO DISMISS OR BILL OF PARTICULARS ARE FILED
BUT DENIED:

The Answer shall be filed within the remaining balance from

receipt of the order denying the motion to dismiss or motion
for bill of particulars, which shall not be less than five (5) days.
(c) REPLY

 If allowed under Rule 6, Rule 10 – 15 days from

service of pleading responded to
 MANNER OF FILING AND SERVICE OF PLEADINGS,
JUDGMENTS, AND OTHER PAPERS (RULE 13)
(a) MANNER OF FILING
(1) By submitting personally the original of the pleading and other
court submission (plainly indicated as such) to the court;
(2) By registered mail
(3) By accredited courier
(4) By electronic mail or other electronic means as may be authorized
by the court in places where the court is electronically equipped
(b) WHEN PLEADING AND OTHER COURT SUBMISSION DEEMED FILED
(1) If made personally, the date and hour indicated by the Clerk of
Court in the Stamped Receipt is deemed the date of filing;
(2) If by registered mail or accredited courier, the date of mailing and
payment or deposit, as shown by the post office stamp on the
envelope or the registry receipt, is deemed the date of filing,
payment or deposit in court.
Accredited couriers are JRS Express, LBC, Entrego, and Ninjavan
(3) If by electronic mail or other electronic means, the date of the
electronic transmission shall be deemed the date of filing
(c) MODES OF SERVICE

Pleadings, motions, notices, judgments and other court submission

shall be served through:
(1) Personal service
(2) By registered mail
(3) By substituted service
(4) By accredited courier
(5) By electronic mail
(6) By facsimile transmission
(7) By other electronic means as may be authorized by the court or as
provided for in international conventions to which the Philippines is
a party.
(d) SERVICE BY ELECTRONIC MAIL AND FACSIMILE WHEN ALLOWED

Shall be made only if the party concerned consents to the such

modes of service
(e) SERVICE OF JUDGMENTS, FINAL ORDERS OR RESOLUTIONS

GENERAL RULE:

Shall be served personally or registered mail

EXCEPTIONS:

(1) Upon ex parte motion of any party in the case, a copy of the
judgment, final order or resolution may be delivered by private
courier at the expense of such party;
(2) When a party summoned by publication has failed to appear in the
action, judgment, final order or resolution shall be served by
publication at the expense of the prevailing party.
(f) PLEADINGS AND COURT ORDERS AND DOCUMENTS THAT SHOULD
BE SERVED BY CONVENTIONAL MEANS, AND NOT THROUGH
ELECTRONIC MAIL OR OTHER ELECTRONIC MEANS
Notwithstanding the other modes of filing and service provided for
under the rules, the following must be served and/or filed personally
or by registered mail (when allowed):

(1) initiatory pleadings and initial responsive pleadings, such as an

answer;
(2) subpoena, protection order, and writs;

(3) Appendices and exhibits to motions, or other documents that are not
readily amendable to electronic scanning process.
 may be filed and served through conventional means (personally or by
registered mail), at the option of the party filing;

(4) Sealed and confidential documents or records

Unless express permission is granted by the court
.
(5) Judgments, final orders or resolutions

EXCEPTIONS:
(1) Upon ex parte motion of any party in the case, a copy of the
judgment, final order or resolution may be delivered by private
courier at the expense of such party;
(2) When a party summoned by publication has failed to appear in the
action, judgment, final order or resolution shall be served by
publication at the expense of the prevailing party.
 REVISED GUIDELINES ON SUBMISSION OF ELECTRONIC COPIES OF
SUPREME COURT-BOUND PAPERS PURSUANT TO THE EFFICIENT USE OF
PAPER RULE (A.M. NO. 10-3-7-SC, JUNE 1, 2022
Filing of Supreme Court-bound pleadings, papers and other submissions
may be done through either of the following modes or manner:
(a) By filing the hard copy personally, by registered mail or accredited
courier
Electronic copies of all Supreme Court-bound papers and their annexes
must be submitted within twenty-four (24) hours from the filing of the
hard copies (filed personally, by registered mail, or by accredited courier),
by transmitting them through electronic mail
when the paper or hard copy is filed in person, by registered mail, or
by accredited courier, the same shall be deemed to have been filed on
the date and time of filing of the hard copy, not the date and time of
the transmission of the electronic mail

Thus, where a hard copy of Supreme Court-bound paper is filed, an

electronic copy is required to be filed within twenty-four hours from
the filing of the hard copy.
(b) By electronic filing
Supreme Court-bound papers may be filed electronically without
express permission from the Supreme Court.
When the manner of filing of the paper or other court submission is
made online, i.e., by transmitting them via electronic mail or other
means pursuant to Section 3(d), Rule 13 of the 2019 Amendments to
the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, the date of the electronic
transmission shall be considered as the date of filing.
No need to file the hard copy of the paper or other submission
EXCEPTIONS:
(a) Initiatory pleadings and initial responsive pleadings, such as an
Answer to a Complaint or a Comment to a Petition;
(b) Appendices and exhibits to motions, or other documents that are
not readily amendable to electronic scanning; and
(c) Sealed and confidential documents or records.

In any of the foregoing instances, express permission is required.

EFFECT OF ABSENCE OF EXPRESS PERMISSION FROM THE SUPREME
COURT:
In the absence of the express permission from the Supreme Court to
file the foregoing online, the date of filing shall be the date when the
hard copy was filed in person, by registered mail, or delivered to the
accredited courier
Thus, where no express permission is obtained, a hard copy must be
filed either in person, by registered mail or accredited courier,
otherwise these papers or submissions shall not be deemed filed and
does not toll the running of the reglementary period.
SUMMONS
(RULE 14)
MODES OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS
(1) PERSONAL SERVICE
Whenever practicable, the summons shall be served:
(a) by handing copy of the summons and informing the
defendant that he/she is being served; or
(b) if the defendant refuses to receive and sign for it, by
leaving the summons within the view and in the
presence of the defendant (personal service by
tender).
(2) SUBSTITUTED SERVICE

If, for justifiable causes, the defendant cannot be served personally

after at least three (3) attempts on two (2) different dates, service may
be effected:
(a) by leaving copies of the summons at the defendant’s residence to
a person at least eighteen (18) years of age and of sufficient age
and discretion residing therein;
 (b) by leaving copies of the summons at the defendant’s office or
regular place of business with some competent person in charge
thereof;

 a competent person includes, but is not limited to, the one who
customarily receives correspondences for the defendant.
(c) By leaving copies of the summons, if refused entry upon making
his/her authority and purpose known, with any of the officers of
the homeowner’s association or condominium corporation, or its
chief security officer in charge of the community or the building
where the defendant may be found;
(d) by sending an electronic mail to the defendant’s electronic mail
address, if allowed by the court.

court order is required before service by electronic mail can be

effected.
SERVICE UPON DOMESTIC PRIVATE JURIDICAL ENTITY
Service shall be made upon:
(a) the President
(b) general manager
(c) corporate secretary
(d) treasurer; or
(e) in-house counsel of the corporation
wherever they may be found ; not necessarily at their office
(f) in the absence or unavailability of the president, managing partner,
general manager, corporate secretary; treasurer or in-house
counsel, service may be made on their secretaries.

QUERY:
May the summons be served upon the secretary wherever he/she may
be found?
(g) if service cannot be made upon the president, managing partner,
general manager, corporate secretary, treasurer, in-house counsel
and their secretaries, service shall be made upon the person who
customarily receives correspondences for the defendant at its
principal place of business.
Should there be refusal on the part of the above-mentioned persons
to receive summons despite at least three (3) attempts on two (2)
different dates, service may be made electronically, if allowed by the
court, as provided under Section 6, Rule 14 on substituted service.
 CONSEQUENCE WHEN A LAWYER MAKES A SPECIAL
APPEARANCE

Where the summons is improperly served and a lawyer makes a

special appearance on behalf of the defendant to, among others,
question the validity of service of summons, the counsel shall be
deputized by the court to serve summons on his/her client.
MOTIONS
(RULE 15)
NOTES:
Among the changes or innovations introduced by the 2019 amendments
are the following:
(1) Notice of Hearing is not anymore required, since hearing is no longer
mandatory, but a matter of discretion and only in cases of litigious
motions.
(2) The need for a Written Explanation if and when filing and service of the
motion cannot be made personally is no longer required. There is no
preference given to personal service insofar as filing and service of
pleadings or motions are concerned.
HEARING ON LITIGIOUS MOTIONS DISCRETIONARY

The court may, in the exercise of its discretion, and if deemed necessary
for its resolution, call a hearing on the motion.
For purposes of the hearing, the court shall issue a Notice of Hearing
which shall be addressed to all the parties concerned, and shall specify
the time and date of the hearing.
(H) OMNIBUS MOTION RULE

A motion attacking a pleading, order, judgment, or proceeding shall

include all objections then available, and all objections not so included
shall be deemed waived.
EXCEPTION:
The Omnibus Motion Rule does not apply to a Motion to Dismiss
grounded on the following:
(1) lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter
(2) litis pendentia
(3) res judicata
(4) statute of limitations
REQUIREMENT FOR A MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE PLEADING OR MOTION

A motion for leave to file a pleading or motion shall be accompanied by

the pleading or motion sought to be filed and admitted.
(J) PROHIBITED MOTIONS
(1) A Motion to Dismiss, except on the following grounds:
(a) lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter
(b) litis pendentia
(c) res judicata
(d) statute of limitations
(2) Motion to hear affirmative defenses
(3) Motion for Reconsideration of the court’s denial of affirmative
defenses.
 in cases where a Motion to Dismiss is allowed as when it is
grounded on lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter, litis pendentia,
res judicata or statute of limitations, the filing of a Motion for
Reconsideration of the action of the court on such Motion to Dismiss is
not prohibited.
 (4) Motion to suspend proceedings without TRO or injunction issued by
the higher court
(5) Motion for extension of time to file pleadings, affidavits, or any other
papers, except a motion for extension to file an answer.
(6) Motion for postponement intended for delay, except if based on:
(a) acts of God
(b) force majeure
(c) physical inability of the witness to appear and testify

 if motion is granted, the moving party shall be warned that the

presentation of his/her/its evidence must still be terminated on the
dates previously agreed upon.
A Motion for Postponement, whether written or oral, shall, at all times,
be accompanied by the original official receipt from the office of the Clerk
of Court evidencing payment of the postponement fee under Section
21(b), Rule 141, to be submitted either at the time of the filing of the said
motion or not later than the next hearing date
The Clerk of Court shall not accept the motion, unless accompanied by
the original receipt.
(K) EFFECTS IF MOTION TO DISMISS OR AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE IS GRANTED
The granting of a Motion to Dismiss or Affirmative Defenses shall bar
re-filing of the same action or claim if based on the following:
(1) the cause of action is barred by res judicata
(2) statute of limitation
(3) payment
(4) waiver
(5) abandonment
(6) extinguishment of obligation; or
(7) unenforceable contract under Statute of Frauds

If based on other grounds, the dismissal shall not be a bar to re-filing of
the same claim or action.
But this is without prejudice to Section 3, Rule 17, where the dismissal is
with prejudice, unless otherwise ordered by the court.
 PROCEEDINGS AFTER
SERVICE OF SUMMONS
(1) MOTION TO DISMISS (RULE 15)

(a) EFFECTS OF FILING A MOTION TO DISMISS

The period to file an Answer is stayed/suspended

Hypothetical admission of the truth of the factual allegations in the
complaint. Thus, if the plaintiff files an action for damages against
the defendant, the defendant in effect, says that “even assuming the
facts to be true as alleged by the plaintiff, the latter is not entitled to
the relief prayed for because his/her action is barred by prescription,
res judicata or that the court has no jurisdiction.
The admission is only hypothetical, not an actual admission of the
material allegations in the complaint. Neither does it amount to
judicial admission. Thus, if the motion is denied, the defendant can
still controvert the material allegations in the complaint
The significance of “hypothetical admission” is that the defendant in
a motion to dismiss is not allowed to present evidence to controvert
the material allegations in the complaint constitutive of plaintiff’s
cause of action. While the movant is allowed to present evidence,
the purpose of the evidence is to prove the facts constitutive of the
ground for a motion to dismiss; i.e., prescription, litis pendentia, or
res judicata
(b) TIME TO FILE MOTION TO DISMISS

 at any time before final judgment.

(c) GROUNDS FOR MOTION TO DISMISS

(1) lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter of the

action;

(2) stature of limitations

(3) litis pendentia

(4) res judicata

(d) GROUNDS FOR MOTION TO DISMISS NOT EXCLUSIVE

The prohibition under Section 12, Rule 15 against filing a motion to

dismiss on the grounds other than (a) lack of jurisdiction over the
subject matter, (b) litis pendentia, (c) res judicata, and (d) statute of
limitations is not an absolute rule.
(e) INSTANCES WHERE A MOTION TO DISMISS MAY BE FILED ON
OTHER GROUNDS:

(1) Under Section 5, Rule 7, non-compliance with the requirement of

Certification against Forum-Shopping and willful and deliberate
act of forum-shopping is a ground for dismissal of the complaint
upon motion.
(2) Under Section 3, Rule 17, a complaint may be dismissed due to
the fault of the plaintiff, as when he/she fails to appear during
the presentation of his/her evidence-in-chief, failure to prosecute
the action for an unreasonable length of time, and failure to
comply with the Rules of Court or a valid court order.
NOTE:
The prohibition against filing a Motion to Dismiss on grounds other
than lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter, litis pendentia, res
judicata and statute of limitations contemplates of a situation where
a motion to dismiss is filed before filing of an answer, where such
other grounds shall be raised as affirmative defenses instead of in a
Motion to Dismiss.
Where a motion to dismiss is filed after the filing of the Answer, a
Motion to Dismiss may be filed on grounds other than lack of
jurisdiction over the subject matter, litis pendentia, res judicata, or
statute of limitations, except if based on grounds that should have
been raised as affirmative defenses.
(f) REMEDIES IF MOTION TO DISMISS IS DENIED

(1) File an Answer and reiterate therein as affirmative defenses the

same grounds alleged in the Motion to Dismiss, that is, lack of
jurisdiction over the subject matter, litis pendentia, res
judicata and statute of limitations.

Any ground not alleged in the Motion to Dismiss may still be raised
as affirmative defense in the answer, since lack of jurisdiction over
the subject matter, litis pendentia, res judicata, and statute of
limitation are not covered by the Omnibus Motion Rule.
QUERY:

Within what period may the defendant file his/her answer after the
denial of his/her Motion to Dismiss?
ANSWER:

Under the old rules, when the defendant filed a Motion to Dismiss
and the same is denied, he/she has the remaining period within
which to file the Answer, but in no case shall it be less than five (5)
days from receipt of the order denying the Motion to Dismiss or the
order denying a Motion for Reconsideration of the Order denying the
Motion to Dismiss.
There is, however, a procedural lacuna under the present rules. In
deleting the entire Rule 16 which governs Motion to Dismiss, the
2019 Amendments to the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure had
overlooked to provide the reglementary period for filing the Answer
in a situation where a Motion to Dismiss is first filed before Answer
and denied by the court.
This is one of the areas left gray by the recent amendments that
begs for clarification from the Supreme Court
But pending such official clarification, and given the absence of a
specific rule on the matter, it is hereby submitted that the
reglementary period for filing Answer after the denial of a Motion
for Bill of Particulars, which is also a remedy available to the
defendant before Answer, shall be applied by analogy.
Thus, the defendant may file his/her answer within the remaining
period, but in case shall be less than five (5) days.
(2) DISMISSALS OF ACTIONS (RULE 17)

(a) WAYS BY WHICH AN ACTION MAY BE DISMISSED UNDER RULE

17

(1) AT THE INSTANCE OF OR BY THE PLAINTIFF

(A) HOW MADE

(i) BY FILING A NOTICE OF DISMISSAL
 The plaintiff may file a notice of dismissal at any time before
service upon him or her of the answer or of a motion for
summary judgment.

 This is a matter of right.

The dismissal under this rule is without prejudice, except:
(1) the notice of dismissal by the plaintiff provides that the
dismissal is with prejudice; or

(2) if barred by the “Two Dismissal Rule.”

(1) CONCEPT
When plaintiff has previously dismissed the same case in a court of
competent jurisdiction based on or including the same claim. Under
this rule, the second notice of dismissal will bar the re-filing of the
action because it will operate as an adjudication of the claim upon
the merits.
In other words, the claim may only be filed twice, the first claim
being the claim embodied in the original complaint. Since, as a rule,
the dismissal is without prejudice, the same may be re-filed.
However, if the re-filed claim or complaint is dismissed again through
a second notice of dismissal, that second notice of dismissal is to be
deemed one with prejudice, because it is considered as an
adjudication upon the merits. Thus, the same complaint may not be
filed the third time.
(2) REQUISITES OF THE “TWO DISMISSAL RULE”
(a) the first dismissal must be at the instance of the plaintiff by filing a Notice of
Dismissal
Thus, the ”Two Dismissal Rule” will not apply if the prior dismissal was done at the
instance of the defendant (Ching vs. Cheng, G.R. No.175507, 8 October 2014).
Antonio Ching is unmarried but had children by two women. Ramon Ching is the
child of Lucia, while Joseph and Jaime Cheng by Mercedes. Ramon executed sole
adjudication, on the basis of which properties of Antonio were transferred in his
name and in his corporation named Po Wing Properties. Joseph, Jaime and
Mercedes filed a case against Ramon and Po Wing to annul titles and documents.
Upon motion of Po Wing, the action was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. A similar
complaint was subsequently filed by Joseph, Jaimie and Lucia, which they asked to
be dismissed without prejudice. A third complaint was filed to disinherit Ramon and
nullify documents. The “Two-Dismissal Rule” does not apply, as the first action was
dismissed upon motion of Po Wing.

Neither will the rule apply if the prior dismissal was by filing a Motion to Dismiss, as
the rule contemplates of two dismissals by filing two notices of dismissal
 (b) the second action must be based on the same claim or include
the same claim as in the first action;

(c) The complaints must have been dismissed in a court of

competent jurisdiction.

Thus, if the court where the first or second action or both complaints
were filed and dismissed has no jurisdiction, the rule does not apply,
because either or both dismissals does not amount to adjudication
on the merits.
(3) if the plaintiff files a Notice of Dismissal, providing therein a reason
that prevents re-filing of the complaint, the dismissal must be
with prejudice.

ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLE:
If after the filing of the complaint and before answer, the plaintiff
files a Notice of Dismissal, on the ground that the claim has already
been extinguished by payment or that the action has already
prescribed.
(ii) BY FILING A MOTION TO DISMISS

(a) WHEN REQUIRED

Once either an answer or motion for summary judgment has been

served on the plaintiff, the dismissal is no longer a matter of right but
of judicial discretion; hence, it will require the filing of a Motion to
Dismiss, not a mere notice of dismissal
(b) NATURE OF DISMISSAL

The dismissal is without prejudice, except if the order of dismissal

specifies that it is with prejudice (Section 2, Rule 17)
(2) DISMISSAL DUE TO THE FAULT OF THE PLAINTIFF AT THE INSTANCE
OF THE COURT OR UPON MOTION OF DEFENDANT (Section 3,
Rule 17)

(a) GROUNDS:

(1) if, for no justifiable reason, the plaintiff fails to appear on

the date of the presentation of his or her evidence-in-
chief on the complaint
This refers to the first day of the scheduled presentation of plaintiff’s
evidence-in-chief.

If plaintiff was able to initially present his/her evidence-in-chief but

fails to appear at the subsequent hearing, the complaint may not be
dismissed, but the plaintiff may be deemed to have waived his/her
right to present further evidence.
(2) If, for no justifiable cause, the plaintiff fails to prosecute his/her
action for an unreasonable length of time, as when he or she fails
to set the case for pre-trial or move for issuance of summons
 (3) If, for no justifiable cause, the plaintiff fails to comply with the
Rules of Court or any order of the court

ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLES:
(a) Failure to comply with the required Certification of Non-Forum
Shopping;
(b) Engaging in the act of forum-shopping;
(c) Failure to appear during the pre-trial conference
(d) Failure to implead indispensable party when directed to do so.
(b) NATURE OF DISMISSAL UNDER SECTION 3, RULE 17

The dismissal under this rule shall have the same effect of an
adjudication on the merits, unless otherwise declared by the court.