REMEDIAL LAW

CIVIL PROCEDURE
JURISDICTION
TEST OF WHETHER THE SUBJECT MATTER IS INCAPABLE OF PECUNIARY
ESTIMATION
In determining whether an action is one the subject matter of which is not
capable of pecuniary estimation, the Court has adopted the criterion of first
ascertaining the nature of the principal action or remedy sought:
1. If it is primarily for the recovery of a sum of money, the claim is considered
capable of pecuniary estimation, and whether jurisdiction is in the municipal courts
or in the RTCs would depend on the amount of the claim.
2.I f the basic issue is something other than the right to recover a sum of
money, where the money claim is purely incidental to, or a consequence of, the
principal relief sought, the Court has considered such actions as cases where the
subject of the litigation may not be estimated in terms of money, and, hence, are
incapable of pecuniary estimation. These cases are cognizable exclusively by RTCs.
(SURVIVING HEIRS OF ALFREDO R. BAUTISTA, et al. v. FRANCISCO LINDO,
et al., G.R. No. 208232, March 10, 2014, Velasco, Jr., J)
ACTION TO ENFORCE RIGHT TO REPURCHASE LOT IS BEYOND PECUNIARY
ESTIMATION.
An action to enforce a right to repurchase the lot of a party formerly owned
pursuant to the right of a free patent holder under Sec. 119 of CA 141 or the Public
Land Act is one beyond pecuniary estimation. It is not one involving title to or
possession of real property or interest therein. The reconveyance of the title is
solely dependent on the exercise of such right to repurchase and is not the principal
main relief or remedy. Such being the case, his action for specific performance is
incapable of pecuniary estimation and cognizable by the RTC. (Surviving Heirs of
Alfredo Bautista v. Lindo, et al., G.R. No. 208232, March 10, 2014, Velasco,
J).
PERSONAL ACTION
An action to recover the deficiency after extrajudicial foreclosure of a real
property mortgage is a personal action because it does not affect title to or
possession of real property, or any interest therein. (BPI FAMILY SAVINGS
BANK, INC. v. SPOUSES BENEDICTO & TERESITA YUJUICO July 22,
2015 )
ADHERENCE TO JURISDICTION
Jurisdiction once acquired is not lost upon the instance of the parties but
continues until the case is terminated. Certainly, it would be the height of injustice
to allow parties that disagree with the decision of a judicial tribunal to annul the
same through the expedient of transferring their interests or rights involved in the

case. (HERITAGE PARK MANAGEMENT CORPORATION(HPMC) v. CIAC and

ELPIDIO UY, et al., G.R. No. 148133, October 8, 2008, VELASCO, JR., J.)
TOTALITY RULE
One or more causes of action may be joined in a single complaint where one
is within the jurisdiction of the Regional Court, provided that none of the causes of
action is a special civil action or one governed by the special rules and where the
causes of action are for sum of money, the aggregate amount is the basis of
jurisdiction.
SMALL CLAIMS/SUMMARY PROCEDURE
PROHIBITED PLEADINGS UNDER THE RULE ON SMALL CLAIMS/ SUMMARY
PROCEDURE:
(a) Motion to dismiss the complaint or to quash the complaint or information
EXCEPT on the ground of lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter, or failure to
comply with the preceding section;
(b) Motion for a bill of particulars;
(c) Motion for new trial, or for reconsideration of a judgment, or for opening of trial;
(d) Petition for relief from judgment;
(e) Motion for extension of time to file pleadings, affidavits or any other paper;
(f) Memoranda;
(g) Petition for certiorari, mandamus, or prohibition against any interlocutory order
issued by the court;
(h) Motion to declare the defendant in default;
(i) Dilatory motions for postponement;
(j) Reply;
(k) Third party complaints;
(l) Interventions.
SUMMARY PROCEDURE
MOTU PROPRIO DISMISSAL OF A CASE
The court may from an examination of the allegations in the complaint and such
evidence as may be attached thereto, dismiss the case outright on any of the
grounds for the dismissal of a civil action which are apparent therein (Section 4,
Rule on Summary Procedure)
BARANGAY CONCILIATION
Effect if one of the parties in a compromise fails or refuses to comply with
the terms of a compromise.
If one of the parties fails or refuses to abide by the compromise, the other
party may either:
1. Enforce the compromise or ;
2. Regard it as rescinded and insist upon his original demand. (Art. 2041, NCC).

In exercising the second option under Art. 2041, the aggrieved party may, if
he chooses, bring the suit contemplated or involved in his original demand, as if
there had never been any compromise agreement, without bringing an action for
rescission. This is because he may regard the compromise as already rescinded by
the breach thereof of the other party. (Catedrilla v. Lauron, G.R. No. 179011,
April 15, 2013 citing Chavez v. CA, G.R. No. 159411, March 18, 2005).
INSTANCES WHERE PARTIES MAY GO DIRECTLY TO COURT WITHOUT THE
NEED OF PRIOR BARANGAY CONCILIATION:
1. Accused is under DETENTION
2. Where a person has otherwise been deprived of personal liberty calling for
HABEAS CORPUS proceedings.
3. Where actions are coupled with PROVISIONAL REMEDIES.
4. Where the action may be barred by the STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS.
RULE 2 - ACTIONS
LACK OF CAUSE OF ACTION
Lack of cause of action is not a ground for a dismissal of the complaint through a
motion to dismiss under Rule 16 of the Rules of Court, for the determination of a
lack of cause of action can only be made during/or after trial ( Vitangcol vs. New
Vista Properties, Inc. 2009, Velasco Jr., J)
FAILURE TO STATE A CAUSE OF ACTION
In a motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action, the focus is on the
sufficiency, not the veracity, of the material allegations (AQUALAB PHILIPPINES,
INC. VS. HEIRS OF MARCELINO PAGOBO
(2009) VELASCO, JR, J.)
RULE 3 - PARTIES
CAPACITY OF MAMMALS TO SUE
The need to give the Resident Marine Mammals legal standing has been
eliminated by our Rules, which allow any Filipino citizen, as a steward of nature, to
bring a suit to enforce our environmental laws. It is worth noting here that the
Stewards are joined as real parties in the Petition and not just in representation of
the named cetacean species. The Stewards, having shown in their petition that
there may be possible violations of laws concerning the habitat of the Resident
Marine Mammals, are therefore declared to possess the legal standing to file this
petition. (Resident Marine Mammals of the Protected Seascape Tanon
Strait, etc. v. Sec. Angelo Reyes, et al., G.R. No. 180771, April 21, 2015 &
companion cases, Leonardo-De Castro, J).
EFFECT NON-JOINDER OF INDISPENSABLE PARTY
The non-joinder of indispensable parties is not a ground for the dismissal of an
action. At any stage of a judicial proceeding , parties may be added on the motion
of a party or on the initiative of the tribunal concerned.

REMEDY: To implead the non-party claimed to be indispensable. If the opposing

party refuses to implead an indispensable party despite the order of the court, that
court may dismiss the case for the plaintiff's failure to comply with the order under
Rule 17, Section 3.
(HEIRS OF FAUSTINO MESINA VS. HEIRS OF DOMINGO FIAN SR;
(2013)VELASCO, JR. J.)
REQUISITES OF CLASS SUIT:

1) The subject matter of controversy is of common or general interest to

many persons;
2) Persons are so numerous that it is impracticable to join all as parties;
3) Parties actually before the court are sufficiently numerous and
representative so that all interests concerned are fully protected;
4) The representatives sue or defend for the benefit of all. (Rule 3, Section
12)
The complaint must specially state that the same is being brought in behalf
of others with whom parties share a common interest (Borlasa v. Polistico, 47
Phil. 345).

RULES ON INDIGENT LITIGANTS:

RULE 141, SECTION 19

RULE 3, SECTION 21

If the applicant for exemption meets

When the application does not satisfy

the salary and property requirements

the salary and property requirements,

under Section 19 of Rule 141, then the

then the application should not be

grant of the application is mandatory

denied outright; The court should apply

the indigency test under Section 21 of
Rule 3 and use its sound discretion in
determining the merits of the prayer for
exemption.

RULES TO OBE OBSERVED IN CASE OF DEATH OF THE OBLIGOR IF THERE

ARE CLAIMS AGAINST HIM:
IF IT IS A MONEY CLAIM ARISING FROM CONTRACT CONTRACT, EXPRESS
OR IMPLIED, THE RULES ARE:
1. If the obligor dies before an action could be filed against him, the obligee will
have to file a money claim with the probate court (in the testate or intestate
proceedings foe the settlement of the estate of the deceased obligor)

2.If the action has alread been instituted against the obligor and he dies before
entry of final judgment in the court in which the action is pending at the time of
such death, the action shall not be dismissed but shall instead be allowed to
continue until entry of final judgment.
If the plaintiff obtains a favorable judgment for money, he will have to file it as
money claim based on judgment in the probate court.(Section 20, Section 3)
IF IT IS A CLAIM THAT DOES NOT ARISE FROM CONTRACT, SUCH AS A
CLAIM FOR RECOVERY OF REAL OR PERSONAL PROPERTY OR
ENFORCEMENT OF A LIEN THEREON, THE RULES ARE:
1. If the obligor dies before an action could be filed against him, an ordinary action
may be filed against his executor or administrator;
2. I f the obligor dies after an action has already been instituted against him, the
action will continue until final judgment. The judgment may be executed against his
executor or administrator ( RULE 39, SECTION 7)
RULE -VENUE
COMPLEMENTARY-CONTRACTS CONSTRUED TOGETHER DOCTRINE
An accessory contract must be read in its entirety and together with the principal
agreement . Thus, the suetyship agreement can only be enforced in conjunction
with the promissory note. Thus, the venue stipulation in the promissory note also
applies to the suretyship agreement as an ancillary contract of the promissory note.
VENUE JURISDICTION IN CRIMINAL VS. CIVIL ACTIONS
VENUE STIPULATIONS
The phrase waiving any other venue plainly shows that the choice of Makati City
as the venue for actions arising out of or in connection with the Restructuring
Agreement and the Collateral, with the Real Estate Mortgages being explicitly
defined as such, is exclusive.( Paglaum Management vs. Union Bank of the
Philippines 18 JUNE 2012)
EFFECT OF PARTIAL DEFAULT
When a pleading asserting a claim states a common cause of action against several
defending parties, some of whom answer and the others fail to do so, the court shall
try the case against all upon the answers thus filed and render judgment upon the
evidence presented.(Rule 9,Sec 3 (c))
PLEADINGS
COMPULSORY COUNTERCLAIM
A claim for recovery of an excess in the bid price should be set up in the
action for payment of a deficiency as a compulsory counterclaim, otherwise it would
belatedly raised, hence, waived.
REQUISITES:

(1) it arises out of or is necessarily connected with the transaction or occurrence

which is the subject matter of the opposing partys claim;
(2) it does not require for its adjudication the presence of third parties of whom the
court cannot acquire jurisdiction; and
(3) the court has jurisdiction to entertain the claim both as to its amount and
nature, except that in an original action before the RTC, the counterclaim may be
considered compulsory regardless of the amount
OMINIBUS MOTION RULE
A motion attacking a pleading , order, judgment, or proceeding shall include all
objections then available.
VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION AGAINST FORUM SHOPPING
TEST OF FORUM SHOPPING
The test to determine whether forum shopping exists is whether the elements
of litis pendencia are present or where a final judgment in one case will amount to
res judicata in the other.
Res judicata means a matter or thing adjudged, judicially acted upon or
decided, or settled by judgment.
REQUISITES:
(1) the former judgment or order must be final;
(2) the judgment or order must be one on the merits;
(3) it must have been rendered by a court having jurisdiction over the
subject matter and parties; and;
(4) between the first and second actions, there must be identity of parties,
subject matter, and causes of action. (CLARK DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION v.
MONDRAGON LEISURE AND RESORTS CORPORATION, et al., G.R. No. 150986, 2
March 2007, J. Velasco, Jr.)
ACTIONABLE DOCUMENT
is a written instrument or document on which an action or defense is based upon.
REPLY
Where the defense
specifically denying
due execution of
Philbanking Corp.

in the Answer is based on actionable documents, a REPLY

it under oath must be made; Otherwise the genuineness and
the document will be deemed admitted.( Casent vs.
2007 Velasco Jr; J.)

HOW TO CONTEST AN ACTIONABLE DOCUMENT:

1.SPECIFICALLY DENYING THE GENUINENESS AND DUE EXECUTION OF THE
DOCUMENT UNDER OATH;
2. SETTING FORTH WHAT HE CLAIMS TO BE THE FACTS
EFFECT OF FAILURE TO PLEAD
Defenses and objections not pleaded either in a motion to dismiss or in the answer
are deemed waived.

EXCEPTIONS:
1. RES JUDICATA
2. PRESCRIPTION
3.LACK OF JURISDICTION OVER THE SUBJECT MATTER
4.LITIS PENDENTIA (Section 1, Rule 9)

REMEDIES OF A PARTY WHO FAILS TO FILE AN ANSWER

1. BEFORE A NOTICE OF DEFAULT
2. AFTER OREDR OF DEFAUL BUT
BEFORE JUDGMENT

FILE A MOTION TO ADMIT ANSWER.

FILE A MOTION UNDER OATH TO SET
ASIDE THE DEFAULT ORDER ON THE
GROUND OF FRAUD, ACCIDENT,
MISTAKE OR EXCUSABLE NEGLIGENCE
(FAME) and that he has a meritorious
defense.

3. AFTER JUDGMENT BEFORE IT

BECOMES FINAL:

A) FILE A MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL ON

THE GROUND OF FAME. I
B) F THE MOTION IS DENIED , THE
DEFENDANT MAY APPEAL WITHIN 15
DAYS FROM RECEIPT OIF ORDER
DENYING THE MOTION .

4. AFTER JUDGMENT BECOMES

FINAL:

FILE A PETITION FOR RELIEF UNDER

RULE 38.

5. AFTER PERIOD TO FILE A

PETITION FOR RELIEF HAS LAPSED:

FILE A PETITION FOR ANNULMENT OF

JUDGMENT BASED ON EXTRINSIC
FRAUD UNDER RULE 47.

RULE 14 - SUMMONS
General Rule: In an action strictly in personam, personal service on the defendant
is the preferred mode of service, that is, by handing a copy of the summons to the
defendant in person.
Exceptions: If defendant, for excusable reasons, cannot be served with the
summons within a reasonable period substituted service can be resorted .
REQUIREMENTS FOR SUBSTITUTED SERVICE OF SUMMONS:
1. Impossibility of prompt of personal service .
NOTA BENE: The sheriff must show several attempts for personal service of at
least three times on at least two different dates.

2. Specific details in the return.

NOTA BENE: The sheriff must describe in the Return of Summons the facts and
circumstances surrounding the attempted personal service.
3. Substituted service effected on a person of suitable age and discretion residing
at defendant's house or residence; or on a competent person in charge of
defendant's office or regular place of business (MANOTOC VS. CA, VELASCO
JR.,J.)
INSTANCES WHEN SERVICE OF SUMMONS MAY BE MADE BY PUBLICATION
1. SERVICE UPON TH DEFENDANT WHOSE IDENTITY OR WHEREABOUTS ARE
UNKNOWN ( SEC.14, RULE 14)
2. EXRATERRITORIAL SERVICE UPON A NON-RESIDENT DEFENDANT (SEC.15, RULE
14)
3. SERVICE UPON A RESIDENT TEMPORARILY OUT OF THE PHILIPPINES (SEC 16. RULE
14)
Extra territorial service is not the exclusive mode of serving summons upon the
resident defendant temporarily out of the Philippines since the said provision uses
the word " may" .Substituted service of summons upon such defendant may be
availed of.( MONTALBAN VS. MAXIMO, 15 MARCH 1968)
Voluntary appearance.
As a general proposition, one who seeks an affirmative relief is deemed to
have submitted to the jurisdiction of the court. It is by reason of this rule that the
filing of motions to admit answer, for additional time to file answer, for
reconsideration of a default judgment, and to lift order of default with motion for
reconsideration, is considered voluntary submission to the courts jurisdiction. This,
however, is tempered by the concept of conditional appearance, such that a party
who makes a special appearance to challenge, among others, the courts
jurisdiction over his person cannot be considered to have submitted to its
authority.
(1)
(2)
(3)

Prescinding from the foregoing, it is thus clear that:

Special appearance operates as an exception to the general rule on
voluntary appearance;
Accordingly, objections to the jurisdiction of the court over the
person of the defendant must be explicitly made, i.e., set forth in
an unequivocal manner; and
Failure to do so constitutes voluntary submission to the jurisdiction
of the court, especially in instances where a pleading or motion
seeking affirmative relief is filed and submitted to the court for
resolution. (Philippine Commercial International Bank v. Spouses
Dy, 606 Phil. 615 [2009])
MOTION TO DISMISS

General Rule: The Court cannot MOTU PROPRIO dismiss a case.

Exceptions:
1. When it appears from the pleadings or the evidence on record that the court has
no jurisdiction over the subject matter or that the action is barred by res judicata or
lis pendens or prescription, the court shall dismiss the claim ( Section 1 , Rule 9)
2. In ejectment cases and in cases governed by the Rule on Summary
Procedure.
TWO DISMISSAL RULE
Unless otherwise stated in the notice, the dismissal is without prejudice, except that
a notice operates as an adjudication upon the merits when filed by a plaintiff who
has once dismissed in a competent court an action based on or including the same
claim. (Rule 17, Sec. 1)
Thus, when the same complaint had twice been dismissed by the plaintiff under
Sec.1 by simply filing a notice of dismissal, the second dismissal shall be with
prejudice.

DISTINCTION BETWEEN PRE-TRIAL IN

CIVIL CASE
Plaintiff moves ex parte to set the case
for pre trial

CRIMINAL CASE
Ordered by the court and no motion to
set the case for pre-trial is required
from either the prosecution or the
defense.

Made after the last pleading has been

served and filed.

Ordered by the court after arraignment

and within 30 days from the date the
court acquires jurisdiction over the
person of the accused.

A pre-trial brief is required

Does not require filing of pre-trial brief

but attendance only in a pre-trial
conference to consider the matters
stated in sec 2, rule18

Considers the possibility of an amicable

settlement as an important objective.

Does not include considering the

possibility of amicable settlement of
criminal liability as one of its purposes
All agreements or admissions made or
entered during the pre-trial conference
shall be reduced in writing and signed
by both the accused and counsel;
Otherwise, they cannot be used against
the accused (Sec. 3, Rule 118)

Agreements and admissions made in

the pre-trial are not required to be
signed by both the parties and their
counsels.(Sec. 7, Rule 18)

DEMURRER
EFFECT OF DISMISSAL OF DEMURRER IN THE APPELLATE COURT: The
defendant loses the right to present evidence and the appellate court shall then
proceed to render judgment on the basis of plaintiff's evidence (Republic vs. Rivera
[2007])
DEPOSITIONS
WRITTEN INTERROGATORIES TO ADVERSE PARTIES
Any party desiring to elicit material and relevant facts from any adverse parties
shall file and serve upon the latter written interrogatories to be answered by the
party served or, if the party served is a public or private corporation or a
partnership or association, by any officer thereof competent to testify in its behalf.
(Rule 25, Sec. 1)
EFFECT OF FAILURE TO SERVE WRITTEN INTERROGATORIES: A party not
served with written interrogatories may not be compelled by the adverse party to
give testimony in open court, or to give a deposition pending appeal. (Rule 25,
Section 6)
RULE 23

RULE 25

TO WHOM IT IS

Party or a witness or any

Always to parties.

SERVED:

other person for that matter

(service)

EXAMINATIONS

There is a direct, re-direct

Just one set of question to

and re-cross examinations

be answered by the other

party

TIME TO ANSWER:

No fix time to answer,

15 days from service

becasue what dictates the

thereof

period is the officer.

JUDGMENT
SEVERAL JUDGMENT
Is one rendered by a court against one or more defendants, but not against all,
leaving the action to proceed against the others (Section 4, Rule 36)

A several judgment is proper when the liability of each party is clearly separable
and distinct from that of his co-parties, such that the claims against each of them
could have been the subject of separate suits.
EXECUTION OF JUDGMENT
VARIANCE RULE: If the writ of execution varies the terms of the judgment and
exceeded them, it has no validity.
SUPERVENING EVENT: A supervening event affects or changes the substance of
the judgment and renders the execution thereof inequitable. Should such an event
occur after a judgment becomes final and executory, which event may render the
execution of the judgment impossible or unjust. A stay or preclusion of execution
may properly be sought (Dee Ping Wee vs. Lee Hiong Wee [2010]).
TWO MODES OF EXECUTION:
1. Execution by motion if the enforcement of the judgement is sought within 5 years
from the date of its entry;
2. Execution by independent action, if the 5 year period has elapsed and before it is
barred by the statute of limitations (Section 6, Rule 39)
EXCEPTIONS:
THE FIVE AND TEN YEAR PERIODS DO NOT APPLY TO THE FOLLOWING:
(1) Special Proceedings such as Land Registration and Cadastral Cases
(2 Judgments for Support which do not become dormant
REMEDIES AVAILABLE TO A THIRD PARTY:
(TRIM)
1. MOTION or application with the court for the release of the property.
2. THIRD-PARTY CLAIM or terceria under Section 16 R39.
3. An action to claim damages on the INDEMNITY BOND if one is filed.
4. A separate REIVINDICATORY action to recover possession of the property from
the officer or the purchaser at the execution sale.
APPEAL
Neypes principle does not apply to administrative cases.
It is settled that the fresh period rule in Neypes applies only to judicial appeals and not
to administrative appeals.
The fresh period rule shall apply to :
1.Rule 40 (appeals from the Municipal Trial Courts to the Regional Trial Courts);
2. Rule 41 (appeals from the Regional Trial Courts to the Court of Appeals or Supreme Court);
3.Rule 42 (appeals from the Regional Trial Courts to the Court of Appeals); Rule 43 (appeals from
quasi-judicial agencies to the Court of Appeals); and
4. Rule 45 (appeals by certiorari to the Supreme Court). Obviously, these Rules cover judicial
proceedings under the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure. (San Lorenzo Ruiz Builders & Dev. Corp.,
Inc., et al. v. Maria Cristina Banya, G.R. No. 194702, April 20, 2015)

Provisional Remedies
1. Rule 57

Grounds upon which attachment may issue.

At the commencement of the action or at any time before entry of judgment, a
plaintiff or any proper party may have the property of the adverse party attached as
security for the satisfaction of any judgment that may be recovered in the following
cases:
(a) In an action for the recovery of a specified amount of money or damages, other
than moral and exemplary, on a cause of action arising from law, contract, quasicontract, delict or quasi-delict against a party who is about to depart from the
Philippines with intent to defraud his creditors;
(b) In an action for money or property embezzled or fraudulently misapplied or
converted to his own use by a public officer, or an officer of a corporation, or an
attorney, factor, broker, agent, or clerk, in the course of his employment as such, or
by any other person in a fiduciary capacity, or for a willful violation of duty;
(c) In an action to recover the possession of property unjustly or fraudulently taken,
detained or converted, when the property, or any part thereof, has been concealed,
removed, or disposed of to prevent its being found or taken by the applicant or an
authorized person;
(d) In an action against a party who has been guilty of a fraud in contracting the
debt or incurring the obligation upon which the action is brought, or in the
performance thereof;
(e) In an action against a party who has removed or disposed of his property, or is
about to do so, with intent to defraud his creditors; or
(f) In an action against a party who does not reside and is not found in the
Philippines, or on whom summons may be served by publication. (Rule 57.
Sec.1)
NOTE: The grounds are exclusive.

Purposes of Preliminary attachment are:

(1) to seize the property of the debtor in advance of final judgment and to
hold it for purpose of satisfying said judgment, as in the grounds stated in
paragraphs (a) to (e) Section 1 Rule 57 of the Rules of Court; or
(2) to acquire jurisdiction over the action by actual or constructive seizure of
the property in those instances where personal or substituted service of
summons on the defendant cannot be effected, as in a paragraph (f) of the
same provision
(Philippine Commercial International Bank vs Alejandro, 2007)
2. In order to prevent or to stop a preliminary attachment a deposit or counterbond in Section 2 Rule 57 refers only to cash deposit hence real property
deposit is not allowed.
3. If a court grants a preliminary injunction but later on the complaint is
dismissed the preliminary injunction, status quo ante order or temporary
restraining order is immediately and automatically lifted even if there is a
pending appeal or a motion for reconsideration. Hence, if there is execution
after the lifting of a temporary restraining order, preliminary injunction or

status quo ante order such person cannot be cited in contempt even if the
court order is silent whether the status quo ante order, TRO or preliminary
injunction is lifted.

Special Civil Action

Rule 62
An Interpleader should be filed against the conflicting claimants hence a
conflicting claimant who fails to file an answer can be declared in default and
the defense of the defendant that the purpose of Interpleader is to resolve
the conflicting claims is untenable (Rule 62, Sec. 5).

Docket fees in Interpleader

Conflicting claimants shall pay the docket fees not the plaintiff in
interpleader.

Certiorari. Rule 65
Are the petitions for certiorari and prohibition applicable to Judicial Bar
Council? Yes. The remedies of certiorari and prohibition are necessarily
broader in scope and reach. Under Rule 65, Sec 1(par 1), the writ of certiorari
or prohibition may be issued to correct errors of jurisdiction committed not
only by a tribunal, corporation, board or officer exercising judicial, quasijudicial or ministerial functions but also to set right, undo and restrain any act
of grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction by any
branch or instrumentality of the Government, even if the latter does not
exercise judicial, quasi-judicial or ministerial functions. Consequently,
petitions for certiorari and prohibition are appropriate remedies to raise
constitutional issues and to review and/or prohibit or nullify the acts of
legislative and executive officials.
Here, the JBC indeed does not fall within the scope of a tribunal, board, or
officer exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions. In the process of
selecting and screening applicants, the JBC neither acted in any judicial or
quasi-judicial capacity nor assumed unto itself any performance of judicial or
quasi-judicial prerogative. However, since the formulation of guidelines and
criteria is necessary and incidental to the exercise of the JBCs constitutional
mandate, a determination must be made on whether the JBC has acted with
grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction in

issuing and enforcing the said policy. Also, the case involves one of
transcendental importance which is the appointment of justice in the bench.
Note: Only the SC can do this not the RTC or CA.

Judgment Declaring presumptive death

The nature of the order is immediately final and executory.
Remedy: File a special civil action for certiorari (Rule 65)

Rule 69
An action for Partition is imprescriptible. For instance, co-owner A filed an
action for partition against co-owner B and C but was dismissed for failure to
prosecute, which has an effect of dismissal with prejudice under res judicata.
Subsequently co-owner C, filed an action for quieting of title for the same
property against B and A. A filed a compulsory counterclaim for partition but
C countered that As former action for partition was dismissed with prejudice
and such dismissal is adjudication on the merits. Is C correct?
No. An action for partition is imprescriptible (Art. 494 Civil Code) ergo; even if
the first action for partition was dismissed pursuant to Sec 3 Rule 17 the coowners can bring another action even a counter-claim for partition because
the action for partition is imprescriptible. Art 494 of the civil code, a
substantive law, prevails over a procedural rule under Sec 3 Rule 17.

Summary procedure does not apply on special proceedings hence rules on

summary procedures do not apply on a petition for issuance of Writ of
Amparo.
May a son avail of mandamus to compel a mother to produce a holographic
will for probate? No. Mandamus is an extra-ordinary remedy available only if
there is no appeal or there is no other plain, speedy, or adequate remedy in
the ordinary course of law. In this case there is an adequate remedy which is
to file a petition for a probate of will under Rule 76 and then too avail the
provision Sec 2 to 5 of Rule 75 in order to compel the mother to produce the
mother to produce the will. Under Sec 2 to 5, the custodial of the will may
be compelled to produce the will on pain of imprisonment.
Requirements for the enforcement of a levy on attachment:
No levy of attachment shall be enforced unless it is preceded or
contemporaneously accomplished by service of summons together with
(CABAWO) a copy of the complaint, the application for attachment, the
applicants affidavit and bond, and the order and writ of attachment, on the
defendant within the Philippines.

Direct contempt vs. Indirect Contempt

Direct Contempt

Indirect Contempt

As to nature

Misbehavior in the presence of or so One which is not committed in the

near a court as to obstruct or presence of the court. It is an act
interrupt the court proceeding.
done at a distance which tends to
belittle,
degrade,
obstruct
or
embarrass the court and justice.
As to punishment
Fine not exceeding Php 2,000 or
imprisonment not exceeding 10 days or
both, if it be RTC or court of equivalent or
higher rank.

Fine not exceeding Php 30,000 or

imprisonment not exceeding 6 months or
both, in RTC or a court of equivalent or
higher rank.

Fine
not
exceeding
Php200
or
imprisonment not exceeding 1 day or
both, if it be MTC.

Fine not exceeding Php 5,000 or

imprisonment not exceeding 1 month or
both, in MTC.

Requirement of charge and hearing

Not required. A person may be
summarily adjudged in contempt and
punished by the court.

There must be a charge in writing filed,

an opportunity given to the respondent
to comment, thereon within such period
as may be fixed by the court and to be
heard by himself or counsel

Right to appeal by a person adjudged guilty

A person adjudged of direct contempt
may not appeal therefrom, but may avail
of the remedies of certiorari or
prohibition. The execution of the
judgment shall be suspended pending
resolution of such petition, provided such
person files a bond fixed by the court
which rendered the judgment and
conditioned that he will abide by and
perform the judgment should the petition
be decided against him (Rule 71 Sec 2)

Yes, the judgment of a court in a case of

indirect contempt may be appealed to
the proper court as in criminal cases. It
appears that in judgment of the MTC or
RTC, where a motion for reconsideration
has been filed and denied, the movantrespondent would have only the balance
within which to appeal.

The Neypes rule or fresh period rule shall apply to:

(1)Rule 40 (appeals from the Municipal Trial Courts to the Regional Trial
Courts);
(2)41 (appeals from the Regional Trial Courts to the Court of Appeals or
Supreme Court);
(3)Rule 42 (appeals from the Regional Trial Courts to the Court of Appeals);
(4) Rule 43 (appeals from quasi-judicial agencies to the Court of Appeals);
and
(5) Rule 45 (appeals by certiorari to the Supreme Court).
These Rules cover judicial proceedings under the 1997 Rules of Civil
Procedure
Except: Administrative proceedings and Rule 64 (Review of Judgments and
Final Orders or Resolutions of the Commission on Elections and the
Commission on Audit)

Quo Warranto (Rule 66)

Basis
is
that
occupant
is
disqualified from holding office by reason of
ineligibility
or
disloyalty.
If successful, respondent is ousted but
petitioner shall not automatically assume the
office vacated.
This rule presupposes that the respondent is
already holding office.
Petition must be filed by a person entitled to
the office.

Quo Warranto or Election Protest (Omnibus

Election Code)
Challenge rights of a person to hold office on
the ground of irregularities in the conduct of
election

Successful protestant will assume office if he

had obtained plurality of valid votes.
Must be filed within 10 days from the
proclamation of the candidate.
Petition must be filed by any registered
candidate. (Regalado)