RULE 111
Where Offended Party waives the right to recover damages
SECTION 1- Institution of criminal and civil actions
Basis for the rule- Revised Penal Code is the primary governing law on the
recovery of civil liability arising from the commission of offense.
Specifically, Art. 100- every person criminally liable for a felony is also
civilly liable.
Civil liability may consist of restitution, reparation of damage,
indemnification of consequential damages.
So, when a complaint is filed, EVEN WITHOUT ALLEGATIONS OF
DAMAGES AND INTENTION TO PROVE AND CLAIM THEM, it is understood
that the offended party has the right to prove and claim them unless a
waiver or reservation is made.
CIVIL ACTION DEEMED INSTITUTED WITH CRIMINAL ACTION
Deemed and Impliedly has no substantial distinction.
When a criminal action is instituted, the civil liability arising from the
offense is impliedly instituted. For it is well settled that civil liability of the
accused must be determined in the criminal action.
BASIS: DUAL NATURE OF A CRIME. An offense causes two classes of
injuries- 1. SOCIAL INJURY- produced by the criminal act which is sought
to be repaired by the imposition of corresponding penalty and PERSONAL
INJURY- caused to the victim of the crime which injury is sought to be
compensated through indemnity which is civil in nature.
It means that the civil action may be tried and prosecuted with all the
ancillary processes provided by law.
Exceptions:
1.
His renunciation operates to divorce the civil aspect from the
criminal and forefends future litigation thereon.
2. When Offended Party reserves his right to a separate civil action
3. Where the aggrieved party by the commission of the act
complained of as an offense actually exercised the right to
maintain a private suit against the offender by instituting a civil
action against him prior to the filing of the criminal case.
DETERMINATION OF CIVIL LIABILITY
General Rule: When no civil action has been instituted by a
person injured or offended by the act or neglect of another prior
to the institution of the criminal proceedings against the latter,
and after the institution of criminal proceedings, the offended
party fails to reserve his right to maintain a civil action, that right
is merged or absorbed in the criminal action.
If there is no waiver or reservation, evidence should be allowed
to establish the extent of injuries suffered.
In Reyes vs Sempio-Dy, mere appearance of private counsel in
representation of the offended part did not constitute such active
intervention as could only import an intention to press a claim for
damages in the action.
The right to file a separate civil action is not foreclosed by the fact
that the accused entered a plea of guilty and private prosecutor
was not afforded a chance to present evidence or make
reservation.
COVERAGE OF THE RULE
SECTION 1 applies only when the offended party in the civil case
is the same offended party in the criminal case and both cases
arise from the same offense or transaction.
It is important to note that the civil liability covered under this
rule pertains only to the civil liability suffered by the offended
party and not the civil liability to reimburse the accused as a
result of his acquittal in the criminal case for they are in the
nature of a counterclaim put up for his defense.
His remedy is to file for a separate cause of action for a baseless
suit against him.
This is pursuant to the rule that no counterclaim, cross-claim or
third-party complaint may be filed by the accused in a criminal
case.
INDEMNITY, NOT PART OF PENALTY
US vs Heery- Civil liability is not part of the penalty for the crime
committed. (Ramos vs Gonong)
AGGRIEVED PARTY MAY PRESENT EVIDENCE EVEN AFTER
ACCUSED PLEAD GUILTY
It is error on the part of the judge not to allow the offended party
to prove the civil liability of the accused who had pleaded guilty
on the theory that it can be filed in a separate action. Take note,
unless there is waiver or reservation, civil liability arising from
offense is deemed instituted with the criminal action.
APPEAL BY THE OFFENDED PARTY
PP vs Maceda- The offended party may, as of right, intervene in
the criminal action when, from the nature of the offense, he is
entitled to indemnity and his action is not waived or expressly
reserved. This is subject to Rule 106 Section 4 that all criminal
actions shall be prosecuted under the control and direction the
fiscal.
Thus, if criminal action is dismissed upon motion of the fiscal, on
the ground of insufficieny of evidence, the offended party
CANNOT APPEAL because the fiscal has the control and direction.
The court has granted the right to appeal upon a question of law
which presupposes the existence of a rightful claim to civil
indemnity nad the offended party may therefore rightly intervene
by interposing an appeal.
The right to intervene and appeal by the offended party is
protected in the same manner as the right of the accused to his
defense. SO, if the accused has within 15 days to appeal from the
judgement, the offended party should have the right within the
same period to appeal from a judgement prejudicial to him.
The offended party may appeal the civil aspect of the case
despite the acquittal of the accused and on this score, there can
be no double jeopardy because accused was not charged anew
with another offense identical to the one for which he was
acquitted (Bernardo vs CA)
WAIVER OF CIVIL ACTION
The right to recover is personal to the offended party hence, it
can be waived.
If civil action arising from crime is waived, the offended party may
still pursue a civil action sourced from culpa aquillana.
Note: it is only for civil liability arising from the offense charged.
WAIVER AND RESERVATION TO FILE SEPARATE ACTION
To waive is to abandon voluntarily the right that may exercise or
enforce.
To reserve is to save for some future time,
Thus, in a case filed by the fiscal at the instance of Chief of Police
to which accused pleaded guilty but declared himself insolvent,
the offended party did not lose the chance to claim in a separate
civil action, damages the reason being the offended party was not
the author of the criminal action.
If the offended party himself filed the complaint without making
declaration as to his civil claim, it is permissible to deduce that he
has waived the right to file a separate civil action.
Where the offended party has already reserved the right to
institute a separate civil proceeding, the dismissal of the criminal
case does not affect the right of the party to institute or continue
the civil proceeding.
RESERVATION, WHEN MADE
The reservation of the right to file the separate civil action shall
be made before the prosecution starts to present evidence and
under circumstances affording offended party a reasonable
opportunity to make such reservation.
Default on his part to make the choice manifest within the time
allotted to him, forfeits that right.
Except if the party, owing to an understandable lack of
opportunity to make the required reservation, fails to do so.
San Jose vs del Mundo- arraignment, accused plead guilty. When
judgment was executed, he declared himself insolvent.
SC said that the aggrieved party did not lose its right to claim
damages in a separate action the reason being he is not the
author of the criminal action.
PARTY AUTHORIZED TO MAKE THE RESERVATION
No one except the offended party. The court cannot reserve that
right for him.
INSTANCES WHERE PARTY IS NOT ALLOWED TO MAKE
RESERVATIONS
. Violations of BP 22
RA 8249 amending PD 1606- In these cases, civil action is deemed
instituted with criminal action.
EFFECT OF INSTITUTION OF SEPARATE CIVIL ACTION
Civil liability of the accused has ceased to be involved in the
criminal action. So, an offended party loses his right to intervene
in the prosecution of the criminal case when he waives, reserves
his right or has instituted a separate civil action. In these
instances, his interest in the criminal case has disappeared.
PRIOR INSTITUTION OF CRIMINAL ACTION, NOT NECESSARY
A separate civil action may be instituted and prosecuted to final
judgement without waiting for the institution and termination of
the criminal action. (Rillion vs Rillion)
When a separate civil action is instituted to demand civil liability
arising from an offense, and during the pendency of the case, no
criminal action is instituted, a preponderance of evidence is
sufficient to prove the act complained of.
DOUBLE RECOVERY NOT ALLOWED
The offended partys entitlement to recovery of damages in
always proscribed by the rule that he may not recover twice for
the same act or omission by the accused.
So, if recovery is had in a separate civil case, the fact bars forever
recovery in all other actions, criminal or otherwise.
If the same act or m=omission created two kinds of liability: delict
and quasi delict, either of the two may be enforced against the
culprit, subject to caveat under article 2177 that offended party
cannot recover under both types of liability.
The invocation of remedy is not an election which will bar the
other, unless the suit upon the remedy first invoked shall reach
the final stage of adjudication or unless by invocation of the first
remedy sough to be enforced, the plaintiff has gained advantage
or caused detriment to the other.
SECTION 2- When separate civil action is suspended
SUSPENSION OF CIVIL ACTION
Although the civil action may be brought before the criminal action
for the said felony is instituted, in cases where the criminal action is
instituted, the civil action shall be suspended pending final judgement
in the criminal action.
The criminal action takes precedence over the civil and the civil case
is suspended in whatever stage it may be found to await the result of
the criminal case.
But, the trial court is not deprived of authority to issue preliminary
and auxiliary writs, attachment, fixing amount of bonds and other
processes which do not go into the merits of the case.
PRIMACY OF CRIMINAL ACTION, EXCEPTIONS
General Rule: Where both criminal and civil actions arising from the
same facts are filed in different courts, the criminal case takes
precedence and civil case Is suspended in whatever stage it may be
found.
Exceptions:
1. In cases of independent civil actions based upon art 32, 33, 34 and
2176 of the Civil code
2. In cases where civil action presents a prejudicial question (Section
6, Rule III)
3. In cases where civil action is consolidated with criminal action
4. Where civil action is not intended to enforce liability arising from
the offense.ex. legal separation based on concubinage
CONSOLIDATION OF CRIMINAL AND CIVIL CASES
Before judgement on the merit is rendered in the civil action, the same
may, upon motion of offended party, be consolidated with the criminal
action in the court where it is tried to avoid higher incidence of multiple
suits and to afford the offended party the opportunity to have the civil
action disposed of with greater dispatch.
The consolidation of the cases must be effected in the criminal court.
Once consolidated, the tribunal is invested with authority to award the
proper amount of damages to the offended party even if such amount
would exceed its civil jurisdiction.
CONSOLIDATION OF THE CASE, NOT MANDATORY
It is not a ministerial duty of the court to grant the consolidation if such
would result to delay in the disposition of the criminal case and work
against the right of the accused to speedy trial.
REPRODUCTION OF EVIDENCE
In cases where consolidation is granted the evidence presented and
admitted in the civil action, shall be deemed automatically reproduced in
the criminal action, without prejudice to the right of the prosecution to
cross examine the witnesses presented by the offended party in the
criminal case.
The consolidate criminal and civil action shall be tried jointly.
EFFECT OF EXTINCTION OF PENAL ACTION
The acquittal of the defendant in the criminal offense is no bar to the
prosecution of the civil action.
RULE: The civil action based on a delict shall be deemed extinguished if
there is a finding in the final judgement that the act or omission from
which the civil liability arise did not exist.
EXCEPTION: A judgement which do not contain any declaration that the
act from which the civil liability might arise did not exist, but found that
his responsibility is civil rather than criminal do not extinguish civil
liability.
Civil liability is not extinguished where the acquittal is based on
reasonable doubt as only preponderance of evidence is required in civil
cases.
The acquittal is not a bar to civil action even by the State.
Acquittal in the criminal prosecution does not constitute evidence of
innocence in a subsequent civil action based upon the criminal act.
In PP vs Bayotas- Upon the death of the accused pending appeal of his
conviction, the criminal action is extinguished inasmuch as there is no
longer a defendant to stand as the accused. The civil action, instituted
therein fot the recovery of civil liability arising is ipso facto extinguished
grounded as it is on the criminal ction.
AWARD OF CIVIL DAMAGES IN CASE OF ACQUITTAL
Under the three instances where civil liability is not extinhguished after
acquittal, the institution os a separate civil action is not precluded under
all those circumstances. A separate civil action may be warranted where EMPLOYER IS A PARTY TO CRIMINAL CASE
there is additional facts have to be established.
It is his concern, as well as of his employee, to see to it that his interest is
ENFORCEMENT OF SUBSIDIARY CIVIL LIABILITY protected In the criminal case by taking a virtual participation in the
defense of his employee. He cannot leave him on his own fate because
An employer maybe held subsidiary liable for the employees civil liability
his failure is also his.
in a criminal action when:
The employer cannot be said to have been deprived of his day in court
1. The employer is engaged in any kind of industry
because the situation is not one wherein the employer is sued for a
2. The employee committed the offense in the discharge of his
primary liability but one which enforcement is sought is subsidiary civil
duties
liability.
3. He is insolvent and has not satisfied his civil liability

The subsidiary liability of the employer, however, arises only after

conviction of the employee in a criminal case. SECTION III When Civil Action may proceed independently

To allow the employer to dispute the civil liability fixed in the criminal CONCEPT ON INDEPENDENT CIVIL ACTIONS
case would be to amend, nullify or defeat a final judgement rendered by
The result of the criminal case, whether acquittal or conviction would be
a competent court.
entirely irrelevant to the civil action.
Subsidiary Liability may be enforced in the same criminal case by filing a
INDEPENDENT CIVIL ACTION WHEN ALLOWED
motion for executin against the person subsidiary liable.
Article 32, 33, 34 and 2176 cases may be brought by the offended party
There must be a hearing for the enforcement of the civil liability wherein
during the pendency of the criminal case. Such may proceed
the ff must be proved:
independently and requires only preponderance of evidence.
a. Existence of employer-employee relationship
RESERVATION NOT NECESSARY
b. Employer is engaged in some kind of industry
c. Employee is adjudged guilty of the wrongful act in the discharge The independent civil actions based on the aforementioned articles are
of his duties the exceptions to the primacy of criminal actions over civil actions.
d. Employee is insolvent
In the doctrine of San Ildefonso Lines vs CA- there is no need to make a
reservation for the above instances.
Thus, the offended party may file two separate suits for the same act or SECTION 4- Effect of Death on Civil Actions
omission. One where civil action arising ex delicto is deemend instituted
Death of the accused after arraignment and during the pendency of the
and another for a civil case for quasi delict. The only limitation is that the
criminal action shall extinguish civil liability arising from the delict.
offended party cannot recover damages from both.
It should be noted however, that in Art. 89 of RPC, the death of the
INDEPENDENT CIVIL ACTION BASED IPON Defamation, FRAUD and
accused extinguished his criminal and civil liabilities. As also applied in the
PHYSICAL INJURIES
case of PP vs Bayotas.
A civil action entirely separate from the criminal action may be brought
Independent civil action, however, under Rule 111 sec 3 may be
by the injured party even without reservation.
continued against the estate or legal representative of the accsued after
Such shall proceed independently and require only preponderance of proper substitution.
evidence.
DEATH BEFORE ARRAIGNMENT
MEANING OF DEFAMATION, FRAUD and PHYSICAL INJURIES
Case shall be dismissed without prejudice to any civil action of the
Physicial Injuries refer to bodily injury not the crime described in the ROC. offended party against the estate of the deceased.

Is criminal negligence within the purview of Art 33? SEC 5- JUDGEMENT IN CIVIL ACTION NOT A BAR

It is not one of the three crimes mentioned in Art 33 and although
Physical injuries is said to include homicide, the charge against Paje (in
Corpus vs Paje) is reckless imprudence resulting to homicide not homicide
or physical injuries. Therefore, thre is no ondependent civil action for the
damages.
A final judgement rendered in the civil action absolving defendant from
the civil liability is no bar to criminal action against him for the same act
or omission.

In Bonita vs Zosa- the Supreme Court held that Article 33 assuemes a

defamation, fraud or physical injuries INTENTIONALLY COMMITTED not
negligence or imprudence.
SECTION 6 SUSPENSION BY REASON OF PREJUDICIAL QUESTION
The rule that the civil action shall be suspended until final judgement is
rendered in the criminal case does not apply when the civil action is a
prejudicial question.
However, the issue involved in the civil case must be determinative of the
guilt or innocence of the accused.
There mere fact that there are actions to annul the marriage entered into
by the accused in the bigamy case does not mean that prejudicial
questions are automatically raised to warrant the suspension of the
criminal case.
2. That the resolution of such determines whether or not the
criminal action may proceed.
RATIONALE OF PREJUDICIAL QUESTION: to avoid conflicting decisions.
In tuanda vs SB: Prejudicial question comes into play in a situation where
a civil action a nd a criminal action are both present and there exists in
the former an issue which must be preemptively resolved before the
criminal action may proceed because the issue in the civil action would be
determinative juris et de jure of the guilt or innocence of the accused in
the criminal case.
NATURE OF PREJUDICIAL QUESTION

In order that the case of marriage be prejudicial to a charge of bigamy, it
must be shown that the accuseds consent to such marriage must be the
one that was obtained by means of duress, force or intimidation to show
that his act in the second marriage must be involuntary and cannot be the
basis of his conviction for bigamy.
The civil case must involve the same facts as upon which criminal
prosecution is based and determinative of the outcome of the criminal
case.

TIME TO PLEAD PREJUDICIAL QUESTION

The rule authorizes suspension of friminal proceedings even during the

period if preliminary investigation by the prosecutor.

When criminal action has been filed in court either for PI or trial, the
petition to suspend shall be filed in the same criminal action AT ANY TIME
BEFORE THE PROSECUTION RESTS.

SEC 7: Elements of Prejudicial Question

Prejudicial question: two elements must concur:

1. That the civil action involves an issue similar or intimately related

to the issue raised in the criminal action