Today's Topics & Notes (1st Assignment)

(February 10, 2020)

The Law on Jurisdiction

Of RTC and MTC

Jurisdiction - it is the power and authority of the court to hear (Rule 30), try and decide a case (Rule 36) brought
before it for resolution, and to implement its decision (Rule 39) rendered thereon. It is vested in the court and not in
the judge.

Jurisdiction is conferred by law and determined by the allegations in the complaint.

 Error of Jurisdiction – Certiorari under Rule 65 - within 60 days
 Error of Judgment – Ordinary Appeal under Rule 45 - within 15 days
 An error of judgment is one which the court may commit in the exercise of its jurisdiction. Such an error does
not deprive the court of jurisdiction and is correctible only by appeal; whereas an error of jurisdiction is one
which the court acts without or in excess of its jurisdiction. Such an error renders an order or judgment void or
voidable and is correctible by the special civil action of certiorari.

 Distinctions between Questions of Law and Fact (Asked in the 2004 Bar Exam)
 A question of law exists when the doubt or controversy concerns the correct application of law or
jurisprudence to a certain set of facts; or when the issue does not call for an examination of the probative
value of the evidence presented, the truth or falsehood of facts being admitted.
 A question of fact exists when the doubt or query invites calibration of the whole evidence considering
mainly the credibility of the witnesses, the existence and relevancy of specific surrounding circumstances, as
well as their relation to each other and to the whole, and the probability of the situation.

Jurisdictions of the following Courts:

I. First Level Courts (MTC, MCTC, MeTC, MTCC):

A. Ordinary Civil Actions:

1. Over civil actions and probate proceedings, testate and intestate, including grant of provisional remedies
in proper cases, where the value of the personal property, estate or amount of the demand does not exceed
₱300k OMM or ₱400k in MM exclusive of interest, damages, of whatever kind, attorney’s fees,
litigation expenses and costs, the amount of which must be specifically alleged. Provided, that interest,
damages of whatever kind, attorney’s fees, litigation expenses, and costs shall be included in the
determination of the filing fees. Provided further that where there are several claims or causes of actions
between the same or different parties, embodied in the same complaint, the amount of demand shall be
the totality of the claims in all the causes of action, irrespective of whether the cause of action arose out of
same or different transactions;
2. In all civil actions involving title to or possession of property or any interest therein where assessed value
of property or interest therein does not exceed ₱20k OMM or does not exceed ₱50k in MM exclusive of
interest, damages of whatever kind, AF, litigation expenses, costs. Provided that in cases of land not
declared for taxation purposes, the value of such property shall be determined by assessed value of
adjacent lots;
3. Civil cases where the demand does not exceed ₱300k or not more than ₱400k MM
4. Over actions involving personal property valued at not more than ₱300k OMM or not more than ₱400k in
MM
5. Admiralty and maritime cases where the demand or claim does not exceed ₱300k OMM or does not
exceed ₱400k in MM

B. Summary Procedure: (No format trial)

1
 1. All cases of Forcible Entry and Unlawful Detainer, irrespective of the amount of damages or unpaid
rentals sought to be recovered. Where AF are awarded, the same shall not exceed ₱20k (Rule 70)
2. All other civil cases, except probate proceedings, where the total amount of the plaintiff’s claim does not
exceed ₱100k OMM or ₱200k MM exclusive of interests and costs (as amended by M 2-11-9-SC)
3. Civil cases not higher than ₱200k Subject to the Rule on Small Claims, as amended (please see below)

C. Small Claims:

1. Civil claims which are exclusively for the payment or reimbursement of a sum of money not exceeding
P400,000.00 in MeTC or P300,000.00 in MTC, MTCC and MCTC.

II. Second Level Court (RTC)

A. Exclusive Original jurisdiction over the following cases:

1. In all actions in which the subject of litigation is incapable of pecuniary estimation (Actions which cannot be
quantified into monetary estimation subject matter; primarily other than recovery of sum of money and where
the money claim is merely incidental to, or a consequence of, the principal relief sought (BP129)
Examples of IPE:
a. Action for rescission of contract
b. Action for specific performance
c. Petition for declaratory relief
d. Action for reformation of instrument
e. Action for consolidation of ownership
f. Action for expropriation
g. Action for support
h. Injunction
i. Partition of real and personal property
j. Custody; and
k. Foreclosure of mortgage
2. In all civil actions which involve title to or possession of real property or any interest therein, where assessed
value (tax dec or affidavit of plaintiff) of property involved exceeds ₱20k OMM or in MM, value of property
involved exceeds ₱50k except actions of FE and UD of lands and buildings, original jurisdiction of which is
conferred with MTC, MeTC, MCTC.
Partition of real property, quieting of title, foreclosure proceedings, interpleader involving real property in
MM: Manila, Quezon City, Makati City, Pasig City, Taguig City, Mandaluyong City, Pasay City, Paranaque
City, Muntinlupa City, Marikina City, San Juan City, Valenzuela City, Las Pinas City, Caloocan City,
Malabon, Navotas, and Pateros
3. In all actions in admiralty and maritime cases where the demand or claim exceeds ₱300k OMM or exceeds
₱400k in MM.
4. In all matters of probate, both testate or intestate, where gross value of estate exceeds ₱300k OMM or
exceeds ₱400k in MM
• Gross value- assessed value of property of deceased before deduction (NOT market value) [appeal by
record on appeal]
5. In all actions involving the contract of marriage and marital relations. (RTC acting as Family Courts)
6. In all cases not within the exclusive jurisdiction of any court, tribunal, person or body exercising judicial or
quasi-judicial functions
7. In all civil actions and special proceedings falling within the exclusive original jurisdiction of a Juvenile and
Domestic Relations Court and of the Court of Agrarian Relations as now provided by law (DARAB,
PARAB)
8. In 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 property in controversy exceeds ₱300k OMM or exceeds ₱400k
in MM (for payment of docket fees, it must be considered)
• Damages of whatever kind are damages that are merely incidental to or in consequence of the main action
• Test of jurisdiction is the capital claim (principal cause of action)
Totality rule R2 S5

2
 Jurisdictional Amounts

I. Civil Actions for sum of money and/or probate proceedings

(Based on the amount of demand or claim, and/or gross value of the estate)

MeTC/MTC/MCTC Regional Trial Courts (RTC)

Outside Metro Manila Metro Manila Outside Metro Manila Metro Manila

Not exceeding Not exceeding Exceeding Exceeding

₱300,000.00 ₱400,000.00 ₱300,00.00 ₱400,000.00

II. Civil Actions involving title to, or possession of real property, or any interest therein
(Based on the assessed value [BIR zonal value] of the real property)

MeTC/MTC/MCTC Regional Trial Courts (RTC)

Outside Metro Manila Metro Manila Outside Metro Manila Metro Manila

Not exceeding Not exceeding Exceeding Exceeding

₱20,000.00 ₱50,000.00 ₱20,00.00 ₱50,000.00

Amounts of Coverage

I. Rules of Procedure for Small Claims Cases (OCA Circular No. 45-2019)
(Based on the value of the claim)

First Level Courts

MTCCs/MTCs/MCTCs MeTCs
Not exceeding Not exceeding
₱300,000.00 ₱400,000.00

II. Revised Rule on Summary Procedure

(Based on the total amount of the plaintiff’s claim)
A. Civil Cases: (Under the jurisdiction of all 1st level courts)
(1) All cases of forcible entry and unlawful detainer, irrespective of the amount of damages or unpaid
rentals sought to be recovered. Where attorney's fees are awarded, the same shall not exceed
twenty thousand pesos (₱20,000.00).
(2) All other civil cases, except probate proceedings, where the total amount of the plaintiff's claim
does not exceed ten thousand pesos (₱10,000.00), exclusive of interest and costs.
=================================================

I. Jurisdictions of Regional Trial Court (RTC)

a) Original Jurisdiction (Sec. 21, B.P. 129)

1) Q: What are the cases falling under the original jurisdiction of the Regional Trial Court?
Ans: The Regional Trial Court shall exercise original jurisdiction over the following cases, to wit:
(a) Actions involving ambassadors, public ministers and consuls;

3
 (b) Over petition for certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo warranto, habeas corpus; (Sec. 21, B.P. 129)

2) Q: What are the other cases falling under the original jurisdiction of the Regional Trial Court under
existing rules:
Ans: a) Actions for annulment of judgment of the Municipal Trial Court (Sec. 10, Rule 47)
b) Petitions for writ of Amparo (A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC);
c) Petition for habeas data (A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC);
d) Petition writ of continuing mandamus. (Sec. 2, Rule 8, Part III of Rules of Procedure in
Environmental Cases, A.M. No. 09-6-8-SC)

b) Exclusive Original Jurisdiction (Sec. 19, B.P. 129)

1) Q: Give at least five (5) examples of cases falling within the exclusive original jurisdiction of the Regional
Trial Court in civil cases? (2016 Bar Exam)
Ans: Regional Trial Court has exclusive original jurisdiction over the following cases subject matter is
incapable of pecuniary estimation pursuant to Sec. 19 (a) of B.P. 129:
1. Action for specific performance;
2. Action for rescission of contract;
3. Action for injunction;
4. Action for declaratory relief;
5. Action for reformation of instrument;
6. Action for consolidation of ownership;
7. Action for expropriation;
8. Action for support.

2) Q: In case of an action for the revival of judgment, which court has jurisdiction?
Ans: As an action to revive judgment raises issues of whether the petitioner has a right to have the final and
executory judgment revived and to have the judgment enforced and does not involve recovery of a sum of
money, we rule that jurisdiction over a petition to revive judgment is properly with the RTCs. Thus, the CA
is correct in holding that it does not have jurisdiction to hear and decide Anama’s action for revival of
judgment. (Douglas F. Anama, vs. CITIBANK, N.A. (formerly First National City Bank), G.R. No. 192048,
December 2017)

 Actions involving title to, possession, or interest over a real property

- Assess value exceeding ₱20 thousand outside Metro Manila or ₱50 thousand within Metro Manila.

1) Q: Which court has jurisdiction over the action?

Ans: Regional Trial Court or Metropolitan/Municipal Trial Court has exclusive original jurisdiction over
actions involving title to, possession, or any interest over a real property based on its assessed value pursuant
to Sec. 19 (b) of B.P. 129, as amended by R.A.7691:
1. Accion Publiciana - RTC/MTC depending on the assess value; - (Action to recover possession [UD or
FE])
2. Interpleader over real property - depending on the assess value;
3. Quieting of title - RTC/MTC depending on the assess value;
4. Action for foreclosure proceeding - RTC/MTC depending on the assess value;
5. Action for partition over real property- RTC/MTC depending on assess value;
6. Action reinvindicatoria- RTC/MTC depending on the assess value. – (Action to recover ownership/title)
Basis of the Answer: Sec. 19 (2), B. P. 129, as amended by R.A. 7691

 Probate proceeding-testate or intestate

- Testate or intestate proceeding where the gross value of the estate exceeds Three hundred thousand pesos
(₱300,000.00) or, in probate matters in Metro Manila, where such gross value exceeds Four hundred
thousand pesos (₱400,000.00). [Sec. 19 (4), B.P.129, as amended by R.A. 7691]

4
 Regional Trial Court Acting as a Special Commercial Court:
1) Intra-corporate dispute falls under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Regional Trial Court.
In intra-corporate dispute involving a corporation under sequestration of the Presidential Commission on
Good Government (PCGG) falls under the jurisdiction of the Regional Trial Court (RTC), not the
Sandiganbayan. (Philippine Overseas Telecommunications Corp. and Philcomsat vs. Victor Africa, G.R. No.
184622, July 3, 2013, Bersamin) [Sec. 5.2 of R.A 8799 or the Securities Regulation Code]

a.1) Take Note: The rule providing that a petition for review under Rule 43 of the Rules of Court is the
proper mode of appeal in intra-corporate controversies, as embodied in A. M. No. 04-9-07-SC, has been in
effect since October 15, 2004. (Philippine Overseas Telecommunications Corp. and Philcomsat vs. Victor
Africa, G.R. No. 184622, July 3, 2013, Bersamin) [A. M. No. 04-9-07-SC 2]

2) Action for violation of Intellectual Property Code i.e. Copyright, Unfair Competition, Patent, etc.

Regional Trial Court has exclusive original jurisdiction over action for violation of Intellectual Property
Code.

Take Note: In case of adverse decision of the RTC the remedy of the aggrieved party is to file a petition for
review under Rule 43 since it absorbs the jurisdiction of the Intellectual Property Office exercising quasi-
judicial functions. [Special Rules on Intellectual Property Rights Cases]

 Regional Trial Court Acting as Land Registration Court:

1) Q: Which court has jurisdiction over judicial reconstitution of Torrens Title?
Ans: A petition for the judicial reconstitution of a Torrens title falls under the exclusive original jurisdiction
of the Regional Trial Court and must strictly comply with the requirements prescribed in Republic Act No.
26; otherwise, the petition should be dismissed. (Saint Mary Crusade to Alleviate Poverty of Brethen
Foundation Inc. vs. Hon. Teodoro Riel, G.R. No. 176508, January 12, 2015, Bersamin)

 Regional Trial Court Acting as an Agrarian Court

1) Q: Which court has jurisdiction over determination of just compensation over agricultural lots?
Ans: A branch of an RTC designated as a Special Agrarian Court for a province has the original and
exclusive jurisdiction over all petitions for the determination of just compensation in that province. In
Republic v. Court of Appeals, the Supreme Court ruled that Special Agrarian Courts have original and
exclusive jurisdiction over two categories of cases: (1) all petitions for the determination of just
compensation to landowners, and (2) the prosecution of all criminal offenses under R.A. 6657. (Land Bank of
the Philippines vs. Corazon M. Villegas, G.R. No. 180384, March 26, 2010)

 Action for recovery of personal properties where the value exceeds ₱300 thousand outside Metro Manila
or ₱400 thousand within Metro Manila
1) Q: Which court has jurisdiction?
Ans: Regional Trial Court or Metropolitan/Municipal Trial Court has exclusive original jurisdiction over
actions recovery of personal property based on its value pursuant to Sec. 19 B.P. 129, as amended by
R.A.7691:
1. Action for Replevin- RTC or MTC depending on the value of the personal property to be recovered;
2. Action for partition of personal property- RTC or MTC depending on the value of the personal properties;
3. Action for Interpleader over personal properties – depending on the value of the personal properties.

 Action for claim for money, exclusive of damages, interest, attorney’s fees and cost of litigation where the
amount of the claim exceeds ₱300 thousand outside Metro Manila or ₱400 thousand within Metro Manila
1) Q: Which court has jurisdiction?

5
 Ans: Regional Trial Court or Metropolitan/Municipal Trial Court has exclusive original jurisdiction over
actions recovery of personal property based on its value pursuant to Sec. 19 B.P. 129, as amended by
R.A.7691:

Take Note: Apply the totality rule or add all the main claims EXCLUDE damages, interest, attorney’s fees
and cost of litigation expenses.

Example: Action for a sum of money ₱300,000. + ₱200,000.00 + damages of ₱200,000.00 + interest of
100,000.00 + attorney’s fees of ₱50,000.00. Which court has jurisdiction.
Ans: RTC since the total amount of the main claims exceeds ₱300,000.00/₱400,000.00 excluding damages,
interest, or attorney’s fees in accordance with the provision of Sec. 19 (8) of B.P. 129, as amended by R.A.
7691.

2) Q: Which court has jurisdiction over action for breach of contract and damages intended to recover
damages?
Ans: Action for breach of contract and damages when the subject matter is for the recovery of the amount
paid as a form of damages is one falling under the jurisdiction of RTC or MTC depending on value of the
claim pursuant to Sec. 19 of B.P. 129 as amended by R.A. 7691 which is ₱300 thousand outside of Metro
Manila or ₱400 thousand within Metro Manila. Considering that the amount of the claim exceeds ₱400
thousand, therefore, it falls within the exclusive original jurisdiction of the Regional Trial Court. (Spouses
Romeo Pajares And Ida T. Pajares, Vs. Remarkable Laundry And Dry Cleaning, Represented By
Archemedes G. Solis, February 20, 2017, G.R. No. 212690, Del Castillo, J.) [Sec. 19 (8), B.P. 129, as
amended by R.A. 7691]

Take Note: If the action is one for recovery of money or reimbursement of money arising from contract, or
damages arising from quasi-contract or delict, and the amount of the claim does not exceed ₱400,000.00, the
case is a Small Claims case and falls within the jurisdiction of the MTC/MCTC.

c) General and Special Jurisdiction of the Regional Trial Court

a) Q: What is the nature of the RTC’s exercise of Special jurisdiction?

Ans: Even if the RTC is designated as a Special Commercial Court/Family Court still it has general
jurisdiction and can entertain all actions/issues not withheld from its plenary powers not falling under the
jurisdiction of any court or tribunal or quasi- judicial body. Example - Issue concerning the constitutionality
of law, ordinance, rules and regulations involve in the case.
b) The matter of whether the RTC resolves an issue in the exercise of its general jurisdiction or of its
limited jurisdiction as a special court is only a matter of procedure and has nothing to do with the question of
jurisdiction. Moreover, it should be noted that Special Commercial Courts (SCCs) are still considered courts
of general jurisdiction. Section 5.2 of R.A. No. 8799, (Majestic Plus International, Inc. Vs. Bullion
Investment and Development Corporation/Majestic Pluc International, Inc. Vs. Bullion Investment and
Development Corporation, et al., G.R. No. 201017/G.R. No. 215289. December 5, 2016, PERALTA, J.)

II. Jurisdictions of Metropolitan/ Municipal/Municipal Circuit Trial Courts

a) Ordinary Civil Actions (Sec. 33, B.P. 129 as amended by R.A. 7691

1) Q: What are the cases falling under the exclusive original jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Trial Courts,
Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts?
Ans: Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial Court, and Municipal Circuit Trial Court shall exercise
exclusive and original jurisdiction over ordinary civil actions, as follows, to wit:
1. Exclusive original jurisdiction over civil actions and probate proceedings, testate and intestate, including
the grant of provisional remedies in proper cases, where the value of the personal property, estate, or
amount of the demand does not exceed Three hundred thousand pesos (₱300,000.00) or, in Metro Manila
where such personal property, estate, or amount of the demand does not exceed Four hundred thousand

6
 pesos (₱400,000.00), exclusive of interest, damages of whatever kind, attorney’s fees, litigation expenses,
and costs, the amount of which must be specifically alleged;
2. Exclusive original jurisdiction in all 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 Twenty
Thousand Pesos (₱20,000.00) or, in civil actions in Metro Manila, where such assessed value does not
exceed Fifty thousand pesos (₱50,000.00) exclusive of interest, damages of whatever kind, attorney’s
fees, litigation expenses and costs.
3. Settlement of the Estate of Small Value under Sec. 2, Rule 74.

b) Cases under the 1991 Rules on Summary Procedure

1) Q: What are the cases falling under the Rules on Summary Procedure?
Ans:
1. Exclusive original jurisdiction over cases of forcible entry and unlawful detainer (Sec. 33[2] of B.P. 129,
as amended by R.A. 7691);
2. All other claims, except probate, amount of the claim not exceeding ₱100th outside and 200th within
Metro Manila. Basis of the Answer: Sec. 33 of B.P. 129 3)

c) Small Claims Cases

1) Q: What cases falls under Small claims?

Ans: Payment or reimbursement of money/claims or damages cases - Not exceeding ₱400 thousand for;

Example: Action for a sum of money ₱100,000. + 50,000.00+ ₱25,000.00 + damages of ₱200,000.00 +
interest of ₱100,000.00 + attorney’s fees of ₱50,000.00. Which court has jurisdiction?
Ans: MTC/MCTC since the total amount of the main claims does not exceed ₱400,000.00 excluding
damages, interest, or attorney’s fees in accordance with the provision of Revised 2016 Rules on Small Claims
Cases, as amended. [Revised 2016 Rules on Small Claims Cases, as amended]

 Special Jurisdiction (Sec. 35 of B.P. 129)

1) Q: What are the cases falling under the special jurisdiction of the MTC/MCTC?
Ans:
1) Petition for habeas corpus; and
2) Application for bail in criminal cases in the province or the city where the absent Regional Trial Judge sit.
[Sec. 35 of B.P. 129 4]

 Delegated Jurisdiction (Sec. 34 of B.P. 129)

1) Q: What are the cases falling under the delegated jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal
Trial Courts, and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts?
Ans:
a. Uncontested lots: To hear and determine cadastral or land registration cases covering lots where there is
no controversy or opposition;
b. Contested lots: Contested lots where the value of which does not exceed ₱100,000.00. The value of the
land shall be ascertained by the affidavit of the claimant or by the claimants if there are several, or from
the tax declaration of the real property.

2) Q: What is the remedy in case of adverse decision of the MTC/MCTC in cadastral and land registration
cases in the exercise of its delegated jurisdiction?
Ans: Under Sec. 34 of B.P. 129, as amended, the decisions of the MTC in cadastral and land registration
cases “shall be appealable in the same manner as decisions of the regional trial courts” which is an implied
reference to Rule 41 of the Rules on Civil Procedure on appeals from decisions of the RTC to the CA in the
exercise of its original jurisdiction by way of notice of appeal within fifteen (15) days.

7
 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assigned Cases

1) First Sarmiento Property Holdings, Inc. v. Philippine Bank of Communications

G.R. No. 202836, June 19, 2018

Facts: In 2002, First Sarmiento obtained from PBCOM a ₱40 million loan, which was secured by a real estate
mortgage over some parcels of land. Subsequently, the loan was increased twice, the last one amounting to
₱100,000,000.00. Four years later, PBCOM filed a Petition for Extrajudicial Foreclosure of Real Estate Mortgage,
claiming that it sent First Sarmiento several demand letters, yet the latter still failed to pay its obligations. First
Sarmiento, on the other hand, attempted to file a Complaint for annulment of real estate mortgage with the RTC.
The Clerk of Court, however, refused to accept the Complaint in the absence of tax declarations of the mortgaged
properties which would be used to assess the docket fees. In the meantime, the mortgaged properties were auctioned
and sold to PBCOM as the highest bidder. Later on upon paying the filing fee of ₱5,545.00, First Sarmiento filed a
Complaint for annulment of real estate mortgage, claiming that it never received the loan of ₱100 million from
PBCOM, yet the latter still sought the extrajudicial foreclosure of real estate mortgage.

As prayed for by First Sarmiento, the RTC issued an ex-parte temporary restraining order for 72 hours, enjoining the
registration of the certificate of sale with the Registry of Deeds and directed the parties to observe the status quo
ante. In its opposition, PBCOM asserted that RTC failed to acquire jurisdiction over First Sarmiento's Complaint
because the action for annulment of mortgage was a real action; thus, the filing fees filed should have been based on
the fair market value of the mortgaged properties. Consequently, the RTC dismissed the Complaint for lack
of jurisdiction and held that following the High Court’s ruling in the previous cases, an action for annulment or
rescission of contract does not operate to efface the true objective and nature of the action which is to recover real
property.

Issue: Did RTC obtain jurisdiction over First Sarmiento's Complaint for annulment of real estate mortgage?

Held: Yes. To determine the nature of an action, whether or not its subject matter is capable or incapable of
pecuniary estimation, the nature of the principal action or relief sought must be ascertained. If the principal relief is
for the recovery of a sum of money or real property, then the action is capable of pecuniary estimation. However, if
the principal relief sought is not for the recovery of sum of money or real property, even if a claim over a sum of
money or real property results as a consequence of the principal relief, the action is incapable of pecuniary
estimation.

In fine, the trial court acquired jurisdiction on the petitioner’s Complaint. This finds support under Section 19(1) of
B.P. Blg. 129, as amended, which provides that RTC shall exercise exclusive original jurisdiction over “all civil
actions in which the subject of the litigation is incapable of pecuniary estimation.”
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

2) Gomez v. Montalban
G.R. No. 174414, March 14, 2008

Facts: Petitioner Elmer Gomez (Gomez) filed a complaint with the RTC for a sum of money and damages and
payment of attorney's fees against Ma. Lita A. Montalban (Montalban). The Complaint alleged that the respondent
obtained a loan from the petitioner in the sum of P 40,000.00 with a voluntary proposal on her part to pay 15%
interest per month. When the loan became due, respondent failed to pay the loan despite several demands; thus,
petitioner filed the Complaint praying for the payment of P 238,000.00, representing the principal loan and its
interest charges plus the 25% of the amount to be awarded as attorney's fees, as well as the cost of the suit.
Summons was served, but despite her receipt thereof, respondent failed to file her answer, resulting to a trial ex parte
in favor of Gomez.

Upon the decision was penned, Montalban filed a Petition for Relief from Judgement allegeing that there was no
effective service of summons upon her since there was no personal service of the same. The summons was received
by one Mrs. Alicia dela Torre, who was not authorized to receive summons or other legal pleadings or documents on

8
respondent's behalf. Respondent attributed his failure to file answer to fraud, accident, mistake or excusable
negligence.

Issue: Whether or not the RTC has jurisdiction over this case for sum of money damages and attorney's fees where
principal amount of obligation is only ₱40,000.00 but the amount of the demand per allegation of the complaint is
₱238,000.00.

HELD: There can be no doubt that the RTC in this case has jurisdiction to entertain, try, and decide the petitioner’s
Complaint.

To this Court, it is irrelevant that during the course of the trial, it was proven that respondent is only liable to
petitioner for the amount of ₱40,000.00 representing the principal amount of the loan; ₱57,000.00 as interest thereon
at the rate of 24% per annum reckoned from 26 August 1998 until the present; and ₱15,000.00 as attorney’s fees.
Contrary to respondents contention, jurisdiction can neither be made to depend on the amount ultimately
substantiated in the course of the trial or proceedings nor be affected by proof showing that the claimant is entitled
to recover a sum in excess of the jurisdictional amount fixed by law. Jurisdiction is determined by the cause of
action as alleged in the complaint and not by the amount ultimately substantiated and awarded.

Basic as a hornbook principle is that jurisdiction over the subject matter of a case is conferred by law and
determined by the allegations in the complaint which comprise a concise statement of the ultimate facts constituting
the plaintiffs cause of action. The nature of an action, as well as which court or body has jurisdiction over it, is
determined based on the allegations contained in the complaint of the plaintiff, irrespective of whether or not the
plaintiff is entitled to recover upon all or some of the claims asserted therein.  The averments in the complaint and
the character of the relief sought are the ones to be consulted. Once vested by the allegations in the complaint,
jurisdiction also remains vested irrespective of whether or not the plaintiff is entitled to recover upon all or some of
the claims asserted therein.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2nd Assignment
(February 17, 2021)

Rule 2, Rules of Court

RULE 1
(Action)

Section 3. Cases governed. - These Rules shall govern the procedure to be observed in actions, civil or criminal and
special proceedings.
(a) A civil action is one by which a party sues another for the enforcement or protection of a right, or the
prevention or redress of a wrong.
(b) A civil action may either be ordinary or special. Both are governed by the rules for ordinary civil actions,
subject to the specific rules prescribed for a special civil action.
(c) A criminal action is one by which the State prosecutes a person for an act or omission punishable by law.
(d) A special proceeding is a remedy by which a party seeks to establish a status, a right, or a particular fact.

Section 5. Commencement of action. - A civil action is commenced by the filing of the original complaint in court.
If an additional defendant is impleaded in a later pleading, the action is commenced with regard to him on the date
of the filing of such later pleading, irrespective of whether the motion for its admission, if necessary, is denied by
the court.

Note: The rule in this jurisdiction is that when an action is filed, the filing must be accompanied by the payment of the requisite
docket and filing fees. The fees must be paid because as a rule, the court acquires jurisdiction over the case only upon
payment of the correct prescribed fees. Without payment, the general rule is that the complaint is not considered filed. Payment
of the full amount of the docket fee is mandatory and jurisdictional. This rule was however, relaxed by the Supreme Court when
in one case, it allowed the payment of the fee within a reasonable time but not beyond the prescriptive period . If the fees are

9
 not paid at the time of the filing, the court acquires jurisdiction only upon full payment of the fees within a reasonable time as
the court may grant, barring prescription.

RULE 2
(Cause of Action)

Section 1. Ordinary civil actions, basis of. - Every ordinary civil action must be based on a
cause of action.
 Requisites/Elements of Cause of Action:
1. Plaintiff’s legal right;
2. Defendant’s obligation to respect plaintiff’s right; and
3. Defendant’s act or omission in violation of the plaintiff’s right.

Section 2. Cause of action,  defined. - A cause of action is the act or omission by which a party
violates a right of another.
1) Q: What is the Distinction between Action, Cause of Action, and. Right of Action?
Action Cause of action Right of action
It is a suit filed in court The delict or wrongful The remedial right or right to relief granted by law to a
for the enforcement or act or omission party to institute an action against a person who has
protection of a right, or committed by the committed a delict or wrong against him. In civil actions, a
the prevention or defendant in violation of right of action is the necessary consequence of a cause of
redress of a wrong. the primary rights of the action, for the enforcement or protection of a right or the
plaintiff. prevention or redress of a wrong; and so they say.

Section 3. One suit for a single cause of action. - A party may not institute more than one suit for
a single cause of action.
Section 4. Splitting a single cause of action; effect of. - If two or more suits are instituted on the
basis of the same cause of action, the filing of one or a judgment upon the merits in any one is
available as a ground for the dismissal of the others.
2) Q: What is rule on splitting of cause of action? (Sec. 3, Rule 2)
A: Splitting of cause of action – one single cause of action - split into many cases. Ex. Violation of lease
contract- one action is for unlawful detainer and another is for recovery of unpaid rentals.

3) Q: What are the effects of splitting of cause of action?

A: It may result to Litis pendentia or barred by prior judgment.

Litis pendentia as a ground for the dismissal of a civil action refers to that situation wherein another action is
pending between the same parties for the same cause of action, such that the second action becomes unnecessary
and vexatious. For litis pendentia to be invoked, the concurrence of the following requisites is necessary:
(a) identity of parties or at least such as represent the same interest in both actions;
(b) identity of rights asserted and reliefs prayed for, the reliefs being founded on the same facts; and
(c) the identity in the two cases should be such that the judgment that may be rendered in one would, regardless
of which party is successful, amount to res judicata in the other.

Res judicata is a legal principle that regards a final judgment on the merits of a case as conclusive between the
parties to such case and their privies. The principle, in our jurisdiction, may be applied in two ways.
The first way, which is known as the ‘bar by former judgment rule,’ (barred by prior judgment) considers the
final judgment in a previous case as an absolute bar to a subsequent case between the same parties. For this
variant of res judicata to apply, however, it is essential that the subsequent case was prosecuted between the
same parties and on the same claim, demand or cause of action as the previously decided case.

10
 The second way or the ‘conclusiveness of judgment rule,’ on the other hand, considers the final judgment in a
previous case not as an absolute bar to a subsequent case between the same parties, but merely as having a
preclusive effect on the latter case insofar as the matters already settled in that final judgment are concerned.
This variant of res judicata applies when there is an identity of parties, but not of claim, demand or cause of
action, between the subsequent case and the previously decided case.
Requisites of Res Judicata:
(d) finality of the former judgment;
(e) the court which rendered it had jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties;
(f) it must be a judgment on the merits; and
(g) there must be, between the first and second actions, identity of parties, subject matter and causes of action.

4) Q: Can there be a motu proprio dismissal of the case in case of splitting of cause of action?
A: Yes, if the splitting of cause of action results to either litis pendetia or barred by prior judgment it may be
dismissed on the inititiave of the court under Sec. 1, Rule 9.

5) Q: What is the remedy of the defendant in case of splitting of cause of action?

A: Defendant may file a motion to dismiss on the ground of litis pendentia or barred by prior judgment under
Sec. 12 (2) & (3) of Rule 15 of the amended rules on Civil Procedure.

6) Q: What is the nature of the dismissal?

A: The dismissal is with prejudice as clearly provided under Sec. 13, Rule 15.

7) Q: What is the Remedy of the plaintiff?

A: Plaintiff may appeal the order of dismissal since it is a final order and therefore appealable under Sec. 1, Rule
41.

8) Q: What are the distinctions between Failure to State a Cause of Action (Rule 16) and Lack of Cause of
Action (Rule 33).
Failure to state a cause of action Lack of cause of action
a) Motion to dismiss based on failure to state a a) A demurrer is filed “after the plaintiff has completed the
cause of action under Rule 16 is made “Within presentation of his evidence/rested its case.”
the time for but before filing an answer.”
b) Failure to state a cause of action is b) Lack or insufficiency of cause of action is
determined simply on the basis of the predominantly based on the appreciation of evidence.
allegations in the complaint of the plaintiff.
c) Failure to state a cause of action may still be c) The court may however require an amendment during
curable by an amendment of the pleading (Sec. the presentation of evidence of the plaintiff, if evidence
3, Rule 16) as a matter of right before a that is not in issue is not objected to by the defendant, in
responsive pleading has been filed, even when a which case the evidence is deemed “impliedly admitted”
motion to dismiss on such ground has been so an amendment is not really necessary to appreciate the
made by the defendant, the same not being a evidence; or when an objection was in fact made, but at the
“responsive pleading’’ under the rules. liberal discretion of the court “if the presentation of the
merits of the action and the ends of substantial justice will
be sub-served thereby.” (Sec. 5, Rule 10)
d) If the motion to dismiss is denied, the movant d) If a demurrer is denied, the defendant shall have the
shall be required to file his answer within the right to present evidence.
balance of the period to which he is entitled at
the time such motion was filed, but in no case
shall be less than five (5) days. (Sec. 4, Rule 16)
e) If a motion to dismiss on the ground of e) If a demurrer to evidence is granted, the dismissal is
failure to state a cause of action has been with prejudice, as the same is considered a judgment on
granted, the dismissal is without prejudice to the the merits of the case, hence, the remedy of the plaintiff is
refiling of the action. to appeal from such judgment. Consequently, on appeal, if
the judgment was reversed, the defendant shall be deemed

11
 to have waived his right to present his evidence.
f) The ground of failure to state a cause of f) The ground of insufficiency of evidence may be invoked
action may be invoked in a motion to dismiss or in a motion for demurrer to evidence (Rule 33), in a
as an affirmative defense in the pleading. (Sec. motion for reconsideration (Rule 37) or in an appeal
6, Rule 16) memorandum.

Demurrer to the evidence (Rule 33) is an objection by one of the parties in an action, to the effect that the
evidence which his adversary produced is insufficient in point of law, whether true or not, to make out a case or
sustain the issue.

RULE 2, Sec. 5
(Joinder of Causes of Action)

Section 5. Joinder of causes of action. - A party may in one pleading assert, in the alternative or
otherwise, as many causes of action as he may have against an opposing party, subject to the
following conditions:
(a) The party joining the causes of action shall comply with the rules on joinder of
parties; - (Correlate this to Sec. 6 of Rule 3)
(b) The joinder shall not include special civil actions or actions governed by special
rules;
(c) Where the causes of action are between the same parties but pertain to different
venues or jurisdictions, the joinder may be allowed in the Regional Trial Court
provided one of the causes of action falls within the jurisdiction of said court and the
venue lies therein; and
(d) Where the claims in all the causes action are principally for recovery of money, the
aggregate amount claimed shall be the test of jurisdiction.
Note: Relate this with Sec. 6 of Rule 3 on Permissive joinder of cause of action

Section 6. Misjoinder of causes of action. - Misjoinder of causes of action is not a ground for
dismissal of an action. A misjoined cause of action may, on motion of a party or on the initiative
of the court, be severed and proceeded with separately.
1) Q: What are the requisites for the joinder of causes of action?
A: -It must comply with the joinder of parties. - It must not involve special civil action or actions governed by
special rules. (key words) - If one of the causes of action is within the jurisdiction of the RTC- then RTC - If sum
of money, aggregate sum shall determine jurisdiction- whether RTC or MTC (Key words under the totality rule)

2) Q: Can there be a joinder of causes of action for injunction and quieting of title?
A: No, since quieting of titles or removal of clouds is a special civil action which is not allowed under Sec. 5 (b),
Rule 2.

Another noticeable area of stumble for the petitioners related to their having joined two causes of action, i.e.,
injunction and quieting of title, despite the first being an ordinary suit and the latter a special civil action under
Rule 63. Section 5, Rule 2 of the Rules of Court disallowed such joinder. The RTC should have severed the
causes of action, either upon motion or motu proprio, and tried them separately, assuming it had jurisdiction over
both under Section 6, Rule 2 of the Rules of Court.

Q: May an action for collection of sum of money be joined with an action for ejectment?
A: No, since collection of money is an ordinary civil action and ejectment case is a special civil action joinder is
prohibited under Sec. 5 (b), Rule 2.

3) Q: Can there be a joinder of claims if the amount does not exceed 400th pesos?

12
 A: Yes, Sec.8 of the Revised 2016 Rules on Small Claims Case allows joinder of Claims in when the aggregate
sum not exceeding 400th pesos exclusive of cost and interest.

Q: Which court has jurisdiction over actions for recovery of money pursuant to the Revised 2016 Rules on
Small Claims Cases?
A: Metropolitan/Municipal Trial Court has exclusive original jurisdiction over such actions under the Revised
2016 Rules on Small Claims Cases.

4) Q: Is Misjoinder of causes of action a ground for dismissal of the action?

A: No. The rule on joinder of causes of action under Sec. 5, Rule 2 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, as
amended, requires that the joinder shall not include special civil actions governed by special rules. Sec. 6, Rule 2
explicitly provides that misjoinder of causes of action is not a ground for the dismissal of the action.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3rd Assignment
(February 19, 2021)

Rule 3, Rules of Court

RULE 3
(Parties to Civil Actions)

 Kinds of Parties:
1. Real Party-in-Interest - the party who stands to be benefited or injured by the judgment in the suit, or the party
entitled to the avails of the suit.
2. Indispensable Party - a real party-in-interest without whom no final determination can be had of an action.
3. Necessary Party - one who is not indispensable but ought to be joined as a party if complete relief is to be accorded
as to those already parties, or for a complete determination or settlement of the claim subject of the action.
4. Representative Party - one acting in a fiduciary capacity such as trustee, guardian, executor, administrator, or a
party authorized by law or ROC. (Note: The beneficiary shall be included in the title of the case and shall be deemed to be
the real party in interest)
5. Pro-forma Party (Formal Party) - one who is required to be joined as co-party in a suit by or against another party
as may be provided by substantive law or procedural rule such as in the case of spouses under Sec. 4.
6. Indigent Party - one who has no money or property sufficient and available for food, shelter, and basic necessities
for himself and his family, but who is allowed or authorized as an indigent by the court to litigate his claim, action
or defense without paying the prescribed docket and other fees.

Section 1. Who may be parties; plaintiff and defendant. - Only natural or juridical persons, or
entities authorized by law may be parties in a civil action. The term "plaintiff" may refer to the
claiming party, the counter-claimant, the cross-claimant, or the third (fourth, etc.) - party
plaintiff. The term "defendant" may refer to the original defending party, the defendant in a
counter-claim, the cross-defendant, or the third (fourth, etc.) - party defendant.
Section 2. Parties in interest. - A real party in interest is the party who stands to be benefited or
injured by the judgment in the suit, or the party entitled to the avails of the suit. Unless otherwise
authorized by law or these Rules, every action must be prosecuted or defended in the name of the
real party in interest.
1) Q: Whether marine mammals, through their stewards, have legal standing to pursue the case?
A: Yes. As to standing, the Court declined to extend the principle of standing beyond natural and juridical
persons, even though it recognized that the current trend in Philippine jurisprudence “moves towards
simplification of procedures and facilitating court access in environmental cases.” Instead, the Court explained,
“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. (G.R. No. 180771,
April 21, 2015)

13
2) Q: What is the “principle of standing beyond natural and juridical persons”?
A: A “standing” or a right to pursue a case which is extended to a certain type of parties who has the right to file
the action or the right to challenge the policies of the State. Ex. Taxpayer suit.

3) Q: Who is the real parties-in-interest in environmental cases?

A: Any real party in interest, including the government and juridical entities authorized by law, may file a civil
action involving the enforcement or violation of any environmental law. (Sec. 4, Part II of A.M. No. 09-6-08 on
the Rules of Procedure in Environmental Cases)

4) Q: What is the remedy if the case is instituted by a person not a real party-in-interest?
A: The remedy of the defendant is to file an answer and raise the ground of failure to state a cause of action as an
affirmative defense. (A.M. No. 19-10-20)

5) Q: What is the remedy of the plaintiff in case his complaint is dismissed for failure to state a cause of action?
A: The remedy of the of the plaintiff is to re-file the action since the order of dismissal is without prejudice
which is not appealable under Sec. 1, Rule 41, and it is not included among the grounds that bars the refiling of
the case under Sec. 13, Rule 15 of the amended Rules on Civil Procedure.

Section 3. Representatives as parties. - Where the action is allowed to be prosecuted and

defended by a representative or someone acting in a fiduciary capacity, the beneficiary shall be
included in the title of the case and shall be deemed to be the real pa2rty in interest. A
representative may be a trustee of an expert trust, a guardian, an executor or administrator, or a
party authorized by law or these Rules. An agent acting in his own name and for the benefit of an
undisclosed principal may sue or be sued without joining the principal except when the contract
involves things belonging to the principal.
Section 4. Spouses as parties. - Husband and wife shall sue or be sued jointly, except as
provided by law.
Section 5. Minor or incompetent persons. - A minor or a person alleged to be incompetent, may
sue or be sued with the assistance of his father, mother, guardian, or if he has none, a
guardian ad litem.
6) Q: Is a representative of the principal a real party-in-interest?
A: No, the rule simply states that, in actions which are allowed to be prosecuted or defended by a representative,
the beneficiary shall be deemed the real party-in-interest and, hence, should be included in the title of the case.

7) Q: What is a citizen suit?

A: Citizen suit – It is a suit filed by any Filipino citizen in representation of others, including minors or
generations yet unborn, may file an action to enforce rights and obligations under environmental laws (Sec. 5,
Part II A.M. No. 09-6-08, Rules on Environmental Cases)

8) Q: Who is the real party in interest in a derivative suit - corporation: Stockholder merely nominal?
A: In a derivative suit, the corporation is the real party in interest while the stockholder filing suit for the
corporation’s behalf is only a nominal party, the corporation should therefore be included as a party in the suit.

Section 6. Permissive joinder of parties. - All persons in whom or against whom any right to
relief in respect to or arising out of the same transaction or series of transactions is alleged to
exist, whether jointly, severally, or in the alternative, may, except as otherwise provided in these
Rules, join as plaintiffs or be joined as defendants in one complaint, where any question of law
or fact common to all such plaintiffs or to all such defendants may arise in the action; but the
court may make such orders as may be just to prevent any plaintiff or defendant from being
14
 embarrassed or put to expense in connection with any proceedings in which he may have no
interest.
Section 7. Compulsory joinder of indispensable parties. - Parties in interest without whom no
final determination can be had of an action shall be joined either as plaintiffs or defendants.
Section 8. Necessary party. - A necessary party is one who is not indispensable but who ought to
be joined as a party if complete relief is to be accorded as to those already parties, or for a
complete determination or settlement of the claim subject of the action.
Section 9. Non-joinder of necessary parties to be pleaded. - Whenever in any pleading in which
a claim is asserted a necessary party is not joined, the pleader shall set forth his name, if known,
and shall state why he is omitted. Should the court find the reason for the omission
unmeritorious, it may order the inclusion of the omitted necessary party if jurisdiction over his
person may be obtained.

The failure to comply with the order for his inclusion, without justifiable cause, shall be deemed
a waiver of the claim against such party.
The non-inclusion of a necessary party does not prevent the court from proceeding in the action,
and the judgment rendered therein shall be without prejudice to the rights of such necessary
party.
Section 10. Unwilling co-plaintiff. - If the consent of any party who should be joined as plaintiff
cannot be obtained, he may be made a defendant and the reason therefor shall be stated in the
complaint.
Section 11. Misjoinder and non-joinder of parties. - Neither misjoinder nor non-joinder of
parties is ground for dismissal of an action. Parties may be dropped or added by order of the
court on motion of any party or on its own initiative at any stage of the action and on such terms
as are just. Any claim against a misjoined party may be severed and proceeded with separately.
9) Q: What are the requirements for the permissive joinder of parties?
A: All persons in whom or against whom any right to relief in respect to or arising out of the same transaction or
series of transactions is alleged to exist whether jointly, severally, or in the alternative, may, except as otherwise
provided in these Rules, join as plaintiffs or be joined as defendants in one complaint subject to the following
requirements:
a) Where any question of law or fact common to all such plaintiffs or to all such defendants may arise in the
action;
b) The court may make such orders as may be just to prevent any plaintiff or defendant from being embarrassed
or put to expense in connection with any proceedings in which he may have no interest. (Sec. 6, Rule 3)

10) Q: Who is an indispensable party?

A: Indispensable parties are parties in interest without whom no final determination can be had of an action.

11) Q: What is the nature of joinder of indispensable party? (Bar Examination 2019)
A: Settled is the rule that joinder of indispensable parties is compulsory being a sine qua non for the exercise of
judicial power, otherwise all subsequent action of the court is null and void and the case should be dismissed for
want of authority.

12) Q: Will non-joinder of indispensable party a ground for outright dismissal of the action?

15
 A: No. Failure to implead any of the indispensable party will not result to outright dismissal, remedy is to
implead them and in case of failure to comply with the order of the court dismissal under Sec. 3, Rule 17 is
allowed.

13) Q: What are the effects in case misjoinder or non-joinder of parties?

A: The effects in case of misjoinder nor non-joinder of parties are:
a) It is not a ground for dismissal of an action;
b) Parties may be dropped or added by order of the court on motion of any party or on its own initiative at
any stage of the action and on such terms as are just;
c) Any claim against a mis-joined party may be severed and proceeded with separately. (Sec. 11, Rule 3)

Section 12. Class suit. - When the subject matter of the controversy is one of common or general
interest to many persons so numerous that it is impracticable to join all as parties, a number of
them which the court finds to be sufficiently numerous and representative as to fully protect the
interests of all concerned may sue or defend for the benefit of all. Any party in interest shall have
the right to intervene to protect his individual interest.
14) Q: What is a class suit?
A: Class suit - is a suit filed before the court whereby the subject matter of controversy is of common or general
interest to many persons so numerous which is impracticable to bring them before the court, and represented by
sufficient number for the benefit of all. Example: Closure of the roads due to excavation affecting many
barangays and their access to different places in going to and out of the province involves subject matter of
controversy which is one of common or general interest to many persons which qualifies for a class suit (Key
words in the answer).

15) Q: What are the elements of a class suit?

A: The necessary elements for the maintenance of a class suit are 1) the subject matter of controversy is one of
common or general interest to many persons; 2) the parties affected are so numerous that it is impracticable to
bring them all to the court; and 3) the parties bringing the class suit are sufficiently numerous or representative of
the class and can fully protect the interest of all concerned. (G.R. No. 152272, March 5, 2012)

Section 13. Alternative defendants. - Where the plaintiff is uncertain against who of several
persons he is entitled to relief, he may join any or all of them as defendants in the alternative,
although a right to relief against one may be inconsistent with a right of relief against the other.
Section 14. Unknown identity or name of defendant. - Whenever the identity or name of a
defendant is unknown, he may be sued as the unknown owner heir devisee, or by such other
designation as the case may require, when his identity or true name is discovered, the pleading
must be amended accordingly.
Section 15. Entity without juridical personality as defendant. - When two or more persons not
organized as an entity with juridical personality enter into a transaction, they may be sued under
the name by which they are generally or commonly known.
In the answer of such defendant, the name and addresses of the persons composing said entity
must all be revealed.
16) Q: What is the rule on alternative defendants?
A: If the plaintiff is not certain against whom the action shall be filed he may join any or all of them as
defendants in the alternative.

17) Q: What is the rule in case a party in an action is an entity without juridical personality?

16
 A: When two or more persons not organized as an entity with juridical personality enter into a transaction, it has
the following effects:
a) They may be sued under the name by which they are generally or commonly known; and
b) In the answer of such defendant, the names and addresses of the persons composing said entity must all be
revealed. (Sec. 15, Rule 13)

Section 16. Death of party; duty of counsel. - Whenever a party to a pending action dies, and the
claim is not thereby extinguished, it shall be the duty of his counsel to inform the court within
thirty (30) days after such death of the fact thereof, and to give the name and address of his legal
representative or representatives. Failure of counsel to comply with his duty shall be a ground for
disciplinary action.
The heirs of the deceased may be allowed to be substituted for the deceased, without requiring
the appointment of an executor or administrator and the court may appoint a guardian ad
litem for the minor heirs.
The court shall forthwith order said legal representative or representatives to appear and be
substituted within a period of thirty (30) days from notice.
If no legal representative is named by the counsel for the deceased party, or if the one so named
shall fail to appear within the specified period, the court may order the opposing party, within a
specified time to procure the appointment of an executor or administrator for the estate of the
deceased and the latter shall immediately appear for and on behalf of the deceased. The court
charges in procuring such appointment, if defrayed by the opposing party, may be recovered as
costs.
Section 17. Death or separation of a party who is a public officer. - When a public officer is a
party in an action in his official capacity and during its pendency dies, resigns, or otherwise
ceases to hold office, the action may be continued and maintained by or against his successor if,
within thirty (30) days after the successor takes office or such time as may be granted by the
court, it is satisfactorily shown to the court by any party that there is a substantial need for
continuing or maintaining it and that the successor adopts or continues or threatens to adopt or
continue to adopt or continue the action of his predecessor. Before a substitution is made, the
party or officer to be affected, unless expressly assenting thereto, shall be given reasonable
notice of the application therefor and accorded an opportunity to be heard.
Section 18. Incompetency or incapacity. - If a party becomes incompetent or incapacitated, the
court, upon motion with notice, may allow the action to be continued by or against the
incompetent or incapacitated person assisted by his legal guardian or guardian ad litem.
Section 19. Transfer of interest. - In case of any transfer of interest, the action may be continued
by or against the original party, unless the court upon motion directs the person to whom the
interest is transferred to be substituted in the action or joined with the original party.
18) Q: What is the effect in case of transfer of interest by the party?
A: In case of any transfer of interest by the party under Sec. 19 Rule 3, the court may allow: a) The action may
be continued by or against the original party; b) Unless the court upon motion directs the person to whom the
interest is transferred to be substituted in the action or joined with the original party. (G.R. No. 181186, February
3, 2016)

17
 Section 20. Action and contractual money claims. - When the action is for recovery of money
arising from contract, express or implied, and the defendant dies before entry of final judgment
in the court in which the action was pending at the time of such death, it shall not be dismissed
but shall instead be allowed to continue until entry of final judgment. A favorable judgment
obtained by the plaintiff therein shall be enforced in the manner especially provided in these
Rules for prosecuting claims against the estate of a deceased person.
19) Q: What are the actions that survive the death of the party?
Answer:
a) Contractual money claims:
- When the action is for recovery of money arising from contract, express or implied, and the defendant dies
before entry of final judgment in the court in which the action was pending at the time of such death, the
case shall:
1. It will not be dismissed but shall instead be allowed to continue until entry of final judgment; and
2. In case of a favorable judgment obtained by the plaintiff therein, such judgment shall be enforced in the
manner especially provided in these Rules for prosecuting claims against the estate of a deceased
person. (Sec. 20, Rule 3)
NOTE: Correlate Sec. 20, Rule 3 with Sec. 5, Rule 86 on the Claims against the Estate.
b) Action which may not be brought against the executor or administrator:
- No action may be commenced against the executor or administrator upon a claim for:
1. The recovery of money;
2. Debt;
3. Interest thereon.
Except:
1. Actions to recover real property;
2. Recovery of personal property or an interest therein, from the estate, or to enforce a lien thereon; and
3. Actions to recover damages for an injury to person or property, real or personal, may be commenced
against him. (Sec. 1, Rule 87)

20) Q: How will the judgment be enforced in case of death of a party during the pendency of the action?
A: In case of death of the defendant the case will continue and judgment shall be enforced against the estate.
(G.R. No. 220479, August 17, 2016)

Section 21. Indigent party. - A party may be authorized to litigate his action, claim or defense as
an indigent if the court, upon an ex parte application and hearing, is satisfied that the party is one
who has no money or property sufficient and available for food, shelter and basic necessities for
himself and his family.
Such authority shall include an exemption from payment of docket and other lawful fees, and of
transcripts of stenographic notes which the court may order to be furnished him. The amount of
the docket and other lawful fees which the indigent was exempted from paying shall be a lien on
any judgment rendered in the case favorable to the indigent, unless the court otherwise provides.
Any adverse party may contest the grant of such authority at any time before judgment is
rendered by the trial court. If the court should determine after hearing that the party declared as
an indigent is in fact a person with sufficient income or property, the proper docket and other
lawful fees shall be assessed and collected by the clerk of court. If payment is not made within
the time fixed by the court, execution shall issue or the payment thereof, without prejudice to
such other sanctions as the court may impose.

18
 Section 22. Notice to the Solicitor General. - In any action involving the validity of any treaty,
law, ordinance, executive order, presidential decree, rules or regulations, the court, in its
discretion, may require the appearance of the Solicitor General who may be heard in person or a
representative duly designated by him.
21) Q: Who is an indigent party?
A: For purposes of a suit in forma pauperis, an indigent litigant is not really a pauper, but is properly a person
who is an indigent although not a public charge, meaning that he has no property or income sufficient for his
support aside from his labor, even if he is self-supporting when able to work and in employment. The term
“immediate family” includes those members of the same household who are bound together by ties of
relationship but does not include those who are living apart from the particular household of which the individual
is a member. (G.R. No. 150107, January 28, 2008)

Indigent Party - one who has no money or property sufficient and available for food, shelter, and basic necessities for
himself and his family, but who is allowed or authorized as an indigent by the court to litigate his claim, action or defense
without paying the prescribed docket and other fees.

22) Q: Is an erroneous granting of a Motion to Declare as pauper litigant a jurisdictional error?

A: NO. It is true that the non-payment of the filing fees usually prevents the trial court from acquiring
jurisdiction over the claim stated in the complaint. But for the CA to annul the judgment rendered after trial
based solely on such non-payment was not right and just considering that the non-payment of the filing fees had
not been entirely attributable to the plaintiff alone. The trial court was more, if not exclusively, to blame for the
omission. The exemption of the clients of the PAO like him from the payment of the legal fees was expressly
declared by law for the first time in Republic Act No. 9406. (G.R. No. 194412/G.R. No. 194566, November 16,
2016)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4th Assignment
(February 24, 2021)

Sec. 17, Rule 3 to Rule 6

RULE 4
(Venue of Actions)

Section 1. Venue of real actions. - Actions affecting title to or possession of real property, or
interest therein, shall be commenced and tried in the proper court which has jurisdiction over the
area wherein the real property involved, or a portion thereof, is situated.
Forcible entry and detainer actions shall be commenced and tried in the municipal trial court of
the municipality or city wherein the real property involved, or a portion thereof, is situated.
Section 2. Venue of personal actions. - All other actions may be commenced and tried where the
plaintiff or any of the principal plaintiffs resides, or where the defendant or any of the principal
defendants resides, or in the case of a non-resident defendant where he may be found, at the
election of the plaintiff.
Section 3. Venue of actions against nonresidents. - If any of the defendants does not reside and
is not found in the Philippines, and the action affects the personal status of the plaintiff, or any
property of said defendant located in the Philippines, the action may be commenced and tried in
the court of the place where the plaintiff resides, or where the property or any portion thereof is
situated or found.

19
Section 4. When Rule not applicable. This Rule shall not apply.
(a) In those cases where a specific rule or law provides otherwise; or
(b) Where the parties have validly agreed in writing before the filing of the action on the
exclusive venue thereof.
 Venue - The place of trial or geographical location in which an action or proceeding should be brought.

 Distinctions between Venue and Jurisdiction (Asked in the 2006 and 2008 Bar Exams)
Venue Jurisdiction
Place where the action is instituted Power of the court to hear and decide a case
May be waived Jurisdiction over the subject matter and over the nature
of the action is conferred by law and cannot be waived
Procedural Substantive
May be changed by the written agreement of the Cannot be the subject of the agreement of the parties
parties

1) Q: How to determine the venue of the action?

A: The nature of the action should be determined, by determining whether it is a real action or a personal action
or mixed action.

2) Q. Will the rule on exclusivity of venue be applied in extra-judicial foreclosure of mortgage?

A: NO. The exclusive venue of Makati City, as stipulated by the parties and sanctioned by Section 4, Rule 4 of
the Rules of Court, cannot be made to apply to the petition for extrajudicial foreclosure of mortgage filed by the
respondent bank because the provisions of Rule 4 pertain to venue of action, which an extrajudicial foreclosure is
not.” (G.R. No. 192877, March 23, 2011)

3) Q: What is the rule on venue in case of a Real action?

A: Action involving title to or possession of real property or interest therein - where the property or any portion
thereof is located.

4) Q: What are the actions which are considered real for determination of venue?
Answer:
a) Action for annulment or rescission of contract over a real property is a real action. The prevalent doctrine is
that an action for the annulment or rescission of a sale of real property does not operate to efface the
fundamental and prime objective and nature of the case, which is to recover said real property. It is a real
action. (G.R. No. 179018, June 18, 2012)
b) Annulment of title or rescission of sale of real property is a real action- venue is where the property is
located: While it is true that petitioner does not directly seek the recovery of title or possession of the
property in question, his action for annulment of sale and his claim for damages are closely intertwined with
the issue of ownership of the building which, under the law, is considered immovable property, the recovery
of which is petitioner’s primary objective. The prevalent doctrine is that an action for the annulment or
rescission of a sale of real property does not operate to efface the fundamental and prime objective and nature
of the case, which is to recover said real property. It is a real action. (G.R. No. 179018, June 18, 2012)
c) Action for specific performance for the delivery of real property.
d) Action for revival of judgment- If the decision to be revived involves real property then – venue is location of
the property of where any portion thereof is situated.
e) Action for interpleader over a real property (Rule 62);
f) Action for quieting of title or removal of clouds; (Rule 63);
g) Action for expropriation proceedings over a real property (Rule 67);
h) Actions for foreclosure of real estate mortgage (Rule 68);
i) Action for partition over a real property (Rule 69);
j) Actions for forcible entry and unlawful detainer;
k) Action publiciana;
l) Action reinvindicatoria.

20
 5) Q: Where is the venue in case of a personal action?
A: Action involving privity of contract, recovery of personal properties or damages, the venue of which lies with
the residence of the plaintiff or defendant at the election of the plaintiff.

6) Q: What are the examples of personal actions?

Answer:
a) Action for the delivery of personal property or replevin;
b) Action for Collection of Sum of Money;
c) Action for interpleader over personal property (Rule 62);
d) Action for partition over personal properties (Rule 69);
e) Action for damages;
f) Action for rescission of contract;
g) Action for specific performance for the delivery of personal property;
h) Action for revival of judgment involving personal properties;
i) Small Claims Cases;
j) 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. (G.R. No.
175796, July 22, 2015)

7) Q: What is the rule on venue in case of non-resident defendants?

A: If any of the defendants does not reside and is not found in the Philippines, and the action affects the personal
status of the plaintiff, or any property of said defendant located in the Philippines, the action may be commenced
and tried in the court of:
a) The place where the plaintiff resides; or
b) Where the property or any portion thereof is situated or found).

8) Q: Can the non-resident plaintiff elect the venue of the action?

A: This Court held that there can be no election as to the venue of the filing of a complaint when the plaintiff has
no residence in the Philippines. In such case, the complaint may only be filed in the court of the place where the
defendant resides. (G.R. No. 186993, August 22, 2012)

9) Q: What is the Doctrine of Exclusivity of Venue?

A: It provides that when the parties expressly stipulated in their written agreement on where the particular place
the action shall be filed, it shall be complied with.

10) Q: Where will the venue of the action when it involves several properties under one (1) contract?
A: According to the Rules, real actions shall be commenced and tried in the court that has jurisdiction over the
area where the property is situated. In this case, all the mortgaged properties are located in the Province of Cebu.
Thus, following the general rule, PAGLAUM and HealthTech should have filed their case in Cebu, and not in
Makati. (G.R. No. 179018, June 18, 2012)

11) Q: What are the requirements in order for the “Doctrine of Exclusivity of Venue” to apply?
A: There must be a valid and binding agreement/contract between the parties entered into before the filing of the
action. If the agreement is simulated or the signature is forged, then exclusivity of venue will not apply and the
rules on venue under the Rules of Court shall apply.

12) Q: Can the parties in an unlawful detainer case stipulate as to the exclusive venue of the action?
A: YES. While Sec. 1, Rule 4 of the Rules of Court states that ejectment actions shall be filed in “the municipal
trial court of the municipality or city wherein the real property involved x x x is situated,” Sec. 4 of the same
Rule provides that the rule shall not apply “where the parties have validly agreed in writing before the filing of
the action on the exclusive venue thereof.” Precisely, in this case, the parties provided for a different venue. In
Villanueva vs. Judge Mosqueda, etc., et al., the Court upheld the validity of a stipulation in a contract providing
for a venue for ejectment actions other than that stated in the Rules of Court. Since the unlawful detainer action
is connected with the contract, Union Bank rightfully filed the complaint with the MeTC of Makati City. (G.R.
No. 190071, August 15, 2012)

13) Q: Where will be the venue of an action to revive judgment?

21
 A: It may be filed in the residence of the plaintiff or defendant in case personal action or location of the property
in case of real action based on the venue in the original action. (G.R. No. 179638, July 8, 2013)

14) Q: Will exclusive stipulation on venue be enforced when the complaint assails the validity of the agreement?
A: No, If the complaint directly assailing the validity of the written instrument itself should not be bound by the
exclusive venue stipulation contained therein and should be filed in accordance with the general rules on venue.
(G.R. No. 204444. January 14, 2015)

15) Q: Can a sales invoice or purchase order be a valid agreement as to the venue of the action?
A: No. The purpose of the Sales Invoices is merely to acknowledge that the representative of the party received
the goods in good condition, and since there is no stipulation then the venue lies with the principal office of the
corporation. (G.R. No. 201302, January 23, 2019)

Rules on Venue in Small Claims Cases

16) Q: What is the rule on venue in small claims case?

A: The regular rules on venue shall apply. 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 Claim/s shall be filed where that branch is located. (Sec. 7 of the Revised 2016 Rules on Small
Claims Cases)

17) Q: What is the effect if the issue of improper venue is not raise?
A: Failure to raise the issue of improper venue in a motion to dismiss on the ground of lack of jurisdiction or in
the answer as affirmative defense, it is deemed waive and cannot therefore be raised for the first time on appeal.

18) Q: What is the remedy of the defendant in case of improper venue?

A: File an answer and raise the ground that the venue is improperly laid as an affirmative defense under Sec. 12,
Rule 8.

19) Q: What is the remedy of the plaintiff in case of dismissal?

A: Re-file the case since the dismissal is without prejudice to the refilling of the action under Sec. 13 Rule 15.

20) Q: Can there be a motu propio dismissal of the action based on improper venue?
A: No. the court cannot motu proprio dismiss the case based on improper venue since it is only for the
convenience of the parties and not jurisdictional, and it is not one of the grounds mentioned under Sec. 1, of Rule
9. (G.R. No. 241369, June 3, 2019)

RULE 5
(Uniform Procedure in Trial Courts)

Section 1. Uniform procedure. - The procedure in the Municipal Trial Courts shall be the same
as in the Regional Trial Courts, except (a) where a particular provision expressly or impliedly
applies only to either of said courts, or (b) in civil cases governed by the Rule on Summary
Procedure.
Section 2. Meaning of terms. - The term "Municipal Trial Courts" as used in these Rules shall
include Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts in Cities, Municipal Trial Courts, and
Municipal Circuit Trial Courts.

5th Assignment
(February 26, 2021)

Rule 6 to Rule 8

RULE 6

22
 (Kinds of Pleadings)

Section 1. Pleadings defined. - Pleadings are the written statements of the respective claims and
defenses of the parties submitted to the court for appropriate judgment.
Section 2. Pleadings allowed. - The claims of a party are asserted in a complaint, counterclaim,
cross-claim, third (fourth, etc.)-party complaint, or complaint-in-intervention.
The defenses of a party are alleged in the answer to the pleading asserting a claim against him or
her.
An answer may be responded to by a reply only if the defending party attaches an actionable
document to the answer.
Section 3. Complaint. - The complaint is the pleading alleging the plaintiff's or claiming party’s
cause or causes of action. The names and residences of the plaintiff and defendant must be stated
in the complaint.
Section 4. Answer. - An answer is a pleading in which a defending party sets forth his or her
defenses.
Section 5. Defenses. - Defenses may either be negative or affirmative.
(a) A negative defense is the specific denial of the material fact or facts alleged in the
pleading of the claimant essential to his or her cause or causes of action.
(b) An affirmative defense is an allegation of a new matter which, while hypothetically
admitting the material allegations in the pleading of the claimant, would nevertheless
prevent or bar recovery by him or her. The affirmative defenses include fraud, statute
of limitations, release, payment, illegality, statute of frauds, estoppel, former
recovery, discharge in bankruptcy, and any other matter by way of confession and
avoidance.
Affirmative defenses may also include grounds for the dismissal of a complaint, specifically, that
the court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter, that there is another action pending between
the same parties for the same cause, or that the action is barred by a prior judgment.
1) Q: What are the pleadings allowed under the amended rules on Civil Procedure?
A: The claims of a party are asserted in the following, to wit:
a) Complaint;
b) Counterclaim;
c) Cross-claim; third (fourth, etc.)-party complaint; or
d) Complaint-in- intervention.
e) The defenses of a party are alleged in the answer to the pleading asserting a claim against him or her.
f) An answer may be responded to by a reply only if the defending party attaches an actionable document to
the answer. (Sec. 2, Rule 6 of the 2019 Amendments to the 1997 Rules on Civil Procedure (A.M. NO. 19-
10-20)

2) Q: What are the affirmative defenses under the rules?

A: The affirmative defenses include the following, to wit:
a) Fraud;
b) Statute of limitations;
c) Release;
d) Payment;

23
 e) Illegality;
f) Statute of frauds;
g) Estoppel;
h) Former recovery;
i) Discharge in bankruptcy; and
j) Any other matter by way of confession and avoidance.

3) Q: What are the other affirmative defenses which can be grounds for the dismissal of the complaint?
A: Affirmative defenses may also include grounds for the dismissal of a complaint, specifically,
a) That the court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter;
b) That there is another action pending between the same parties for the same cause (litis pendentia), or
c) That the action is barred by a prior judgment.

Section 6. Counterclaim. - A counterclaim is any claim which a defending party may have
against an opposing party.
Section 7. Compulsory counterclaim. - A compulsory counterclaim is one which, being
cognizable by the regular courts of justice, arises out of or is connected with the transaction or
occurrence constituting the subject matter of the opposing party's claim and does not require for
its adjudication the presence of third parties of whom the court cannot acquire jurisdiction. Such
a counterclaim must be within the jurisdiction of the court both as to the amount and the nature
thereof, except that in an original action before the Regional Trial Court, the counter-claim may
be considered compulsory regardless of the amount. A compulsory counterclaim not raised in the
same action is barred, unless otherwise allowed by these Rules.
Section 8. Cross-claim. - A cross-claim is any claim by one party against a co-party arising out
of the transaction or occurrence that is the subject matter either of the original action or of a
counterclaim therein. Such cross-claim may cover all or part of the original claim.
Section 9. Counter-counterclaims and counter-crossclaims. - A counter-claim may be asserted
against an original counter-claimant.
A cross-claim may also be filed against an original cross-claimant.
4) Q: What are the distinctions between compulsory counterclaim (principle of recoupment) and permissive
counterclaim (principle of set off)?
COMPULSORY COUNTERCLAIM PERMISSIVE COUNTERCLAIM
a) A compulsory counterclaim arises out of or is a) A permissive counterclaim does not arise out of
connected with the transaction or occurrence and is not connected with the transaction or
constituting the subject matter of the opposing party’s occurrence constituting the subject matter of the
claim opposing party’s claim;
b) A compulsory counterclaim is barred if not set up b) A permissive counterclaim is not barred even if
in the answer (or in the amended answer not set up in the answer;
c) Plaintiff need not answer a compulsory c) plaintiff must answer a permissive counterclaim;
counterclaim, except in summary proceeding
d) If plaintiff does not answer a compulsory d) Plaintiff who does not answer a permissive
counterclaim, he cannot be declared in default; counterclaim may be declared in default in respect
thereto;
e) A compulsory counterclaim does not require a e) A permissive counterclaim, being an initiatory
certification on non-forum shopping; pleading, requires a certification on non-forum
shopping;
f) Compulsory counterclaim is not an initiatory f) If it is a permissive counterclaim, the lack of a
pleading, and thus need not require a certificate of certificate of non-forum shopping is fatal. (G.R. No.

24
 non-forum shopping. 139018, April 11, 2005)

5) Q: Are payment of docket fees in compulsory counterclaim and cross-claim required?

A: Payment of docket fee in compulsory and cross-claim are suspended as per resolution of the Supreme Court
dated September 21, 2004. (G.R. No. 143581, January 7, 2008)

6) Q: Are docket fees required in permissive counterclaim? (Bar Examination 2019)

A: The rule in permissive counterclaim is that for the trial court to acquire jurisdiction, the counterclaimant is
bound to pay the prescribed docket fees. (G.R. No. 170483, April 19, 2010)

7) Q: What is the remedy in case of judgment on counterclaim, cross-claim of third- party complaint while the
main case is pending?
A: The judgment is not appealable under Sec. 1, Rule 41 and therefore Petition for certiorari is available, unless
the court will allow appeal.

8) Q: What is the effect of the dismissal of the main action on the counterclaim?
A: In case of dismissal of the main action, the counterclaim whether permissive or compulsory will not be
dismissed and shall be prosecuted in the same case or in a separate action. (Padilla vs. Globe Asiatique, Delfin
Lee)

9) Q: Can the court award counterclaim in an action for expropriation?

A: No, by express provision of Sec. 3, Rule 67 that, no counterclaim, cross-claim or third-party complaint shall
be alleged or allowed in the answer or any subsequent pleading.

Section 10. Reply. - All new matters alleged in the answer are deemed controverted. If the
plaintiff wishes to interpose any claims arising out of the new matters so alleged, such claims
shall be set forth in an amended or supplemental complaint. However, the plaintiff may file a
reply only if the defending party attaches an actionable document to his or her answer.
A reply is a pleading, the office or function of which is to deny, or allege facts in denial or
avoidance of new matters alleged in, or relating to, said actionable document.
In the event of an actionable document attached to the reply, the defendant may file a rejoinder if
the same is based solely on an actionable document.
Section 11. Third, (fourth, etc.) - party complaint. - A third (fourth, etc.) - party complaint is a
claim that a defending party may, with leave of court, file against a person not a party to the
action, called the third (fourth, etc.) - party defendant for contribution, indemnity, subrogation or
any other relief, in respect of his or her opponent's claim.
The third (fourth, etc.)-party complaint shall be denied admission, and the court shall require the
defendant to institute a separate action, where: (a) the third (fourth, etc.)-party defendant cannot
be located within thirty (30) calendar days from the grant of such leave; (b) matters extraneous to
the issue in the principal case are raised; or (c) the effect would be to introduce a new and
separate controversy into the action.
Section 12. Bringing new parties. - When the presence of parties other than those to the original
action is required for the granting of complete relief in the determination of a counterclaim or
cross-claim, the court shall order them to be brought in as defendants, if jurisdiction over them
can be obtained.
Section 13. Answer to third (fourth, etc.) - party complaint. - A third (fourth, etc.) - party
defendant may allege in his or her answer his or her defenses, counterclaims or cross-claims,
including such defenses that the third (fourth, etc.) - party plaintiff may have against the original

25
 plaintiff's claim. In proper cases, he [she] may also assert a counterclaim against the original
plaintiff in respect of the latter's claim against the third-party plaintiff.
10) Q: What is the rule in case of allegation of new matters in the answer?
A: Under the above-stated rules, all new matters alleged in the answer are deemed controverted.

11) Q: How can the plaintiff interpose his claim arising out of the new matters?
A: If the plaintiff wishes to interpose any claims arising out of the new matters so alleged, such claims shall be
set forth in an amended or supplemental complaint. (Sec. 10, Rule 6 of the amended Rules on Civil Procedure)

12) Q: When can the plaintiff file a reply?

A: The plaintiff may file a reply only if the defending party attaches an actionable document to his or her
answer.

13) Q: What is a reply?

A: A reply is a pleading, the office or function of which is to deny, or allege facts in denial or avoidance of new
matters alleged in, or relating to, said actionable document.

14) Q: When can a rejoinder be filed?

A: In the event of an actionable document attached to the reply, the defendant may file a rejoinder if the same is
based solely on an actionable document.

15) Q: When can the court deny a third (fourth, etc.)-party?

A: The third (fourth, etc.)-party complaint shall be denied admission, and the court shall require the defendant to
institute a separate action, where:
(a) The third (fourth, etc.)- party defendant cannot be located within thirty (30) calendar days from the grant of
such leave;
(b) Matters extraneous to the issue in the principal case are raised; or
(c) The effect would be to introduce a new and separate controversy into the action. (Sec. 11, Rule 6 of the
amended Rules on Civil Procedure)

16) Q: What is the rule on bringing in of new parties in counterclaim and cross-claim?
A: When the presence of parties other than those to the original action is required for the granting of complete
relief in the determination of a counterclaim or cross-claim, the court shall order them to be brought in as
defendants, if jurisdiction over them can be obtained. (Sec. 12, Rule 6)

RULE 7
(Parts of a Pleading)

Section 1. Caption. - The caption sets forth the name of the court, the title of the action, and the
docket number if assigned.
The title of the action indicates the names of the parties. They shall all be named in the original
complaint or petition; but in subsequent pleadings, it shall be sufficient if the name of the first
party on each side be stated with an appropriate indication when there are other parties.
Their respective participation in the case shall be indicated.
Section 2. The body. - The body of the pleading sets forth its designation, the allegations of the
party's claims or defenses, the relief prayed for, and the date of the pleading.
(a) Paragraphs. - The allegations in the body of a pleading shall be divided into
paragraphs so numbered to be readily identified, each of which shall contain a statement
of a single set of circumstances so far as that can be done with convenience. A paragraph
may be referred to by its number in all succeeding pleadings.

26
 (b) Headings. - When two or more causes of action are joined the statement of the first
shall be prefaced by the words "first cause of action,'' of the second by "second cause of
action", and so on for the others.
When one or more paragraphs in the answer are addressed to one of several causes of
action in the complaint, they shall be prefaced by the words "answer to the first cause of
action" or "answer to the second cause of action" and so on; and when one or more
paragraphs of the answer are addressed to several causes of action, they shall be prefaced
by words to that effect.
(c) Relief. - The pleading shall specify the relief sought, but it may add a general prayer
for such further or other relief as may be deemed just or equitable.
(d) Date. - Every pleading shall be dated.
Section 3. Signature and address. - (a) Every pleading and other written submissions [to the
court] must be signed by the party or counsel representing him or her.
(b) The signature of counsel constitutes a certificate by him or her that he or she has read the
pleading; that to the best of his knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an inquiry
reasonable under the circumstances:
(1) It is not being presented for any improper purpose, such as to harass, cause unnecessary
delay, or needlessly increase the cost of litigation;
(2) 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;
(3) The factual contentions have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, will
likely have evidentiary support after availment of the modes of discovery under these
[R]ules; and
(4) The denials of factual contentions are warranted on the evidence or, if specifically so
identified, are reasonably based on belief or a lack of information.
(c) If the court determines, on motion or motu proprio and after notice and hearing, that this
[R]ule has been violated, it may impose an appropriate sanction or refer such violation to the
proper office for disciplinary action, on any attorney, law firm, or party that violated the rule, or
is responsible for the violation. Absent exceptional circumstances, a law firm shall be held
jointly and severally liable for a violation committed by its partner, associate, or employee. The
sanction may include, but shall not be limited to, non-monetary directive or sanction; an order to
pay a penalty in court; or, if imposed on motion and warranted for effective deterrence, an order
directing payment to the movant of part or all of the reasonable attorney’s fees and other
expenses directly resulting from the violation, including attorney’s fees for the filing of the
motion for sanction. The lawyer or law firm cannot pass on the monetary penalty to the client.
Section 4. Verification. - Except when otherwise specifically required by law or rule, pleadings
need not be under oath or verified.
A pleading is verified by an affidavit of an affiant duly authorized to sign said verification. The
authorization of the affiant to act on behalf of a party, whether in the form of a secretary’s
certificate or a special power of attorney, should be attached to the pleading, and shall allege the
following attestations:

27
(a) The allegations in the pleading are true and correct based on his or her personal knowledge,
or based on authentic documents;
(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.
The signature of the affiant shall further serve as a certification of the truthfulness of the
allegations in the pleading.
A pleading required to be verified that contains a verification based on "information and belief",
or upon "knowledge, information and belief", or lacks a proper verification, shall be treated as an
unsigned pleading.
1) Q: Can the court grant relief not prayed for in the pleading?
A: No. Courts cannot grant a relief not prayed for in the pleadings or in excess of what is being sought by the
party. (G.R. No. 173559, January 7, 2013)

2) Q: What is the requirement in order that pleadings and other written submission be presented to the court?
A: Every pleading and other written submissions to the court must be signed by the party or counsel representing
him or her.

3) Q: What are the effects of the signature of the counsel in the pleading? (Sec. 3, Rule 7)
A: The signature of counsel constitutes as:
1) Certificate by him or her that he or she has read the pleading and document;
2) That to the best of his or her knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under
the circumstances:
3) It is not being presented for any improper purpose, such as to harass, cause unnecessary delay, or
needlessly increase the cost of litigation;
4) 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;
5) The factual contentions have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, will likely have
evidentiary support after availment of the modes of discovery under these rules; and
6) The denials of factual contentions are warranted on the evidence, or if specifically so identified, are
reasonably based on belief or a lack of information. (Sec. 3, Rule 7 of the 2019 Amendments to the 1997
Rules on Civil Procedure)

4) Q: What are the consequences of violation of the rule?

A: If the court determines, on motion or motu proprio and after notice and hearing, that this rule has been
violated, it may:
1) Impose an appropriate sanction; or
2) Refer such violation to the proper office for disciplinary action, on any attorney, law firm, or party that
violated the rule, or is responsible for the violation.

5) Q: What are the sanctions that may be imposed against the law firm in case of violation of the rule?
A: Absent exceptional circumstances, a law firm shall be held jointly and severally liable for a violation
committed by its partner, associate, or employee which may include the following, to wit:
1) Non-monetary directive or sanction;
2) An order to pay a penalty in court; or,
3) If imposed on motion and warranted for effective deterrence, an order directing payment to the movant of
part or all of the reasonable attorney’s fees and other expenses directly resulting from the violation, including
attorney’s fees for the filing of the motion for sanction.

6) Q: What is the prohibition as regards the above liabilities?

A: The lawyer or law firm cannot pass on the monetary penalty to the client.

28
7) Q: How to verify a pleading under the Sec. 4, Rule 7 of the amended rules?
A: A pleading is verified by an affidavit of an affiant duly authorized to sign said verification. The authorization
of the affiant to act on behalf of a party, whether in the form of a secretary’s certificate or a special power of
attorney, should be attached to the pleading, and shall allege the following attestations:
(a) The allegations in the pleading are true and correct based on his or her personal knowledge, or based on
authentic documents;
(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.

8) Q: What is the purpose of the signature of the affiant under the new rules?
A: The signature of the affiant shall further serve as a certification of the truthfulness of the allegations in the
pleading.

9) Q: What is the effect of a defective verification under the new rules?

A: A pleading required to be verified that contains a verification based on “information and belief,” or upon
“knowledge, information and belief,” or lacks a proper verification, shall be treated as an unsigned pleading.

Acts of Forum Shopping

Section 5. Certification against forum shopping. - The plaintiff or principal party shall certify
under oath in the complaint or other initiatory pleading asserting a claim for relief, or in a sworn
certification annexed thereto and simultaneously filed therewith: (a) that he [or she] has not
theretofore 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; (b) if there is such other pending action or claim, a complete
statement of the present status thereof; and (c) if he [or she] should thereafter learn that the same
or similar action or claim has been filed or is pending, he [or she] shall report that fact within
five (5) calendar days therefrom to the court wherein his [or her] aforesaid complaint or
initiatory pleading has been filed.
The authorization of the affiant to act on behalf of a party, whether in the form of a secretary’s
certificate or a special power of attorney, should be attached to the pleading.
Failure to comply with the foregoing requirements shall not be curable by mere amendment of
the complaint or other initiatory pleading but shall be cause for the dismissal of the case without
prejudice, unless otherwise provided, upon motion and after hearing. The submission of a false
certification or non-compliance with any of the undertakings therein shall constitute indirect
contempt of court, without prejudice to the corresponding administrative and criminal actions. If
the acts of the party or his [or her] counsel clearly constitute willful and deliberate forum
shopping, the same shall be ground for summary dismissal with prejudice and shall constitute
direct contempt, as well as a cause for administrative sanctions.
Section 6. Contents. - Every pleading stating a party’s claims or defenses shall, in addition to
those mandated by Section 2, Rule 7, state the following:
(a) Names of witnesses who will be presented to prove a party’s claim or defense;
(b) Summary of the witnesses’ intended testimonies, provided that the judicial affidavits of said
witnesses shall be attached to the pleading and form an integral part thereof. Only witnesses
whose judicial affidavits are attached to the pleading shall be presented by the parties during

29
 trial. Except if a party presents meritorious reasons as basis for the admission of additional
witnesses, no other witness or affidavit shall be heard or admitted by the court; and
(c) Documentary and object evidence in support of the allegations contained in the pleading.
10) Q: What is forum shopping?
A: It is an act of malpractice committed by the parties to the case by filing multiple suits before different court or
fora, either successively or simultaneously, involving the same parties, cause of action, and asking for the same
relief, for the purpose of obtaining a favorable judgment;

11) Q: What are the effects of forum shopping?

A: Dismissal with prejudice- since it is barred by prior judgment or litis pendentia. (Sec. 5, Rule 15)

12) Q; Can the court motu propio dismiss the case in case of forum shopping?
A: Yes, if it is based on litis pendentia or barred by prior judgment as mandated under Sec. 1, Rule 9.

13) Q: What is the test of determining the existence of forum shopping?

A: The test for determining the existence of forum shopping is whether the elements of litis pendentia are
present, or whether a final judgment in one case amounts to res judicata in another. Thus, there is forum
shopping when the following elements are present:
a. identity of parties, or at least such parties as represent the same interests in both actions;
b. identity of rights asserted and relief prayed for, the relief being founded on the same facts; and
c. the identity of the two preceding particulars, such that any judgment rendered in the other action will,
regardless of which party is successful, amount to res judicata in the action under consideration; said
requisites are also constitutive of the requisites for auter action pendant or lis pendens. (G.R. No. 172505,
October 1, 2014)
Example: If the judgment was challenged, but the appeal was denied with finality, and later on the order
and the writ of execution was questioned in a separate petition for certiorari and prohibition, then there is
no forum shopping since it involves different cause of action and relief prayed for.

14) Q: What are the effects of forum shopping?

Answer:
1) Summary dismissal of the case;
2) Contempt;
3) Administrative liability of the counsel

15) Q: Does forum shopping exist in case of a pending civil/criminal case and administrative case?
A: NO. "The settled rule is that criminal and civil cases are altogether different from administrative matters, such
that the disposition in the first two will not inevitably govern the third and vice versa." In the context of the case
at bar, matters handled by the IC are delineated as either regulatory or adjudicatory, both of which have distinct
characteristics. (G.R. No. 207277, January 16, 2017)

16) Q: Is forum shopping present in case of annulment of Real Estate Mortgage and action for injunction
invoking the nullity of Real Estate Mortgage?
A: There can be no determination of the validity of the extrajudicial foreclosure and the propriety of injunction
in the Injunction Case without necessarily ruling on the validity of the REM, which is already the subject of the
Annulment Case. The identity of the causes of action in the two cases entails that the validity of the mortgage
will be ruled upon in both, and creates a possibility that the two rulings will conflict with each other. This is
precisely what is sought to be avoided by the rule against forum shopping. The substantial identity of the two
cases remains even if the parties should add different grounds or legal theories for the nullity of the REM or
should alter the designation or form of the action. The well-entrenched rule is that 'a party cannot, by varying the
form of action, or adopting a different method of presenting his case, escape the operation of the principle that
one and the same cause of action shall not be twice litigated.' (G.R. No. 207914)

17) Q: Is forum shopping a ground for the filing of motion to dismiss an action?
A: Yes, forum shopping can be a ground for the dismissal of an action based on litis pendentia or barred by prior
judgment under Sec. 12 (a), Rule 15.

30
 Certification of Non- Forum Shopping
18) Q: When is certification of non-forum shopping required?
A: All initiatory pleadings must contain a certification against forum shopping under Sec. 5, Rule 7

19) Q: Is certification of non-forum shopping required in case of a petition for issuance of writ of possession?
A: NO. We affirm the ruling of the CA that a certificate against forum shopping is not a requirement in an ex
parte petition for the issuance of a writ of possession. An ex parte petition for the issuance of writ of possession
is not a complaint or other initiatory pleading as contemplated in Section 5, Rule 7 of the 1997 Rules of Civil
Procedure. (G.R. No. 195445. December 7, 2016)

20) Q: Who shall sign the certification of non-forum shopping?

A: As a rule, the party shall sign the certification against forum shopping, subject to exception. The requirement
that it is the petitioner, not her counsel, who should sign the certificate of non-forum shopping is due to the fact
that a “certification is a peculiar personal representation on the part of the principal party, an assurance given to
the court or other tribunal that there are no other pending cases involving basically the same parties, issues and
causes of action.” “Obviously, it is the petitioner, and not always the counsel whose professional services have
been retained for a particular case, who is in the best position to know whether [she] actually filed or caused the
filing of a petition in that case.” Per the above guidelines, however, if a petitioner is unable to sign a certification
for reasonable or justifiable reasons, she must execute an SPA designating her counsel of record to sign on her
behalf. “A certification which had been signed by counsel without the proper authorization is defective and
constitutes a valid cause for the dismissal of the petition.” (G.R. No. 172590, January 7, 2013)

21) Q: What is the requirement on the authorization of the affiant to act for and in behalf of the party under the
amended rules?
A: The authorization of the affiant to act on behalf of a party, whether in the form of a secretary’s certificate or a
special power of attorney, should be attached to the pleading. (Sec. 5, Rule 7)

22) Q: Can the court motu proprio dismiss the case in case of failure to comply with the certification against
forum shopping?
A: No motu proprio dismissal in case of failure to comply with the certification against forum shopping since it
requires notice and hearing under Sec. 5, Rule 7, and it is not one of the grounds mentioned under Sec. 1, Rule 9
on motu proprio dismissal.

23) Q: What is the effect of failure to comply with certification against forum shopping?
A: Certification against forum shopping is a condition precedent in all initiatory pleadings, and failure to comply
can be raised as an affirmative defense in the answer under Sec. 12, Rule 15 of the new rules.

24) Q: What is the nature of the dismissal? What is the remedy?

A: The nature of the dismissal is without prejudice to the refilling of the action under Sec. 13, Rule 15: Remedy
is refilling of the action.

25) Q: Can the pleading be amended in case there is failure to comply with certification against forum shopping?
A: As a general rule, under Sec. 5, Rule 7 amendment of the pleading is not allowed in case of failure to comply
with certification against forum shopping.

26) Q: Is the rule absolute?

A: No, Substantial compliance rule and presence of special circumstance and compelling reasons are the
exceptions to the rule. Certification against forum shopping, non-compliance therewith or a defect therein, x x x,
is generally not curable by its subsequent submission or correction thereof, unless there is a need to relax the
Rule on the ground of ‘substantial compliance’ or presence of ‘special circumstances or compelling reasons.’
(G.R. No. 172590. January 7, 2013)

27) Q: Can the certification against forum shopping be notarized by the clerk of court?
A: NO. This Court cannot agree with petitioner’s argument that the notarization of verifications and
certifications on non-forum shopping constitutes part of a clerk of court’s daily official functions. We are not

31
 prepared to rule in petitioner’s favor on this score; as it is, the workload of a clerk of court is already heavy
enough. We cannot add to this the function of notarizing complaints, answers, petitions, or any other pleadings
on a daily or regular basis; such a responsibility can very well be relegated to commissioned notaries public.
Besides, if the practice – specifically the notarization by clerks of court of pleadings filed in cases pending
before their own salas or courts – is allowed, unpleasant consequences might ensue; it could be subject to abuse,
and it distracts the clerks of court’s attention from the true and essential work they perform. (G.R. No. 196651.
February 3, 2016)

28) Q: What are the additional contents of the pleading under Sec. 6, Rule 7 of the amended rules?
A: Every pleading stating a party’s claims or defenses shall, in addition to those mandated by Section 2, Rule 7,
state the following:
a. Names of witnesses who will be presented to prove a party’s claim or defense;
b. Summary of the witnesses’ intended testimonies, provided that the judicial affidavits of said witnesses shall
be attached to the pleading and form an integral part thereof. Only witnesses whose judicial affidavits are
attached to the pleading shall be presented by the parties during trial. Except if a party presents meritorious
reasons as basis for the admission of additional witnesses, no other witness or affidavit shall be heard or
admitted by the court; and
c. Documentary and object evidence in support of the allegations contained in the pleading.

Other Requirements of a Pleading

29) Q: What are the other requirements in case of an initiatory pleading?
Answer:
1) MCLE Compliance Number with date of issuance;
2) Roll Number
3) IBP Number
4) PTR Number
5) Contact Number

30) Q: What is the effect of Failure to comply with MCLE Compliance?

Answer:
1) Counsel shall be fined with P4,000.00
2) Administrative liability

RULE 8
(Manner of Making Allegations in Pleadings)

Section 1. In general. - Every pleading shall contain in a methodical and logical form, a
plain, concise and direct statement of the ultimate facts, including the evidence on which
the party pleading relies for his [or her] claim or defense, as the case may be, omitting the
statement of mere evidentiary facts.
If a cause of action [or] defense relied on is based on law, the pertinent provisions thereof
and their applicability to him [or her] shall be clearly and concisely stated.
Section 2. Alternative causes of action or defenses. - A party may set forth two or more
statements of a claim or defense alternatively or hypothetically, either in one cause of
action or defense or in separate causes of action or defenses. When two or more statements
are made in the alternative and one of them if made independently would be sufficient, the
pleading is not made insufficient by the insufficiency of one or more of the alternative
statements.
Section 3. Conditions precedent. - In any pleading a general averment of the performance
or occurrence of all conditions precedent shall be sufficient.

32
Section 4. Capacity. - Facts showing the capacity of a party to sue or be sued or the
authority of a party to sue or be sued in a representative capacity or the legal existence of
an organized association of person that is made a party, must be averred. A party desiring
to raise an issue as to the legal existence of any party or the capacity of any party to sue or
be sued in a representative capacity, shall do so by specific denial, which shall include such
supporting particulars as are peculiarly within the pleader's knowledge.
Section 5. Fraud, mistake, condition of the mind. - In all averments of fraud or mistake the
circumstances constituting fraud or mistake must be stated with particularity. Malice,
intent, knowledge, or other condition of the mind of a person may be averred generally.
Section 6. Judgment. - In pleading a judgment or decision of a domestic or foreign court,
judicial or quasi-judicial tribunal, or of a board or officer, it is sufficient to aver the
judgment or decision without setting forth matter showing jurisdiction to render it. An
authenticated copy of the judgment or decision shall be attached to the pleading.
Section 7. Action or defense based on document. - Whenever an action or defense is based
upon a written instrument or document, the substance of such instrument or document shall
be set forth in the pleading, and the original or a copy thereof shall be attached to the
pleading as an exhibit, which shall be deemed to be a part of the pleading, or said copy
may with like effect be set forth in the pleading.
Section 8. How to contest such documents. - When an action or defense is founded upon a
written instrument, copied in or attached to the corresponding pleading as provided in the
preceding section, the genuineness and due execution of the instrument shall be deemed
admitted unless the adverse party, under oath specifically denies them, and sets forth what
he or she claims to be the facts, but the requirement of an oath does not apply when the
adverse party does not appear to be a party to the instrument or when compliance with an
order for an inspection of the original instrument is refused.
Section 9. Official document or act. - In pleading an official document or official act, it is
sufficient to aver that the document was issued or the act was done in compliance with law.
Section 10. Specific denial. - A defendant must specify each material allegation of fact the
truth of which he or she does not admit and, whenever practicable, shall set forth the
substance of the matters upon which he or she relies to support his or her denial. Where a
defendant desires to deny only a part of an averment, he or she shall specify so much of it
as is true and material and shall deny only the remainder. Where a defendant is without
knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of a material averment
made to the complaint, he or she shall so state, and this shall have the effect of a denial.
Section 11. Allegations not specifically denied deemed admitted. - Material averments in a
pleading asserting a claim or claims, other than those as to the amount of unliquidated
damages, shall be deemed admitted when not specifically denied. Allegations of usury in a
complaint to recover usurious interest are deemed admitted if not denied under oath.
Section 12. Affirmative defenses. - (a) A defendant shall raise his or her affirmative
defenses in his or her answer, which shall be limited to the reasons set forth under Section
5(b), Rule 6, and the following grounds:

33
 1. That the court has no jurisdiction over the person of the defending party;
2. That venue is improperly laid;
3. That the plaintiff has no legal capacity to sue;
4. That the pleading asserting the claim states no cause of action; and
5. That a condition precedent for filing the claim has not been complied with.
(b) Failure to raise the affirmative defenses at the earliest opportunity shall constitute a
waiver thereof.
(c) The court shall motu proprio resolve the above affirmative defenses within thirty (30)
calendar days from the filing of the answer.
(d) As to the other affirmative defenses under the first paragraph of Section 5(b), Rule 6,
the court may conduct a summary hearing within fifteen (15) calendar days from the filing
of the answer. Such affirmative defenses shall be resolved by the court within thirty (30)
calendar days from the termination of the summary hearing.
(e) Affirmative defenses, if denied, shall not be the subject of a motion for reconsideration
or petition for certiorari, prohibition or mandamus, but may be among the matters to be
raised on appeal after a judgment on the merits.
Section 13. Striking out of pleading or matter contained therein. - Upon motion made by a
party before responding to a pleading or, if no responsive pleading is permitted by these
Rules, upon motion made by a party within twenty (20) calendar days after the service of
the pleading upon him or her, or upon the court's own initiative at any time, the court may
order any pleading to be stricken out or that any sham or false, redundant, immaterial,
impertinent, or scandalous matter be stricken out therefrom.
1) Q: What is the requirement in case of allegations of actionable document in the pleading?
A: It must be denied under oath, otherwise the genuineness and due execution of the actionable document (not of
its contents) is deemed impliedly admitted under Sec. 8, Rule 8.

2) Q: What are the exceptions?

Answer:
1. When the person denying is not a party to the actionable document (Possible source of a bar problem)
2. In case of refusal to comply with the Order of production.

3) Q: What is the remedy of the movant?

A: In case of failure to deny the allegation of actionable document under oath, the movant may file a Motion for
judgment on the pleadings under Rule 34, since the answer does not tender an issue.

4) Q: What is requirement in order for the 1st exception to apply?

A: The 1st exception especially if the party filing the pleading is not a party to the actionable document/contract,
and the denial must be in good faith, otherwise it will result to an implied admission. Therefore, there can be
filing of a Motion for judgment on the pleading.
TAKE NOTE: Examine who is the one filing the answer- If party to the actionable document then answer must be
under oath- otherwise NO.

5) Q: What are the kinds of denial under the amended rules?

A: The kinds of denial are as follows, to wit
1. Absolute denial- A defendant must specify each material allegation of fact the truth of which he or she does
not admit and, whenever practicable, shall set forth the substance of the matters upon which he or she relies
to support his or her denial.
2. Partial denial - Where a defendant desires to deny only a part of an averment, he or she shall specify so much
of it as is true and material and shall deny only the remainder.

34
 3. Denial by disavowal of knowledge- Where a defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to
form a belief as to the truth of a material averment made to the complaint, he or she shall so state, and this
shall have the effect of a denial.

6) Q: What are the other affirmative defenses which can be raised in the answer under the amended rules?
A: A defendant shall raise his or her affirmative defenses in his or her answer, which shall be limited to the
reasons set forth under Section 5(b), Rule 6, and the following grounds:
1. That the court has no jurisdiction over the person of the defending party;
2. That venue is improperly laid;
3. That the plaintiff has no legal capacity to sue;
4. That the pleading asserting the claim states no cause of action; and
5. That a condition precedent for filing the claim has not been complied with. (Sec. 12, Rule 8)

7) Q: What is the remedy in case of denial of the affirmative defenses under the amended rules?
A: Affirmative defenses, if denied, shall not be the subject of a motion for reconsideration or petition for
certiorari, prohibition or mandamus, but may be among the matters to be raised on appeal after a judgment on the
merits.

8) Q: What is a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP)?

A: A legal action filed to harass, vex, exert undue pressure or stifle any legal recourse that any person, institution
or the government has taken or may take in the enforcement of environmental laws, protection of the
environment or assertion of environmental rights shall be treated as a SLAPP and shall be governed by these
Rules. (Sec. 1, Rule 6 Part II of the Rules on Environmental Cases)

9) Q: How to allege Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP) as a defense?

A: Defendant may file an answer interposing as a defense that the case is a SLAPP. (Sec. 2, Rule 6 Part II of the
Rules on Environmental Cases)

==================================================================================

 Coverage/Scope of Remedial Law:

1) Laws on the Jurisdiction of Courts
2) Civil Procedure (Rules 1-71), consisting of:
a. General Provisions – (Rule 1)
b. Ordinary Civil Actions (Rules 2-56)
i. Civil Actions (Rules 2-5)
ii. Procedure in the RTC (Rules 6-39)
iii. Appeals (Rules 40-43)
iv. Procedure in the CA (Rules 44-55)
v. Procedure in the SC (Rule 56)
c. Provisional Remedies (Rules 57-61)- - - [PPRRS]
d. Special Civil Actions (Rules 62-71) - - - [IDRC-QE-FPFC] *
3) Special Proceedings (Rules 72-109) - - - - - [SCRATCH-DAMAGE-CAA]
4) Criminal Procedure (Rules 110-127)
5) Rules on Evidence (Rules 128-134)
Note: - Rules 135-142 pertain to Legal Ethics
- Rule 143 – Applicability of the Rules
- Rule 144 – Effectiveness
- * Quieting of Title is also a Special Civil Action (Almeyda v. Ilacas, GR 64757-R, Jan. 21, 1982)
- Nos. 2 to 5 above are the four main divisions of Remedial Law.
- Only letters b to d above are the three main divisions of Civil Procedure.

35