Jurisdiction To Rule 10 JW 2019

Transcribers: Ali, Almajose, Ampatin, Ang, Berlanga, Bulatao, Candelaria, Chavez, Cruz Ash, Cruz Au, Cuizon, De Leon
Alf, De
Leon Raine, Delos Santos, Francia, Ilacad, Kalaw, Labatos, Lavarias, Lim Fan, Loja, Manaligod, Manresa, Mengullo, Oliveros,
Pangilinan, Patricio, Pelaco, Peña, Regala, Quiambao, Sales, Simpao, Solano, Teves, Torio
Civil Procedure Lecture Judge Wagan

Jurisdiction-Rule 10 ROC
(inaudible) So You need to correlate the rules. Remember this is a

very important subject. This is a part of Remedial Law. And of the 5
Remedial Law subjects, this is the biggest of the five. And as you
notice in Rules of Civil Procedure, or Civil Procedure per se, it
includes Rules 1 to 56 up to the Rules on Appeal and even up to
the Provisional Remedies (Rule 57 to 71). There are 6 Provisional
Remedies. In addition, the Special Rules: Summary Procedure, the
Rule of Procedure in Small Claims, as well as the substantive law
on Barangay Conciliation. So we have separate rules. You need to
know these not only because these will govern ordinary civil
actions but other cases which are not governed by the Rules of
Court.
We also have to observe some of the rules from Rules 1 to 56 in

the absence of the specific provision in that particular rule or law.
For example, Motion, this rule on motion applies to all, even in
criminal cases, special civil actions, special proceedings, and even
in those proceedings which are not governed by the Rules of
Court.
With that as an introduction, first things first, you know as

discussed by Dean Jara, by the way Dean Jara was my professor
in Civil Procedure. And he was the one who invited me to teach in
Mendiola. We are invited to teach.
First, what is important is jurisdiction. I will not go through again

substantive law versus remedial law, procedural law versus
substantive law because you already know that. And I think and I
guess Dean Jara already discussed that. But I will just have to
emphasize Jurisdiction. You know, by the way, you will not actually
be able to relate discussion if you have not read these rules. It
1 of 78
Transcribers: Ali, Almajose, Ampatin, Ang, Berlanga, Bulatao, Candelaria, Chavez, Cruz Ash, Cruz Au, Cuizon, De Leon Alf, De
would be difficult to understand them if you did not prepare,

talagang foreign sa inyo 'yan pag di niyo binasa
First what is jurisdiction? For purposes of civil actions filed in court,

and that's basic. JURISDICTION is the power or the authority to
hear, try, and decide the case and to carry its judgment into effect.
So with that, what actually is jurisdiction? It primarily goes into the

power of the court to entertain the case, to act on a case. So if we
do not have that power, we cannot act on the case or even when
the court acted on it without jurisdiction, the proceedings will be
null and void. You know that. That's how important jurisdiction is.
Where do we get that power? Where do we get that power to hear,

try, and decide the case? Remember, it is conferred by law. So if
the law says "the trial courts do not have jurisdiction to hear
certificate of conveyances," like for example those issued by the
LTFRB, the Land Transportation and Franchising Board, it is a
quasi judicial agency or body which is tasked on that matter. So if
those disputes relate to that certificates of conveyances, trial
courts do not have jurisdiction. Why? Because the law creating the
LTFRB provides so.
Another thing, if the dispute relates to disputes between

subdivision buyer and subdivision developer. Do they have
jurisdiction, the trial courts? No. Why? because it is exclusively
conferred to the HLURB.
So the power to hear, try, and decide the case and to carry the
judgment into effect is conferred by law. It is the law that says what
are the cases cognizable by the first level courts, what are the
cases cognizable by the RTC. If it is not there, then they do not
have that power. That's how important jurisdiction is. And you
know that in criminal cases that's also the case. In criminal cases,
BP 129 as amended by RA 7691 also confers jurisdiction of what
2 of 78
cases are cognizable by the first level court and the second level
court.
By the way if I say first level court, I am referring to the five courts.
What are those 5 courts? the Shari'a Circuit Trial Court, the
Municipal Trial Court in general, Municipal Circuit Trial Court in
general, Municipal Trial Court in Cities, as well as Metropolitan Trial
Court. So there are 5 first level courts. Are these promulgated by
the Supreme Court? No. They are also created by law. And where
can you find it? Also in BP129 as amended. So as I have said:
Shari'a Circuit Trial Court, the Municipal Trial Court in general,
Municipal Circuit Trial Court, Municipal Trial Court in Cities, and
Metropolitan Trial Court.
So if I say first level courts, I will be referring to these five. Even

Section 2 of Rule 5 says
that when the Rules of Court refer to "Municipal Trial Courts," the
Rules of Court would be referring to these five. Again, these are
created by law. What about the second level courts Obviously, 2nd
level courts are your RTCs.
Okay, we go back to the definition. So whenever we have that

jurisdiction as conferred by law, as stated in BP 129 as amended,
by the way, if you will be asked, what is the primary law on
jurisdiction? Would your answer be RA 7691 or BP 129? Still
BP129, as amended by RA 7691. RA 7691 is just a law expanding
the jurisdiction of the first level court and the second level court as
provided in BP 129. Because you should say correctly, you should
cite it correctly. So the law on jurisdiction is BP 129 as amended by
RA 7691.
Okay, assuming that the law confers jurisdiction. So jurisdiction is

the power or the authority to hear, try, and decide the case and to
carry its judgment into effect. "To carry its judgment into effect,"
because most, if I call them in recit and they say "and to execute
3 of 78
the judgment," "and to enforce the judgment." The question is are

there judgments that require to be executed? Are there judgments
that need execution? Not all.
For example, complaint was filed, summons served, defendant

instead of filing an answer, filed a motion to dismiss on the ground
that the court does not have jurisdiction. So the court heard the
motion to dismiss. After hearing, the court found out that it does
not have jurisdiction. So it granted the motion and dismissed the
complaint. Question: is that a judgment? Yes, it is equivalent to a
judgment. We call that as a final order. There may be other forms of
judgments. So what I'm trying to say is that not all judgments are
subject to execution, not all judgments are subject to enforcement.
So the proper phrase should be "and to carry its judgment into
effect."
So in my example, since the disposition of the court is to dismiss

the case is there something to execute? None. Because what
actually is the judgment of the court? Dismissal of the complaint
I encountered one case in Pasay, I inherited the case from the

predecessor judge. The previous judge granted the motion to
dismiss. So of course the plaintiff was aggrieved, the plaintiff
appealed to the CA. It was not satisfied it went up to the SC.
Supreme Court also affirmed the resolution of the CA upholding
the dismissal of the RTC. The judgment dismissing the complaint
became final. But you know what? The defendant went to court, to
the RTC Pasay, filed a Motion for Execution. At first when I
received it I really was wondering why. What's the need? What is
there to execute? So nevertheless, since that's the motion, I
advised my staff to include that in the calendar. During the hearing,
I asked the counsel for the defendant.
Judge:What is there to execute, counsel? Why did you file a

motion for execution?
Counsel: Because, Your Honor, the property should be given to the

defendant.
4 of 78
Judge: Was that included in the judgment of the court? What was
the judgment of the court?
Counsel: But Your Honor, the property will have to be given to the
defendant
Judge: Okay read the dispositive portion of the judgment, the order
of the court that became final
Counsel: Wherefore the motion is granted, hence, the case is

dismissed
Judge: So is there something to execute in that?
He did not answer. This is just an example just to demonstrate to

you that not all judgments actually require execution. And you may
know later that even under Rule 33, when the defendant files a
demurrer to evidence, which is akin to a Motion to Dismiss, and the
court grants the demurrer to evidence, due to insufficiency of
evidence, then that is also a judgment. But what is the judgment
actually? It will also have to dismiss the complaint. That is even
subject to appeal.
But if affirmed, there's nothing to execute.
Again, jurisdiction is the power or the authority of the court to hear,

try, and decide the case and to carry its judgment into effect. It is
conferred by law. The next question is, as a judge, of course, even
if I forget them, as a judge, I am expected to know what are those
that are
cognizable by the RTC, is it not? Even if I forget them, I am

expected to know. So since BP 129 confers jurisdiction to the RTC
as enumerated in Section 19 of BP 129, the next question is how
will I be able to determine that I have jurisdiction over a certain
complaint? I belong to a multi sala court - Pasay. We are 13
branches, so when they filed a case, they file it first to the clerk of
court and the clerk of court to the Executive Judge, then raffle it to
the branches. So let's say the complaint is given to me. how will I
be able to know that that case falls within the jurisdiction of RTC?
What is my duty? as a judge I will have to go over the allegations in
the complaint, examine the allegations in the complaint. And what
5 of 78
are these allegations? They are material facts constituting the

cause of action of the plaintiff. If after examining the allegations -
the material facts as alleged, I find that I have jurisdiction, then I'll
instruct the branch clerk to issue summons.
So jurisdiction is conferred. But how will that be determined by the

judge? How will that be determined by the court? It will be
determined by the allegations in the complaint. So you have to be
precise in these phrases, "jurisdiction is conferred by law, but it will
be determined by the allegations in the complaint" - the allegations
are those which make out a cause of action.
Now, granting that the court has jurisdiction, we now go to what

are the aspects for the court to acquire jurisdiction over a civil case
or civil action? There are four. And you know these. I will just have
to emphasize these. There are four aspects of how a court
acquires jurisdiction: jurisdiction over the subject matter,
jurisdiction over the person of the defendant, jurisdiction over the
issues to be resolved, and jurisdiction over the res.
You might wonder why did we used the word "aspects" and not
"requisites." Because not all may concur in one case. Unlike in
criminal cases, where there are 3 requisites for the court to acquire
jurisdiction over a criminal action. And you learned that in criminal
procedure.
The first requisite is jurisdiction over the subject matter of the

offense; second, jurisdiction over the person of the accused; then
jurisdiction over the place where the alleged crime or offense was
committed. Those 3 must concur for the court to acquire
jurisdiction. But in civil cases these four that I mentioned earlier
may not all concur. Example, let's say X filed a complaint for
collection of sum of money against B arising from the unpaid load.
So you know that under BP 129 as amended, RTC has jurisdiction
over claims of money if the amount exceeds Php 300,00 outside
Metro Manila, Php 400,000 within Metro Manila. So let's say I have
jurisdiction over the claim for unpaid loan. Jurisdiction over the
6 of 78
person will of course be acquired when summon is served to the

defendant. Jurisdiction over the issues, how do we acquire
jurisdiction over the issues? Jurisdiction over the issues is actually
the power or the authority to resolve the issue. How do we acquire
it? If that issue is raised in the complaint and/or if that issue is
raised in the answer. In a complaint for a simple collection of sum
of money, obviously these are the usual allegations in a complaint
for collection:
Par 1. That on such a day, defendant obtained a loan in the amount

of Php 500,000, as shown or as evidenced by the promissory
note.
Par 2. Defendant promises to pay the loan within 1 year in equal

monthly installments.
Par 3, Notwithstanding the loan having become due, defendant did

not pay.
Par 4. Due to the defendants failure to pay, plaintiff sent demand

letters for defendant to pay but defendant did not pay.
Par 5. Notwithstanding repeated demands, defendant did not pay.
So those are examples of material allegations that make out or

constitute a cause to collect. So with that allegations in the
complaint what are the issues that I have to resolve and over which
I acquire jurisdiction to resolve those issues? First, whether the
defendant indeed obtained a loan. Second, whether defendant
reneged on his promise to pay the loan. Then, whether the
defendant received the demand letter. Those are issues that have
to be resolved as alleged - as can be seen from the allegations in
the complaint.
Do not think that issues are only raised in the answer. No. If it says,
Judge she owes me -
that's her complain and the answer is no I do not owe her - that's
her answer. You follow? So we acquire jurisdiction over the issues
7 of 78
as raised in the pleadings. And I gave you an example of what are

probable issues in an action to collect an unpaid loan.
Let's say in Answer to that complaint, the defendant alleges:
Par 1. Defendant specifically denies that he obtained a loan, the

truth of the matter is that I did not obtain a loan. And I do not have
knowledge of what was alleged in the pleading.
Par 2. Assuming for the sake of argument, that loan has already
been paid.
Assuming those were the allegations in the answer. So what are

the issues raised in the answer? If that's how he sets forth his
defenses? There are two:
1. whether or not it is true that he obtained a loan
2. whether there was payment.
So these are issues that are raised in the pleadings, both in the
complaint and in the answer. So once these are raised and the
court has jurisdiction over the subject matter, the court will have
the authority to resolve those disputes.
As I've said in that simple collection of sum of money, next

question is does the court have jurisdiction over the res? What is a
res? Do not limit yourselves to say that res involves property or real
property. Res may involve status of the plaintiff; real property
belonging to plaintiff or defendant, as the case may be; or may be
interest of the plaintiff or defendant over the property; or
possession of a real property; or res can also be a personal
property. So res may be anything about real property - possession,
title, or interest or it may also be possession, title, or interest over a
personal property. That is a res. So next question how may court
acquire juris over the res? If that res is submitted to the jurisdiction
of the court or if that res was attached by a deed.
8 of 78
I'll go back to my question. In the simple collection for sum of

money, does that case has a res? No. There's no res. Why? It does
not involve a real property - possession, title, or any interest,
neither does it involve a personal property. And it does not also
involve a status of the plaintiff. So in this simple collection of
money, what are those aspects that are present? Only jurisdiction
over the subject matter, jurisdiction over the person of the
defendant, and jurisdiction over the issues but it does not have
jurisdiction over the res. So this is to tell you that these are not
requisites. They may not all concur.
Let's say the defendant is actually working in Dubai for 6 years. So

when plaintiff filed the collection for sum of money the court
ordered the issuance of summon but sheriff was not able to
personally serve it to the defendant because defendant is out of
the country. And let's say, even with the substituted service of
summons, the sheriff was not also able to enforce it because the
address is unknown. He cannot serve it even through substituted
service, so what will happen in the meantime? Under the
administrative matter, the case in the meantime will be sent to the
Archives. We cannot proceed with the case. Why? because we did
not acquire jurisdiction over the person of the defendant. But is
there a remedy for the plaintiff? Because the plaintiff is eager to
receive the Php 500,000 unpaid loan. Is there a remedy? Yes, if
that plaintiff will be represented by a Bedan lawyer. What's the
remedy there? The plaintiff may file an application for preliminary
attachment. What is the purpose of that? It is a provisional remedy.
What's the purpose? To attach any of the property of the
defendant found in the Philippines. For what purpose? For the
case to proceed. Why will the case proceed when the court
attaches real or personal property or any interest? Because the
court has already acquired jurisdiction over the res. So this is what
we call a quasi in rem. Again, the first example where there was no
attachment yet. It is actually an action in personam - binding only
against the defendant but since plaintiff availed of a provisional
9 of 78
remedy - a preliminary attachment, the property is actually

attached, once a specific property is attached, and it can be either
personal or real property, the court acquires jurisdiction over the
res, the case may now proceed,
because the court acquires jurisdiction over the res. But in the
event judgment will be in favor of plaintiff, satisfaction or execution
of the judgment.
What about the issue in lack of jurisdiction. So when a party assails

or questions the jurisdiction of the court, when is the earliest
possible opportunity to raise the issue on lack of jurisdiction? By
filing a motion to dismiss. If you look at Section 1 of Rule 16, that's
included in the second enumeration - lack of jurisdiction over the
subject matter of the claim.
In my example, defendant and the court did not realize, it went up

to the Court of Appeals. Can that issue still be raised? Yes. The
rule is basic: the issue on lack of jurisdiction can be raised at any
time, even on Appeal. Is that absolute? That’s the general rule.
There was one case that took the exception to this rule. BUT that
has already been clarified. So you’ve read Tijam vs Sibonghanoy.
What happened in Tijam? Tijam filed a collection case against
Sibonghanoy, Sibonghanoy posted a surety bond and Tijam was
supposed to execute against the surety. The surety company
actively participated in the trial court until the issue reached the
Court of Appeals. For the first time, for 15 years, after the surety
actively participated, they raised that the trial court did not have
jurisdiction. It went up to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court
said: No, although the general rule is the issue on lack of
jurisdiction can be raised at any time, you are estopped - Estoppel
by Laches. But that is only an exception.
From the time Tijam was decided, there were other cases that
followed suit. So it seemed that the subsequent cases followed the
ruling in Tijam That they invoked estoppel by laches. So the
10 of 78
Supreme Court in Calili vs. Ramirez pointed out that that is only an
exception and the general rule still remains. Finally, in the case of
Figueroa vs People, penned by Justice Nachura, the SC stated that
to clarify once and for all, the issue on lack of jurisdiction can be
raised at any time even on appeal, can be raised at any stage of
the proceedings.The ruling in Tijam vs. Sibonghanoy which applied
the principle of Estoppel in Laches is only but an exception. And
that exception will apply only if the case will have the same facts
as Tijam vs Sibonghanoy.
So do you think there will be repeat of Tijam vs Sibonghanoy? I

don’t think so because lawyers now are too eager to file a Motion
to Dismiss. It is for their benefit actually because if they will be able
to dispose of the case, the defendant will be so happy and that
lawyer can attend to other cases and it will save time, money, and
effort of the court than proceeding in the case when in the first
place the court does not have the power to try the dispute.
So that explains Tijam vs. Sibonghanoy. Actually if you read

Figueroa vs. People, it laid down the history of the ruling from
Sibonghanoy up to Figuroa. As third years, you should read that
case . You would not have the time hopefully when you reach
fourth year and you will be under me in Remedial Law. There
wouldn’t be enough time and more reason that you will not have
enough time when you read it during the 6-month review. This is
the time to have stock knowledge in Civil Procedure. Mind you
class, in RemRev, ang coverage namin ng midterms ay Civil
Procedure up to Special Civil Actions. Dalawang subjects yan in
one sem. Pabilisan ang aral talaga doon. What rules are those?
From Jurisdiction (Rule 1) to Rule 71. In second sem, Special
Proceedings , Crimpro and Evid. Do you think you still have the
time to go over these? NO. This is the time. Fourth year will only be
a review.
11 of 78
Jurisdiction over the person of the accused is determined through

valid service of summons. You will know them more on Rule 14 on
how to serve summons.
Purpose of summons:
1. Primary purpose is Due Process: to notify the defendant that

there’s a complaint and he has a period to file an answer. Twin
requirements of due process are notice and hearing. Summons
complies the notice requirement while the hearing in court later
complies with the hearing requirement.
2. Once defendant is notified, court acquires jurisdiction.
How will court exercise its jurisdiction? There are Doctrines or

Principles in the court's exercise. These principles are only
applicable when court acquires jurisdiction.
1. Principle of Continuing Jurisdiction or Doctrine of Court

Adherence: once court acquire jurisdiction, it continues to
exercise such until case is terminated, it will not be divested of
such power.
2. Principle of Judicial Stability or Non Interference: to maintain

the stability of courts. Applies to co-equal courts or tribunal. Court
of co-equal can't interfere in or enjoin the proceedings of a co
equal court, tribunal, ir body. Example: RTC and LA are co-equal.
Labor Arbiters are equivalent to RTCs.
3. Principle of Hierarchy of Courts: applies only in courts which

have concurrent jurisdiction. There will be no hierarchy if in the first
place there is no concurrent jurisdiction. Which courts have
concurrent jurisdiction? Based on BP 129: RTC, CA, SC over
petitions for certiorari, mandamus, quo warranto, prohibition. What
does that mean? If you follow the law, the law will give a choice to
12 of 78
the petitioner. He may file it in the RTC or CA or directly in SC. But

the Supreme Court said no, although we have concurrent
jurisdiction, follow the hierarchy of courts - commence the petition
first in the RTC or with the CA then appeal to Supreme Court. This
principle was first promulgated in case of St. Martin Funeral Homes
vs NLRC. What rules govern labor cases? Labor Code, although
the Rules of Court apply suppletorily. Under the Labor Code, there
is no appeal from the NLRC to any of the courts. So what they did
before was they availed the power of the Supreme Court,
remember Section 1 of Art VIII, the Supreme Court has the power
to entertain petitions for certiorari on judicial controversies, they
invoked that. So before the ruling in St. Martin Funeral Homes vs
NLRC, all the labor cases under NLRC went all the way up to the
Supreme Court via Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65. The SC
was loaded with all the petitions from NLRC, so SC promulgated in
St. Martin the hierarchy of courts and directed the parties to file
instead in the Court of Appeals (not RTC because they are co-
equal). So the Supreme Court certified the labor cases down to
CA. In People vs. Mateo, this gave rise to the amendment of Rule
122 on the Rules of Criminal Procedure. This is the rule on
automatic review in case there is death penalty. This is just for
academic discussion. Before, when the death penalty was still
allowed to be imposed, the case will be on automatic review with
the SC. That's automatic, no need to file Notice of Appeal. SC held
in People vs Mateo that it needs to follow hierarchy of courts.
Hence, if death (at present no death penalty pursuant to RA 9346)
or reclusion perpetua is imposed, Court of Appeals will have to
determine first automatic review before it will go up to SC and give
the accused another level of review before the case reaches the
SC. These are just examples of the application of hierarchy of
courts.
4. Principle of Primary Jurisdiction: applies when the law

specifically confers jurisdiction to that court, or quasi-judicial
agency, body, or tribunal that has EXCLUSIVE jurisdiction - to the
13 of 78
exclusion of all other courts. Example: in a Personnel Action

(transfers of employees), a principal of a school does not want to
be transferred to another place because she says it is far away
from her residence, yet she was given a directive for her transfer.
So she filed an action for injunction with the RTC questioning the
directive of her transfer. The superintendent filed an opposition
alleging that the RTC does not have jurisdiction because the issue
exclusive belongs to the CSC under the Civil Service Law. Is the
defendant correct? Yes, it is the CSC which has primary
jurisdiction. In the same manner that for subdivision disputes, it is
the HLURB which has exclusive jurisdiction over disputes BUT if
cause is damages, then it will be the RTC. Like for example,
maritime collision - nagbanggaan ang dalawang barko, di ko
malaman bakit pa sila nagbanggaan ang lawak lawak ng dagat,
nagbanggaan pa. If that happens does RTC have jurisdiction? No,
it is the MARINA. But let's say the passengers or the owners of
cargoes loaded in the vessel would like to file for damages. Would
that be cognizable by the MARINA? No, cognizable by the RTC
depending on the amount of claim.
Do not confuse Principle of Primary Jurisdiction with Principle on

Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies. They are not the same.
Let us say X files a complaint and alleges that Y, his adjacent

neighbor, encroaches 1.5 meters of his property - in other words a
boundary dispute. Does the RTC or first level court has
jurisdiction? Yes, depending on the assessed value of the subject
property because this is a real action. RTC has jurisdiction because
it involves possession over real property. But the defendant filed an
answer saying that RTC has no jurisdiction because the plaintiff did
not comply with exhaustion of Administrative Remedies and the
RTC does not even have primary jurisdiction under the Principle on
Primary Jurisdiction. He argues that plaintiff did not exhaust
14 of 78
Administrative Remedies because this issue should have been

lodged first with the National Housing Authority that awarded the
respective lots to us. Diyan sa Pasay, sa Villamor Airbase, marami
diyan awarded lots to the retired members of the armed forces, so
this is a common occurrence. Question, which principle apply?
Principle of Primary Jurisdiction or the Principle on Exhaustion of
Administrative Remedies? What did I tell you? RTC has jurisdiction.
Does NHA also has the authority to determine? Yes because it is
the unit or the agency that awarded the lots. NHA even knows
what are the extent of the metes and bounds of each of the
awarded lots to the parties. What applies instead is the Principle
on Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies.
5. Principle on Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies: court in the

meantime will defer the exercise of its jurisdiction to the agency,
tribunal or administrative body that has the special skill, knowledge
or expertise to determine the issue before the issue is lodged in
court. In other words, in exhaustion of administrative remedies,
both administrative agency and the court have the authority to
resolve the dispute. Unlike in Primary Jurisdiction, there is only 1
court, body, or tribunal which has the primary or exclusive
jurisdiction to resolve that dispute.
6. Principle on Ancillary Jurisdiction: when the court has

jurisdiction over the main subject matter, main cause of action,
then it will also have jurisdiction over incidents or provisional
remedies that may be availed of in relation to the main action.
Example: in collection for sum of money that I earlier gave, plaintiff
resorted to filing an application for preliminary attachment which is
just an incident to the main action or plaintiff files a complaint for
specific performance and plaintiff would like for the meantime for
the defendant to be enjoined - so he is asking for preliminary
injunction and/or temporary restraining order. These are just
incidental to the main action. Is it possible cases? Are there also
incidents in criminal cases apart from the main action? Yes.
15 of 78
Accused is charged with rape but he is saying that it should not be

raped and he should be allowed to post bail so he filed a petition
for bail. The petition for bail which is a summary hearing is just an
incident to the main case. The private complainant that filed the
case for rape also would like the court to hold the departure of the
defendant. The prosecution files a Motion for the Issuance of a
Hold Departure Order - that's another incident to a criminal case.
Even your provisional remedies: preliminary attachment, injunction,
replevin, support pendente lite, they can even be availed of in
criminal actions. What is the basis? Rule 127, provisional remedies
in criminal cases - they are obviously incidental to the main action.
That's what we call Ancillary Jurisdiction.
7. Residual Jurisdiction: residue or latak na lang. What did I tell you

earlier about jurisdiction? Jurisdiction is the power or the authority
to try, to hear, and decide the case and to carry its judgment into
effect. Once our judgment is final and the plaintiff wins, and there
are awards in the judgment of course plaintiff would be eager to file
a Motion for Execution. Because you know class, when plaintiff
files a complaint for collection, or for specific performance, for
reinvindicatoria, for recovery of possession, what does he want?
He wants to be granted with relief. Simply, he wants to be satisfied.
How will he be satisfied? Only when the judgment will be enforced
or executed. However class, when we decide and judgment is
final, what happens to our jurisdiction? It is lost. Let's say I
rendered judgment for the collection of sum of money. The
judgment became final because 15 days have elapsed without the
defendant filing for a motion for reconsideration, motion for new
trial, or without defendant filing for a notice of appeal. The 15 day
period has elapsed. Judgment became final. What happens to my
jurisdiction to hear, try, and decide the case? Lost.
Wala na akong jurisdiction doon. That's when we say the judgment

is immutable. That's the principle of Immutability.
16 of 78
8. Principle of Immutability: the judgment can no longer be

changed, the judgment can no longer be modified, it is final. Even if
the judgment is incorrect? Yes, because that judgment has
attained finality that it becomes immutable - can no longer be
modified or can no longer be changed.
But as I've said, what does the plaintiff actually likes? Plaintiff
actually like to be satisfied. How will he be satisfied? Only when
the judgment will be enforced.
So in enforcing the judgment, does the plaintiff still need the

authority of the court? YES. But is it not I said I lost my
jurisdiction? Yes, I lost my jurisdiction. Then, by which power does
the courts have to enforce the judgement? That’s when we say,
RESIDUAL POWER. We only exercise our residual power to carry
the judgement into effect or you will say to enforce the judgement.
But we can no longer change anything in the judgement. Even if it
being correct? Yes. Except lang kung the court does not have
jurisdiction because that judgment cannot be enforced for being
VOID.
Now enough with those principles, we go to what are the kinds of

courts. I already mentioned First Level Courts, Second Level
Courts. The First level courts and the Second level courts are
collectively referred to as TRIAL COURTS. The trial courts,
sometimes referred to as lower courts. But you do not anymore
have previous “inferior courts”. Kaya nga lang nag change yung
phrasing kasi dati, if you can read decisions before, 1980s 1990s
and 1970s, where the SC decisions still use the word “inferior”.
That is already no longer used and is changed to First level court
and Second level court, these two are collectively referred to as
LOWER COURTS or TRIAL COURTS.
What are the other courts? We have the APPELLATE courts - the
CA and the SC, as the case may be. Although these two are
17 of 78
appellate courts, they also exercise exclusive jurisdiction; and BP

129 provides CA exercises exclusive jurisdiction over petitions for
annulment of decisions of the RTC.
And I told you earlier that SC, CA, and RTC have concurrent
jurisdiction over petitions for certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus.
There are also cases that are exclusively heard by the SC but
seldom because it is an appellate court.
By the way, I told you earlier that when I discussed about hierarchy,
the SC says you file it first with the RTC or CA as the case may be,
is that absolute? No. There are instances wherein the SC would
say okay since the issue is of TRANSCENDENTAL IMPORTANCE
we will exercise our jurisdiction to hear this petition for certiorari.
Since the issue is of transcendental importance, the SC will have to
resolve this. It’s up for the SC. It’s discretionary on the part of the
SC. But for us? What’s the policy? Follow the hierarchy of courts.
I still encounter parties that go directly to the SC. Petition for

certiorari: Judge Wagan committed grave abuse of discretion
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction. Why? Because I denied
the petition for certiorari, and I also denied the MR. The case
actually involves a criminal case which is cognizable by the
Metropolitan Trial Court of Pasay. They wanted to dismiss or
suspend the proceedings in the criminal case before the MeTC of
Pasay but that was denied by the judge, so they filed MR but was
also denied. They went up to the RTC saying that MeTC Pasay
committed grave abuse of discretion per my decision on the
petition for certiorari. I did not find the MeTC judge committed
grave abuse of discretion. So I dismissed the petition and the
counterpart, denied. Yesterday, I saw petition for review on
certiorari, that’s Rule 45 actually. It’s an appeal directly to the
Supreme Court. I will no longer mention about that – if it’s proper or
not, let the Supreme Court say. But under the rules, if the one to
appeal the decision of the RTC, they have to go to the RTC
through notice of appeal via ordinary appeal and you will learn that
18 of 78
under the rules on appeal from Rules 40-56. Okay, so that’s

Residual Jurisdiction.
THE COURTS. What are the different classification of courts? You

have courts which have general jurisdiction as supposed to courts
which have limited jurisdiction. Courts which have general
jurisdiction are those which the law confers the court to hear any
other cases aside from those enumerated. That’s expressed in
Section 19. Which court are considered as general jurisdiction?
The RTC. Why? Because of par 6, Sec 19 of BP 129. The RTC has
general jurisdiction over all other civil cases not falling within the
jurisdiction of any court, tribunal, body exercising judicial and
quasi-judicial functions, it is otherwise known as the catch-all
provision. Which courts have limited jurisdiction? Meaning limited
only to those enumerated and conferred by law – obviously the first
mentioned courts. They do not have this catch-all provision.
What about courts which have special jurisdiction? We have the

Family Courts, the Commercial Courts, the Cyber Crime Courts,
and the Drugs Court. We do not anymore have the Heinous Crime
because they were abolished because the judges of heinous
crimes then were targets of death threats. May heinous crimes dati
talaga. And Justice Peralta was seating as heinous crimes’ judge
before QC. If you have seen the movie Hukom Bitay the judge who
became a justice was also assigned to a Heinous Crime Court.
But to avoid that with the regular courts we also have our share of
hearing in heinous crimes courts.
Okay, now, special courts. How will you classify family courts? Is
that a court designated by the Supreme Court? No. A Family Court
is a statutory court. Why statutory? Because it is created by law.
The Family Court Act specifically creates Family Courts. But the
Cyber Crime Court, Commercial Court, and the Drugs Court are
19 of 78
just designated by the Supreme Court by what power of the

Supreme Court? The rule-making power of the Supreme Court.
Where can you find that? Par 5, sec 5, Rule 8 of the Constitution.
The rule-making, so they are just designated as Special Courts.
Why do you need to know this? Kasi pag nagcoconflict – when

does the family court have jurisdiction over marriage and marital
relations? Dati we have the juvenile justice and marital court, now
we have the family courts. Let’s say the issue involves marriage or
when the accused is a victim – when the victim or the accused is a
minor. Let’s say – of course you’re referring (?) to a problem with
the family court. Let’s say the minor was charged with the
cybercrime, which court has jurisdiction? The Family Court or the
Cybercrime Court? The Family Court. That takes precedence over
the Cybercrime Court which is just designated by the Supreme
Court. Why? Because again, the Family Court is a statutory court.
So these – another example of a special court is, of course, is the

court of tax appeals which is specifically tasked to hear tax cases,
and Sandiganbayan which exclusively hears those crimes involving
government officials in relation or public officers in relation to their
office, and the Plunder law and other – RA 319, Executive Order 1
and 2, as the case may be. So you know they are considered as
special because they get to hear only cases as may be conferred
by law, unlike the RTC which has general jurisdiction. What about
original and appellate? Original is that the case must first be
commenced with the court which the law confers jurisdiction. And
appellate, you know, the appellate is the jurisdiction to review – to
review cases on appeal.
Now, what are the cases cognizable by the MTC and the RTC, we
will discuss that later. What are the other classifications of
jurisdiction, aside from appellate, original, general, and limited? We
also have what we call exclusive and concurrent. Exclusive
meaning that court is exclusively conferred the jurisdiction, to the
20 of 78
exclusion of others. Concurrent, example – it can be exercised with

any other tribunal, as may be conferred by law. We also have
territorial and extra-territorial. Territorial, of course, within the
territorial district or judicial district. We also have extra-territorial.
That extra-territorial is more common or relevant in criminal cases.
Now, aside from those, we go now to what are the cases

cognizable by the MTC or RTC as the case may be. Jurisdiction,
Section 33 of BP 129 expressly enumerates cases over which the
first level courts have jurisdiction.
Okay, first is when it involves civil actions involving recovery of

personal property or amount – it involves recovery of amount or
demand of money which does not exceed P300k or P400k as the
case may be, it falls under the jurisdiction of the first level courts.
The first level courts also have jurisdiction over probate, where the
gross value of the estate does not exceed P300k or P400k, as the
case may be. This has already been amended by RA 7691. The
MTC also has jurisdiction over real actions. What are real actions?
They are actions involving title to, possession of, or interest over
real property. What about personal actions? Personal actions are
other actions. In other words, they are actions that do not involve
title to, possession of, or interest over real property. Of course
MTCs also have jurisdiction over forcible entry and unlawful
detainer cases. Strictly speaking, ejectment cases otherwise
known as accions interdictal – and ejectment cases may either be
forcible entry or unlawful detainer – strictly speaking, they are
recovery of possession over real property. But exclusively lodged
with the first level courts. But as I’ve said, the first level courts also
have jurisdiction over real actions.
What could be other real actions? Accion reinvidicatoria. What is

accion reinvidicatoria? Recovery of ownership or title. So where
should that be filed? It will depend on the assessed value.
21 of 78
If the assessed value does not exceed 20,000 outside Metro

Manila - MTC. If it exceeds 20,000 - RTC. If the assessed value
does not exceed 50, 000 for those real properties located in
Manila? - MetC. If it exceeds the value of 50,000 - RTC.
How will you determine assessed value? The case of R-II Builders
explains what a real action is and how you will determine the
assessed value.
The assessed value of the real property will be determined from the
certification by the BIR as to the zonal value of that property. In the
absence of the BIR Certification of the zonal value, the plaintiff may
present the tax declaration that is issued by the Office of the
Treasurer in every city or municipality. In the absence of such,
whatever is alleged in the complaint as the assessed value.
What else do first level courts have jurisdiction over other cases
aside from personal action, real action, forcible entry cases? Again,
they are limited only to those mentioned under Section 33 of BP
129 as amended by RA 7691.
Now what are those cases cognizable by the RTC? RTC also have
jurisdiction over real action: if it exceeds the 20,000 assessed value
threshold or if it exceeds the 50,000 assessed value threshold.
RTC also have jurisdiction over personal actions.
Now what are these personal actions? Not real actions, meaning
the amount or the value property or the amount of the claim or
demand exceeds 300,000 outside Metro Manila and exceeds
400,000 Metro Manila. That’s a personal action.
With respect to the Juvenile or Domestic relations are now lodged

in the Family Court and they are actually or equivalent to or co-
equal with Regional Trial Courts.
What else do RTCs have jurisdiction over? RTC have jurisdiction

over civil actions, ordinary civil actions wherein the subject matter
22 of 78
of the litigation is incapable of pecuniary estimation.

So take note of all the cases and of course, the
catch-all provision: all other cases not falling within the jurisdiction
of any court, tribunal, body, person exercising judicial or quasi-
judicial function.
( Those who are not interested, go out or get out. If you are not
listening, it’s unfair. I was just requested to pinch in. If you are not
interested because you believe that you are ready to take the
midterm exams, the door is open. Mind you class, you are taking
the exams of Dean Jara and I will welcome you in Alabang. T.T )
CASE: X filed a case for collection of sum of money against D

arising from the execution of a promissory note where D promised
to pay the unpaid loan amounting to P200,000. Plaintiff is asking
for recovery of P200,000 representing the unpaid loan. In addition
to this, the plaintiff alleges that he suffers anxiety, sleepless nights,
besmirched reputation. He’s also asking for P100,000 moral
damages and since he wants to set an example for the defendant
who made a run-around and did not pay despite the demands. He
is asking for P100,000 exemplary damages. Since he was
constrained to secure the services of a lawyer to file the complaint
in order to assert his cause of action, he also paid for P100,000 as
attorney’s fees.Which court has jurisdiction? Which court? first
level court or second level court? Why the first level court?
(inaudible answer of student)
Which amount did you consider as a jurisdictional amount?

(P500,000 - Student). Ok sit down.
If you add all, how many actually are the total claims for money?
P500,000. But why would this be cognizable only by the first level
23 of 78
court? Because under BP 129, this will only be the amount that will
be considered for purposes of jurisdictional amount.
Why BP 129? Both section 33 and section 19 expressly provide

the proviso – Provided the total amount of claims must not include
Interests, Damages of whatever kind, Attorney’s fees or Cost of
Litigation. So this is cognizable by the first level court.
But let us say X and Y entered into a contract of landscaping

services but Y, whose services were engaged, was not able to
comply with his obligation under the contract of service
notwithstanding him being paid of the P300,000 initial payment
and this happens in Manila. So since time was of the essence for
X, he wants to have the landscaping services done before his
relatives arrive, the balikbayans from the US, he engaged the
services of A to complete the landscaping. Since he felt that he
was aggrieved from the non-compliance of Y, he files a complaint
to recover the amount he paid to A, of which whose services he
engaged to finish the contract for which he paid A the amount of
P200,000, as actual damages to recompense him with what he
paid to the other landscaper to complete with the services and he
is also asking for moral damages and exemplary damages. Which
court has jurisdiction? The RTC or the first level court? What did I
say? Where did this happen? In Metro Manila but this time what
would be the factors that you will consider as jurisdictional
amount? The jurisdictional amount here would now be the
P400,000.
Why? Why would you include now moral damages and exemplary
damages? Because damages are no longer incidental. It is now the
main cause of action. So which court has jurisdiction? The first
level court of Manila. Because it does not exceed P400,000 but
which amount did you consider for purposes of determining
jurisdictional amount? All the claims for damages.
24 of 78
But is it not that in the first situation, we exclude moral and

exemplary damages, damages of whatever kind? Yes. Because the
main cause of action in the first situation was to recover the unpaid
loan which is the main cause of action. The claims for damages,
moral, exemplary, and attorney’s fees are still incidental
In the second situation, the main cause is for damages, and so you
have to add all claims for damages but we exclude attorney’s fees.
Where do we find that? BP 129 as amended by RA 7691. Would
that be the same in case of RTC? Yes. 
 
But let’s say X filed a complaint against Y. Y obtained a loan from

him and for which he executed four promissory notes. The first
promissory note was not complied with by Y. Despite the first note
having become due, Y did not pay. So X filed a complaint to collect
the amount in the first note which is 200,000 pesos. He also
included in the same complaint the amount in the second, third,
and fourth promissory notes. At the same time X is asking for
100,000 pesos attorney’s fees. Which court has jurisdiction? It
would be the RTC. Why? All of them will be added to determine the
jurisdictional amount assuming all of them have already become
due. It is not premature. All of them have already become due so
we will add all of them.
How many? It would be 700,000. Again, all of the promissory notes

have already become due. So he is joining as many causes of
action as he may have, based on the actionable documents—the
four promissory notes. What do we call this principle? This
principle is the totality rule. Condition number 4 of Section 5, Rule
2. What does it say? “When all claims in all causes of action are
principally for recovery of money, the aggregate amount shall be
the test of determining jurisdiction.” So you will add all those to
determine.  
 
But let’s say, the second and third and fourth promissory notes are
25 of 78
not yet due, can we actually join them in one complaint? Yes he
may. Mapipigil mo ba siya kung ‘yan yung ilalagay niya sa
complaint? Hindi. Pwede nga siyang magfile ng baseless
complaint eh. Kaya nga ihehearing naming ‘yan kung totoo o hindi.
So let’s say only the first promissory note have already become
due, but he added second, third and fourth promissory note. Is it
possible that he may add them? But what would be the remedy?
It’s up for the defendant’s counsel now to move for the dismissal of
the second, third, and fourth causes of action. On what ground?
The complaint failed to state a cause of action as the note is still
premature. There is no act or omission yet that has violated the
rights of the plaintiff.
Remember the requisites of cause of action: 1) A right that belongs

to the plaintiff; 2) A correlative duty on the part of the defendant to
respect that right; and 3) The act or omission on the part of the
defendant that violates that right. The third requisite is not yet
present as the second, third, and fourth promissory notes are not
yet due. What’s the ground for the dismissal? The complaint failed
to state a cause of action insofar as the second, third, and fourth
promissory notes are concerned.  
 
But let’s say the first and second promissory notes being due and
despite repeated demands, the defendant did not pay and the
plaintiff is saying “the defendant is about to abscond and the
defendant has already filed an insolvency proceedings.” Can the
plaintiff actually include third and fourth?
-Yes.
What’s the principle involved?
-The Doctrine of Anticipatory Breach. When the plaintiff has

reasonable expectancy that the defendant will no longer comply
with his obligation, but of course it should be similar obligations, he
may include but it’s up to the plaintiff to convince the court to give
26 of 78
him that relief in third and fourth causes of action so he has to

comply with the pre-requisites of Doctrine of the Anticipatory
Breach.
So what’s Totality Rule again?
-If all the claims in all of the causes of action are principally for
recovery of money, their aggregate amount shall be the test of
jurisdiction. In the same manner that if the causes of action for
damages (moral, exemplary, actual compensatory damages) they
will also be, again, total of which would be the test of jurisdiction. If
the main of cause is claim for damages you will also add because
damages now would be the main cause of action.
X filed a complaint for recovery of 1 1/2 meter land - boundary

dispute, which court has jurisdiction?
-It is recovery of a real property. It would, again, depend on

assessed value.
What’s the threshold?
-20,000 or 50,000 as the case may be.
Why is this a real action?
-Of course, it is a recovery of a piece of real property. That

recovery of real property, it does not matter as to the area.
There is even a case na inencroach lang nung isa ay .05 so and so

meter. Kasi bakit daw? Kaso ko ito sa Pasay.
Complainant: “Kasi judge tuwing may birthdayan kami sa loob, di

makapasok ang videoke.”
Gusto kong tumawa but I don’t want to belittle the claim. He was
saying “Judge! In the title it is annotated that we are entitled to the
right of way but the right of way was narrowed down”. Sige, mag-
usap muna kayo ha? Pwede bang tibagin mo ng konti para
makapasok?
27 of 78
Defendant: “Nako judge kapag tinibag namin yan masisira ang

foundation kasi may taas”
C: “Ayun na nga judge dapat di siya naglagay sa taas because

right of way includes up up up”
Gusto ko talaga sila mag-ayos kasi feeling ko sayang oras ko kasi

videoke lang problema dito.
J: “Okay would you like to get your respective engineers so that

the right of way can be widened so the videoke can pass through”
“Yes judge”
C: “Di na nga ako nagrereklamo judge na pati taas nilagyan niya e.

Right of way yan diyan di namin nakikita ang langit”
That’s recovery of possession. Again, it would be based on the

assessed value. 20,000 or 50,000 as the case may be.
But let’s say X, the owner of a condominium unit, filed a complaint

alleging that Y, who is a tenant, did not leave the condo despite the
expiration of the period of lease. So he wants recovery of
possession of condominium unit. Which court has jurisdiction?
You have to determine if it is accion interdictal or accion publiciana.

When I say accion interdictal, it is an ejectment case. It is either
forcible entry or unlawful detainer. So which court has jurisdiction?
Exclusively with the first level courts.
When can that be an accion publiciana? If, the one year period
from the moment of expiration from the last demand to vacate has
already lapsed or the one year period from the time the defendant
surreptitiously or stealthy intruded into the property, those cases
can no longer be interdictal. But they will be accion publiciana whic
h is also recovery of possession. Which court has jurisdiction? It
will depend now on the assessed value.
So what’s the operative words, to know if it is interdictal or

publiciana. The jurisdictional requirements in ejectment. If it is
ejectment, then MTC or if it is not, then recovery of possession and
28 of 78
it will depend whether it’s the MTC or the RTC as the case may be
in real actions.
But actually class, sometimes depende na rin yan sa plaintiff kung

ano yung sinampa nya. Kung sinampa nya ejectment, makita ng
judge, aba nag-lapse na yung one year period, MTC doesn’t have
jurisdiction. Can the MTC judge outrightly dismiss the case? YES,
because that a jurisdictional fact that must be alleged in the
complaint.
But let’s say the one-year period has elapsed but the complaint
doesn’t state the assessed value, sinampa nila sa RTC. Ang
nakalagay sa complaint “Recovery of Possession over the real
property”. It’s not interdictal. But the complaint doesn’t state the
assessed value, which court has jurisdiction? NEITHER. Why? It
cannot be determined from the allegations in the complaint if RTC
has jurisdiction. So the action there is to dismiss for lack of
jurisdiction. Why, what did I say earlier? How will we determine
jurisdiction? Through the allegations in the complaint. But the
complaint doesn’t state the assessed value, do I have jurisdiction?
NO, because I cannot determine if from the allegations in the
complaint. Some lawyers would say, what about judge if we
attached the tax declaration. Basta nag-attached ka ina-lleged mo.
We can determine the assessed value. So we can determine, if we
have jurisdiction or not. That’s how we treat in so far as real action.
Complaint filed by X saying that he did not give me the right of way
and under the title it was annotated that I am entitled to the right of
way, which court has jurisdiction? What kind of action is
enforcement of a right of way? It’s enforcement of interest over real
property. So it is therefore a real action and it will also depend on
the assessed value.
Judge, he put firewall and I was denied of my right to easement in

view. You have learned that are easements and servitudes. What
are they? They are interest over real property. They are real actions.
How to determine the jurisdiction? Assessed value, depending on
29 of 78
the threshold amount. So in other words. Do both first level and

second level court have jurisdiction? YES. Over real actions? YES,
depending on the assessed value and provided that the assessed
value is alleged in the complaint.
Ito mas complicated. Si MTC. Sinampa yung complaint nakalagay

“Unlawful Detainer, Ejectment”. MTC has jurisdiction. But the MTC
says “aba hindi niya inalleged when was the last demand and it is a
jurisdictional fact that must be alleged. Must the MTC dismissed it
outright? NO, under Rule 70. If it is not an unlawful detainer. MTC
will have to go over again the allegations in the complaint because
MTC has jurisdiction over real actions which are recovery of
possession. But let’s say the MTC finds that the assessed value is
less than P20,000 or less than P50,000 will that be converted from
interdictal to publiciana? Yes, provided that the assessed value is
still within the jurisdiction of the first level courts. And strictly
speaking, actions interdictal and actions publiciana are real actions
and they both involve recovery of real property. But, if it is
interdictal, exclusively with the first level courts. If it is publiciana,
real action depending on the assessed value.
He wants to recover his BMW which was borrowed, you know,

commodatum? Bailment which is essentially gratuitous. He lent the
BMW to his girlfriend, but the two broke up and the latter did not
return the BMW. Does the boyfriend have a cause of action against
the girlfriend to recover the BMW? Of course! Because he owns it.
If he wants to recover the BMW which court has jurisdiction? RTC,
because it is recovery of personal property, is there a BMW that
costs less than P300,000 or P400,000. Okay. You may argue “kasi
Judge second-hand eh”. Yes, you have that point, but a BMW
usually is more than P300,000 or P400,000, as the case may be.
So since that involves recovery of personal property where the
value exceeds P300,000 or P400,000, as the case may be, RTC.
But if you say, “second-hand yun Judge”, 19- - yung model, so it
30 of 78
may be less than P300,000 or P400,000, as the case may be. So, it
will be under the jurisdiction of the first level courts.
In other words, if it is recovery of personal property, which court

has jurisdiction? It would depend on the market value of the
personal property as alleged. As alleged in the complaint, to
determine which court has jurisdiction.
If it is to recover a refrigerator or bicycle, that would also depend

on the market value of the personal property. In other words, for
jurisdiction, in general, if it is a real action, jurisdiction depends on
the assessed value. If it is recovery of personal property, it would
depend on the market value of the personal property. If the main
cause of action is for recovery of sum of money, demand, or
reimbursement of money, jurisdictional amount. If it is for probate,
both testate or intestate, depends on the jurisdictional amount. If
it’s admiralty or maritime, RTC and it is cognizable actually by
commercial court, maritime commercial court.
But if it is an action incapable of pecuniary estimation, that must be

exclusively lodged with the RTC because an action which is
exclusively under the jurisdiction of RTC, ang bilis, alam niyo na
yan. Pag binigyan kayo ng problem, would that be an action
incapable of pecuniary estimation? What are the common
examples of actions incapable of pecuniary estimation? Specific
performance, rescission, cancellation of contract, reformation of
contract, what about quieting of title? It involves obviously interest
over or title over property then it is a real action that would depend
on the assessed value.
Partition, what kind of action is partition? It involves interest over

real property so it would depend on the assessed value.
Expropriation, a real property, remember , under Rule 67, ano ang
ineexpropriate? Alam niyo to [kay Professor Adonis], ano ang
ineexpropriate? Real property lang ba? Hindi, pati personal
properties. But expropriation, which court has jurisdiction? Is it a
31 of 78
real action? No. Is that a real, if it’s a personal property, would that
be a personal action, neither. Expropriation is a different thing. The
nature of which is incapable of pecuniary estimation because it’s
actually an exercise of the authority to expropriate. It’s not about
the value of the property, it’s about the exercise of the power of the
authority to exercise the power of the state of the eminent domain.
Okay, now, there was a complaint for a specific performance, he

alleges in the complaint that we have an agreement that he will be
the one to transfer the title in my name. I gave him money but he
did not transfer the property, after six months, I found out that he
caused the property to be registered in his name, therefore, I am
praying for this court to cancel the transfer certificate of title in his
name and that I be paid moral damages because of sleepless
nights and attorney’s fees. The complaint is denominated as
complaint for a specific performance. Is that exclusively cognizable
by the RTC? Is that an action incapable of pecuniary estimation
because it for specific performance? No. He may have
denominated as specific performance but his ultimate prayer is to
recover ownership that was denied of him. [So] even if sometimes,
complaint are denominated as specific performance, cancellation,
rescission, [because lawyers do that], but the ultimate relief sought
is to recover ownership, to recover interest over real property or
recover possession of real property. That action will be considered
as a real action, and you will have to determine which court has
jurisdiction depending on the assessed value. RII Builders explains
that, the ultimate relief. You have to look into the ultimate relief so
you know, [as we will know], we’re discussing what are those
specific performance, specific performance is a claim other than
money, he wants the defendant to comply with his obligations so
it’s not about the money. It’s not about real property, neither about
personal property so it’s incapable of pecuniary estimation.
32 of 78
Okay, Rules of Court. The rules of court
To what courts will apply? Of course you know that. To what cases
this will apply? All criminal, civil actions and special proceedings.
You know what a civil action is as distinguished from a criminal
action. How do you distinguish a civil action from a special action?
Both are governed by the Rules of Court but Special Civil Action
are specifically governed by those specific rules under Rule 62 to
71. There are 10 Special Civil Actions. What are the cases when
the Rules of Court will not govern? Election cases, land registration
or cadastral cases, insolvency proceedings and naturalization
proceedings. Why … why … do the Rules to not apply to these?
Because there are specific rules of procedure in the law. Land
registration? Anong magaapply sa land registration? P.D. 1529. The
Land Registration Property Act. For insolvency proceedings
mayroon na tayong FRIA, meron na tayo FLSLS (?) Rules. What
about naturalization? We have three. You learned that in
Constitutional Law.. by act of Congress, by the administrative or by
judicial, you know all these. They are governed by separate rules.
Nevertheless, the Rules of Court will apply suppletorily to these
proceedings in the absence of a particular rule in that law.
Okay. How do we construe the Rules of Court? Would that favor

either the plaintiff or the defendant? No. The Rules of Court in
general is to promote and obtain just and speedy and inexpensive
disposition of cases. This is the general rule. Are there exceptions?
Yes. Rules with respect with reglementary procedure. It is to be
construed against the party who needs to comply with the
reglementary period. Example, reglementary to file an appeal,
reglementary period in relation with criminal cases. So we have
these rules that have to be strictly construed. Another example is
the Criminal Procedure in where the presumption is the innocence
of the accused. So in case of doubt in the application of the rules,
in the procedure of criminal cases, it shall be in favor of the
accused.
Rule 2. Cause of Action. Okay, what is important in so far as the

Cause of Action is concerned? Just remember these two. What is
the very important rule? There are 2: Section 1. A complaint must
be based on a cause of action. What is the consequence if the
33 of 78
complaint is not based on a cause of action? The complaint is

vulnerable to a dismissal. On what ground? The complaint is not
based on a cause of action. You will find that in Rule 16, Section 1.
Yes, it is one of the grounds under Section of Rule 16 of the Rules
of Court. But the ground there specifically provides that a pleading
states no cause of action otherwise same complaint states no
cause of action. But what is a cause of action? A cause of action is
an act or omission by which a party violates the right of another.
Parang felony, what is a felony under Article 3? An act or omission
punishable by law. Do they have the same basis? It’s the act or
omission by a party, violating the right of another. In a civil action, it
is the right violated by another which gives rise to a civil liability. In
a criminal case the act or omission punishable by law which gives
rise to criminal liability.
But what are the requisites of a cause of action? There are three:
the right that belongs to the plaintiff. What is this right? Where did
he base his right? What are the sources of his right? Just like the
sources of obligation.
Remember the sources of obligation? Law. Contracts. Quasi –

Contract. Quasi – Delict. Delict.
The right there may be based on contract. The right there may be
based on law. Why is he filing for specific performance? Because
he did not comply with his obligation. Plaintiff wants defendant to
comply with the contract. Why did he file for damages? Because
defendant breached the contract. Why did he file for support?
Because he did not comply with his obligation to give support,
under the Family Code. Why did he file an action for the annulment
of a deed of sale or annulment of donation? Because there was
fraud. Where did he based that? Law. The Civil Code. Fraud is an
actionable act. There is a right on the part of the plaintiff, there is a
corresponding obligation on the part of the defendant, or
correlative obligation to respect that right and the third requisite,
the act or omission which violates that right. These are the
essential requisites of a cause of action. So, these 3 must concur.
If all are present then he has a cause action.
34 of 78
How will you distinguish a cause of action from a right of action.

Which comes first? Of course you do not have a right to assert it if
you do not have a cause. And what’s the cause? The act or
omission that violates. So which comes first? The cause, before
the right to commence the action, the right to institute a cause in
court.
So, what happens? What’s the rule now? We go to the procedure.

Knowing that those are the requisites of a cause of action, we go
to the procedure. What’s the rule? A party may not institute more
than one suit for a single cause of action. This is phrased in such a
way that it says a party is prohibited. If he files two or more, there
is a consequence. In other words, section 3 of rule 2 provides for
what we call, splitting of a cause of action. Why is it not allowed?
Because it results in multiplicity of suits. So what if there are
several cases? Kaya naman magbayad ni plaintiff ng attorney’s
fees, at sinong masaya doon? Mga abogado. Andaming bayad sa
kanila andaming kaso eh. Pero sinong malungkot? Si defendant.
Because defendant will have to secure the services of a lawyer to
attend several cases. So, if there is multiplicity of suits, there may
be a possibility of conflicting decisions because these are filed in
several courts.
Another is, this will cause inconvenience to the parties as there will
be a waste of money and time. So, that is prohibited. But the
problem is how will it be applied? He files a case for collection of
200,000 pesos to collect the promissory note. Yan lang ang cause
niya, the unpaid loan and attorney’s fees. 2 causes of action
alleged in the complaint. After one month, he filed a complaint for
moral damages stating that he suffered severe anxiety, sleepless
nights because the defendant did not pay him. Is there splitting of
a cause of action? There is none. Why? What is the basis for his
cause to collect the 200,000 pesos. The unpaid loan. It’s a contract
of loan as evidenced by the promissory note. What is his cause to
collect moral damages? The civil code. Remember Articles 22
35 of 78
something that provides the instances where a party may claim for
moral damages. This is a different cause. Why does he have to say
that he suffered sleepless nights, serious anxiety, because these
are the factual bases for him to be allowed moral damages under
the civil code, so it is based on a general cause. Question. Is there
actually multiplicity? Yes, may dalawang kaso. Can that proceed
independently, yes actually. But what should have been done?
What is encouraged rather? It is encouraged that he joined that in
one complaint. Now, we have what we call joinder of causes of
action but it is not splitting because they are based on different
causes of action. The note is based on contract of loan, the moral
damages is based on, he was invoking the civil code, because he
has sleepless nights and serious anxiety, the attorney’s fee is
different cause Art 2209 of Civil Code, it also enumerate instances
when attorney’s fees may be asked.
But let us say that you loaned P1.2Million evidenced by a real

estate mortgage (REM). He did not pay. Does the creditor has the
cause of action against the debtor? Yes. What is that cause?
Cause is to collect the unpaid loan based on the omission to pay.
Omission which gives rise to liability. So what the bank did is that
the bank filed a complaint to collect to unpaid loan based on
contract of loan, after 1 month, the bank also filed a judicial
foreclosure of REM. Question, is there splitting of cause of action?
Yes. What are the actions filed? First, action to collect the unpaid
loan based on contract of loan. The second, an action to foreclose
the REM. Two different actions, is there splitting? Yes. Why? There
is a single cause of action there which is the cause to collect the
unpaid loan. He wants to be paid. His cause is to collect based on
the contract. What is the reason why he executed the real estate
mortgage? To guarantee payment it is also based on payment. So
he actually split. He made actually also opt either to file the cause
to collect or to enforce to file judicial or extrajudicial foreclosure.
What the banks usually do now, hindi na sila magcocollect, ma
geextra-judicial foreclosure na lang sila and this is governed by Act
36 of 78
No. 3315, Extra judicial foreclosure of REM, wala ng court

intervention dyan. Mabilis yan under that law. So those are
instances that shows splitting of action.
Assuming we have the Doctrine of Anticipatory Breach on in the

event the all of these already becomes due, so pwede silang I-join
in one complaint. What’s the reason why? Oh before we go to that,
what is the consequence if the plaintiff or claimant split its cause of
action? The complaint will be dismissed. The defendant may file
motion to dismiss on what ground? Either based on litis
pendencia or res judicata, both are grounds to dismiss under
Section 1 of Rule 16. So here, he may join all causes of action?
Yes. In fact, that is encouraged under section 5 of Rule 2, a party
may in one pleading join, in alternative, or otherwise, as may
causes of action as he may have against the defendant, provided
that he complies with the four conditions.
What is the first condition? He must comply with the rule on joinder
of party, what is that rule? Section 6 of Rule 3, permissive joinder
of parties. This happens when? Uhm there are several defendants
or several plaintiffs, a party in whom or against whom a right to
relief exist or arise of the same transaction or series of transactions
the parties may and the claim refers to the obligation to join
severally or otherwise, they may all be joined as plaintiffs or
defendants as the case maybe, provided there is a common
question of fact or law among or between the parties.
So what are the Requisites of Joinder?
First, the subject matter arises out of or the same transaction or a

series of transactions;
Second, there is a common question of fact or law between or

among the parties.
Third, there are of course several defendants or several plaintiffs.
37 of 78
But the question is, must the plaintiff who wants to join as many
causes of action as he may have, must he always comply with
joinder of parties? Must he always comply with joinder of parties?
Answer, no. Kasi kung isa lang si plaintiff, against one defendant,
ano ijojoin niya? So, he will only comply with joinder if there are 2
or more defendants, or 2 or more plaintiffs (first condition).
The second condition, in the joinder, he must not include special

civil action or cases governed by special rules. Hindi niya pwedeng
ijoin in a collection for sum of collection of money yung action for
support, because action for support is cognizable by the family
courts. You cannot also join in a complaint for a specific
performance and action for certiorari or an action for interpleader
or an action for declaratory relief because these are governed by
special civil action. You cannot join in an action to recover
ownership, partition because partition is a special civil action. Bakit
bawal? Kasi magkaiba ang rules. Itong first cause of action, ito
muna i-comply natin. Itong second, we will comply later, mahirap.
They are governed by separate rules.
The third condition, in all claims, when there are several claims and
the jurisdiction pertain to… where the claims are rather pertaining
to different jurisdiction or venue, the joinder may be allowed in the
RTC, in those instances where RTC has jurisdiction over any of the
causes of the action and venue also lies with the RTC. Bakit sa
RTC? So dumadami kami kesa MTC kasi pag hindi pwede, dun sa
RTC. Bakit, the reason is RTC is a part of general jurisdiction. Is it
possible that in one complaint, marami siyang jinoin? For example
here, he joined, but his claim for moral damages is Php500,000. Is
that cognizable by the MTC? No, because it’s beyond the
jurisdication of the MTC. The MTC will dismiss the third cause of
action or he may opt to file that with the RTC. Pero the best
possible remedy there is, if the main cause of action is actually with
the MTC, pag sinama ko ang claim just beyond, if you will dismiss
38 of 78
that complaint and file with the RTC, magrerefile ka, magbabayad
ka uli ng filing fees.
The best way is to dismiss that cause, which is beyond the

jurisdiction and proceed with the rest of those cases. But there is
an option where the plaintiff may file this with the RTC, because it
has jurisdiction in any of those causes of action provided that they
will also lie steady.
The fourth condition, we already discussed that, the Totality Rule.

When the claims and all causes of action are principally one, for
recovery of money the aggregate amount is a test of jurisdiction.
The last, misjoinder meaning he joined a cause of partition. What
did we say? It cannot be because it is governed by special civil
action. Is that a ground to dismiss, a misjoined? It is not, because
a misjoinder is not a ground to dismiss. What will be done, as I’ve
said earlier, drop the misjoined cause of action and the case may
proceed. Just like misjoinder or non-joinder of parties, will that be a
ground to dismiss, also not. If he is an indispensable party, he will
just be impleaded. If no then the case may not proceed, because
without that party there can be no final determination of release.
Rule 2 (should be Rule 3, namali lang si Judge) on parties. What’s

the important rule on Rule 2? Pag sinabi kasing important, may
consequence yan. Kagaya ng, what’s the important under Rule 3?
(should be Rule 2 naman) Every ordinary civil action must be based
on a cause of action. Pag walang cause of action yan, vulnerable
to a dismissal.
So what’s important rule on Rule 3? A case can be prosecuted only

in the name of the real party in interest. So who is a real party in
interest? It is one who is entitled, who may be benefited or
prejudiced with the avails of the suit or is entitled, benefited with
the judgment in the suit or is entitled to the avails in the suit. So
who is a real party in interest? Go again to the requisites of cause
of action. Is he the plaintiff who really has the right? If he is not, he
39 of 78
is not the real party in interest. Is he the defendant who is suppose

to comply with that right? Is he the defendant who is suppose to
respect that right? If he is not, he is not the real defendant in
interest. Is he the - third - is he the real person who committed the
act, or who omitted, that gives rise to the violation? If he is not the
person who really did that act, he may be the person who is
entitled to comply or rather, he may be the defendant who has the
obligation to comply, he may be the person who has the duty to
respect the right but he was not the person who committed the act
or omitted the obligation that gives rise to civil liability. Is he the
real defendant in interest? No. So that’s your test of who is a real
party in interest. Real party in interest again is a party who stands
to be benefited with the judgment in the suit or he is entitled,
benefited or prejudiced by kasi pwedeng bene- ang real party in
interest could be real plaintiff in interest, real defendant in interest
— he is a party who stands to be benefited or prejudiced by
judgment in the suit or entitled to the avails in the suit.
So if the complaint is not against the real defendant in interest, that

is vulnerable to a dismissal. On what ground? Complaint states no
cause of action because he is not the real defendant in interest. If
the plaintiff is filed by a person who is not the real person whose
right was violated, complaint may also be dismissed. On what
ground? Complaint states no cause of action because he is not the
real plaintiff in interest who stands to be benefited.
Pag in-answer niyo sa bar, hindi niyo na kailangan sumagot ng

kahaba haba, ginamit niyo na yung words ng Rule. Will you grant
or deny the motion? Granted, the Complaint states no cause of
action as it was filed by, kung sino man ang pangalan nun, X who
is not the real person in interest. He is not the real person who
stands to be benefited from the judgment in the suit. Period. You
said it all. In the same manner, you say complaint- motion granted,
the defendant is not the real defendant in interest, he is not the real
40 of 78
party in interest, he is not the real person who is to be prejudiced

by the judgment in the suit.
So what are- who are the parties? Who may be the parties? Of
course, natural, juridical, or entities authorized by law to sue and
be sued. We do not have to dwell on who are natural, you know
that, juridical, you know that, but entities authorized by law to sue
and be sued, I think you have discussed it with Dean Jara. These
are those authorized by law, like your labor unions authorized
under the Labor Code, the party list authorized by the Constitution
and the law. You have the catholic, the property of the catholic is
authorized under the law.
You have the estate of the deceased person is authorized under

the Civil Code and the Special Proceedings. You also have
corporation in fact, partnership in fact as de facto and so on and
so forth, the Civil Code authorizes them to be sued. If they may still
present to be a partnership de facto or corporation as the case
may be.
Now, what are kinds of parties?
Parties as representatives, pro-formal parties, indispensable

parties, necessary parties, nominal parties.
Representative - it is very easy to know. The real party in interest is

represented by a legal representative. Who may be a legal
representative? The parents, the guardian, if it is of minor or
incompetence. The prisoners, if they have the accessory penalty of
civil interdiction. They cannot actually sue or be sued while serving
sentence; but those civil interdicted may still exercise power of
administration over the property. But the common representatives
are attorneys-in-fact. Usually, a plaintiff will execute innate special
power of attorney authorizing his attorney in fact to sue and be
sued, and prosecute the case in his behalf. Provided, the special
power of attorney contains all that needed to be contained.
Especially authorized by the plaintiff to file, appear for in his behalf,
the complaint, to enter into stipulations, to enter into alternative
41 of 78
dispute resolution, and amicable settlements. Those are required of

the special power of attorney to appoint one as an attorney in fact.
What about spouses? Husband and wife must be sued jointly. Is

that rule absolute? No. There may be cases between the husband
and the wife may not be pursued because they are the party, and
in cases where it includes their exclusive property. They need not
be joined. And of course, if the civil liability arises from a
commission of a crime, violation of RA 9262, there is cause for
support; they may not be filed because the other party is the
accused as the case may be.
Now, what are nominal parties? Nominal party is a court, tribunal,

person, or body that has to be joined because it is the order or
judgment of that court which is brought for review, or brought for
determination. Like in certiorari, if they say Judge Wagan
committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess
of jurisdiction, and they filed it with the Court of Appeals, I am just
a nominal party that must be impleaded. The nominal party must
be impleaded because it is the order or resolution or the judgment
of the nominal party which is subject for determination of whether
or not that court, that judge, that tribunal acted without jurisdiction
or acted with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or
excess of jurisdiction. Just like in prohibition and mandamus, there
are nominal parties involved.
There very important classification are the indispensable and

necessary parties. Who are the indispensable parties. They are
parties without whom no final determination of the case can be
have. As distinguished from necessary parties, they are parties not
being indispensable, but need to be joined in order to have a
complete relief, without whom no complete relief can be have.
Which of the two parties must be joined, compulsory joined? It is
the indispensable parties. From the word itself, they are the parties
without whom no final determination of case can be have.
42 of 78
Example: in a double sale, X sold the property to Y. After 3 months,

without Y having transferred the title to his name, X again sold the
property to A, and Y later on found out that the same property was
sold again to A, so he wants to recover ownership over the
property because he was the first buyer. So, what did he file? He
filed an action for annulment of the second sale. But he filed the
case only against X, the vendor. Is A an indispensable party? Yes,
of course because this is a case for declaration of the nullity of the
second sale. As a judge there, as the court there, I cannot possibly
declare the sale void because the other party in the contract, the
other privy to the contract, was not impleaded as one of the
parties. If I will declare the sale null and void, it will greatly
prejudice the right of the second buyer, who is an indispensable
party. But let’s say, X is the owner of a condominium unit which is
being leased by Y. Y, despite the expiration of the period of the
lease did not vacate the condo, so X filed for a case of recovery,
not a case for unlawful detainer kasi nag expire na yung one-year
period. He filed a case for accion publiciana for the recovery of the
possession of the condominium unit against Y. But Y sublet the
condominium unit to A, the sublessee, despite the prohibition in
the contract.
So, X filed for the recovery of possession of the condo against Y

and Y filed a motion to dismiss because X did not implead A, the
sublessee occupying the condo. Will you grant the motion? No, it
is not even a ground- misjoinder or non-joinder- to dismiss. But the
next question is, is A an indispensable party? No since the contract
is only between X and Y. But A is in possession now? X does not
have a cause to recover possession from A because he does not
have a contract with A. But if it is an ejectment class, and it is filed
against Y, eh yung nakatira is yung kapatid, si A, walang contract
at nakatira lang si A, at nag file ng ejectment case si X kay Y, the
lessee, is A an indispensable party? No. But can he be the subject
of the ejectment case? Yes because he derives a title under Y.
Yung hindi makarelate, di ko na uulitin yon XD. So that
43 of 78
demonstrates the distinction between an indispensable and

necessary party.
Now an indispensable party, when not impleaded, the remedy is

not Motion to Dismiss, because under Rule 3, nonjoinder of a
compulsory or indispensable party is not a ground to dismiss.
What would be the remedy? To implead. But you know in practice,
walang abogado, in my several years, walang actually abogadong
mag fa-file ng Motion to Implead. Ano yung fina-file? Motion to
Dismiss. And during the hearing, “why did you file a Motion to
Dismiss?, “Your honor baka makalusot.” “But don’t you know that
under the rule a nonjoinder of parties is not a ground to
dismiss?”….. Nonetheless, we treat it as a Motion to Implead. If
indeed the party is an indispensable party, then I will just direct the
plaintiff to amend the complaint and implead the indispensable
party because without whom there can be no final determination of
the case.
What are good examples of a necessary party? Yung subrogation

sa contract, or if there is a claim only for reimbursement, or if there
is a joint obligation, joint obligation and the defendant wants to
claim the share so they are only considered a necessary parties as
distinguished from indispensable parties/indispensable party. What
if you bought a cellphone from ABC Shop - that shop is not a
juridical person neither an entity authorized by law (unclear) mas
marami yan, Aling Nene's Restaurant, ABC Carwash, ABC...
marami sila -- entities without juridical personality.
Are they also, sometimes, cause of violation of a right? More often

than not, yes. Do we have a cause against him? Because it is not a
natural person, it is not a juridical person neither an entity
authorized by law to... Can we sue them? Against ABC Shop? No,
because it does not have a juridical entity. Against who? Against
the owner or the proprietor of the ABC Shop. So how will your
complaint be? X vs. B (owner or proprietor doing business under
44 of 78
the name and style ABC Shop). Is it possible that ABC Shop may
have a claim against the third person? So magiging plaintiff din si
ABC Shop. Is it allowed? Not as it is but to the owner so if that
ABC Shop that has a cause it may be, the owner, Juan Dela Cruz,
doing business under the name and style ABC Shop against
defendant.
What if, let's say, those who have cars who parked their cars
outside and you go out after this lecture you found out the
windshield (knock on wood) totally smashed (reacts). Do you have
a cause of action? Obviously, because that is a violation of your
property. Against who? Tinanong niyo yung guard, guard nakita
niyo ba? Sino nag... Hindi. And you have a cause of action. Kaya
mabait ang rules eh. You can even file a complaint against an
unknown smasher (reacts). You can even file a complaint against
an unknown defendant. Yes, 8. If you ask me, have I encountered a
complaint against an unknown defendant? Wala, walang magfifile
na abogado diyan although it is allowed. Why? It would be difficult.
To whom will we serve the summons? In the meantime, we cannot
serve the summons. In the meantime the case will not proceed
because we did not acquire jurisdsiction over the person. But you
may ask, eh bakit nandyan pa yan Judge? We are allowed to file a
case against an unknown defendant and an unknown entity
because there will be plain defect hanggang matapos na hindi mo
alam eh mageexpire na yung prescriptive period mo. So you have
a remedy by which to beat the prescriptive period and assert your
cause. In the meantime na toll na ang prescriptive period nandun
na nag assert ka na, you did not sleep on your right nandoon na sa
court but in the meantime you have to ascertain the whereabouts
and amend the complaint so as to implead the proper person
whom you alleged before as an unknown defendant. Sabihin,
practice lang, wala namang nagfifile na lawyer ng ganon kasi ang
para sakanila walang patutunguhan. But if you the prescriptive
period of your right to file an action is about to expire, you have to
45 of 78
do that. Otherwise, wala na yung cause of action mo, prescribed

na.
What if, let's say, Okay I have one case, remember M/V Princess of
the Stars? It's still there in Mindoro, nakausli diba because it sunk.
PAL loaded 800,000 worth of air conditioning units that was
supposed to be unloaded in Davao en route in Cebu dapat din
bago Davao but it sunk. So PAL filed a case against Sulpicio Lines,
the owner of M/V Princess of the Stars to recover the value of the
goods that was loaded and PAL also filed a case against the
insurer of Sulpicio Lines and the insurer of the cargo. But before
the pre-trial has started, PAL manifested, "Your Honor we were
already paid." "By whom? By the defendant? You have a
compromise agreement?" "No, Your Honor, we were paid by our
only insurance, Philam Life. Yes your Honor, and we move Your
Honor that there will be substitution of plaintiff." But first you have
to prove to me that indeed there was payment so PAL has already
been satisfied with him claim but you have to show to me that
indeed there was a policy contract between you and Philam and
proof that Philam paid. Who now is the real party in interest to
recover by way of subrogation against Sulpicio Lines? Philam. This
is what we call transfer of interest.
What will the rule be? In transfer of interest, the court decides
whether the complaint will be continued by the original plaintiff and
the real plaintiff in interest will be impleaded as co-plaintiff dalawa
sila or the court may decide in its discretion to substitute the
original plaintiff with that of the new real plaintiff in interest that is
with respect to the transfer of parties. What if the wife does not
want to be joined in action for collection by the husband-but why
should they be joined (because there is a commonality of interest)
ayaw sumama sa complaint ni wife. Let's say they are separated
for 10 years, ayaw talaga ni wife, but husband cannot collect
because the complaint may be dismissed because he did not join
his wife. What is the remedy? Because the wife is an unwilling
46 of 78
plaintiff then she will be joined as a defendant. That’s the purpose

of an unwilling co-plaintiff. What else in so far as the parties? I
already discussed on indispensable, what about entity - I’ve
already discussed an entity without juridical personality, alternative
defendants. Knock on wood, pag balik niyo sa bahay, nagddrive ka
binangga ka sa likod mo. The drivers of these cars behind... unang
lumabas, hindi ako may kasalanan, siya yung may kasalanan
binangga niya ako eh. There were 2. Who will you implead? Either,
because you did not know who; the one who committed the act so
you may implead them as alternative defendants. That’s like what
PAL did: only against Sulpicio Lines and impleaded the insurance
company. Bahala kayo basta bayaran niyo ako. Actually it is for the
benefit of Sulpicio Lines because the latter won’t engage a 3rd
party complaint: a separate complaint because sinama na siya ni
PAL. The case was dismissed. I was actually eager to resolve it
because yung Kapitan nag testify, nagguguluhan ako, very
technical yung testimony nila about the bulletin report of PAGASA.
Parang trinatrack nila yung bagyo. Sinasabi ng Sulpicio Lines
fortuitous event. Masyadong technical buti nalang nag
compromise.
Another classification of parties is class suit. X is the owner of a 3

hectare property and is occupied by 10 thousand occupants, he
filed a case against them against 10 thousand occupants because
he intends it it to sell it to SMDC. Not a class suit because in class
suit it only applies if there are 2 or more or numerous plaintiffs who
cannot be joined and it is impracticable to join them. This case
there are numerous defendants here. What is the classic example-
requisites of class suits? Numerous as it is impracticable to be
joined as plaintiffs rather. There is a common or general interest
among the so called numerous plaintiffs and these plaintiffs are
represented by a sufficient number. What is the classic example of
a class suit: Oposa vs Factoran. Eh talaga naman, included
generation yet unborn, talaga naman. Nabasa niyo Oposa vs
Factoran? Even the yet unborn, kasama. That’s a class suit. But
47 of 78
take note, is this synonymous with citizen’s suit in writ of

kalikasan? We also have citizen suit in the writ of kalikasan. Almost
the same but there are particular rules in so far as writ of kalikasan
for citizen’s suit.
What are the other examples of class suit?
The taxpayer’s suit. Alangan naman isama nila lahat ng taxpayers.

Umali vs Estanislao(GR 104037 May 29, 1992), have you read that
case in Tax Law? Binibigay yan sa Tax Law. What else? Derivative
Suit, in representation of the stockholders, is another example of a
class suit.
Now, what is the rule when the party dies? Who are the parties in a
case? Plaintiff and Defendant. Plaintiff dies, the Defendant dies,
what’s the rule? Each of the lawyers has the duty to inform the
court as to the fact of death, append thereto the proof of such fact
and inform the court of who will be the legal representatives, who
will be substituted in place of the deceased party. They will be
substituted. So, what is the rule? The case will proceed, even for
monetary claims, until judgement, and even until the judgement
becomes final. But can this money claim be enforced in the same
case? No, because it shall be filed as a claim against the estate of
the deceased. But let’s say the defendant, who is now the
judgment obligor (talo si defendant, so kailangan magbayad si
defendant, we call him now as a judgement obligor), but he died
after a writ of execution was issued and his property was also
already levied of execution, may naka-separate nang property para
ibenta on execution, will this still be now considered as a claim
against the estate? No more, because there has already been a
separate property set aside for the execution. You have to correlate
provisions under Rule 3 on death as well as actions based on
monetary claims in Section 7 Rule 39.
48 of 78
You know what’s the rule in so far as incompetent or minors, it’s

self explanatory. Now, who is a pauper litigant? It’s an indigent
party. What are the requirements of an initiatory pleading? 1)
Payment of docket fees, 2) Certification against Forum Shopping.
Those 2 are mandatory requirements and without compliance with
any of this, the complaint MAY be dismissed. There’s a 3rd
requirement, but only if the law or the rules require, 3)Verification,
because under Section 4 Rule 7, “Pleadings may not be verified”.
So, when a plaintiff files a complaint report, where will he go to or
the lawyer go to? He will go to the Clerk of Court to pay the docket
fees. But he’s an indigent, ….(inaudible)… Paano niya babayaran
yan. Nanghihingi/naniningil ng P100k, P150k, tapos pabababyaran
ng fee and he’s represented by the PAO lawyer. He will be allowed
to litigate as an indigent or a pauper litigant provided he is allowed
by the court. If it is a multi-sala, His motion to litigate as indigent or
motion to litigate as pauper will be … (inaudible) to the executive
judge because the executive judge who will hear. If the executive
grants, then the clerk of court dockets the complaint without the
plaintiff having required to pay the docket fees. However, if there
be judgment in favor of the plaintiff, the docket fees will constitute
as a lien. Docket fees will be paid first before plaintiff will be
satisfied. In a single sala, dun din lang sa clerk of court. If the judge
allows, what is the proof to be presented?
Pano natin malalaman na indigent sya. They will get a certificate of

indigency from the Brgy. Chairperson of the place he resides or
from the DSWD.
Pano Judge kung nagsisinungaling yung Kapitan? Ay bahala sya

nag certify sya eh. But that’s a public record and there’s a
presumption of regularity in the performance of his duties.
What is ____ if the complaint pertains to the constitutionality of the

an ordinance/law – the plaintiff will have to comply by giving notice
to the Office of the Solicitor General. I already mentioned those
which requires notice.
49 of 78
Venue is the place where the complaint is filed. How do you

distinguish Venue in criminal and civil actions
Venue in Criminal Actions is jurisdictional, it is not in civil cases.

Why is not in civil actions? Because venue in civil actions is
essentially for the convenience of the parties EXCEPT for real
actions.
What are the rules for Venue?
What are the rules for venue in ORDINARY civil actions, ordinary ha
kasi pag special civil actions may specific rules .
For purposes of venue, again, actions are classified into real and
personal actions. What are real actions again? Those involving title
to or possession or interest over real property. What about
personal actions?
Where should real actions be filed? What are the examples of a real
action? Action to recover possession of real property, action over
interests over real property. Where should the venue be? It should
be filed in the Court where the property is located.
Why? Because the court in order to subject that res to its

jurisdiction, the Court must first have jurisdiction over that property
and it must be within its territorial jurisdiction. I cannot order the
cancellation of the title in (place) because that is beyond my
jurisdiction because my jurisdiction is limited to the territory of
Pasig.
I already mentioned examples of real actions. Where should the

venue for personal actions be? The complaint shall be filed in the
Court of the place where plaintiff resides or where the defendant
resides or if there are several defendants or several plaintiffs any of
the residence of any of the plaintiffs or defendants as the case
maybe. What about non resident defendants? Ano yung non-
resident defendants? Those who have greencards na immigrants
na sila, they are residents outside the country, in Canada, Australia,
US, they are non-residents. Are there cases which may also be
filed against them? Where should the venue be? If they are found
in the PH, nandito sila nagbabakasyon sa Bora, the the complaint
may also be filed, if it is a personal action, in the Court of the place
50 of 78
where plaintiff resides or in Bora, where the non-resident maybe

found. Pag yan ang question, just go direct to the point, that it may
be filed in the court of the place where the plaintiff resides or the
Court of the place where the defendant resides at the election of
the plaintiff.
Meron akong case, ang banggaan sa Samar, Maharlika highway.

Nadismiss yung criminal case for reckless imprudence in Samar.
So they were only left with the civil liability. And they were from
Samar. They filed the case in Pasay. Why? Because Pantranco is in
Pasay. Everytime I hear that case, the defendants talagang
mahangin talaga sa labas. Halatang kagagaling lang sa bus.
Nagtravel pa sila from Samar just to go to Pasay. And I wonder
why they chose to file it in Pasay. But I cannot question that as a
judge. They have that option. If they want to be inconvenienced, so
be it. But for as long as it is in accordance with rule 4.
What about if he is a non-resident and is not found? Who are

they?
Of course they are not in the Philippines. Can we file a case against
them? Yes.
If it involves the status of the plaintiff, where should it be filed? In

the court of the place where the plaintiff resides. If it involves a real
action, it shall be filed or if it involves a property of the defendant, it
shall be filed in the court of the place where the property or part of
it is located. So thats the rule in so far as non-residents are not
found.
Are there instances where this rule will not apply? Yes, Sec 4. In
those instances where the law or the rules provide otherwise.
1. What is the example of a law? libel, 353, 354, if it is a case

arising, I'm not talking about the criminal but the civil aspect
51 of 78
of libel, and you learned it under criminal law that if it is a

case of libel against a public officer, where will you file it?
Manila RTC, is it not? There is a specific law which provides
for the venue of libel.  
2. An example of a rule? Rule 111. You learned from Judge

Palamos crim pro, that, in the civil action arising from
violation of BP22, where should that be filed under rule 111, it
should be instituted in the same criminal case, it cannot be
separated. The private complainant who would like to claim
the civil liability arising from the bouncing check cannot file it
in a separate civil action. The civil liability is deemed instituted
in the criminal action for violation of BP22.  
3. Another example, civil cases cognizable under the

Sandiganbayan, hindi mo pwedeng ifile kung saan saan. You
will not apply section 2. Just like civil liabilities arising from
tax cases, only in the CTA. 
What about the 2nd exception?
When the parties validly agreed in writing prior to or before filing of

the case as to the exclusive venue
What are the kinds of venue stipulations? There are two.
1. Permissive stipulation on venue; and
2. Restrictive stipulation on venue.
When can that be permissive? They stipulate.
Example: (In cases ganito lagi sinasabi sa contract)
52 of 78
“In case a litigation arises from lease contract, the case should be
filed in the courts of Manila”.
What kind of venue stipulation is that? Restrictive or permissive?
It is only permissive. Why? It does not provide for a qualifying or

restrictive specification of where the venue should be. So, it’s not
restrictive. Meaning it will only be considered as in addition
(permissive) to the rules on venue under Sections 2 and 3.
Kasi pag sinabi pag Sec. 1 real action, madali lang yan, it is where
the property is located.
So what could be example of restrictive venue stipulations:
“Exclusively in the courts of Pasay; only in the court of Pasay; only

in the courts of Makati to the exclusion of all others.”
So those clearly suggest qualifying or restrictive specification of

where the venue should be.
Why can the parties agree on the venue in civil cases? And in
criminal cases di pwede?
Kasi nga in criminal cases it is jurisdictional but in civil cases

essentially for the convenience of the parties.
“Eh kung parehas sila taga Baguio, gusto nila sa Manila hayaan mo
sila gusto pumunta ng manila eh. Pakielam mo.”
Why is the rule on venue of is important?
Because if venue is improperly laid it is a ground to dismiss under

Section 1 of Rule 16 - that venue was improperly laid. That is an
objection. Remember Sec. 1 of Rule 9, defenses and objections
not raised either in a motion to dismiss or as defenses in the
answer are deemed waived. However, when it appears from the
record of the case during trial that:
1. the court does not have jurisdiction over the subject matter; or
53 of 78
2. there is a pending case between the same parties; or
3. that there was a prior judgment; or
4. that the action is one that already had prescribed
These grounds are not waived. So venue can be waived.
What about the ground on failure to state a cause of action, which

could be the ground in Rule 3 if it is not filed against a real party in
interest. Failure to state a cause of action, can that be waived?
Yes. Because it is not one of those non-waivable defenses as
provided under Sec. 1 of Rule 9.
Rule 5 is self-explanatory.
The rules that govern in the municipal trial courts are the same as
that of the trial courts except as those provided by specific rule or
the rule on summary procedure. Aside from the rule on summary
procedure, take note that, the rule on the summary procedure was
amended ha. Yung gagamitin niyo yung 1991 revised rule. Take
note! Di sinasabi na Rule”s”. 1991 Revised Rule. Isa lang yan on
summary procedure. And we have a separate rule that is observed
by the MTC. The Rule of Procedure on Small Claims. These are
specific rules that apply only to MTCs. Kaya hindi nasama yung
Rule of Procedure on Small Claims kasi lately lang yan - 2016.
Yung rule 13,14,15 Rule of procedures on small claims. Unlike
yung Revised Rule on Summary Procedure. It’s included in Sec 1
of Rule 5.
Rule 6
What are the pleadings allowed under the Rules of Court. There are
6.
Complaint, counter claim, cross claim, third party complaint,

complaint-in-intervention, answer and reply. So 7.
54 of 78
Of those 7 which are initiatory, and which are responsive?
Initiatory complaints are:
1. complaint,
2. counter claim,
3. cross claim,
4. third party complaint so on and so forth; and
5. complaint in intervention.
What are responsive pleadings – answer and reply.
Of course you know
1. answer to counterclaim,
2. answer to cross claim , and so on and so forth.
There is also
1. counter-counter claim; and
2. counter cross-claim
3. there are actually also counterclaim
Another question: is a counterclaim akin to a complaint? Yes.

Parehas lang yan. Kaya lang, para to distinguish mo from the other,
it’s a counterclaim. But is it actually also a complaint? Yes. By
whom? The defending party against the claimant.
Why the need to know? What are initiatory pleadings? Eh ano

ngayon kung may initiatory pleadings? Why? Because as I have
said, there are mandatory requirements that have to be complied
with in initiatory pleadings. If they could not be complied, the
complaint will be dismissable. Ano sasabihin mo sa cliente, pag file
mo ng complaint, dismissed. Pupunta yung cliente ngayon sayo,
“Anong nangyari, Attorney?” Si plaintiff nagbayad ng P150,000
docket fees. Binayaran ka pa, abogado ka ng P100,000. And then
nadismiss lang, ang pinaka-first base. Imagine that.
55 of 78
So what are these mandatory requirements? Payment of fees.

Manchester v. Court of Appeals: is the first case where issue on
payment of fees were ruled upon. What was that case? It involves
a claim I think for sum of money or damages where the plaintiff did
not allege the specific amount in the prayer. Remember Rule 7?
Anong parts of the complaint under Rule 7? The caption, the body,
and the signature. But to me, para bang tao: head, body, and the
prayer. You follow? The prayer. So, in Machester v. CA, the
defendant moved to dismiss. Why? The defendant was saying,
“The Court did not acquire jurisdiction. Jurisdiction was not vested
because fees were not paid.” There are several amounts prayed
for/stated in the body, in the complaint, in the allegations. But the
plaintiff did not specify them in the prayer. So the Court did not
acquire jurisdiction.
The Supreme Court sustained that and dismissed the complaint.

And from then on, that case of Manchester was decided in 1987.
By reason of that case, the Supreme Court promulgated Circular
[No.] 7-88. What does it state? From now on, lawyers, [the] Bench,
the members of the Bar, and litigants, take note that when you file
a complaint, and there are claims for money, you have to specify
not only in the body of the complaint, but also in the prayer. Para
sa ano? For the Clerk of Court to assess properly the correct
docket fees. Anong sabi sa Manchester, the plaintiff in Machester?
“I paid the docket fees. But the Clerk of Court assessed only this.”
Because he did not actually specify the other amounts in the
prayer. So the Supreme Court said, “From now on, you have to
specify not only in the body but also in the prayer for the Clerk of
Court to assess the docket fees.”
Although, from Manchester, the Supreme Court (reacts) that ruling

when it ruled in Sun Insurance v. Asuncion. (Kasi you are not my
students in CivPro eh. They know these cases because I gave them
in advance. Bahala na kayong magsulat diyan and then basahin
niyo kung gusto niyo.) Sun Insurance v. Asuncion clarified, sabi ng
56 of 78
Supreme Court, nagtake ng little backseat ang Supreme Court. Ok,

the policy from now on, courts must not dismiss the complaint
outright kung hindi nagbayad ng docket fees.
What did the Supreme Court say? Give the plaintiff reasonable
time to pay the correct docket fees. Meaning, to pay the
deficiency, if there’s any. If the plaintiff does not pay within the
period, then dismiss the case.
And this was further clarified in Tacay v. RTC. In that case, the
Supreme Court, the policy of the Court now is not to dismiss the
complaint outright for failure to pay the correct docket fees if
there’s deficiency, but allow the plaintiff to pay the deficiency within
a reasonable time. In my case, I usually give the plaintiff 15 days or
10 days, as the case may be, to pay. But if did not, or he does not,
rather, then the case may be dismissed. Why? Bakit ididismiss
kung hindi nagbayad?
What did we say?
Jurisdiction is conferred by law, so as rtc judge, I have jurisdiction

over actions incapable of pecuniary estimation. However, I cannot
acquire that jurisdiction. I cannot exercise that jurisdiction unless
the correct fees are paid. That's when we say, jurisdiction is not
vested. Jurisdiction is not acquired if the correct docket fees are
not paid. But again, what's the policy? Not to dismiss outrightly but
allow reasonable time for the plaintiff to pay the correct docket
fees.
What's the second requirement? Certification against forum

shopping. Where is this provided? Section 5 of rule 7. What is the
purpose of certification again? This is to ensure that plaintiff has to
disclose to the court if there are other pending cases between the
same parties, if there is none then he will indicate that in the
certification. If there are then he will disclose the same and he will
also promise in that certification, that it in the event he knows of
that case he will inform the court within the period of five days.
This certification by the way is subscribed, it’s under oath. There
were cases where the plaintiff was filed with the case of perjury
57 of 78
because he told a lie in the certification. This is because it is a

requirement filed in court. These two are mandatory requirements.
Now the third requirement where the law or the rule require
verification. Section 4 of rule 7. How to verify? Either you swear
under oath, subscribe under oath the pleading, or you append a
verification. What is important is the plaintiff states in his
verification that he has read all the allegations in the complaint, and
those allegations are true and correct to the best of his personal
knowledge end or based on authenticated documents or records.
What if you said to the best of my knowledge, information, and
belief? Is that verification? No. It is as if there is no verification.
Who signs the verification? The plaintiff because he is the one who
has read and has knowledge of those facts.
What about the certification against forum shopping? Again, it's

the plaintiff because he is also the person who has knowledge of
the facts and who has knowledge that there is an existing case
between him and the defendant. Can that be signed by the
lawyer? No, it cannot be. Unless in certain circumstances when the
lawyer actually knows of this fact.
How will you distinguish verification from certification??? First

distinction: verification as a rule is not a requirement in an initiatory
pleading, it is required only when the law or the rules require;
certification is a mandatory requirement- a formal requirement in
initiatory pleading. Second as to who signs? In both, the plaintiff.
Third, amendment. Verification may be cured by amendment but
not certification against forum shopping. Which of the two may be
allowed to dismiss? Certification. But can verification be a ground
to dismiss? Yes if the law or the rules require that the pleading be
verified and it was not verified.
What can be examples of pleadings where the law or the rule

requires it to be verified?
Rule 47 petition for annulment of judgment. Rule 47 expressly

requires that the petition be verified. Rule 65 Petition for certiorari,
prohibition and mandamus requires that it be verified. Quo
warranto requires that it be verified. Rule 70 all complaints of
ejectment, unlawful detainer and forcible entry, all pleadings must
be verified. Rule 38 Petition for relief of judgment requires that it be
58 of 78
verified. The rules on appeal under Rules 42, 43 and 45 requires

that the petition for review and the petition for review on certiorari
requires that they be verified. Kaya dun sa Supreme Court kahit
appeal yan hindi vinerify hah, masaya ang researcher dun hindi na
magreresearch. I was once a court of attorney in the Court of
Appeals for six years. I worked with Justice Callejo the one retired
now who’s the vice chancellor. So pag binigay sakin assigned ung
petition if it is not verified naku isang sentence lang yan,
makakapag-kape na kami ng maaga hahaha Because the rule
requires them as a matter of of form.
What is a complaint? It is a written statement of the parties, the

claims and causes of action against. What is an answer? It is a
pleading wherein the defendant set forth his defenses.
What is a counterclaim? It is a claim by the defending party against

a claimant. Counterclaim can either be compulsory or permissive.
What is a cross-claim? It is a claim by a party against a co-party.
What is a third-party complaint? It is a claim by the defending party
against a person who is not a party to a case for reimbursement or
for subrogation or any claim arising from the main cause of action.
What is a complaint in intervention? It is a complaint filed by a
person nakikigulo siya, hindi siya kasama sa gulo, gusto niya
makigulo. So, he is a person who is not a party to a case and has a
legal interest in the case. Rule 90 on intervention, he files a
complaint in intervention. Okay we don’t have to.
What are the parts of a complaint? Just go over the Rule 7 the
caption, the body, and the prayer, I already discussed that. Now,
the body must arranged in a methodical manner paragraphs by
paragraphs 1,2,3,4. Bakit 1,2,3,4 because when the defendant
answer mabilis issight ni defendant. Defendant will just say
defendant respectfully alleges the following: I admit ang galing noh
inamin nya “I admit paragraphs 1 and 2 of the complaint” bakit
niya inamin? Eh personal circumstances lang naman un eh.
Paragraph 1 personal circumstances of the plaintiff, paragraph 2
personal circumstances of defendant. “I ADMIT” ang laki pa all
59 of 78
bold paragraphs 1 and 2. Number 2, I specifically deny the

material allegations alleged in paragraphs 3 to 10. Hahaha oh
ganun ang answer niya. That is a negative defense. Specifically
denied each of the material allegations under paragraphs 3 to 10.
The truth of which I do not admit for the lack of sufficient
knowledge to form a belief as to the existence of such facts. So,
what did he allege in his answer? Negative defense. Pero kulang
pa yan. Sino ba yung gumawa nito? Abogado, sasabihin bakit,
assuming for the sake of argument ganun ang answer nila
“Assuming for the sake of argument the loan has already been
paid.” So, what did he allege if he says that? Affirmative defense.
Actually, kahit hindi niyo na sabihing assuming for the sake of
argument, even if it is not allege Section 5 of Rule 6 paragraph 2
says that affirmative defense is an allegation of new matter while,
hypothetically admitting the allegations in the complaint would bar
or prevent recovery.
Kasi pag sinabing “Judge may utang siya” yun ang complaint niya
simple lang diba may utang siya. Sagot niya “hindi wala akong
utang Judge” pero sabi niya “hindi nabayaran ko na yun.”
Pagsinabi mong nabayaran, ano ngayon yung binayaran mo kung
hindi mo inamin na may utang ka. Kaya talaga lahat ng affirmative
defenses defendant is deemed to have admitted. If you say “No I
deny alI, I specifically deny all because , there was fraud, kapag
sinabi mong may fraud, edi inamin mo na may kontrata kayo,
sinasabi mo lang na may fraud. So all of these affirmative
defenses, as I have said the defendant when he alleges any of
those affirmative defenses, he’s actually admitting hypothetical
lang, hypothetically admitting all allegations in the complaint. What
could be the. Is, are the affirmative defenses limited to those
mentioned in paragraph 2 of Section 5 of Rule 6? No. What could
be other affirmative defenses? Lahat ng modes of extinguishing
obligations under the Civil Code maybe an affirmative defense.
Waiver,abandonment also included. Lahat yun. They could be
considered why? Simply, anything that would prevent or bar
60 of 78
recovery provided it is a new matter can be an affirmative defense.

But if the defendant chooses to allege a negative defense, how
should he deny it? You have to refer to paragraph 1 section 6,
section 5 to Section 10 Rule 8. Specific denial. So how should the
defendant alleged his negative defense, the defendant must under
Section 10 Rule 8, he must specifically deny each, EACH material
allegations in the complaint the truth of which he does not admit
and allege those facts that would he believed to be true or he shall
allege that he does not have sufficient knowledge to form a belief
of such fact. So what is the consequence if he does not specifically
deny?
Section 11 of Rule 8 says he is deemed to have admitted.
Oh ganito makinig ah. Collection for sum of money. Eto yung usual
na allegations, maliban sa personal circumstances.
On such a date, defendant obtained a loan, to guarantee payment

of that loan, defendant executed a promissory note promising to
pay that loan in 6 equal monthly installments. The promissory note
is attached hereto as exhibit as annexed A.
Next paragraph: Notwithstanding the note having become due

defendant did not pay.
Next Paragraph: Despite repeated demands defendant did not pay.
Do they make out a cause of action? Yes it has a right guaranteed

obligation, act or omission, the non-payment is the omission that
makes out a cause of action
Eto ang sagot ni defendant, abogado na gumawa nito ah parang

kayo yan sa susunod. It says defendant by counsel, kaya by
counsel kasi si counsel nga gumagawa eh, respectfully alleges:
I admit paragraphs 1 and 2 as to personal circumstances of

plaintiff and defendant.
I specifically deny Pars 3-10
And that’s it.
61 of 78
What is the effect of that denial? It is pregnant with admissions.

That is a denial pregnant with admissions otherwise known as
negative pregnant.
Why do we say that it is pregnant? It is loaded with, bloated with

admissions because he did not comply with Section 10 of Rule 8.
So ganun nga sagot ni defendant eh masisisi mo ba sya? Pano nya
sinuntok si Pacquiao ganun lang talaga sya sumuntok. Di ba sagot
lang yan? E kung may complaint sayo sagutin mo rin ng suntok
masisisi mo ba sya? Ganun sya maganswer eh.
Who will now avail of another remedy? Si plaintiff anong gagawin

mo? Kung yan ang answer?
What would be the remedy of the plaintiff, since the answer

actually is pregnant with admissions, meaning defendant is
deemed to have admitted, under Section 11, admitted all the
allegations that make out a cause to collect? So what would be the
remedy of the plaintiff? You file… plaintiffs may — “may,” kasi nasa
sa kanya kung mag-file s’ya o hindi — plaintiff may file a Motion for
Judgment on the Pleadings.
Why? He’ll say, “Judge, tapusin na natin ‘to. Inamin na n’ya.

Judgment na.” Because it is ripe for judgment. He admitted, and
these are considered “judicial admissions.”
Judicial admissions under Section 4 of Rule 129 of the Rules of

Negligence provide that they do not require proof. So they can now
be ripe for judgment.
Okay, so that is in so far is the answer.
Counterclaim: compulsory and permissive. When will it be

compulsory? And the counterclaim, which is actually a claim: a
complaint also of the defendant, arises out of, or necessarily
connected with the subject matter of the action. And it does not
62 of 78
require the presence of third persons on whom the court may or

may not acquire jurisdiction. Look at that: I gave examples on
moral damages, exemplary damages and attorney’s fees which are
incidental to the main cause of action for sum of money, or unpaid
loan. What kind… okay. They defined that. Let’s say defendant, in
his answer: “I specifically deny paragraphs 3 to 10 the truth of
which… for lack of sufficient knowledge to confirm the existence of
those facts.” Sagot n’ya. “By way of counterclaim, by reason on
the complaint, I suffered sleepless nights, besmirched reputation,
for which I pray that the plaintiff be directed to pay me moral
damages. By reason of the complaint, I was forced to secure the
services of a lawyer, for which I paid Php 100,000 as attorney’s
fees. I was also forced to spend litigation expenses for which I ask
for.” So these are the counterclaims of the defendant. What
counterclaims are they? Compulsory or permissive? They are
compulsory counterclaims.
But what if let’s say si defendant sumagot: specifically deny and

then he says by way of counterclaim — Plaintiff is claiming unpaid
remittances, insurance agent s’ya eh. So ang complaint sa kanya
(defendant), hindi n’ya nireremit ‘yung mga collections. Eto ‘yung
sagot n’ya: specific denial and then he says, “It is actually the
plaintiff who owes me my bonuses. The insurance company did
not pay me my bonus, and it did not pay me my commissions and
unpaid salaries.” So he is asking for the court to award those to
him. What kind of counterclaims are they? They are permissive.
They do not arise out of nor is necessarily connected with the main
cause.
Why is it permissive? Because defendant has a choice either to

litigate it, to litigate them, in the same complaint or file a separate
action.
63 of 78
Since that is a permissive counterclaim, which does not arise out

of or not necessarily connected, defendant has to pay the docket
fees and comply with certification against forum-shopping. But if it
is merely compulsory, no need to comply with those, because that
is a compulsory counterclaim.
What about cross-claims? A claim by a party against a co-party?
Section 2 of Rule 9. Compulsory counterclaims, as well as cross-

claims, which are not pleaded or which are not interposed in the
same action are barred. They are deemed barred. Unlike
permissive that they have a choice to file a separate case. Why? As
we said, under the rule, compulsory counterclaim arises out of or
neccessary connected with the main action.
Take note. So, if it is a compulsory crossclaim, they are not

initiatory. No need to pay docket fees, no need to comply with
certification, but they must be interposed - written in the same
case; otherwise, barred (Sec. 2, Rule 9).
Reply is a pleading, the function of which is to deny or allege facts

in denial of the new matters alleged by the defendant in his
answer.
Example: He filed an answer that the debt has already been paid.
So there is a new matter alleged by way of defense in the answer.
Plaintiff may file a reply on that: “Hindi totoo ‘yun, yung binayaran
lang niya ‘yung unang promissory note.” So that is how to deny the
new matter alleged in the answer. What could be these new
matters alleged in the answer? -- Affirmative defenses which are to
bar recovery and the plaintiff may opt to file a reply because a reply
is an option on the part of the plaintiff.
Who actually files a reply? The claimant. Is it possible for a

defendant to file a reply? Yes, in a cross claim, third-party
64 of 78
complaint. Is it possible for the plaintiff to file a counterclaim? Yes,

in a crossclaim, complaint in intervention.
Who files the reply? The claimant. Kasi pag claimant, kasama na
ang lahat. Pag sinabi nating plaintiff, you will only be limited to the
plaintiff. But the defendant may also be a claimant in a
counterclaim, in a third-party complaint, and a cross claim.
What if the claimant also has to allege a new matter arising from
the new matter alleged by the defendant in his answer. Cab he
incorporate that in his reply? No. The purpose of a reply is only to
deny or alleg facts in denial of the new matters alleged by the
defendant his answer.
What is the remedy of the claimant if he wants to allege new

matters? He may file an amended complaint or a supplemental
complaint.
What is the difference between an amended and supplemental

pleadings?
In amendment, what could be the subject of amendment? It could

be a fact or any allegation that occurred even prior to the filing of
the complaint or during the filing of that complaint. While
supplemental is a remedy that can be availed of to add or
supplement facts which occurred since the filing of the pleading
sought to be supplemented. What are these? These could be
transactions or occurrences or events that may have happened
since the filing of the pleading sought to be supplemented. Hindi
pwedeng mag-interchange yan. That remedy should be based on
those facts. So we go back, if it is a reply, if he wants to issue
matter he may either file an amended or supplemental pleading, as
the case may be.
So those are the pleadings may be allowed and there could be an

answer to counterclaim, answer to third-party claim, answer to a
65 of 78
cross-claim, there could also be counter counterclaim. Who may

file counter counterclaim? The plaintiff. May the defendant also file
a counter counterclaim? Yes, in a third-party complaint.
Who are the parties to the third-party complaint, may gusto si

defendant isama, this is a claim by the defending party against a
third person, who are the parties? third-party plaintiff and third-
party defendant. Third-party plaintiff who at the same time is the
defendant and third-party defendant (hanggang doon nalang)
Now, I already discussed Rule 7, parts of the complaint- they are

self-explanatory. What is the effect if the complaint is not signed?
Sa lahat ng hindi pinirmahan yung complaint- ang dami I
encountered 4 instances, ang pinirmahan yung certification against
forum shopping, pero yung complaint hindi, e certification is just
formal requirement of complaint. I have one instance, where (…it
was), the lawyer was my classmate in first year in san beda, what
did I do? Did I dismiss it outright? No, naisip ko yung plaintiff nag
bayad ng docket fees, palagay ko mas malaki pa yung binayad
nyang attorney’s fees, kawawa naman. Diba? kasalanan ba nung
plaintiff? sinong may sala? Kayo in the future, so what did I do? In
the interest of justice and for humanitarian consideration, wala pa
namang prejudice to the defendant e, summons has not yet been
served, I usually issue an order directing the plaintiff together with
the lawyer, (ah) through the lawyer, to sign the complaint within the
period of 10 days, telling him which, complaint will be dismissed;
one, an unsigned pleading or unsigned complaint produces no
legal effect. I discussed already verification, certification.
Now, 8 provides only the manner of allegation (wag kayong mag-

alala may quiz, o you listen)
Rule 8: Manner of allegation
Section 1 simply states that the pleading, any of those seven, must
be arranged in methodical form and logical.
66 of 78
Kapag nagkuwento kayo kasi may complaint ka e. Dba kapag

nagsumbong sa’yo ‘yung girlfriend niyo, “Binubog ako.” Kulang
ang kuwento, ang tanong mo, “Nino?”; “Kailan?”; “Saan?” Dba
kulang? Kapag nag-file ka ng complaint lahat ‘yun sunod sunod.
SO —
“On such a date, defendant obtained a loan in the amount of [xxx]

promising to pay.
To guarantee payment defendant executed a promissory note

promising to pay the loan in so and so equal monthly instalments.
The copy of which is attached here to the next annexed page.
That withstanding the loan having become due, defendant did not
pay; despite repeated demands, defendant did not pay.”
It is in a chronological order and it is numerical in form kasi nga

kapag nag-answer si defendant sasabihin niya ng paragraph so
and so. That’s how it is in Section 1 of Rule 8.
But what about if it is a complaint between members of the family?

Under the Family Code who are those [immediate] members of the
family? Descendant, ascendant, and the children. What is required
as a condition precedent?
There must be earnest efforts to settle the dispute among

members of the family. That is a condition precedent. What could
be other condition precedent? Barangay conciliation.
What is another condition precedent? Valid tender of payment in

consignation.
What is another? Exhaustion of administrative remedies.
How will you allege them in a complaint? General averment.
67 of 78
How will you allege a judgment? You have to specify the judgment
- court that rendered such and attach a copy.
Capacity, you will also aver, and representative as the case may be.
What about mistake or fraud, how can they be alleged?
SPECIFICALLY alleged. Why? What are those that should be
specifically alleged? Facts constituting fraud; facts constituting
mistake.
What about conditions of the mind? What are examples of

condition of the mind? Good faith, Bad faith. They need only to be
averred by the plaintiff generally not specifically.
But let’s say the complaint is based on an actionable document.

What could be examples of actionable documents? In a complaint
for sum of money based on promissory note - the promissory note
is an actionable document. Complaint for declaration of nullity of
the deed of sale; nullity of the deed of donation - these are based
on actionable document because these are based on instruments.
Actionable document could be an instrument, a contract, an
agreement. It need not be an agreement because it can only be an
instrument like a promissory note.
What is a promissory note? We learned this in our Negotiable

Instruments. A unilateral promise to pay.
(Dean Sundiang on memorize Section 1 NIL)
How will you aver an actionable document? There are two ways by
which to aver an actionable document and it is self-explanatory.
Either by alleging substantially the provisions of the actionable
document which is relevant to the subject matter of the main
action and attend to the complaint the copy of the actionable
68 of 78
document or aver; copy in verbatim the instrument or actionable

document in the complaint.
Dito naman sa defendant. How will a defendant contest an

actionable document?
Isa lang and very stringent ang rules di’yan. If the complaint or
pleading is based on an actionable document, contest it by
denying under oath the due execution and genuineness of that
document.
What is the consequence if he did not deny it under oath?
He is deemed to have admitted the due execution and

genuineness of the document.
E ano ngayon kung admitted ang due execution and genuineness

of the document?
Aba, mas madali ang trabaho ni plaintiff. When the plaintiff

presents evidence, he need not call a witness, present a witness,
to testify that the document is genuine and the defendant signed
that document because that fact has already been admitted when
the defendant fails to deny it under oath. We call that judicial
admissions.
As to contracts, again – due execution and genuineness of an

actionable document.
Starting out with obligation, the procedure there is self-explanatory

just like how to bring new parties under Rule 3 except as those
four that I already mentioned.
You have to refer Section 1 of Rule 9 to Sec. 1 of Rule 16. Section

1 of Rule 16 enumerates the defenses and objections that may be
raised in a motion to dismiss. But defenses and motions are not
limited only to those under Section 1.
69 of 78
Okay, I have already discussed Section 2. Compulsory

counterclaims and cross-claims are deemed barred when not set
up in an action. What if the defendant did not raise in an answer?
How many days are provided in Rule 11 for time to plead?
How many days does the defendant have to file answer? 15 days.
How many days to file an answer to a counterclaim? 10 days.
How many days to answer to a crossclaim? 10 days.
How many days to answer to a supplemental complaint? 10 days.
How many days to answer to an amended complaint? It depends.

If it is a matter of right, 15 days. If it is a matter of discretion, 10
days unless the court gives a different period.
Read: Section 3, Rule 9.
What is the consequence if the defendant does not file an answer?
He may be declared in default.
What are the requirements to declare defendant in default?
Plaintiff should file a motion in writing with notice to the defendant

and there must be showing of proof of such failure.
Motion. Since that is a motion to declare a defendant in default,

that must comply with the rule on motion under Rule 15. It must be
in writing, it must be set for hearing, there must be notice to the
defendant.
What does the notice that contains means under Section 3?
Yung notice to the defendant, basta si plaintiff serves the

defendant with a copy of his motion to declare defendant in
default. That is sufficient notice. He serves the pleading to the
defendant and the rule on service of pleadings are those that are
provided under Rule 13- service of pleadings which is different
70 of 78
from service of summons under Rule 14. So when these are

shown, the defendant may be declared in default.
As a judge, where will I based my finding that the defendant did

not file an answer?
I will base it from the return or report of the sheriff. The return
shows when was the summons served to the defendant and I will
just compute how many days have elapsed and declare defendant
in default.
What happens if defendant was declared in default?
He lost standing, active participation in the proceedings. What will

the court do after the defendant is declared in default?
The court may decide, subject to its discretion, to render judgment

as may be warranted by the facts alleged by the complaint or
require the plaintiff to present evidence ex parte.
Who decides? The court.
Aba, kasi may mga abugado diyan: “Motion to Declare Defendant

in Default and Allow the Plaintiff to Present Evidence Ex Parte”.
Aba, sila na nagdedesisyon.
In my case, if you ask me as a judge, what will I do? Do I render

judgment immediately or require presentation of evidence before
me?
In my case, the safe way, is to require evidence ex parte.
What are my reasons? Because the plaintiff usually only attaches

photocopies, malay ko kung pinagawa sa Recto yan. I want to be
sure so you have present evidence. Show me that you are entitled
to relief being prayed for.
Is it possible natalo mo rin si plaintiff even if one way na nga,

wala na nga si defendant? YES.
71 of 78
If he will not be able to prove his cause during the presentation of

plaintiff’s evidence ex parte. But more often than not, winner na
diyan si plaintiff and there will be judgment by default. Sa
basketball ganun din, pag wala yung kabila, default na, panalo na,
but in cases, it’s actually the same but the court will have to go
over the allegations in the complaint including the attachments and
determine if he really is entitled to relief.
Now, since defendant is declared in default, does he have a re

medy? YES.
What’s the remedy of the defendant?
To file a motion to lift the order of default or a motion to set aside

the order of default.
The rules are stringent. What must be complied?
4. File a motion to lift, in writing;
5. Set it for hearing;
6. Comply with the rule under Rule 15:
1. He must show nevertheless that he has a meritorious

defense; and  
2. That his ground to set aside is any of those FAME:

Fraud, Accident, Mistake, or Excusable negligence.  
What kind of fraud? Extrinsic fraud not intrinsic fraud.
What is extrinsic fraud? Fraud that is outside the subject matter

in controversy.
He’s actually saying that there was fraud that prevented him from
filing the answer within the period. There was an accident that
prevented him from filing the answer within the period. There was a
mistake or excusable negligence that prevented him from filing the
answer within the period. So he is asking the court that he be given
another chance to participate in the case. Once [the court] finds
72 of 78
that there is basis for the lifting, [it] lifts and [it] gives the defendant
a fresh period to file the answer.
The Supreme Court says that, courts should be lenient in lifting the
order of default. The Supreme Court also says that courts should
be stringent in following the reglementary period.
Questions, is there inconsistency in those rulings? NO.
The court simply says, if you will not file the answer within the
reglementary period, then it’s strict, [you] may be declared in
default but if [you] can show to the court that [you have] a ground
to lift the order of default and that [you have] a meritorious defense,
then the court should be lenient in lifting the order of default
because it is best to hear the case on the merits rather than on
technicality.
What is the effect of partial declaration of default if there are

several defendants and some filed an answer, some did not?
The court case may proceed against those who filed the answer
and judgement may be rendered against those not answering
defendants.
But are there cases where declaration of default is prohibited?

YES.
Obviously, declaration of nullity of judgment, annulment of

judgment and legal separation.
Why what’s the reason for this?
They are for reasons of public policy. This is to avoid collusion.

Kasi pag dineclare, baka nag-usap na yang mag-asawa; “magfa-
file ako ng petition for annulment ah. Wag ka na mag-answer para
diretso na.” So it’s not allowed because it is against public policy.
In fact prosecutors would be directed to submit a report that there
is collusion between the parties. That’s the procedure under the
special rule on declaration of nullity of marriage and annulment of
marriage.
73 of 78
Rule 10
Section 1 defines what amendment is. And you know that as

distinguished from supplemental. I already mentioned earlier.
What are the kinds of amendments?
As to when it may be availed of, there are four:
1. Amendment as a matter of right; 
2. Amendment as a matter of discretion;  
3. Amendment to conform to the evidence presented; and  
4. Amendment to authorize presentation of evidence.  
What are the other kinds of amendments as to the Subject of

Amendment? There are 2. -- Formal and Substantial
Amendments. Follow? Ok.
When is it a matter of right?
-- Before the service of responsive pleading, ONCE, as a matter of

right.
So if it is the plaintiff who wants to amend the complaint, when

may the plaintiff amend it as a matter of right?
-- Before he is served with the answer.
Ano yung word na serve?
-- You have to correlate that to Rule 13 on SERVICE. Because

Service may either be Personal, By Registered Mail, or by
Substituted Service.
Now, may the defendant also amend his answer?
-- YES. Before he is served with the reply.
May the claimant amend his reply?
74 of 78
-- YES. Within 10 days from the time he serve it to the adverse

party.
Now, can he still amend as a matter of right for the 2nd time?
(Hindi pa naman sya na-serve[an] ng answer eh. A matter of right
pa?) Can he still amend?
-- YES if he wants. BUT this time, not as a matter of right. He will

have to ask Leave of Court.
What about after he is served with answer? Can he still amend?
-- [YES.] Eh gusto ba nya eh. Kahit burahin nya lahat. Gugustuhin

ko yon. Wala na akong ide-decide. Can he still amend? YES. It's
his choice. But he will have to ask Leave of Court.
Just as like when the defendant would like to file a third party
complaint, he also asks Leave of Court.
Why? Why do we have to determine if we allow him to amend

after the answer is served? -- Because it may be that that was
intended only to cause DELAY. So we have to hear it. What's his
reasons why he want to amend.
Can he amend it by adding a cause of action?
-- YES. Provided he asks Leave of Court.
Can he amend it in order for the court to acquire jurisdiction?
-- NO. THAT'S PROHIBITED. In order to vest jurisdiction of the

court, NO. That's prohibited. So take note of those which
amendments are prohibited.
Now. What can be amended as a matter of right? Both as to Form

and Substance?
-- ANYTHING that he wants, as a matter if right, BEFORE a

responsive pleading is served.
After responsive pleading is served, what can be amended?
75 of 78
-- Also Both. Substantial and Formal amendments. But as to

Substantial, he is to ask leave of court. As to Form, it may be
summarily adjudged, it may be summarily granted by the court. In
fact, the court may, on its own, motu proprio, also order Formal
Amendments.
What could be the nature of Formal Amendments?
-- It could be typo[graphical errors], clerical, obviously, PROVIDED

they do not cause prejudice to the adverse party.
Date? I-amend nya ang date?
-- It would depend. Baka yung date na yun mache-change para

lang it appears na it is filed within the prescriptive period. That's
another thing. That could be substantial. No more formal.
The 2 other kinds of amendment is at Section 5.
Ganito, ganito ko lang sasabihin, 5minutes na lang 😅 . What did

we say earlier? How does the court acquire jurisdiction over the
issues?
-- When they are raised in the pleadings.
And what are these pleadings?
-- Those 7 pleadings.
**Itong collections of sum of money. Plaintiff is on the witness

stand. Tanong ng abogado (Plaintiff's Counsel):
PC: What is your agreement concerning payment of interest?
*Defendant's Counsel objected*
DC: Objection your Honor. Irrelevant. The court does not have
jurisdiction. It was not alleged in the complaint. Neither was it
agreed upon during the pre-trial.
76 of 78
Wala talaga akong jurisdiction kasi di nya sinabi. Hindi nya hiningi
sa plaintiff nya. 'Di din yan inagree. So what would be my ruling? --
SUSTAINED.

The counsel, nakatingin sa kliyente, naluha si kliyente eh. Kasi

mas malaki yung claim ng interest.
PC: Your Honor, your Honor, Please. In the interest of justice

your Honor. It's clear from the promissory note your Honor that [it]
was agreed in the contract your Honor that there was agreement of
payment of interest your Honor.
Judge W: But why di nag-allege?
PC: Your Honor, because your Honor.
(Crowd laughs LOL)
Kung yung abogado nagsabi lang na “pardon, your honor, it

was my fault”, pagbibigyan ko pa eh. Because he was brave
enough to accept his mistake. Pwede naman talaga mangyari na
nakalimutan, pero sobra talaga yung sa example na to. Or you may
say “In the interest of justice, your honor, it would bring injustice to
my client”
What then happens to this? If the court GRANTS, that’s

when we say amendment to authorize the presentation of evidence.
What if tinanong si plaintiff, what is your agreement as to

the payment of interest? Eh wala si defendant so di nagobject.
*inallow yung cross* unang tanong ni defendant’s counsel, how
much was the amount of the payment of the interest? Wala na
nagconsent na siya, although that was not actually raised or
claimed in the complaint, he consented to that issue. In effect,
they both submitted that the issue for the court to resolve.
77 of 78
So what is the remedy? Amendment so as to conform to

the evidence presented.
These remedies are provided under Section 5, but would

there be an effect if the plaintiff did not ask to amend even if
both parties conform to the evidence? None. Because both have
conformed, the court in effect will then have the authority or power
to resolve that issue.
What is the effect of the amendment? It supersedes the

original.
How would I know the difference between the original

and the amended complaint? Under Rule 5 or 6?, they have to
mark it with appropriate marks by underlining the portions they
sought to be amended. When they file for example a supplemental
pleading, they will file motion for leave to file supplemental
pleading/answer/complaints with motion to admit supplemental
answer. There are two motions here, omnibus motion-- motion to
amend and motion for leave to supplement with motion to admin.
What is the basis? Rule 15, if the motion is asking for

admission, the party must also attach the pleading sought to be
amended.
What happens to the original complaint or answer or

reply? Can they be used? Yes, they can be used by the adverse
party if there are admissions in the original pleading and is called
extrajudicial admissions.
Why are they considered as extrajudicial? Because they

were superseded with the amended and supplemental pleadings.
78 of 78

Jurisdiction To Rule 10 JW 2019

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Jurisdiction To Rule 10 JW 2019

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Jurisdiction To Rule 10 JW 2019

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Transcribers: Ali, Almajose, Ampatin, Ang, Berlanga, Bulatao, Candelaria, Chavez, Cruz Ash, Cruz Au, Cuizon, De Leon

Civil Procedure Lecture Judge Wagan

(inaudible) So You need to correlate the rules. Remember this is a

We also have to observe some of the rules from Rules 1 to 56 in

With that as an introduction, first things first, you know as

First, what is important is jurisdiction. I will not go through again

would be diﬃcult to understand them if you did not prepare,

First what is jurisdiction? For purposes of civil actions filed in court,

So with that, what actually is jurisdiction? It primarily goes into the

Where do we get that power? Where do we get that power to hear,

Another thing, if the dispute relates to disputes between

So if I say first level courts, I will be referring to these five. Even

Okay, we go back to the definition. So whenever we have that

Okay, assuming that the law confers jurisdiction. So jurisdiction is

the judgment," "and to enforce the judgment." The question is are

For example, complaint was filed, summons served, defendant

So in my example, since the disposition of the court is to dismiss

I encountered one case in Pasay, I inherited the case from the

Judge:What is there to execute, counsel? Why did you file a

Counsel: Because, Your Honor, the property should be given to the

Counsel: Wherefore the motion is granted, hence, the case is

Judge: So is there something to execute in that?

He did not answer. This is just an example just to demonstrate to

But if aﬃrmed, there's nothing to execute.

Again, jurisdiction is the power or the authority of the court to hear,

cognizable by the RTC, is it not? Even if I forget them, I am

are these allegations? They are material facts constituting the

So jurisdiction is conferred. But how will that be determined by the

Now, granting that the court has jurisdiction, we now go to what

The first requisite is jurisdiction over the subject matter of the

person will of course be acquired when summon is served to the

Par 1. That on such a day, defendant obtained a loan in the amount

Par 2. Defendant promises to pay the loan within 1 year in equal

Par 3, Notwithstanding the loan having become due, defendant did

Par 4. Due to the defendants failure to pay, plaintiﬀ sent demand

Par 5. Notwithstanding repeated demands, defendant did not pay.

So those are examples of material allegations that make out or

as raised in the pleadings. And I gave you an example of what are

Let's say in Answer to that complaint, the defendant alleges:

Par 1. Defendant specifically denies that he obtained a loan, the

Assuming those were the allegations in the answer. So what are

1. whether or not it is true that he obtained a loan

2. whether there was payment.

As I've said in that simple collection of sum of money, next

I'll go back to my question. In the simple collection for sum of

Let's say the defendant is actually working in Dubai for 6 years. So

remedy - a preliminary attachment, the property is actually

What about the issue in lack of jurisdiction. So when a party assails

In my example, defendant and the court did not realize, it went up

So do you think there will be repeat of Tijam vs Sibonghanoy? I

So that explains Tijam vs. Sibonghanoy. Actually if you read

Jurisdiction over the person of the accused is determined through

1. Primary purpose is Due Process: to notify the defendant that

2. Once defendant is notified, court acquires jurisdiction.

How will court exercise its jurisdiction? There are Doctrines or

1. Principle of Continuing Jurisdiction or Doctrine of Court

2. Principle of Judicial Stability or Non Interference: to maintain

3. Principle of Hierarchy of Courts: applies only in courts which

the petitioner. He may file it in the RTC or CA or directly in SC. But