XI.

RULE 14: Summons (Sections 1-23)

A. What is a Summons; Alias Summons
B. Who issues
C. Who serves
D. To whom served
- to entity without juridical personality (S-7)
- to prisoners (S-8)
- to minors and incompetents (S-10)
- to spouses (S-11)
- to juridical entities: public or private; domestic or foreign
E. Kinds of Summons
a. Service in person (S-5)
b. Substituted (S-6)
c. Extraterritorial(S-17)
1. personal
2. publication
3. any mode
d. Publication (S-16)
F. Proofs of Service (S-21,22)
G. Voluntary Appearance (s-23)

Cases:
1. Valmonte vs CA- 252 SCRA
2. Millenium Ind. & Com. Corp., vs Tan- 326 SCRA
3. E.B. Villarosa vs. Benito – 312 SCRA
4. Santos vs. PNOC Exploration, 566 SCRA 272
5. Mason vs. CA, 413 SCRA
6. Jose vs. Boyon, 414 SCRA
7. Manotoc vs. CA – 499 SCRA 21
8. Ong vs. Co, February 25, 2015
9. Domagas vs. Jensen – 448 SCRA 663
10. Dole Phil. Vs. Quilala – 557 SCRA 433
11. Green Star Express v. Nissin Universal Robina Corp – 761 SCRA
12. Guy vs. Gacott – 780 SCRA 579 (1/13/16)
13. G.V. Florida Transit Inc. vs. Tiara Commercial Corporation 842 SCRA, October
18, 2017
14. Arrieta vs. Arrieta, 866 SCRA 140, Nov. 19, 2018

On voluntary appearance:
1. Sunrise Garden Corp. vs. CA – 771 SCRA 616
2. Tujan-Militante vs. Nustad, 827 SCRA (2017)

Comment: what doctrines/principles in the above cases have been abandoned,

modified, retained and incorporated in the amended rules?

XII. RULES 15: Motions (Sections 1-13)

A. Definition
B. Requirements
C. Kinds: litigious; non-litigious
D. Omnibus Motion
E. Prohibited Motions
F. Dismissal with prejudice

Cases:
1. Republic vs. Dimarucut, 857 SCRA (2017)
what happened to the 3-day notice rule?
2. Acampado vss. Cosmilla, 771 SCRA
 3. Laude vs. Gines-Jabalde, 775 SCRA
4. De Guzman vs. Ochoa, 684 SCRA

Note: Rule 16 has been deleted. Why?

-  Are the grounds for a motion to dismiss removed from the rules?
-  Are there no more motions to dismissed?
-  What is preclusion of issues/collateral estoppel?
Almagro vs. PAL, 880 SCRA 107

XIII. RULE 17: Dismissal of Actions (Sections 1-4)

A. Dismissal Upon Notice (S-1)
B. Dismissal Upon Motion (S-2)
C. Dismissal due to plaintiff’s fault (S-3)
1. Blay vs. Bana, 858 SCRA, 3/7/2018
2. Lim Tech Chuan, 752 SCRA 268
3. Ching vs. Cheng, 737 SCRA

XIV. RULE 18: Pre-Trial (Sections 1-10)

A. When conducted
B. Nature and Purpose
C. Notice
D. Effect of failure to appear
E. Pre-trial Brief/Pre-trial Order
- What are the innovations? Reasons?
F. Mediations
G. Judicial Dispute Resolutions

Note: A.M. No. 03-1-09 Supreme Court effective August 16, 2004 (Guidelines to be
observed by trial courts judges and clerks of court in the conduct of pre-trial and use of
deposition-discovery measures)

XV. RULE 19: Intervention (Sections 1-4)

-  Who may intervene (S-1)
-  When to intervene (S-2)

Cases:
1. Office of the Ombudsman vs. Sison, 612 SCRA
Compare with Ombudsman vs. Chavez, 700 SCRA
2. Anonuevo vs. Intestate Estate of Jalandoni, 636 SCRA
3. Rodriguez vs. CA, 698 SCRA 352
4. Fernandez vs. CA, 691 SCRA 167
5. Yao vs. Perello, 414 SCRA
6. Pinlac vs. CA, 410 SCRA
7. Chipongian vs. Benitez-Lirio - 768 SCRA 204

XVI. RULES 20 to 22:

A. Calendar of Cases (Sections 1-2)
B. Subpoena (Sections 1-10)
C. Computation of Time (Sections1-2)
 XI. RULE 14: Summons (Sections 1-23)

CODAL

RULE 14 SUMMONS

RULE 14 SUMMONS
PERSONS WHO ISSUE AND SERVE SUMMONS
Section 1. Clerk to issue summons. Section 3. By whom served

Unless the complaint is on its face The summons may be served by the
dismissible under Section 1, Rule 9, the sheriff, his or her deputy, or other proper
court shall, within five (5) calendar days court officer, and
from receipt of the initiatory pleading and
proof of payment of the requisite legal in case of failure of service of summons
fees, direct the clerk of court to issue the by them,
corresponding summons to the
defendants. (1a) 1. the court may authorize the plaintiff - to
serve the summons - together with the
sheriff.

2. . In cases where summons is to be

served outside the judicial region of the
court where the case is pending, the
plaintiff shall be authorized to cause the
service of summons.

3. If the plaintiff is a juridical entity, it shall

notify the court, in writing, and name its
authorized representative therein,
attaching a board resolution or
secretary’s certificate thereto, as the case
may be, stating that such representative
is duly authorized to serve the summons
on behalf of the plaintiff.

4. If the plaintiff misrepresents that the

defendant was served summons, and it is
later proved that no summons was
served, the case shall be dismissed with
prejudice, the proceedings shall be
nullified, and the plaintiff shall be meted
appropriate sanctions.
5. If summons is returned without being
served on any or all the defendants, the
court shall order the plaintiff to cause the
service of summons by other means
available under the Rules.

Failure to comply with the order shall

cause the dismissal of the initiatory
pleading without prejudice.
Section 13. Duty of counsel of record. – Where the summons is improperly served
and a lawyer makes a special appearance on behalf of the defendant to, among
others, question the validity of service of summons, the counsel shall be deputized by
the court to serve summons on his or her client.
Section 23. Voluntary appearance. – The defendant’s voluntary appearance in the
action shall be equivalent to service of summons. The inclusion in a motion to dismiss
of other grounds aside from lack of jurisdiction over the person of the defendant shall
be deemed a voluntary appearance.

CONTENT AND VALIDITY OF SUMMONS

Section 2. Contents. – The summons Section 4. Validity of summons and
shall be directed to the defendant, signed issuance of alias summons.
by the clerk of court under seal, and
contain:
The name of the court and the names of GR: Summons shall remain valid until
the parties to the action; duly served,

When authorized by the court upon ex XPN: unless it is recalled by the court.
parte motion, an authorization for the
plaintiff to serve summons to the
defendant;

A direction that the defendant answer In case of loss or destruction of

within the time fixed by these Rules; and summons, the court may, upon motion,
issue an alias summons.

A notice that unless the defendant so There is failure of service after

answers, plaintiff will take judgment by unsuccessful attempts to personally serve
default and may be granted the relief the summons on the defendant in his or
applied for. her address indicated in the complaint.

A copy of the complaint and order for Substituted service should be in the
appointment of guardian ad litem, if any, manner provided under Section 6 of this
shall be attached to the original and each Rule.
copy of the summons.

SERVICE OF SUMMONS: GENERAL AND EXCEPTION

GR: Section 5. Service in person on XPN: Section 6. Substituted service.
defendant.
Whenever practicable, the summons If, for justifiable causes, the defendant
shall be served by handing a copy thereof cannot be served personally after at
to the defendant in person and informing least three (3) attempts on two (2)
the defendant that he or she is being different dates, service may be
served, or, if he or she refuses to receive effected:
and sign for it, by leaving the summons
within the view and in the presence of the 1. By leaving copies of the summons at
defendant. the defendant’s residence to a person at
least eighteen (18) years of age and of
sufficient discretion residing therein;

2. By leaving copies of the summons at

[the] defendant’s office or regular place of
business with some competent person in
charge thereof. A competent person
includes, but is not limited to, one who
customarily receives correspondences for
the defendant;

3. By leaving copies of the summons, if

refused entry upon making his or her
authority and purpose known, with any of
 the officers of the homeowners’
association or condominium corporation,
or its chief security officer in charge of the
community or the building where the
defendant may be found; and

4. By sending an electronic mail to the

defendant’s electronic mail address, if
allowed by the court.

SERVICE UPON ENTITIES

Section 7. Service Section 12. Service upon Section 14. Service upon
upon entity without domestic private juridical foreign private juridical
juridical personality. entity. entities.
When persons When the defendant is a When the defendant is a
associated in an entity corporation, partnership or foreign private juridical
without juridical association organized under entity which has transacted
personality are sued the laws of the Philippines or is doing business in the
under the name by which with a juridical personality, Philippines, as defined by
they are generally or service may be made on the law, service may be made
commonly known, on its
service may be effected 1.president, 1. resident agent
upon all the defendants 2. managing partner, designated in accordance
3. general manager, 4. with law for that purpose,
1. by serving upon any corporate secretary, 4. or, if there be no such
one of them, or treasurer, or agent, on
2. upon the person in 5. in- house counsel of the
charge of the office or corporation wherever they 2. the government official
place of business may be found, or in their designated by law to that
maintained in such absence or unavailability, effect, or
name.
6. on their secretaries. 3. on any of its officers,
But such service shall agents, directors or
not bind individually any If such service cannot be trustees within the
person whose made upon any of the Philippines.
connection with the entity foregoing persons, it shall
has, upon due notice, be made upon If the foreign private
been severed before the juridical entity is not
action was filed. 7. the person who registered in the
customarily receives the Philippines, or has no
correspondence for the resident agent but has
defendant at its principal transacted or is doing
office. business in it, as defined
by law, such service may,
In case the domestic with leave of court, be
juridical entity is under effected outside of the
receivership or Philippines through any of
liquidation, service of the following means:
summons shall be made on
the 1. By personal service
coursed through the
1. receiver or appropriate court in the
2. liquidator, as the case foreign country with the
may be. assistance of the
Department of Foreign
Should there be a refusal on Affairs;
 the part of the persons
above-mentioned to receive 2. By publication once in a
summons despite at least newspaper of general
three (3) attempts on two (2) circulation in the country
different dates, where the defendant may
be found and
3. service may be made
electronically, if allowed by 3. by serving a copy of the
the court, as provided under summons and the court
Section 6 of this Rule. order by registered mail at
Section 15. Service upon the last known address of
public corporations. – the defendant;

When the defendant is the 4. By facsimile;

Republic of the Philippines,
service may be effected on 5. By electronic means with
the the prescribed proof of
service; or
1. Solicitor General;
6. By such other means as
in case of a province, city or the court, in its discretion,
municipality, or like public may direct.
corporations, service may
be effected on its

2. executive head, or on
such 3. other officer or
officers as the law or the
court may direct.

SERVICE UPON PERSONS

Section 8. Service upon Section 10. Service upon Section 11. Service
prisoners. minors and incompetents. upon spouses.
WHEN: When the defendant WHEN: When the defendant WHEN: When spouses
is a prisoner confined in a is a minor, insane or are sued jointly,
jail or institution, service otherwise an incompetent service of summons
shall be effected upon him or person, service of summons should be made
her shall be made upon

WHO: WHO: to each spouse

WHO: by the officer having 1. him or her personally and individually.
the management of such jail 2. on his or her legal
or institution who is deemed guardian if he or she has
as a special sheriff for said one, or
purpose. 3. if none, upon his or her
guardian ad litem whose
RETURN: The jail warden appointment shall be applied
shall file a return within five for by the plaintiff.
(5) calendar days from
service of summons to the WHEN: In the case of a
defendant. (9a) minor, service shall be made
on
WHO:
1. his or her parent or
2. guardian. (10a)

THE UNKOWN, THE OUT OF THE COUNTRY AND EXTRA TERRITORIAL SERVICE
 Section 16. Service Section 18. Residents Section 17. Extraterritorial
upon defendant temporarily out of the service. must answer.
whose identity or Philippines.
whereabouts are
unknown.
In any action where the When any action is When the defendant
defendant is commenced against a
defendant 1. does not reside and is not
1. designated as an 1. who ordinarily found in the Philippines, and
unknown owner, or the resides within the 2. the action affects the personal
like, or Philippines, status of the plaintiff or
2. whenever his or her 2. but who is 3. relates to, or the subject of
whereabouts are temporarily out of it, which is, property within the
unknown and cannot service Philippines, in which the
be ascertained by defendant has or claims a lien or
diligent inquiry, - may, by leave of interest, actual or contingent, or in
court, be also effected which the relief demanded
- within ninety (90) out of the Philippines, consists, wholly or in part, in
calendar days from the as under the preceding excluding the defendant from any
commencement of the Section.{ExtraTerritorial interest therein, or the property of
action, service may, Summons} the defendant has been attached
- by leave of court, be within the Philippines, service
effected upon him or may,
her - by publication in a - by leave of court, be effected out
newspaper of general of the Philippines
circulation and in such - by personal service as under
places and for such Section 5; or as provided for in
time as the court may international conventions to which
order. the Philippines is a party; or
- by publication in a newspaper of
NOTE: Any order general circulation in such places
granting such leave and for such time as the court
shall specify a may order, in which case a copy
reasonable time, which of the summons and order of the
shall not be less than court shall be sent
sixty (60) calendar - by registered mail to the last
days after notice, known address of the defendant,
within which the or in any other manner the court
defendant must may deem sufficient.
answer.
NOTE: Any order granting such
leave shall specify a reasonable
time, which shall not be less than
sixty (60) calendar days after
notice, within which the defendant
Section 9. Service consistent
with international conventions.
– Service may be made through
methods which are consistent with
established international
conventions to which the
Philippines is a party.
Section 19. Leave of court. – Any application to the court under this Rule for leave to
effect service in any manner for which leave of court is necessary shall be made by
motion in writing, supported by affidavit of the plaintiff or some person on his [or her]
behalf, setting forth the grounds for the application.
 PROOF OF SERVICE
Section 21. Proof of service. Section 22. Proof of service by
publication.
The proof of service of a summons shall If the service has been made by
be made in writing by the server and shall publication, service may be proved by the
set forth the manner, place, and date of affidavit of the publisher, editor, business
service; shall specify any papers which or advertising manager, to which affidavit
have been served with the process and a copy of the publication shall be
the name of the person who received the attached and by an affidavit showing the
same; and shall be sworn to when made deposit of a copy of the summons and
by a person other than a sheriff or his or order for publication in the post office,
her deputy. postage prepaid, directed to the
defendant by registered mail to his or her
If summons was served by electronic last known address.
mail, a printout of said e-mail, with a copy
of the summons as served, and the
affidavit of the person mailing, shall
constitute as proof of service.

Section 20. Return.

COMPLETION OF SERVICE
PERIOD: Within thirty (30) calendar days from issuance of summons by the clerk of
court and receipt thereof,

REQUIREMENT: the sheriff or process server, or person authorized by the court,

shall complete its service.
RETURN OF SERVICE
PERIOD: Within five (5) calendar days from service of summons,

REQUIREMENT: the server shall file with the court and serve a copy of the return to
the plaintiff’s counsel,
REGULAR MODES: SPECIAL MODE: Should substituted service
have been effected, the return shall state the
1. personally, following:
2. by registered mail, or
3. by electronic means authorized 1. The impossibility of prompt personal service
by the Rules. within a period of thirty (30) calendar days from
issue and receipt of summons;

2. The date and time of the three (3) attempts

on at least two (2) different dates to cause
personal service and the details of the inquiries
made to locate the defendant residing thereat;
and

3. The name of the person at least eighteen

(18) years of age and of sufficient discretion
residing thereat,
4. name of competent person in charge of the
defendant’s office or regular place of business,
or

5. name of the officer of the homeowners’

association or condominium corporation or
 6. its chief security officer in charge of the
community or building where the defendant
may be found. (4a)

NOTES:
What is a Summons;
Defined as the writ by which the defendant is notified of the action brought against him
[Licaros v.Licaros, G.R. No. 150656 (2003)]

Alias Summons
Section 4. Validity of summons and issuance of alias summons – Summons shall
remain valid until duly served, unless it is recalled by the court. In case of loss or
destruction of summons, the court may, upon motion, issue an alias summons. There is
failure of service after unsuccessful attempts to personally serve the summons on the
defendant in his or her address indicated in the complaint. Substituted service should be
in the manner provided under Section 6 of this Rule.

1. Nature and purpose of summons in relation to actions in personam, in rem and

quasi in rem

In relation to actions in personam, in rem, and quasi in rem

1. Action in personam 2. Action in rem and quasi in rem
Purpose of summons Purpose of summons in actions in rem
a. To acquire jurisdiction over the person and quasi in rem
of the defendant in a civil case a. Not to acquire jurisdiction over the
b. To give notice to the defendant that an defendant but mainly to satisfy the
action has been commenced against him. constitutional requirement of due process
[1 Riano 376, 2011 Ed.] b. Jurisdiction over the defendant is not
required
Where the action is in personam, that is, c. The court acquires jurisdiction over an
one brought against a person on the action as long as it acquires jurisdiction
basis of his personal liability, jurisdiction over the res that is the subject matter of
over the person of the defendant is the action. [Macasaet v. Co, Jr., G.R. No.
necessary for the court to validly try and 156759 (2013)]
decide the case. [Velayo-Fong v. Velayo,
G.R. No. 155488

When summons are issued

Summons shall be issued:
1. Within 5 calendar days from receipt of the initiatory pleading, and 2. Upon proof of
payment of the requisite legal fees

• Note: The old rules merely required payment of the requisite legal fees. The new rules
now require proof of such payment to be submitted with the initiatory pleading.
Summons shall not be issued, and the case shall be dismissed if the complaint on its
face is dismissible under Sec. 1, Rule 9. Such provides for the non-waivable grounds for
dismissal of a complaint, to wit: 1. The court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter

2. Litis pendentia

3. Res judicata

4. The action is barred by the statute of limitations. [Sec. 1, Rule 14]

Note: The rule directing the court not to issue summons in case any of the grounds are
present is similar to the Rules on Small Claims and Summary Procedure. However, the
grounds under the amended provision are limited to the non- waivable grounds in Sec.
1, Rule 9

Contents (S2)
Summons shall be
Directed to the defendant, and
Signed by the clerk of court under seal

Summons shall contain

The name of the court, and the names of the parties to the action;
plaintiff to serve summons to the defendant;
When authorized by the court upon ex parte motion, an authorization for the

Note: The plaintiff may serve summons together with the sheriff, only when the sheriff,
his deputy or proper court officer fails to serve summons, or if the summons is to be
served outside the judicial region of the court.

In the latter case, there would be no need for the sheriff, his deputy, or the proper court
officer to have first failed to serve the summons before the plaintiff may be authorized
by court to serve summons. [Sec. 3, Rule 14]

- A direction that the defendant answer within the time fixed by the ROC; and
- A notice that unless the defendant so answers, plaintiff will take judgment by default
and may be granted the relief applied for

- The following shall be attached to the original and each copy of the summons
a. A copy of the complaint, and
b. An order for appointment of guardian ad litem, if any. [Sec. 2, Rule 14]

Who issues
Section 1. Clerk to issue summons. – Unless the complaint is on its face dismissible
under Section 1, Rule 9, the court shall, within five (5) calendar days from receipt of the
initiatory pleading and proof of payment of the requisite legal fees, direct the clerk of
court to issue the corresponding summons to the defendants

By whom issued
Clerk of court upon directive of the court. [Sec. 1, Rule 14]
Leave of court in case service requires prior leave

Any application under this rule for leave to effect service in any manner for which leave
of court is necessary shall be made by:
a. A motion in writing,
b. Supported by affidavit of the plaintiff or some person on his behalf setting forth the
grounds for the application. [Sec. 19, Rule 14]

Who serves
Section 3. By whom served. – The summons may be served by the sheriff, his or her
deputy, or other proper court officer, and in case of failure of service of summons by
them, the court may authorize the plaintiff - to serve the summons - together with the
sheriff.
In cases where summons is to be served outside the judicial region of the court where
the case is pending, the plaintiff shall be authorized to cause the service of summons.
If the plaintiff is a juridical entity, it shall notify the court, in writing, and name its
authorized representative therein, attaching a board resolution or secretary’s certificate
thereto, as the case may be, stating that such representative is duly authorized to serve
the summons on behalf of the plaintiff.
If the plaintiff misrepresents that the defendant was served summons, and it is later
proved that no summons was served, the case shall be dismissed with prejudice, the
proceedings shall be nullified, and the plaintiff shall be meted appropriate sanctions.
If summons is returned without being served on any or all the defendants, the court
shall order the plaintiff to cause the service of summons by other means available under
the Rules.

Failure to comply with the order shall cause the dismissal of the initiatory pleading
without prejudice.

Who may serve summons: [exclusive list]

1. Sheriff
2. His/her deputy
3. Other proper court officer, or
4. The plaintiff together with the sheriff

Rules for service of summons by plaintiff

The court shall authorize the plaintiff to serve summons together with the sheriff upon
ex parte motion in 2 instances:
1. In case of failure of service of summons by the aforementioned persons, or
2. In cases where summons is to be served outside the judicial region of the court
where the case is pending.
- Note: There is no need for prior failure to serve in this case before the plaintiff may be
authorized by the court to serve.

If the plaintiff is a juridical entity

1. It shall notify the court, in writing, name its authorized representative, and
2. A board resolution or secretary’s certificate must be attached stating that such
representative is duly authorized to serve the summons on behalf of the plaintiff.

If the plaintiff misrepresents that the defendant was served summons, and it is later
proved that no summons was served:
a. The case shall be dismissed with prejudice,
b. The proceedings shall be nullified, and
c. The plaintiff shall be meted appropriate sanctions.

If summons is returned without being served on any or all the defendants,

The court shall order the plaintiff to cause the service of summons by other means
available under the Rules.

• Failure to comply with the order shall lead to dismissal without prejudice. [Sec. 3, Rule
14]

D. To whom served
- to entity without juridical personality (S-7)
Section 7. Service upon entity without juridical personality. – When persons associated
in an entity without juridical personality are sued under the name by which they are
generally or commonly known, service may be effected upon all the defendants by
serving upon any one of them, or upon the person in charge of the office or place of
business maintained in such name. But such service shall not bind individually any
person whose connection with the entity has, upon due notice, been severed before the
action was filed.

- to prisoners (S-8)
Section 8. Service upon prisoners. – When the defendant is a prisoner confined in a jail
or institution, service shall be effected upon him or her by the officer having the
management of such jail or institution who is deemed as a special sheriff for said
purpose. The jail warden shall file a return within five (5) calendar days from service of
summons to the defendant.

- to minors and incompetents (S-10)

Section 10. Service upon minors and incompetents. – When the defendant is a minor,
insane or otherwise an incompetent person, service of summons shall be made upon
him or her personally and on his or her legal guardian if he or she has one, or if none,
upon his or her guardian ad litem whose appointment shall be applied for by the plaintiff.
In the case of a minor, service shall be made on his or her parent or guardian

- to spouses (S-11)
Section 11. Service upon spouses. – When spouses are sued jointly, service of
summons should be made to each spouse individually.

General Rule: Husband and wife shall sue or be sued jointly EXPN: those provided by
law, which are as follows:
1. A spouse without just cause abandons the other or fails to comply with his or her
obligations to the family with respect to the marital, parental, or property relations
(Family Code Art 101 and 108).
2. A spouse may mortgage, encumber, alienate or otherwise dispose of his or her
exclusive property, without the consent of the other spouse, and appear alone in court
to litigate with regard the same (FC Art 111)
3. The regime of separation of property governs the property relations of the spouses
(FC Art 145).

- to juridical entities: public or private; domestic or foreign

Section 12. Service upon domestic private juridical entity. – When the defendant is a
corporation, partnership or association organized under the laws of the Philippines with
a juridical personality, service may be made on the president, managing partner,
general manager, corporate secretary, treasurer, or inhouse counsel of the corporation
wherever they may be found, or in their absence or unavailability, on their secretaries.
If such service cannot be made upon any of the foregoing persons, it shall be made
upon the person who customarily receives the correspondence for the defendant at its
principal office.

In case the domestic juridical entity is under receivership or liquidation, service of

summons shall be made on the receiver or liquidator, as the case may be.
Should there be a refusal on the part of the persons above-mentioned to receive
summons despite at least three (3) attempts on two (2) different dates, service may be
made electronically, if allowed by the court, as provided under Section 6 of this Rule.
(11a)

Section 14. Service upon foreign private juridical entities. – When the defendant is
a foreign private juridical entity which has transacted or is doing business in the
Philippines, as defined by law, service may be made on its resident agent designated in
accordance with law for that purpose, or, if there be no such agent, on the government
official designated by law to that effect, or on any of its officers, agents, directors or
trustees within the Philippines.

If the foreign private juridical entity is not registered in the Philippines, or has no resident
agent but has transacted or is doing business in it, as defined by law, such service may,
with leave of court, be effected outside of the Philippines through any of the following
means:
(a) By personal service coursed through the appropriate court in the foreign country with
the assistance of the Department of Foreign Affairs;
(b) By publication once in a newspaper of general circulation in the country where the
defendant may be found and by serving a copy of the summons and the court order by
registered mail at the last known address of the defendant;
(c) By facsimile;
(d) By electronic means with the prescribed proof of service; or
(e) By such other means as the court, in its discretion, may direct. (12a)

Section 15. Service upon public corporations. – When the defendant is the Republic
of the Philippines, service may be effected on the Solicitor General; in case of a
province, city or municipality, or like public corporations, service may be effected on its
executive head, or on such other officer or officers as the law or the court may direct.
(13a)

The government officials designed by law to receive summons for foreign private
juridical entity are as follows:
(a) Superintendent of Banks, for banking, savings and loan trust corporations (Section
17, R.A. 337);
(b) Insurance Commissioner, for insurance corporations (Section 177 of the Insurance
Act, as amended);
(c) The Securities and Exchange Corporation, for other corporations (Section 123 of the
Corporation Code).

E. Kinds of Summons

a. Service in person (S-5)

Section 5. Service in person on defendant. – Whenever practicable, the summons
shall be served by handing a copy thereof to the defendant in person and informing the
defendant that he or she is being served, or, if he or she refuses to receive and sign for
it, by leaving the summons within the view and in the presence of the defendant

b. Substituted (S-6)
Section 6. Substituted service. – If, for justifiable causes, the defendant cannot be
served personally after at least three (3) attempts on two (2) different dates, service
may be effected:

(a) By leaving copies of the summons at the defendant’s residence to a person at least
eighteen (18) years of age and of sufficient discretion residing therein;

(b) By leaving copies of the summons at [the] defendant’s office or regular place of
business with some competent person in charge thereof. A competent person includes,
but is not limited to, one who customarily receives correspondences for the defendant;

(c) By leaving copies of the summons, if refused entry upon making his or her authority
and purpose known, with any of the officers of the homeowners’ association or
condominium corporation, or its chief security officer in charge of the community or the
building where the defendant may be found; and

(d) By sending an electronic mail to the defendant’s electronic mail address, if allowed
by the court.

Meaning of Residence
Residence refers to the place where the person named in the summons is living at the
time when the service is made, even though he may be temporarily out of the country at
the time (Palma v. Galvez, G.R. No. 165273, March 10, 2010).

Meaning of Office or Regular Place of Business

Similarly, the terms “office” or “regular place of business” refer to the office or place of
business of defendant at the time of service (Keister v. Navarro, G.R. No. L-29067, May
31, 1977).

“Competent person”
- A competent person includes, but is not limited to, one who customarily receives
correspondences for
the defendant.

c. Extraterritorial (S-17)
1. personal
2. publication
3. any mode

Section 17. Extraterritorial service. – When the defendant does not reside and is not
found in the Philippines, and the action affects the personal status of the plaintiff or
relates to, or the subject of which is, property within the Philippines, in which the
defendant has or claims a lien or interest, actual or contingent, or in which the relief
demanded consists, wholly or in part, in excluding the defendant from any interest
therein, or the property of the defendant has been attached within the Philippines,
service may, by leave of court, be effected out of the Philippines by personal service as
under Section 5; or as provided for in international conventions to which the Philippines
is a party; or by publication in a newspaper of general circulation in such places and for
such time as the court may order, in which case a copy of the summons and order of
the court shall be sent by registered mail to the last known address of the defendant, or
in any other manner the court may deem sufficient. Any order granting such leave shall
specify a reasonable time, which shall not be less than sixty (60) calendar days after
notice, within which the defendant must answer. (15a)

Section 18. Residents temporarily out of the Philippines. – When any action is
commenced against a defendant who ordinarily resides within the Philippines, but who
is temporarily out of it, service may, by leave of court, be also effected out of the
Philippines, as under the preceding Section. (16a)

When allowed
1. When the defendant does not reside and is not found in the Philippines, and
2. The action
a. Affects the personal status of the plaintiff or
b. Relates to, or the subject of which is, property within the Philippines, in which the
defendant has or claims a lien or interest, actual or contingent, or
c. In which the relief demanded consists, wholly or in part, in excluding the defendant
from any interest therein, or
d. The property of the defendant has been attached within the Philippines.

Modes
1. By personal service of summons done outside the PH;
2. By any means provided for in international conventions to which the PH is a party;
3. By publication in a newspaper of general circulation in such places and for such time
as the court may order, in which case a copy of the summons and order of the court
shall be sent by registered mail to the last known address of the defendant, or
4. In any other manner the court mat deem sufficient.
A resident who is temporarily out of the PH names as a defendant in any action (in rem,
quasi in rem, and in personam) may, with leave of court, be the subject of extraterritorial
service in the same ways as above mentioned.

d. Publication (S-16)
Section 16. Service upon defendant whose identity or whereabouts are unknown. – In
any action where the defendant is designated as an unknown owner, or the like, or
whenever his or her whereabouts are unknown and cannot be ascertained by diligent
inquiry, within ninety (90) calendar days from the commencement of the action, service
may, by leave of court, be effected upon him or her by publication in a newspaper of
general circulation and in such places and for such time as the court may order. Any
order granting such leave shall specify a reasonable time, which shall not be less than
sixty (60) calendar days after notice, within which the defendant must answer

Proofs of Service (S-21,22)

Section 21. Proof of service. – The proof of service of a summons shall be made in
writing by the server and shall set forth the manner, place, and date of service; shall
specify any papers which have been served with the process and the name of the
person who received the same; and shall be sworn to when made by a person other
than a sheriff or his or her deputy. If summons was served by electronic mail, a printout
of said e-mail, with a copy of the summons as served, and the affidavit of the person
mailing, shall constitute as proof of service. (18a)

Section 22. Proof of service by publication. – If the service has been made by
publication, service may be proved by the affidavit of the publisher, editor, business or
advertising manager, to which affidavit a copy of the publication shall be attached and
by an affidavit showing the deposit of a copy of the summons and order for publication
in the post office, postage prepaid, directed to the defendant by registered mail to his or
her last known address. (19a)

G. Voluntary Appearance (s-23)

Section 23. Voluntary appearance. – The defendant’s voluntary appearance in the
action shall be equivalent to service of summons. The inclusion in a motion to dismiss of
other grounds aside from lack of jurisdiction over the person of the defendant shall be
deemed a voluntary appearance

Examples of affirmative reliefs that is deemed to be voluntary appearance:

1. Additional time to file an answer
2. Reconsideration of a default judgment
3. To lift order of default with MR.

Instance when filing a pleading seeking affirmative relief will NOT constitute as a
submission of one’s person to the jurisdiction of the court
- A party who makes a special appearance to challenge the court’s jurisdiction over his
person cannot be
considered to have submitted to its authority.
- However, if the party also includes a motion to dismiss on other grounds aside from
lack of jurisdiction
over the person of the defendant, then that shall be deemed as voluntary appearance.

Cases:
1. Valmonte vs CA- 252 SCRA
TOPIC: SUMMONS
PRINCIPAL CASE FILED: Rosita Dimalanta (Dimalanta), private respondent & sister of
Lourdes Valmonte filed a complaint for partition of real property (situated in Manila) and
accounting of rentals against Sps. Valmonte
DOCTRINE:
―Service of summons upon a nonresident who is not found in the Philippines must be
made either (1) by personal service; (2) by publication in a newspaper of general
circulation; or (3) in any other manner which the court may deem sufficient.‖
A resident defendant in an action in personam, who cannot be personally served with
summons, may be summoned either by means of substituted service in accordance
with Rule 14, 8 or by publication as provided in 17 and 18 of the same Rule.

On the other hand, if the action is in rem or quasi in rem, jurisdiction over the person of
the defendant is not essential for giving the court jurisdiction so long as the court
acquires jurisdiction over the res. If the defendant is a nonresident and he is not found
in the country, summons may be served extraterritorially in accordance with Rule 14,
17.

2. Millenium Ind. & Com. Corp., vs Tan- 326 SCRA

TOPIC: SUMMONS TO A CORPORATION
{DOCTRINE OF SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE}
PRINCIPAL CASE FILED: Tan filed a against Millenium a complaint for foreclosure of
mortgage with the RTC in Cebu City
DOCTRINE:
Summons is the means by which the defendant in a case is notified of the existence of
an action against him and, thereby, the court is conferred jurisdiction over the person of
the defendant.

If the defendant is a corporation, Rule 14, Sec. 13 requires that service of summons be
made upon the corporation‘s president, manager, secretary, cashier, agent, or any of its
directors

The requisites for the application of the doctrine of substantial compliance, to wit:
(a) there must be actual receipt of the summons by the person served, i.e., transferring
possession of the copy of the summons from the Sheriff to the person served;
(b) the person served must sign a receipt or the sheriff's return; and
(c) there must be actual receipt of the summons by the corporation through the
person on whom the summons was actually served.

The third requisite is the most important for it is through such receipt that the purpose of
the rule on the service of summons is attained.

The rationale of the rule is that service must be made on a representative so integrated
with the corporation sued as to make it a priori presumable that he will realize his
responsibilities and know what he should do with any legal papers received by him.

3. E.B. Villarosa vs. Benito – 312 SCRA

TOPIC: SUMMONS TO A CORPORATION {EXCLUSIVE LIST OF OF DESIGNATED
PERSONS}
PRINCIPAL CASE FILED: Private respondent Imperial, as plaintiff, filed a Complaint for
Breach of Contract and Damages against petitioner Villarosa, as defendant, before the
Regional Trial Court of Makati allegedly for failure of the latter to comply with its
contractual obligation in that, other than a few unfinished low cost houses, there were
no substantial developments therein.
DOCTRINE:
The designation of persons or officers who are authorized to accept summons for a
domestic corporation or partnership is now limited and more clearly specified in Section
11, Rule 14 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure.

The rule now states

―general manager– instead of only ―manager–;
―corporate secretary– instead of ―secretary–; and
―treasurer– instead of ―cashier.
– The phrase ―agent, or any of its directors– is conspicuously deleted in the new rule.
Sec. 11, Rule 14 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure provides that:
When the defendant is a corporation, partnership or association organized under the
laws of the Philippines with a juridical personality, service may be made on the
president, managing partner, general manager, corporate secretary, treasurer, or in-
house counsel. (emphasis supplied).

A strict compliance with the mode of service is necessary to confer jurisdiction of the
court over a corporation. The officer upon whom service is made must be one who is
named in the statute; otherwise the service is insufficient.

The officer upon whom service is made must be one who is named in the statute;
otherwise the service is insufficient. The purpose is to render it reasonably certain that
the corporation will receive prompt and proper notice in an action against it or to insure
that the summons be served on a representative so integrated with the corporation that
such person will know what to do with the legal papers served on him.

4. Santos vs. PNOC Exploration, 566 SCRA 272

TOPIC: Rule on Substituted Service Through publication
PRINCIPAL CASE FILED: Respondent PNOC Exploration Corporation filed a
complaint for a sum of money against petitioner Pedro T. Santos, Jr. in the RTC of
Pasig City.
DOCTRINE:
Rule on substituted service through publication applies to both actions. The present rule
expressly states that it applies "in any action where the defendant is designated as an
unknown owner, or the like, or whenever his whereabouts are unknown and cannot be
ascertained by diligent inquiry." Thus, it now applies to any action, whether in
personam, in rem or quasi in rem.

Where the defendant could not be personally served with summons despite diligent
efforts to locate his whereabouts, he may properly be served with summons by
publication.— Section 14, Rule 14

Service of summons by publication is proved by the affidavit of the printer, his foreman
or principal clerk, or of the editor, business or advertising manager of the newspaper
which published the summons.

The service of summons by publication is complemented by service of summons by

registered mail to the defendant‘s last known address. This complementary service is
evidenced by an affidavit ―showing the deposit of a copy of the summons and order for
publication in the post office, postage prepaid, directed to the defendant by registered
mail to his last known address.‖

The rules, however, do not require that the affidavit of complementary service be
executed by the clerk of court. While the trial court ordinarily does the mailing of
copies of its orders and processes, the duty to make the complementary service
by registered mail is imposed on the party who resorts to service by publication.

5. Mason vs. CA, 413 SCRA

TOPIC: SUBSTITUTED SERVICE - strict compliance with Section 11, Rule 14 of the
1997 Rules of Civil Procedure.
PRINCIPAL CASE FILED: Petitioners Sps Mason filed a complaint for rescission of
contract with damages against private respondent Columbus Philippines Bus Corp
before the RTC of Pasay City.
DOCTRINE: EB VILLAROSA CASE ABANDONED THE DOCTRINE OF
SUBSTIANTIAL COMPLAINCE HELD IN THE MILLENIUM CASE.
It is worth emphasizing that notice to enable the other party to be heard and to present
evidence is not a mere technicality or a trivial matter in any administrative or judicial
proceedings. The service of summons is a vital and indispensable ingredient of due
process. We will deprive private respondent of its right to present its defense in this
multi-million peso suit, if we disregard compliance with the rules on service of summons.

Had the Rules of Court Revision Committee intended to liberalize the rule on service of
summons, we said, it could have easily done so by clear and concise language.

Absent a manifest intent to liberalize the rule, we stressed strict compliance with Section
11, Rule 14 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure. x x x

We must stress that Millenium was decided when the 1964 Rules of Court were still in
force and effect, unlike the instant case which falls under the new rule.
Hence, the cases cited by petitioners where we upheld the doctrine of substantial
compliance must be deemed overturned by Villarosa, which is the later case. x x x‖

Since we have ruled that service of summons upon private respondent through its filing
clerk cannot be considered valid, it necessarily follows therefore that the Regional Trial
Court of Pasay City did not acquire jurisdiction over private respondent. Consequently,
all the subsequent proceedings held before it, including the order of default, are null and
void..

6. Jose vs. Boyon, 414 SCRA

TOPIC: REQUIREMENTS FOR A PROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS AND ITS
EFFECT ON NON COMPLIANCE.
PRINCIPAL CASE FILED: Petitioner Patrick and Rafaela Jose lodged a complaint for
specific performance against [respondents] Helen and Romeo Boyon to compel them to
facilitate the transfer of ownership of a parcel of land subject of a controverted sale
before the RTC of Muntinlupa.
DOCTRINE:
Personal service of summons is preferred to substituted service. Only if the former
cannot be made promptly can the process server resort to the latter.

Moreover, the proof of service of summons must:

(a) indicate the impossibility of service of summons within a reasonable time;
(b) specify the efforts exerted to locate the defendant; and
(c) state that the summons was served upon a person of sufficient age and discretion
who is residing in the address, or who is in charge of the office or regular place of
business, of the defendant.

The failure to comply faithfully, strictly and fully with all the foregoing requirements of
substituted service renders the service of summons ineffective.

7. Manotoc vs. CA – 499 SCRA 21

TOPIC: Requirements and Strict Compliance with the Rules on Substituted Service.
PRINCIPAL CASE FILED: Petitioner Imelda Imee Marcos - Manotoc is the defendant
in a Civil Case entitled Agapita Trajano, et al.v. Imee Marcos- Manotoc a.k.a. Imee
Marcos for Filing, Recognition and/or Enforcement of Foreign Judgment rendered in
Honolulu Hawaii for the wrongful death of deceased Archimedes Trajano
DOCTRINE:
While substituted service of summons is permitted, since it is extraordinary in character
and in derogation of the usual method of service, it must faithfully and strictly comply
with the prescribed requirements and circumstances authorized by the rules.

The party relying on substituted service or the sheriff must show that defendant cannot
be served promptly or there is impossibility of prompt service. Section 8, Rule 14
provides that the plaintiff or the sheriff is given a reasonable time to serve the summons
to the defendant in person.

Sheriffs are enjoined to try their best efforts to accomplish personal service on
defendant, and since the defendant is expected to try to avoid and evade service of
summons, the sheriff must be resourceful, persevering, canny, and diligent in serving
the process on the defendant; Several attempts means at least three (3) tries,
preferably on at least two different dates.

The sheriff must describe in the Return of Summons the facts and circumstances
surrounding the attempted personal service. The efforts made to find the defendant and
the reasons behind the failure must be clearly narrated in detail in the Return. The date
and time of the attempts on personal service, the inquiries made to locate the
defendant, the name/s of the occupants of the alleged residence or house of defendant
and all other acts done, though futile, to serve the summons on defendant must be
specified in the Return to justify substituted service.

If the substituted service will be effected at defendant’s house or residence, it should be

left with a person of „suitable age and discretion then residing therein. A person of
suitable age and discretion is one who has attained the age of full legal capacity (18
years old) and is considered to have enough discernment to understand the importance
of a summons. Discretion is defined as the ability to make decisions which represent a
responsible choice and for which an understanding of what is lawful, right or wise may
be presupposed. Thus, to be of sufficient discretion, such person must know how to
read and understand English to comprehend the import of the summons, and fully
realize the need to deliver the summons and complaint to the defendant at the earliest
possible time for the person to take appropriate action.

Thus, the person must have the relation of confidence to the defendant, ensuring that
the latter would receive or at least be notified of the receipt of the summons. The sheriff
must therefore determine if the person found in the alleged dwelling or residence of
defendant is of legal age, what the recipient’s relationship with the defendant is, and
whether said person comprehends the significance of the receipt of the summons and
his duty to immediately deliver it to the defendant or at least notify the defendant of said
receipt of summons. These matters must be clearly and specifically described in the
Return of Summons.

In view of the numerous claims of irregularities in substituted service which have

spawned the filing of a great number of unnecessary special civil actions of certiorari
and appeals to higher courts, resulting in prolonged litigation and wasteful legal
expenses, the narration of the efforts made to find the defendant and the fact of failure
written in broad and imprecise words will not suffice the facts and circumstances should
be stated with more particularity and detail on the number of attempts made at personal
service, dates and times of the attempts, inquiries to locate defendant, names of
occupants of the alleged residence, and the reasons for failure should be included in the
Return to satisfactorily show the efforts undertaken; To allow sheriffs to describe the
facts and circumstances in inexact terms would encourage routine performance of their
precise duties relating to substituted service for it would be quite easy to shroud or
conceal carelessness or laxity in such broad terms.

8. Ong vs. Co, February 25, 2015

TOPIC: Failure to Comply with the Requirements for Substituted Service and its effect
resulting to Void Judgment
PRINCIPAL CASE FILED: Co filed two petitions for declaration of nullity on the ground
of psychological incapacity on two different occasions
DOCTRINE:
The presumption of regularity was never intended to be applied even in cases where
there are no showings of substantial compliance with the requirements of the rules of
procedure. Such presumption does not apply where it is patent that the sheriff's or
server's return is defective.

In court proceedings, there is no right more cherished than the right of every litigant to
be given an opportunity to be heard. This right begins at the very moment that
summons is served on the defendant. The Rules of Court places utmost importance in
ensuring that the defendant personally grasps the weight of responsibility that will befall
him. Thus, it is only in exceptional circumstances that constructive notification, or
substituted service of summons, is allowed. If the server falls short of the rigorous
requirements for substituted service of summons, then the Court has no other option but
to strike down a void judgment, regardless of the consequences.

9. Domagas vs. Jensen – 448 SCRA 663

TOPIC: SUMMONS – RESIDENCE AS CONTEMPLATED IN RULES FOR
SUBSTITUTED SERVICE.
PRINCIPAL CASE FILED: Domagas filed a case for forcible entry against Jensen,
alleging that on 9 January 1999 she was deprived of sixty eight (68) square metres of
her land by Jensen‘s fencing of such portion of the property.
DOCTRINE:
The pertinent facts and circumstances attendant to the service of summons must be
stated in the proof of service or Officer’s Return; otherwise, any substituted service
made in lieu of personal service cannot be upheld. This is necessary because
substituted service is in derogation of the usual method of service. It is a method
extraordinary in character and hence may be used only as prescribed and in the
circumstances authorized by statute. Here, no such explanation was made. Failure to
faithfully, strictly, and fully comply with the requirements of substituted service renders
said service ineffective.

An action for unlawful detainer or forcible entry is a real action and in personam
because the plaintiff seeks to enforce a personal obligation or liability on the defendant
under Article 539 of the New Civil Code, for the latter to vacate the property subject of
the action, restore physical possession thereof to the plaintiff, and pay actual damages
by way of reasonable compensation for his use or occupation of the property.

Jurisdiction over the person of a resident defendant who does not voluntarily appear in
court can be acquired by personal service of summons as provided under Section 7,
Rule 14 of the Rules of Court.
If he cannot be personally served with summons within a reasonable time, substituted
service may be made in accordance with Section 8 of said Rule.
If he is temporarily out of the country, any of the following modes of service may be
resorted to:
(1) substituted service set forth in Section 8;
(2) personal service outside the country, with leave of court;
(3) service by publication, also with leave of court; or
(4) any other manner the court may deem sufficient.

10. Dole Phil. Vs. Quilala – 557 SCRA 433

TOPIC: IMPROPER SERVING OF SUMMONS CURED BY VOLUNTARY
APPEARANCE.
PRINCIPAL CASE FILED: A complaint for the recovery of a sum of money, accounting
and damages was filed by private respondent All Season Farm Corporation against
petitioner Dole Philippines, Inc. (Tropifresh Division) („Dole‰) and several of its officers.
DOCTRINE:
Well-settled is the rule that service of summons on a domestic corporation is restricted,
limited and exclusive to the persons enumerated in Section 11, Rule 14 of the 1997
Rules of Civil Procedure, following the rule in statutory construction that expressio unios
est exclusio alterius. Service must therefore be made on the president, managing
partner, general manager, corporate secretary, treasurer, or in-house counsel.

11. Green Star Express v. Nissin Universal Robina Corp – 761 SCRA
TOPIC: SUMMONS, DESIGNATED PERSONS FOR RULES FOR SUBSTITUTED
SERVICE.
PRINCIPAL CASE FILED: Sayson and Green Star filed a complaint for damages
against N-URC arising from the criminal case of reckless imprudence resulting in
homicide filed by N-URC against Sayson and Green Start before the RTC of San Pedro,
Laguna.
DOCTRINE:
Service must, therefore, be made only on the persons expressly listed in the rules. If the
revision committee intended to liberalize the rule on service of summons, it could have
easily done so by clear and concise language.

It is a well-established rule that the rules on service of summons upon a domestic

private juridical entity must be strictly complied with. Otherwise, the court cannot be said
to have acquired jurisdiction over the person of the defendant.

12. Guy vs. Gacott – 780 SCRA 579 (1/13/16)

TOPIC: SUMMONS ISSUED TO A PARTNERSHIP
PRINCIPAL CASE FILED: Gacott filed a complaint for damages arising from the non
replacement of defective transreceivers that he purchased from Quantech Systems
herein represented by Michael Guy as general manager.
DOCTRINE:
Section 11, Rule 14 of the 1997 Revised Rules of Civil Procedure, when the defendant
is a corporation, partnership or association organized under the laws of the Philippines
with a juridical personality, the service of summons may be made on the president,
managing partner, general manager, corporate secretary, treasurer, or in-house
counsel.

A partner must be separately and distinctly impleaded before he can be bound by a

judgment. In the spirit of fair play, it is a better rule that a partner must first be impleaded
before he could be prejudiced by the judgment against the partnership

A decision rendered on a complaint in a civil action or proceeding does not bind or

prejudice a person not impleaded therein, for no person shall be adversely affected by
the outcome of a civil action or proceeding in which he is not a party. The principle that
a person cannot be prejudiced by a ruling rendered in an action or proceeding in which
he has not been made a party conforms to the constitutional guarantee of due process
of law.

Notice to any partner, under certain circumstances, operates as notice to or knowledge

to the partnership only. Evidently, it does not provide for the reverse situation, or that
notice to the partnership is notice to the partners. Unless there is an unequivocal law
which states that a partner is automatically charged in a complaint against the
partnership, the constitutional right to due process takes precedence and a partner must
first be impleaded before he can be considered as a judgment debtor.

13. G.V. Florida Transit Inc. vs. Tiara Commercial Corporation (842 SCRA,
October 18, 2017)
TOPIC: DEFECTIVE SUMMONS IS CURED BY A VOLUNTARY APPEARANCE OF
THE PARTY WHO FILED TO BE SERVED WITH THE PROPER SUMMONS
PRINCIPAL CASE FILED: GV Florida instituted a third-party complaint against TCC
arising from the alleged defective tires it purchased and stalled in a bus that had a
collision with another bus liner VLI where VLI had sued GV Florida for damages.
DOCTRINE:
The enumeration under R14, S11 is exclusive -
When the defendant is a corporation, partnership or association organized under the
laws of the Philippines with a juridical personality, service may be made on the
president, managing partner, general manager, corporate secretary, treasurer, or in-
house counsel.
The service of summons is not the only more through which a court acquires jurisdiction
over the person of the defendant. There is voluntary appearance when a party, without
directly assailing the court‘s lack of jurisdiction, seeks affirmative relief from the court.

Service of summons, however, is not the only mode through which a court acquires
jurisdiction over the person of the defendant. Section 20 of Rule 14 of the Rules of
Court states:

a. Sec. 20. Voluntary appearance. — The defendant's voluntary appearance in the

action shall be equivalent to service of summons. The inclusion in a motion to dismiss of
other grounds aside from lack of jurisdiction over the person of the defendant shall not
be deemed a voluntary appearance.

i. There is voluntary appearance when

a. a party, without directly assailing the court's lack of jurisdiction, seeks affirmative
relief from the court.
b. a party appears before the court without qualification, he or she is deemed to have
waived his or her objection regarding lack of jurisdiction due to improper service of
summons.

Improper service of summons and lack of voluntary appearance do not automatically

warrant the dismissal of the complaint. Thus, when there is improper service of
summons and the defendant makes a special appearance to question this, the proper
and speedy remedy is for the court to issue alias summons.

In cases of improper service of summons, courts should not automatically dismiss the
complaint by reason of lack of jurisdiction over the person of the defendant. The remedy
is to issue alias summons and ensure that it is properly served.

14. Arrieta vs. Arrieta, 866 SCRA 140, Nov. 19, 2018
TOPIC: EXTRATERRITORIAL SERVICE OF SUMMONS
PRINCIPAL CASE FILED: Cris filed a petition for the declaration of nullity of his
marriage with Melania on the ground of psychological incapacity before the RTC
DOCTRINE:
Personal service of summons is the preferred mode of service of summons. However,
other modes of serving summons may be done when justified. For instance, service of
summons by extraterritorial service is allowed after leave of court when the defendant or
respondent does not reside or is not found in the country or is temporarily out of the
country.
Section 15. Extraterritorial service.
When the defendant does not reside and is not found in the Philippines, and the action
affects the personal status of the plaintiff or relates to, or the subject of which is,
property within the Philippines, in which the defendant has or claims a lien or interest,
actual or contingent, or in which the relief demanded consists, wholly or in part, in
excluding the defendant from any interest therein, or the property of the defendant has
been attached within the Philippines, service may, by leave of court, be effected out of
the Philippines by personal service as under Section 6; or by publication in a
newspaper of general circulation in such places and for such time as the court may
order, in which case a copy of the summons and order of the court shall be sent by
registered mail to the last known address of the defendant, or in any other manner the
court may deem sufficient.

Any order granting such leave shall specify a reasonable time, which shall not be less
than sixty (60) days after notice, within which the defendant must answer. (Emphasis
and underscoring supplied)

Extraterritorial Service of Summons

Breaking down the provision, three (3) modes of extraterritorial service of summons are
recognized. These are: (1) by “personal service as under Section 6 [of the Rules]”; (2)
by publication in a newspaper of general circulation in such places and for such time as
the court may order, in which case a copy of the summons and order of the court shall
be sent by registered mail to the last known address of the defendant; and (3) “in any
other manner the court may deem sufficient.”

On voluntary appearance:
1. Sunrise Garden Corp. vs. CA – 771 SCRA 616
TOPIC: Conditional Appearance
PRINCIPAL CASE FILED: SGC filed a Complaint for damages with prayer for
temporary restraining order and writ of preliminary injunction against Hardrock
Aggregates, Inc (HAI).
DOCTRINE:
Preliminarily, jurisdiction over the defendant in a civil case is acquired either by the
coercive power of legal processes exerted over his person, or his voluntary appearance
in court.

This, however, is tempered by the concept of conditional appearance, such that a

party who makes a special appearance to challenge, among others, the court's
jurisdiction over his person cannot be considered to have submitted to its
authority.

Accordingly, objections to the jurisdiction of the court over the person of the defendant
must be explicitly made, and failure to do so constitutes voluntary submission to the
jurisdiction of the court, especially in instances where a pleading or motion seeking
affirmative relief is filed and submitted to the court for resolution.

Due process requires that a party be given the chance to be heard. The general rule is
that ―no man shall be affected by any proceeding to which he is a stranger, and
strangers to a case are not bound by a judgment rendered by the court.‖ Corollarily, an
ancillary writ of remedy cannot affect nonparties to a case.

2. Tujan-Militante vs. Nustad, 827 SCRA (2017)

TOPIC: VOLUNTARY APPEARANCE
PRINCIPAL CASE FILED: Plaintiff Respondent NUSTAD filed a petition before the
RTC of Lucena City and prayed that defendant petitoner Ma. Hazelina A. Tujan-
Militante be ordered to surrender to the Register of Deeds of Lucena City the owner's
duplicate copy of the Transfer Certificate of Title Nos. T-435798, T- 436799, T- 387158
and T-387159, which were all issued in Nustad's name. She averred that Tujan-Militante
has been withholding the said titles.
DOCTRINE:
A trial court acquires jurisdiction over the person of the defendant by service of
summons. However, it is equally significant that even without valid service of summons,
a court may still acquire jurisdiction over the person of the defendant, if the latter
voluntarily appears before it.

By seeking affirmative reliefs from the trial court, the individual [petitioner is] deemed to
have voluntarily submitted to the jurisdiction of the court. A party cannot invoke the
jurisdiction of the court to secure the affirmative relief against his opponent and after
obtaining or failing to obtain such relief, repudiate or question that same jurisdiction.

END OF RULE 14
==================================================================

XII. RULES 15: Motions (Sections 1-13)

CODAL:
RULE 15 MOTIONS

Section 1. Motion defined.

A motion is an application for other than by a pleading.
relief

Section 2. Motions must be in writing.

GR: All motions shall be in XPN’ except those made in open court
writing or in the course of a hearing or trial.

A motion made in open should immediately be resolved in

court or in the course of a open court, after the adverse party is
hearing or trial given the opportunity to argue his or
her opposition thereto.

When a motion is based on the court may hear the matter on a

facts not appearing on davits or depositions presented by
record, the respective parties, but the court
may direct that the matter be heard
wholly or partly on oral testimony or
depositions.

CONTENTS FORM AND ACCOMPANIMENTS

Section 3. Contents. – A Section 11. Form. – The Rules
motion shall state the relief applicable to pleadings shall apply to
sought to be obtained and written motions so far as concerns
the grounds upon which it is caption, designation, signature, and
based, and if required by other matters of form.
these Rules or necessary to
prove facts alleged therein,
shall be accompanied by
supporting affidavits and
other papers.
Section 9. Omnibus motion. Section 10.
– Subject to the provisions Motion for leave.
of Section 1 of Rule 9, a
motion attacking a pleading, A motion for shall be
order, judgment, or leave to file a accompanied by
proceeding shall include all pleading or the pleading or
objections then available, motion motion sought to
and all objections not so be admitted.
included shall be deemed
waived.
Section 12 par 3 shall, at all times,
A motion for be accompanied
postponement, by the original
whether written official receipt
or oral, from the office of
the clerk of court
evidencing
payment of the
postponement
fee under Section
21(b), Rule 141,

to be submitted
either
1. at the time of
the filing of said
motion or
2. not later than
the next hearing
date.

The clerk of court

shall not accept
the motion
unless
accompanied by
the original
receipt. (n)

Section 4. Non-litigious Section 5. Litigious motions. –

motions.
(a) Litigious motions include:
Motions which the court may
act upon without prejudicing 1) Motion for bill of particulars;
the rights of adverse parties 2)  Motion to dismiss;
are non-litigious motions. 3)  Motion for new trial;
4)  Motion for reconsideration;
These motions include: 5)  Motion for execution pending
appeal;
a)  Motion for the issuance of 6)  Motion to amend after a
an alias summons; responsive pleading has been led;
b)  Motion for extension to le 7)  Motion to cancel statutory lien;
answer; 8)  Motion for an order to break in
c)  Motion for postponement; or for a writ of demolition;
d)  Motion for the issuance of 9)  Motion for intervention;
a writ of execution; 10)  Motion for judgment on the
e)  Motion for the issuance of pleadings;
an alias writ of execution; 11)  Motion for summary judgment;
f)  Motion for the issuance of a 12)  Demurrer to evidence;
writ of possession; 13)  Motion to declare defendant in
g)  Motion for the issuance of default; and
an order directing the sheri to 14)  Other similar motions.
execute the final certificate of
sale; and (b) All motions shall be served by
h)  Other similar motions. personal service, accredited private
courier or registered mail, or
electronic means so as to ensure
their receipt by the other party.

(c) The opposing party shall file his

or her opposition to a litigious
motion within five (5) calendar days
from receipt thereof. No other
submissions shall be considered by
the court in the resolution of the
motion.
These motions shall not be set The motion shall be resolved by the
for hearing and shall be court within fifteen (15) calendar
resolved by the court within days from its receipt of the
five (5) calendar days from opposition thereto, or upon
receipt thereof. expiration of the period to le such
opposition.

Section 6. Notice of hearing on Section 7. Proof of service

litigious motions; discretionary. necessary. – No written motion
– The court may, in the exercise shall be acted upon by the court
of its discretion, and if deemed without proof of service thereof,
necessary for its resolution, call pursuant to Section 5(b) hereof.
a hearing on the motion. The
notice of hearing shall be
addressed to all parties
concerned, and shall specify the
time and date of the hearing.

Section 8. Motion day. – Except

for motions requiring immediate
action, where the court decides
to conduct hearing on a litigious
motion, the same shall be set on
a Friday.

Section 12. Prohibited motions.

The following motions shall not be allowed:
(a)  Motion to dismiss (b)  Motion to hear (e)  Motion for
except on the affirmative defenses; extension of time to
following grounds: (c)  Motion for file pleadings,
1)  That the court has reconsideration of affidavits or any
no jurisdiction over the court’s action on other papers, except
the subject matter of the affrmative a motion for
the claim; defenses; extension to file an
2)  That there is (d)  Motion to answer as provided
another action suspend proceedings by
pending between the without a temporary Section 11, Rule 11;
same parties for the restraining order or and
same cause; and injunction issued by (f)  Motion for
3)  That the cause of a higher court; postponement
action is barred by a intended for delay,
prior judgment or by except If it is based
the statute of on acts of God, force
limitations; majeure or physical
inability of the
witness to appear
and testify. If the
motion is granted
based on such
exceptions, the
moving party shall be
warned that the
presentation of its
evidence must still
be terminated on the
dates previously
agreed upon.

Section 13. Dismissal with prejudice.

Subject to the an order granting a motion to shall bar the
right of appeal dismiss or an affirmative refiling of the
defense same action or
claim.
1. that the cause of action
is barred by a prior judgment or
by the statute of limitations;

2. that the claim or demand set

forth in the plaintiff’s pleading
has been paid, waived,
abandoned or otherwise
 extinguished; or

3. that the claim on which the

action is founded is
unenforceable under the
provisions of the statute of
frauds

NOTES:

Definition

Section 1. Motion defined. – A motion is an application for relief other than by a pleading
Motion v. Pleading
Motion Pleading
To apply for relief other than by a To submit a claim or defense for
As to Purpose
pleading. appropriate judgment
They cannot be initiatory as they
As to being
are always made in a case already May be initiatory
Initiatory
filed in court.
As to the Time of
May be filed even after judgment Always filed before judgment
filing
Only 9 kinds of pleadings are
As to the Kinds Any application for relief not by a
allowed by the rules (Rule 6, Sec.
allowed pleading is a motion
2)
Generally written but may be oral
As to Form when made in open court or in the Must be written.
course of the hearing or trial.

B. Requirements

Form EXPN: Oral

General Rule: All motions shall be in those made in open court or in the course
writing of hearing or trial.
Such motions should be immediately
resolved in open court, after the adverse
party is given the opportunity to argue his
or her opposition.

C. Kinds: litigious; non-litigious

Hearing on Litigious Motions:

General Rule: NOT required
EXPN: When the court, in the exercise of its discretion, and if deemed necessary for its
resolution, call a hearing on the motion. In which case, the court is required to issue a
notice of hearing which shall be addressed to all the parties concerned, and shall
specify the time and date of the hearing.
- Where the court decides to conduct hearing on a litigious motion, the same shall be
set on a Friday (R15, Sec. 8)

What are Non-Litigious motions

Motions which the court may act upon without prejudicing the rights of adverse parties.
Such motions shall not be set for hearing and the court shall resolve the motion within 5
calendar days from receipt of the motion.
Non-litigious motions include:
a. Motion for issuance of an alias summons;
b. Motion for extension to file an answer;
c. Motion for postponement;
d. Motion for the issuance of a writ of execution;
e. Motion for the issuance of an alias writ of execution
f. Motion for the issuance of a writ of possession;
g. Motion for the issuance of an order directing the sheriff to execute the final certificate
of sale; and
h. Other similar motions. [Sec. 4, Rule 15]

Examples of non-litigated motions:

In de los Reyes v. Ramnani, G.R. No. 169135, June 18, 2010, the petitioner argued that
the subject motion was defective for lack of a notice of hearing. According to the SC, the
motion was a non-litigious motion. While, as a general rule, all written motions should
be set for hearing under Section 4, Rule 15 of the Rules of Court, excepted from this
rule are non- litigious motions or motions which may be acted upon by the court without
prejudicing the rights of the adverse party. Respondent is entitled to the issuance of the
final certificate of sale as a matter of right and petitioner is powerless to oppose the
same. Hence, the subject motion falls under the class of non-litigious motions. At any
rate, the trial court gave petitioner an opportunity to oppose the subject motion as in fact
he filed a Comment/ Opposition on March 1, 2004 before the trial court. Petitioner
cannot, therefore, validly claim that he was denied his day in court.

Litigious motions
What are Litigious Motions
One which requires the parties to be heard before a ruling on the motion is made by the
court. [1 Riano 368, 2011 Ed.]

Litigious motions include:a. Motion for bill of particulars; b. Motion to dismiss;

Note: Since a motion to dismiss is now classified as a litigious motion, such motion
should be resolved within 15 calendar days from the filing of the opposition to the
motion to dismiss. [Sec. 5(c), Rule 15] Therefore, this clearly repeals Secs. 2 and 3,
Rule 16 of the old Rules of Court on hearing and resolution of a motion to dismiss.

c. Motion for new trial;d. Motion for reconsideration;e. Motion for execution pending
appeal;f. Motion to amend after a responsive pleading has been filed; g. Motion to
cancel statutory lien;h. Motion for an order to break in or for a writ of demolition; i.
Motion for intervention;j. Motion for judgment on the pleadings;k. Motion for summary
judgment;l. Demurrer to evidence;m. Motion to declare defendant in default; andn.
Other similar motions. [Sec. 5(a), Rule 15]

The period to file an opposition would be 5 calendar days from the receipt of the litigious
motion. The court shall then resolve the motion within 15 calendar days from receipt of
the opposition or upon expiration of the period to file such opposition.

Note: No other submissions, other than the opposition, shall be considered by the court
in resolving the motion. [Sec. 5(c), Rule 15]

Service of Litigious Motions Litigious motions shall be served by: 1. Personal service; 2.
Accredited private courier;3. Registered mail; or

Electronic means. [Sec. 5(b), Rule 15]

Note: Remember that electronic means of service may only be availed of with consent
of the other party or with authorization of the court. [Sec. 9, Rule 13]

No written motion shall be acted upon by the court without proof of service thereof
pursuant to Section 5(b). [Sec. 7, Rule 15]

Hearing on Litigious Motions

The court may call for a hearing if deemed necessary for the motion’s resolution and
send notice to all parties concerned, specifying the time and date of the hearing. [Sec.
6, Rule 15] Note that the allowance for hearing only applies to litigious motions, since
non-litigious motions cannot be set for hearing. [Sec. 4, Rule 15]

Motion Day
General Rule: Where the court decides to conduct a hearing on a litigious motion, it
shall be set on a Friday.
Exception: When a motion requires immediate action. [Sec. 8, Rule 15]

Omnibus Motion
What is the Omnibus Motion Rule?
The Omnibus Motion Rule is a procedural principle which requires that every motion
that attacks a pleading, judgment, order or proceeding shall include all grounds then
available, and all objections not so included shall be deemed waived (Sec. 8, Rule 15,
Rules of Court).

What objections are not deemed waived even if not included in the motion?
Under Sec. 1, par. 2, Rule 9 of the Rules of Court), the following objections are not
deemed waived even if not pleaded in the motion to dismiss or in the answer:

that the court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter;

that there is another action pending between the same parties for the same cause (litis
pendencia);
that the action is barred by a prior judgment (res judicata); and
that the action is barred by the statute of limitations (prescription)

What is an example of a motion that is subject to the omnibus motion rule?

A motion to dismiss is a typical example of a motion subject to the omnibus motion rule,
since a motion to dismiss attacks a complaint which is a pleading.

A motion to dismiss must invoke all objections which are available at the time of its
filing. If the objection which is available at the time is not pleaded in the motion, that,
ground is deemed waived. It can no longer be invoked as an affirmative defense in the
answer which the movant may file following the denial of his motion to dismiss.

Example:
Q: X filed a motion to dismiss invoking (1) the complaint's failure to state a cause of
action and (b) the court's of lack of jurisdiction over the person of the defendant. Two
objections available at the time the motion is filed, namely, improper venue and
prescription were not included in the motion. The motion to dismiss was denied. May X
still allege in his Answer as defenses improper venue and prescription?

A: Improper venue is deemed waived because it was available as a defense at the time
the motion was filed but was not invoked. Prescription, on the other hand, is not waived
and can still be interposed as an affirmative defense in the answer. It is a defense that
is not deemed waived under the explicit provisions of Sec. l of Rule 9.
Jurisprudence:
● Section 8, Rule 15 of the Rules of Court defines an omnibus motion as a motion
attacking a pleading, judgment or proceeding. A motion to dismiss is an omnibus motion
because it attacks a pleading, that is, the complaint. For this reason, a motion to
dismiss, like any other omnibus motion, must raise and include all objections available
at the time of the filing of the motion because under Section 8, "all objections not so
included shall be deemed waived." As inferred from the provision, only the following
defenses under Section 1, Rule 9, are excepted from its application: [a] lack of
jurisdiction over the subject matter; [b] there is another action pending between the
same parties for the same cause (litis pendentia); [c] the action is barred by prior
judgment (res judicata); and [d] the action is barred by the statute of limitations or
prescription. (Sps. De Guzman vs. Ochoa, G.R. No. 169292, April 13, 2011)

General rule: A motion attacking a pleading, order, judgment, or proceeding shall

include all objections then available. All objections not included in the motion are
deemed waived [Sec. 9, Rule 15]

Purpose: To require the movant to raise all available exceptions for relief during a single
opportunity so that multiple and piece-meal objections may be avoided. [Manacop v.
Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 104875 (1992)]

Exceptions: Non-waivable grounds under Sec. 1, Rule 9, namely:

a. Lack of jurisdiction over subject matterb. Litis pendentiac. Res judicata

Prohibited Motions
-  The Amended Rules of Court have deleted Rule 16 of the old Rules of Court, which
formerly dealt with motions to dismiss.
-  Now, under the Amended Rules, the grounds are limited only to lack of jurisdiction
over the subject matter, litis pendentia, res judicata, and prescription.
-  The court is now empowered to dismiss a case motu proprio if the aforementioned
non- waivable grounds are apparent on the face of the complaint.
-  The other grounds for a motion to dismiss under Rule 16 of the old Rules (i.e. lack of
jurisdiction over the person, improper venue, lack of capacity to sue, payment/release,
unenforceability under the statute of frauds, failure to comply with condition precedent)
can now only be raised as affirmative defenses.

Prohibited motions
The following motions shall not be allowed:
1. Motion to dismiss except on the following grounds:
• Lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter,
• Litis pendentia, or
• That the action is barred by res judicata or the statute of limitations. [Sec. 12, Rule 15]

2. Motion to hear affirmative defenses;

Note: Such motion is prohibited since under the Amended Rules, the court is required to
act on the affirmative defenses set out in the answer within 30 calendar days if the
affirmative defense is among those listed in Sec. 12, Rule 8. The court is also allowed to
avail of a summary hearing within 15 calendar days from the filing of the answer, and is
thereafter mandated to resolve the affirmative defense within 30 calendar days from the
termination of the summary hearing if the affirmative defenses are those set forth in the
first paragraph of Sec. 5(b), Rule 6. [Sec. 12, Rule 8]

3. Motion for reconsideration of the court’s action on affirmative defenses;

Note: The denial of an affirmative defense shall not be the subject of a motion for
reconsideration or a petition for certiorari, prohibition, or mandamus. [Sec. 12, Rule 8]

However, it is not clear from the amended rules whether the court’s action of approving
an affirmative defense cannot be the subject to a motion for reconsideration, since Sec.
12(c), Rule 15 merely provides that a motion for reconsideration of the court’s action on
an affirmative defense is a prohibited pleading. It does not distinguish whether between
the court’s act of either denying or approving the affirmative defense.

4. Motion to suspend proceedings without a TRO or injunction issued by a higher court;

Note: The principle of judicial courtesy justifies the suspension of proceedings before
the lower courts even without an injunctive writ or order from the higher court. However,
this remains an exception and may be applied only if there is a strong probability that
the issues before the higher court would be rendered moot and moribund as a result of
the continuation of the proceedings in the lower court. [Trajano v. Uniwide Sales
Warehouse Club, G.R. No. 190253, (2014)]

5. Motion for extension of time to file pleadings, affidavits, or any other papers, except a
motion for extension to file an answer as provided by Sec. 11, Rule 11;
Any pleading may still be filed out of time without seeking for motion for extension of
time, and it will depend on the court whether it will be admitted. The Rules authorizes
the court, in its discretion, to accept a pleading, although filed late. [Sec. 11, Rule 11]

6. Motion for postponement intended for delay, except if it is based on: • Acts of god,•
Force majeure, or• Physical inability of the witness to appear and testify. [Sec. 12, Rule
15]

Allowed motions for postponement

If the motion for postponement is granted, the presentation of evidence by the moving
party must still be terminated on the dates previously agreed upon. [Sec. 12, Rule 15]
Note: The dates previously agreed upon refer to those set forth in the schedule of trial
as required under Sec. 1, Rule 30.

The motion for postponement, whether written or oral, shall be accompanied by the
original official receipt from the clerk of court evidencing payment of the postponement
fee.

Such receipt evidencing payment of the fee shall be submitted at the time of the filing of
the motion or not later than the next hearing date. The clerk shall not accept the motion
unless accompanied by said receipt. [Sec. 12, Rule 15]

Note: Sec. 3, Rule 30 allows postponement of trial due to illness of party or counsel,
provided that their presence is indispensable and that the character of illness is such as
to render the non-attendance excusable.

Pro forma motions

The Court has indeed held time and again, that under Sections 4 and 5, Rule 15 of the
Rules of Court, mandatory is the requirement in a motion, which is rendered defective
by failure to comply with the requirement. As a rule, a motion without a notice of hearing
is considered pro-forma and does not affect the reglementary period for the appeal or
the filing the requisite pleading. (Anama vs. Phil. Savings Bank; G.R. No. 187021, 25
January 2012)

A motion which does not meet the requirements of Sections 4 and 5, Rule 15 of the
Rules of Court is considered a worthless piece of paper, which the Clerk of Court has
no right to receive and the trial court has no authority to act upon. Service of a copy of a
motion containing a notice of the time and the place of hearing of that motion is
mandatory requirement, and the failure of movants to comply with these requirements
render their motions fatally defective. (KKK Foundation, Inc. vs. Bargas; G.R. No.
163785, 27 December 2007)
Dismissal with prejudice
- It is one made by the court after adjudication on the merits.
-  The remedy is an appeal. in both actions

Cases:
1. Republic vs. Dimarucot, 857 SCRA (2017)
TOPIC: FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE OLD SEC 4 “3 DAY NOTCE RULE”
Section 4. Hearing of motion. – Except for motions which the court may act upon
without prejudicing the rights of the adverse party, every written motion shall be set for
hearing by the applicant.
Every written motion required to be heard and the notice of the hearing thereof shall be
served in such a manner as to ensure its receipt by the other party at least three (3)
days before the date of hearing, unless the court for good cause sets the hearing on
shorter notice. (4a)

PRINCIPAL ACTION FILED: Alvin filed a Petition for Declaration of Absolute Nullity of
Marriage in the RTC of her marriage with Nailyn, based on Art 36 of the Family Code

DOCTRINE:
The provision on setting of a hearing by the movant under the 1997 Rules of Court has
been deleted, to wit:
15.04; Hearing of motion;Except for motions which the court may act upon without
prejudicing the rights of the adverse party, every written motion shall be set for hearing
by the applicant.

As explained by Atty. Tranquil Salvador, the deletion of the said provision passes on the
duty of setting the hearing to the courts. It is more expeditious, considering that the
court has the discretion to set the hearing, and if may immediately refer to its calendar
of cases.

MR: IS NOW A LITIGIOUS MOTION UNDER NEW SEC 5 SO IT SHOULD BE

CONSTRUED WITH SECTION 6, 7 AND 5B THEREOF
Section 6. Notice of hearing on litigious motions; discretionary. – The court
may, in the exercise of its discretion, and if deemed necessary for its
resolution, call a hearing on the motion. The notice of hearing shall be
addressed to all parties concerned, and shall specify the time and date of
the hearing.
Section 7. Proof of service necessary. – No written motion shall be acted
upon by the court without proof of service thereof, pursuant to
Section 5(b) hereof.
Section 5(b) All motions shall be served by personal service, accredited
private courier or registered mail, or electronic means so as to ensure their
receipt by the other party.

While it is a settled rule that a special civil action for certiorari under Rule 65 will not lie
unless a motion for reconsideration is filed before the respondent court; there are well-
defined exceptions established by jurisprudence, such as [i] where the order is a patent
nullity, as where the court a quo has no jurisdiction

2. Acampado vs. Cosmilla, 771 SCRA

TOPIC: Non Compliance with Notice and Hearing otherwise Motion becomes a pro
forma, worthless piece of paper.
PRINCIPAL CASE FILED: A Petition for the Declaration of the Nullity of Document was
filed by respondents Sps Cosmilla against petitioners Ethel Acampado et al before the
RTC of Kalibo, Aklan
DOCTRINE:
The notice of hearing to the adverse party is therefore a form of due process; it gives
the other party the opportunity to properly vent his opposition to the prayer of the
movant. In keeping with the principles of due process, therefore, a motion which dees
not afford the adverse party a chance to oppose should simply be disregarded.
Principles of natural justice demand that a right of a party should not be affected without
giving it an opportunity to be heard.

The Motion for Reconsideration is a contentious motion that needs to comply with the
required notice and hearing and service to the adverse party as mandated by Sections
4 and 5 of Rule 15 of the Rules of Court.

The Motion for Reconsideration is a contentious motion that needs to comply with the
required notice and hearing and service to the adverse party as mandated by the
following provisions of the Revised Rules of Court (Rule 15 Secs. 4, 5 and 6)

The foregoing requirements – that the notice shall be directed to the parties concerned,
and shall state the time and place for the hearing of the motion are mandatory, and if
not religiously complied with, the motion becomes pro forma.

A motion that does not comply with the requirements of Sections 4 and 5 of Rule 15 of
the Rules of Court is a worthless piece of paper which the clerk of court has no right to
receive and which the court has no authority to act upon. The logic for such requirement
is simple: a motion invariably contains a prayer, which the movant makes to the court
which is usually in the interest of the adverse party to oppose.

3. Laude vs. Gines-Jabalde, 775 SCRA

TOPIC: NON COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIRED NOTICE AND HEARING
PRINCIPAL CASE FILED: A Complaint for murder was filed by Jennifer‘s sibling,
Marilou S. Laude, against Pemberton before the Office of the City Prosecutor which
Information was later filed with the RTC in Olongapo City.
DOCTRINE:
NON COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIRED NOTICE AND HEARING CONSTITUTES
DENIAL OF DUE PROCESS ON THE ADVERSE PARTY.

Failure to meet the three-day notice rule for filing motions and to obtain the concurrence
of the Public Prosecutor to move for an interlocutory relief in a criminal prosecution
cannot be excused by general exhortations of human rights. Rule 15, Section 4 of the
Rules of Court clearly makes it a mandatory rule that the adverse party be given notice
of hearing on the motion at least three days prior.

Failure to comply with this notice requirement renders the motion defective consistent
with protecting the adverse party's right to procedural due process. While the general
rule is that a motion that fails to comply with the requirements of Rule 15 is a mere
scrap of paper, an exception may be made and the motion may still be acted upon by
the court, provided doing so will neither cause prejudice to the other party nor violate his
or her due process rights. The adverse party must be given time to study the motion in
order to enable him or her to prepare properly and engage the arguments of the
movant.

"While the general rule is that a motion that fails to comply with the requirements of Rule
15 is a mere scrap of paper, an exception may be made and the motion may still be
acted upon by the court, provided doing so will neither cause prejudice to the other
party nor violate his or her due process rights.
The adverse party must be given time to study the motion in order to enable him or her
to prepare properly and engage the arguments of the movant.
In this case, the general rule must apply because Pemberton was not given sufficient
time to study petitioners‘ Motion, thereby depriving him of his right to procedural due
process.

4. De Guzman vs. Ochoa, 684 SCRA

TOPIC: MOTION TO DISMISS
PRINCIPAL ACTION FILED: Respondent spouses Cesar Ochoa and Sylvia Ochoa,
through respondent Araceli Azores, ostensibly acting as attorney-in-fact, commenced
an action seeking the annulment of contract of mortgage, foreclosure sale, certificate of
sale and damages.
DOCTRINE:
An order denying a motion to dismiss is an interlocutory order which neither terminates
the case nor finally disposes of it, as it leaves something to be done by the court before
the case is finally decided on the merits.

As such, the general rule is that the denial of a motion to dismiss cannot be questioned
in a special civil action for certiorari which is a remedy designed to correct errors of
jurisdiction and not errors of judgment. Therefore, an order denying a motion to dismiss
may only be reviewed in the ordinary course of law by an appeal from the judgment
after trial. The ordinary procedure to be followed in such cases is to file an answer, go to
trial, and if the decision is adverse, reiterate the issue on appeal from the final judgment.

Only in exceptional cases where the denial of the motion to dismiss is tainted with grave
abuse of discretion that the Court allows the extraordinary remedy of certiorari. By grave
abuse of discretion, we mean such capricious and whimsical exercise of judgment that
is equivalent to lack of jurisdiction.

A motion to dismiss, like any other omnibus motion, must raise and include all
objections available at the time of the filing of the motion because under Section
8, "all objections not so included shall be deemed waived." Absent any justifiable
reason to explain this fatal omission, the ground of defective verification and
certification of forum shopping was deemed waived and could no longer be
questioned by the petitioners in their second motion to dismiss.

Note: Rule 16 has been deleted. Why?

The 2019 Amendments deleted the entire Rule 16 (“Motion to Dismiss”) of the
1997 Rules of Civil Procedure (hereinafter, “1997 Rules”). There seems to be an
intent to strongly discourage the use of motions to dismiss – {USED AS A
DELAYING TACTIC TO FORESTALL OR DELAY THE PROCEEDINGS}.

MOTION TO DISMISS – INTERLOCUTORY ORDER

ONCE DENIED,THE PROPER RECOURSE PROCEED WITH THE TRIAL AND FILE
AN APPEAL AFTER JUDGMENT HAS BEEN RENDERED.

Motion to Dismiss under the 2019 Amendments to the 1997 Rules of Civil
Procedure
I. PERIOD TO FILE NOT PROVIDED
The 2019 Amendments does not expressly provide when a motion to dismiss may
be filed, as well as the effect of the filing/denial of the motion. Under the old 1997
Rules, a motion to dismiss may be filed before the filing of the Answer and, if the
motion is denied, the movant still has at least 5 days within which to file an
Answer. These provisions are not found in the 2019 Amendments.

The most logical implication of the deletion is this — the filing of a motion to
dismiss does NOT toll the running of the 30-day period to file an Answer (the 2019
Amendments also extended the reglementary period from 15 days to 30 calendar
days).

II. GROUNDS FOR MOTION TO DISMISS

A motion to dismiss is a prohibited motion (Rule 15, Sec. 12), except when it is
filed on the basis of the following grounds:

1) That the court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter of the claim;
2) That there is another action pending between the same parties for the same
cause; or
3) That the cause of action is barred by a prior judgment or by the statute of
limitations;
The issuance of an order granting a motion to dismiss or affirmative defenses,
based on the three grounds enumerated above, bars the refiling of the same
action or claim.

Except these three grounds, defenses and objections not pleaded either in a
motion to dismiss or in the answer are deemed waived (Rule 9, Sec. 1).

III. VOLUNTARY APPEARANCE

A motion to dismiss is a prohibited motion if not based on the three grounds
mentioned above.

This may give rise to the impression that only three grounds may be used to
support a motion to dismiss. However, the 2019 Amendments recognizes one
more ground — lack of jurisdiction over the person of the defendant (Rule 14,
Sec. 23).

Rule 14 of the 2019 Amendments provides that the inclusion in a motion to

dismiss of other grounds aside from lack of jurisdiction over the person of the
defendant shall be deemed a voluntary appearance of the defendant (Sec. 23).

This is a reversal of the previous rule (Rule 14, Sec. 20 of the 1997 Rules) that the
inclusion in a motion to dismiss of other grounds aside from lack of jurisdiction
over the person of the defendant shall not be deemed a voluntary appearance.

Incidentally, in case of a motion to dismiss based on improper service of

summons, the court may deputize the defendant’s counsel to serve the
summons. [See also Rules on Summons]

In case of affirmative defenses, however, raising other grounds (in addition to

lack of jurisdiction over the person of the defendant) does not amount to a
voluntary appearance.

IV. HEARING ON MOTION TO DISMISS

While a motion to dismiss is a litigious motion (Rule 15, Section 5), the court has
discretion not to hold a hearing and proceed to rule on the motion. [See Rules on
Motions]

If the same ground is raised as an affirmative defense, the court may motu
proprio dismiss the case.
 - Are the grounds for a motion to dismiss removed from the rules? NO

- Are there no more motions to dismissed?NO.

RULE 15 SEC 5 {2} – RULE 15 SEC 12 {LIMITED TO 3 GROUNDS ON SEC 12}

RULE 16 OLD RULES NEW RULES

RULE 16 RULE 15 SEC 12
CONTAINS
Motion to Dismiss LETTERS B-E-F OF R16 SEC 1
Section 12. Prohibited motions.
Section 1. 10 Grounds. — Within the The following motions shall not be
time for but before filing the answer to allowed:
the complaint or pleading asserting a
claim, a motion to dismiss may be (a)  Motion to dismiss except on the
made on any of the following grounds: following grounds:
1)  That the court has no jurisdiction
(a) That the court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter of the claim;
over the person of the defending 2)  That there is another action
party; pending between the same parties for
the same cause; and
(b) That the court has no jurisdiction 3)  That the cause of action is barred
over the subject matter of the claim; by a prior judgment or by the statute
of limitations;
(c) That venue is improperly laid;

(d) That the plaintiff has no legal RULE 8 SECTION 12

capacity to sue; COTNAINS LETTERS A.C.D.G, J
R16 SEC 1
(e) That there is another action NOW CAN BE RAISED AS
pending between the same parties for AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
the same cause; - LITIS (a) A defendant shall raise his or her
PENDENTIA/FORUM SHOPPING affirmative defenses in his or her
answer, which shall be limited to the
(f) That the cause of action is barred reasons set forth under Section 5(b),
by a prior judgment or by the statute Rule 6, and the following grounds:
of limitations; - RES JUDICATA, 1. That the court has no jurisdiction
PRESCRIPTION over the person of the defending
party;
(g) That the pleading asserting the 2. That venue is improperly laid;
claim states no cause of action; 3. That the plaintiff has no legal
capacity to
(h) That the claim or demand set forth sue;
in the plaintiff's pleading has been 4. That the pleading asserting the
paid, waived, abandoned, or otherwise claim
extinguished; states no cause of action; and
5.That a condition precedent for filing
(i) That the claim on which the action the claim has not been complied with.
is founded is enforceable under the
provisions of the statute of frauds; and
RULE 8 SEC 12
(j) That a condition precedent for filing
the claim has not been complied with. b) Failure to raise the affirmative
(1a) defenses at the earliest opportunity
shall constitute a waiver thereof.
Section 6. Pleading grounds as
affirmative defenses. — If no motion to
dismiss has been filed, any of the (e) Affirmative defenses, if denied,
grounds for dismissal provided for in shall not be the subject of a motion for
this Rule may be pleaded as an reconsideration or petition for
affirmative defense in the answer and, certiorari, prohibition or mandamus,
in the discretion of the court, a but may be among the matters to be
preliminary hearing may be had raised on appeal after a judgment on
thereon as if a motion to dismiss had the merits. (n)
been filed. (5a)

The dismissal of the complaint under

this section shall be without prejudice
to the prosecution in the same or
separate action of a counterclaim
pleaded in the answer. (n)

Section 6. Notice of hearing on

litigious motions; discretionary. – The
Section 2. Hearing of motion. — At the court may, in the exercise of its
hearing of the motion, the parties shall discretion, and if deemed necessary
submit their arguments on the for its resolution, call a hearing on the
questions of law and their evidence on motion. The notice of hearing shall be
the questions of fact involved except addressed to all parties concerned,
those not available at that time. Should and shall specify the time and date of
the case go to trial, the evidence the hearing. (5a)
presented during the hearing shall
automatically be part of the evidence - VERY IMPORTANT GAME CHANGER,
of the party presenting the same. (n) OLD RULES A MOTION TO DISMISS
SHOULD BE SET FOR HEARING BY
THE MOVANT SEE CASES OF
DIMARUCOT- ACOMPADO, LAUDE}
WHERE FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH
THE PREVIOUS MADADTORY
REQUIRMENT OF NOTICE AND
HEARING WAS DEEEMD A FATAL
FLAW.

UNDER THE NEW RULES, NO NEED.

JUST FILE THE OPPOSITION AND IT
WILL BE UP TO THE COURT TO
DETERMINE IF THERE IS A NEED FOR
A HEARING.

RULE 15 SEC 5 {2}

Section 4. Time to plead. — If the Section 5. Litigious motions. –
motion is denied, the movant shall file (a) Litigious motions include:
his answer within the balance of the 2) Motion to dismiss;
period prescribed by Rule 11 to which
he was entitled at the time of serving (b) All motions shall be served by
his motion, but not less than five (5) personal service, accredited private
days in any event, computed from his courier or registered mail, or
receipt of the notice of the denial. If electronic means so as to ensure their
the pleading is ordered to be receipt by the other party.
amended, he shall file his answer
within the period prescribed by Rule (c) The opposing party shall file his or
11 counted from service of the her opposition to a litigious motion
 amended pleading, unless the court within five (5) calendar days from
provides a longer period. (4a) receipt thereof. No other submissions
shall be considered by the court in the
resolution of the motion. {PERIOD IS
NOW FIXED}

Section 3. Resolution of Motion. — R15 LAST PAR

After the hearing, the court may The motion shall be resolved by the
dismiss the action or claim, deny the court within fifteen (15) calendar days
motion, or order the amendment of the from its receipt of the opposition
pleading. thereto, or upon expiration of the
period to file such opposition. (n)
The court shall not defer the resolution COURT WANTED TO ABREVIATE OR
of the motion for the reason that the SHORTEN THE PERIOD
ground relied upon is not indubitable.

In every case, the resolution shall

state clearly and distinctly the reasons
therefor. (3a)

Section 5. Effect of dismissal. — RULE 15

Subject to the right of appeal, an order Section 13. Dismissal with prejudice. –
granting a motion to dismiss based on Subject to the right of appeal, an order
paragraphs (f), (h) and (i) of section 1 granting a motion to dismiss or an
hereof shall bar the refiling of the affirmative defense that the cause of
same action or claim. (n) action is barred by a prior judgment or
by the statute of limitations; that the
claim or demand set forth in the
plaintiff’s pleading has been paid,
waived, abandoned or otherwise
extinguished; or that the claim on
which the action is founded is
unenforceable under the provisions of
the statute of frauds, shall bar the
refiling of the same action or claim. (5,
R16)

NEW RULES
EARLY STAGE – RAISE AFFIRMATIVE
DEFENSES
SECOND LAYER - RAISE MTD BASED
ON THE 3 LIMITED GROUNDS

- What is preclusion of issues/collateral estoppel?

1. Almagro vs. PAL, 880 SCRA 107

TOPIC: PRECLUSION/COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL
PRINCIPAL ACTION FILED: Alamagro et al instituted the consolidated complaints of
illegal dismissal and monetary claims against PAL, Lucio Tan, and Jose Antonio Garcia,
DOCTRINE:
Res judicata Conclusiveness of Stare decisis
judgment
Res judicata under the Conclusiveness of The principle of stare
concept of conclusiveness judgment applies where decisis equally applies to
of judgment is embodied in there is identity of parties this case. The time-
the third paragraph of in the first and second honored principle of stare
Section 47, Rule 39 of the cases, but there is no decisis et non quieta
Rules of Civil Procedure. identity of causes of action. movere literally means to
adhere to precedents, and
Otherwise known as Simply put, conclusiveness not to unsettle things which
preclusion of issues or of judgment bars the are established.
collateral estoppel, the relitigation of particular
doctrine of conclusiveness facts or issues in another The rule of stare decisis is
of judgment bars the litigation between the a bar to any attempt to
relitigation of any right, same parties on a different relitigate the same issue
fact, or matter in issue claim or cause of action. where the same questions
directly adjudicated or relating to the same event
necessarily involved in the Here, the rule on have been put forward by
determination of an action conclusiveness of parties similarly situated as
before a competent court judgment also applies in a previous case litigated
in which judgment is because the determination and decided by a
rendered on the merits and of who participated in the competent court.
conclusively settled by the illegal strike subject of the
judgment therein. return-to work order, and It is one of policy grounded
who defied the return-to- on the necessity for
This applies to the parties work order has long been securing certainty and
and their privies regardless declared settled in Airline stability of judicial
of whether the claim, Pilots. decisions: Time and again,
demand, purpose, or the Court has held that it is
subject matter of the two In this case, it is a very desirable and
actions is the same. undisputed that all necessary judicial practice
petitioners signed PAL’s that when a court has laid
Thus, if a particular point logbook for return to work down a principle of law as
or question is in issue in returnees/return to work applicable to a certain
the second action, and the compliance. They are thus state of facts, it will adhere
judgment will depend on covered by the Court’s to that principle and apply
the determination of that finding that those who it to all future cases in
particular point or question, participated in the strike which the facts are
a former judgment had lost their employment substantially the same.
between the same parties Hence, this question
or their privies will be final cannot be raised again Stare decisis et non quieta
and conclusive in the here. movere. Stand by the
second if that same point decisions and disturb not
or question was in issue Furthermore, although the what is settled.
and adjudicated in the first parties are not exactly the
suit. same, the concept of Stare decisis simply
conclusiveness of means that for the sake of
judgment still applies certainty, a conclusion
because jurisprudence reached in one case
does not dictate absolute should be applied to those
identity but only substantial that follow if the facts are
identity of parties. substantially the same,
even though the parties
There is substantial may be different. It
identity of parties when proceeds from the first
there is a community of principle of justice that,
interest between a party in absent any powerful
the first case and a party in countervailing
the second case, even if considerations, like cases
the latter was not ought to be decided alike.
 impleaded in the first case.
Thus, where the same
As this Court explained in questions relating to the
Rodriguez, ALPAP and same event have been put
petitioners „share an forward by the parties
identity of interest from similarly situated as in a
which flowed an identity of previous case litigated and
relief sought, namely, the decided by a competent
reinstatement of the court, the rule of stare
terminated ALPAP decisis is a bar to any
members to their former attempt to relitigate the
positions. same issue.

Note: Rule 16 has been deleted

- Are there no more motions to dismissed?
- What is preclusion of issues/collateral estoppel?

XIII. RULE 17: Dismissal of Actions (Sections 1-4)

NOTES:
A. Dismissal Upon Notice (S-1)

A complaint may be dismissed by the plaintiff by filing a notice of dismissal at any time
before service of
1. The answer, or
2. A motion for summary judgment
Upon such notice being filed, the court shall issue an order confirming the dismissal.

It is not the order confirming the dismissal which operates to dismiss the complaint. As
the name of the order implies, it merely confirms the dismissal already effected by the
filing of the notice

General Rule: The dismissal upon notice by the plaintiff shall be without prejudice to the
re-filing of the complaint.
EXPN:
1. The notice of dismissal provides that the dismissal is with prejudice; or
2. The plaintiff has previously dismissed the same case in a court of competent
jurisdiction.

Two-Dismissal Rule
- This rule applies when the plaintiff has:
o Twice dismissed the action
o Based on or including the same claim; and o In a court of competent jurisdiction.
- Otherwise, the dismissal is with prejudice and the complainant cannot file the same
complaint because of res judicata.

Dismissal upon notice by plaintiff; two-dismissal rule

A complaint may be dismissed by the plaintiff by filing a notice of dismissal at any time
before service of

a. The answer, orb. A motion for summary judgmentUpon such notice being filed, the
court shall issue an order confirming the dismissal. [Sec. 1, Rule 17]
Note: Sec. 1, Rule 17 refers to “before service”, not “before filing.”

Withdrawal is not automatic but requires an order by the court confirming the dismissal.
Until thus confirmed, the withdrawal does not take effect [1 Herrera 1055, 2007 Ed.]
It is not the order confirming the dismissal which operates to dismiss the complaint. As
the name of the order implies, it merely confirms the dismissal already effected by the
filing of the notice [1 Riano 489, 2014 Bantam Ed.]

General rule: Dismissal is without prejudice

Exceptions:
a. Unless otherwise stated in the notice
b. A notice operates as an adjudication upon the merits when filed by a plaintiff who has
once dismissed in a competent court an action based on or including the same claim
[Sec. 1, Rule 17]

Two-dismissal Rule
The notice of dismissal operates as an adjudication upon the merits [Sec. 1, Rule 17]
Applies when the plaintiff has
1. A twice dismissed action,
2. Based on or including the same claim,
3. In a court of competent jurisdiction. [1 Riano 490, 2014 Bantam Ed.]

In Strongworld Construction Corp. v. Perello, 496 SCRA 700 – dismissals based on

pars. (f), (h) and (i) of Section 1 bar the refiling of the same action or claim, or with
prejudice. Dismissal based on the rest of the grounds enumerated are without prejudice
because they do not preclude the refiling of the same action.

In Pinga v. Heirs of German Santiago, 494 SCRA 393 – Under Sec. 3, Rule 17, the
dismissal of the complaint due to the fault of the plaintiff does not necessarily carry with
it the dismissal of the counterclaim, compulsory or otherwise. The dismissal of the
complaint is without prejudice to the right of the defendants to prosecute the
counterclaim.

B. Dismissal Upon Motion (S-2)

General Rule: Dismissal is without prejudice.

EXPN: Otherwise specified in the order.

Effect on counterclaim
The dismissal shall be without prejudice to the right of the defendant to prosecute his
counter-claim in a separate action unless within 15 calendar days from notice of the
motion he manifests his preference to have his counterclaim resolved in the same
action [Sec. 2, Rule 17]
Note: Sec. 2, Rule 17 is clear: the counterclaim is not dismissed, whether it is a
compulsory or a permissive counterclaim because the rule makes no distinction [1
Riano 491, 2014 Bantam Ed.]

C. Dismissal due to plaintiff’s fault (S-3)

The dismissal is due to the fault of the plaintiff in the following instances:
1. Plaintiff fails to appear for no justifiable cause on the day of the presentation of his or
her evidence
in chief on the complaint;
2. Plaintiff fails to prosecute his or her action for an unreasonable length of time; or
3. Plaintiff fails to comply with the Rules or any order of the court.

General Rule: The dismissal shall be with prejudice

EXPN: the court provides otherwise.

The complaint may be dismissed upon motion of the defendant or upon the court’s
own motion if, for no justifiable cause, the plaintiff:

1. Fails to appear on the date of the presentation of his evidence in chief on the
complaint
a. The plaintiff’s failure to appear at the trial after he has presented his evidence and
rested his case does not warrant the dismissal of the case on the ground of failure to
prosecute. It is merely a waiver of his right to cross- examine and to object to the
admissibility of evidence [Jalover v. Ytoriaga, G.R. No. L-35989 (1977)]

2. Fails to prosecute his action for an unreasonable length of time, also called as non-
prosequitur
a. The test for dismissal of a case due to failure to prosecute is whether or not, under
the circumstances, the plaintiff is chargeable with want of due diligence in failing to
proceed with reasonable promptitude. [Calalang v. CA, G.R. No. 103185 (1993)]
b. The dismissal of an action pursuant to this Rule rests upon the sound discretion of
the court. [Smith Bell and Co. v. American President Lines Ltd., G.R. Nos. L-5304 to L-
5324 (1954)]
c. The action should never be dismissed on a non-suit for want of prosecution when the
delay was caused by the parties looking towards a settlement. [Goldloop Properties Inc.
v. CA, G.R. No. 99431 (1992)]

3. Fails to comply with the ROC or any court order. [Sec. 3, Rule 17]
a. A case may be dismissed for failure to answer written interrogatories under Rule 25
even without an order from the court to answer. [Arellano v. CFI Sorsogon, G.R. No. L-
34897 (1975)] [also see Sec. 5, Rule 29

General rule: This dismissal shall have the effect of an adjudication upon the merits and
is thus a dismissal with prejudice. [AFP Retirement v. Republic, 694 SCRA 118 (2013)]
Exception: Otherwise declared by the court. [Sec. 3, Rule 17]

Note: Under Sec. 3, Rule 14, the plaintiff’s failure to comply with the order of the court to
serve summons shall cause the dismissal of the initiatory pleading without prejudice.
This rule can be seen as an exception to the general rule that dismissal due to failure to
comply with the order of the court shall cause dismissal with prejudice.

Effect on counterclaim
Dismissal is without prejudice to the right of the defendant to prosecute his counterclaim
in the same or in a separate action [Sec. 3, Rule 17]

Section 4. Dismissal of counterclaim, cross-claim, or third-party complaint.

Provisions of Rule 17 shall apply to the dismissal of any counterclaim, cross-claim, or
third-party complaint.
Voluntary dismissal by the claimant by notice as in Sec. 1, Rule 17 shall be made:
a. Before a responsive pleading or a motion for summary judgment is served; or
b. If there is none, before the introduction of evidence at trial or hearing. [Sec. 4, Rule
17]

Cases:

1. Blay vs. Bana, 858 SCRA, 3/7/2018

TOPIC: Dismissal Upon Motion of the Plaintiff and its effect on a defendants
counterclaim
PRINCIPAL ACTION FILED: Petitioner BLAY filed before the RTC a Petition for
Declaration of Nullity of Marriage, seeking that his marriage to respondent BANA be
declared null and void on account of his psychological incapacity pursuant to Article 36
of the Family Code.
DOCTRINE:
As stated in the third sentence of Section 2, Rule 17, if the defendant desires to
prosecute his counterclaim in the same action, he is required to file a manifestation
within fifteen (15) days from notice of the motion.

Otherwise, his counterclaim may be prosecuted in a separate action. As explained by

renowned remedial law expert, former Associate Justice Florenz D. Regalado, in his
treatise on the matter: Under this revised section,

1. where the plaintiff moves for the dismissal of the complaint to which a counterclaim
has been interpose, the dismissal shall be limited to the complaint. Such dismissal shall
be without prejudice to the right of the defendant to either prosecute his counterclaim in
a separate action or to have the same resolved in the same action.

2. Should he opt for the first alternative, the court should render the corresponding order
granting and reserving his right to prosecute his claim in a separate complaint.

3. Should he choose to have his counterclaim disposed of in the same action wherein
the complaint had been dismissed, he must manifest within 15 days from notice to him
of plaintiff's motion to dismiss.

In this case, the CA confined the application of Section 2, Rule 17 to that portion of its
second sentence which states that the "dismissal shall be limited to the complaint."
Evidently, the CA ignored the same provision's third sentence, which provides for the
alternatives available to the defendant who interposes a counterclaim prior to the
service upon him of the plaintiff's motion for dismissal.

As may be clearly inferred therefrom, should the defendant desire to prosecute his
counterclaim, he is required to manifest his preference therefor within fifteen (15) days
from notice of the plaintiff's motion to dismiss. Failing in which, the counterclaim may be
prosecuted only in a separate action.

The rationale behind this rule is not difficult to discern: the passing of the fifteen (15)-
day period triggers the finality of the court's dismissal of the complaint and hence, bars
the conduct of further proceedings, i.e., the prosecution of respondent's counterclaim, in
the same action.

Thus, in order to obviate this finality, the defendant is required to file the required
manifestation within the aforesaid period; otherwise, the counterclaim may be
prosecuted only in a separate action.

2. Lim Tech Chuan, 752 SCRA 268

TOPIC: DISMISSAL UPON THE PLAINTIFF’S MOTION AND ITS EFFECTS ON A
DENFENDANTS COUNTERLCAIM.
PRINCIPAL ACTION FILED: Serafin Uy filed a Complaint for quieting of title, surrender
of owner‘s copy of certificate of title, declaration of nullity of affidavit of adjudication and
sale, annulment of tax declaration, and other reliefs with a prayer for preliminary
injunction with the RTC, impleading Lim Teck Chuan, Leopolda Cecilio, and Henry Lim
as defendants.
DOCTRINE:
A dismissal of an action is different from a mere dismissal of the complaint. For this
reason, since only the complaint and not the action is dismissed, the defendant in spite
of said dismissal may still prosecute his counterclaim in the same action. In the instant
case, the petitioner's preference to have his counterclaim (and cross-claims) be
prosecuted in the same action was timely manifested.
The Rules of Court do not prohibit any of the parties from filing a Rule 45 petition with
this Court in case only questions of law are raised or involved.

3. Ching vs. Cheng, 737 SCRA

TOPIC: TWIN DISMISSAL RULE
PRINCIPAL ACTION FILED: The Chengs filed a complaint before the Branch 6 of the
RTC of Manila for declaration of nullity of titles against Ramon Ching. That was further
amended for an action of Annulment of Agreement, Waiver, Extra-Judicial Settlement of
Estate and the Certificates of Title Issued by Virtue of Said Documents with Prayer for
Temporary Restraining Order and Writ of Preliminary Injunction
DOCTRINE:
Rule 17 of the Rules of Civil Procedure governs dismissals of actions at the instance of
the plaintiff. Hence, the ―two-dismissal rule‖ under Rule 17, Section 1 of the Rules of
Civil Procedure will not apply if the prior dismissal was done at the instance of the
defendant.

XIV. RULE 18: Pre-Trial (Sections 1-10)

NOTES:

When conducted

Section 1. When conducted. – After the last responsive pleading has been served and
filed, the branch clerk of court shall issue, within five (5) calendar days from filing, a
notice of pre-trial which shall be set not later than sixty (60) calendar days from the filing
of the last responsive pleading.

Pre-trial is a procedural device by which the court is called upon, after the filing of the
last pleading, to compel the parties and their lawyers to appear before it, and negotiate
an amicable settlement or otherwise make a formal settlement and embody in a single
document the issues of fact and law involved in the action, and such other matters as
may aid in the prompt disposition in the action, such as the:
1. Number of witnesses the parties intend to present
2. Tenor or character of their testimonies
3. Documentary evidence
4. Nature and purpose of each of them
5. Number of trial dates that each will need to put on his case. [1 Herrera 1074, 2007
Ed.]

Nature and Purpose

Section 2. Nature and purpose. – The pre-trial is mandatory and should be terminated
promptly. The court shall consider:
(a) The possibility of an amicable settlement or of a submission to alternative modes of
dispute resolution;
(b) The simplification of the issues;
(c) The possibility of obtaining stipulations or admissions of facts and of documents to
avoid unnecessary proof;
(d) The limitation of the number and identification of witnesses and the setting of trial
dates;
(e) The advisability of a preliminary reference of issues to a commissioner;
(f) The propriety of rendering judgment on the pleadings, or summary judgment, or of
dismissing the action should a valid ground therefor be found to exist;
(g) The requirement for the parties to:
1. Mark their respective evidence if not yet marked in the judicial affidavits of their
witnesses;
2. Examine and make comparisons of the adverse parties’ evidence vis-a-vis the copies
to be marked;
3. Manifest for the record stipulations regarding the faithfulness of the reproductions and
the genuineness and due execution of the adverse parties’ evidence;
4. Reserve evidence not available at the pre-trial, but only in the following manner:
i. For testimonial evidence, by giving the name or position and the nature of the
testimony of the proposed witness;
ii. For documentary evidence and other object evidence, by giving a particular
description of the evidence.

No reservation shall be allowed if not made in the manner described above. (h) Such
other matters as may aid in the prompt disposition of the action.

The failure without just cause of a party and counsel to appear during pre-trial, despite
notice, shall result in a waiver of any objections to the faithfulness of the reproductions
marked, or their genuineness and due execution.

The failure without just cause of a party and/or counsel to bring the evidence required
shall be deemed a waiver of the presentation of such evidence.
The branch clerk of court shall prepare the minutes of the pre-trial, which shall have the
following format: (See prescribed form)

- Pre-trial is mandatory and should be terminated promptly.

- Note: The Judicial Affidavit Rule requires that documentary or object evidence must be
marked and attached to the judicial affidavits, with such evidence being marked as
Exhibit A, B, C for the plaintiff, and Exhibit 1, 2, 3 for the defendant. [Sec. 2(a)(2), AM
No. 12-8-8-SC]

Pre-trial is mandatory and should be terminated promptly. [Sec. 2, Rule 18]

Purpose of pre-trial is to consider
1. Possibility of an amicable settlement or of a submission to alternative modes of
dispute resolution
2. Simplification of the issues
3. Possibility of obtaining stipulations or admissions of facts and of documents to avoid
unnecessary proof
4. Limitation of the number and identification of witnesses and the setting of trial dates
5. Advisability of a preliminary reference of issues to a commissioner
6. Propriety of rendering judgment on the pleadings, or summary judgment, or of
dismissing the action should a valid ground therefore be found to exist
7. The requirement for the parties to:

a. Mark their evidence if not yet marked in the judicial affidavits of their witnesses,
Note: The Judicial Affidavit Rule requires that documentary or object evidence must be
marked and attached to the judicial affidavits, with such evidence being marked as
Exhibit A, B, C for the plaintiff, and Exhibit 1, 2, 3 for the defendant. [Sec. 2(a)(2), AM
No. 12-8-8-SC]

b. Examine and make comparisons of the adverse parties’ evidence vis- a-vis the
copies to be marked,
c. Manifest for the record, stipulations regarding the faithfulness of the reproductions
and the genuineness and due execution of the adverse parties’ evidence,

d. Reserve evidence not available at the pre-trial, but only in the following manner, or
else it shall not be allowed
i. Testimonial evidence: by giving the name or position and the nature of the proposed
witness
ii. Documentary/Object evidence: by giving a particular description of the evidence
8. Such other matters as may aid in the prompt disposition of the action

Failure without just cause of a party and counsel to appear during pre-trial, despite
notice, shall result in a waiver of any objections to the faithfulness of the reproductions
marked, or their genuineness and due execution

Failure without just cause to bring the evidence required shall be deemed a waiver of
the presentation of such evidence. [Sec. 2, Rule 18]

Note: Both waivers mentioned above are based on lack of just cause either to appear
during pre-trial or to bring the evidence required.

Notice
Section 3. Notice of pre-trial. – The notice of pre-trial shall include the dates respectively
set for: (a) Pre-trial;
(b) Court-Annexed Mediation; and
(c) Judicial Dispute Resolution, if necessary.

The notice of pre-trial shall be served on counsel, or on the party [if he] or she has no
counsel. The counsel served with such notice is charged with the duty of notifying the
party represented by him or her.
Non-appearance at any of the foregoing settings shall be deemed as non-appearance
at the pretrial and shall merit the same sanctions under Section 5 hereof. (3a)

- The Amended Rules have now deleted the requirement for the plaintiff to move for
pre- trial, and has directly vested it with the clerk of court.
- The “last pleading” need not be literally construed as the actual filing of the last
pleading. For the purpose of pre-trial, the expiration of the period for filing the last
pleading is sufficient. [Sarmiento v. Juan, G.R. No. L-56605 (1983)]

The “last pleading” need not be literally construed as the actual filing of the last
pleading. For the purpose of pre-trial, the expiration of the period for filing the last
pleading is sufficient. [Sarmiento v. Juan, G.R. No. L-56605 (1983)]

The sufficiency of the written notice of pre-trial is irrelevant where evidence shows that
counsel and the parties actually knew of the pre-trial. [Bembo v. CA, G.R. No. 116845
(1995)]

When pre-trial conducted

The notice of pre-trial shall set pre-trial to be conducted not later than 60 calendar days
from the filing of the last responsive pleading. [Sec. 1, Rule 18]

Contents of Notice of Pre-Trial

The notice of pre-trial shall include the dates set for:
a. Pre-trial;
b. Court-Annexed Mediation (CAM); and
c. Judicial Dispute Resolution (JDR), if necessary [Sec. 3, Rule 18]
Service of Notice of Pre-Trial

The notice of pre-trial shall be served on counsel, or on the party if he or she has no
counsel [Sec. 3, Rule 18]

Effect of failure to appear

Section 4. Appearance of parties. – It shall be the duty of the parties and their counsel
to appear at the pre-trial, court-annexed mediation, and judicial dispute resolution, if
necessary. The non-appearance of a party and counsel may be excused only for acts of
God, force majeure, or duly substantiated physical inability.

A representative may appear on behalf of a party, but must be fully authorized in writing
to enter into an amicable settlement, to submit to alternative modes of dispute
resolution, and to enter into stipulations or admissions of facts and documents.

Section 5. Effect of failure to appear. – When duly notified, the failure of the plaintiff and
counsel to appear without valid cause when so required[,] pursuant to the next
preceding Section, shall cause the dismissal of the action. The dismissal shall be with
prejudice, unless otherwise ordered by the court. A similar failure on the part of the
defendant and counsel shall be cause to allow the plaintiff to present his or her
evidence ex parte within ten (10) calendar days from termination of the pre-trial, and the
court to render judgment on the basis of the evidence offered. (5a)

The non-appearance of a party and counsel may be excused only for:

1. Acts of God;
2. Force majeure; or
3. Duly substantiated physical inability.
A representative may appear on behalf of a party, but must be fully authorized in writing
to:
1. Enter into an amicable settlement,
2. To submit to alternative modes of dispute resolution, and
3. To enter into stipulations or admissions of facts and documents.

- The written authorization must be in the form of a special power of attorney as

authority to enter into amicable settlement must be in such form [Sec. 23, Rule 138; Art.
1878(3), Civil Code]

Effect of failure to appear:

1. By the plaintiff and counsel
– shall cause the dismissal of the action
– dismissal shall be with prejudice, unless otherwise ordered by the court.
2. By the defendant and counsel
– cause to allow the plaintiff to present his or her evidence ex parte within 10 calendar
days from termination of the pre-trial, and the court to render judgment on the basis of
the evidence offered.
3. Either party and counsel
–result in a waiver of any objections to the faithfulness of the reproductions of evidence
marked, or their genuineness and due execution.

It shall be the duty of the parties and their counsel to appear at:
a. Pre-trial,
b. Court-annexed mediation, and
c. Judicial dispute resolution, if necessary. [Sec. 4, Rule 18]
Note: Both parties and their counsel are required to attend. Appearance of either only
the party or his counsel counts as non- appearance, unless:

Excused non-appearance
Appearance of a party and counsel may only be excused for:
a. Acts of god, b. Force majeure, or
c. Duly substantiated physical inability. [Sec. 4, Rule 18]

Appearance by Representative
A representative may appear on behalf of a party, but must be fully authorized in writing
to:
Enter into an amicable settlement,
b. To submit to alternative modes of dispute resolution, and
c. To enter into stipulations or admissions of facts and documents. [Sec. 4, Rule 18]
Note: It is not sufficient for the representative to be given the power to enter into one or
two of the matters enumerated. An incomplete authority does not satisfy the
requirement of the Rules and should be deemed the equivalent of having no authority at
all. [1 Riano 429, 2016 Bantam Ed.]

Moreover, only the authorization is required in order for a representative to appear on

behalf of a party. A ground for excused non- appearance need not concur with the
written authorization in order to allow a representative to appear on behalf of the party.
The written authorization must be in the form of a special power of attorney as authority
to enter into amicable settlement must be in such form [Sec. 23, Rule 138; Art. 1878(3),
Civil Code]

Effect of failure to appear

Note: The party and counsel must have been duly notified and their failure to appear
was without valid cause. It is only then that the following effects occur upon non-
appearance of both party and counsel:

i. By the plaintiff and counsel

The action shall be dismissed with prejudice, unless otherwise ordered by the court.
[Sec. 5, Rule 18]
Remedy: Motion for reconsideration, then appeal

Note: This would be the proper remedy because dismissal with prejudice amounts to an
adjudication on the merits and is thus, final. [1 Riano 426, 2016 Bantam Ed.]

ii. By the defendant and counsel

The plaintiff shall be allowed to present evidence ex parte within 10 calendar days from
termination of pre-trial, and judgment shall be rendered based on the evidence offered.
[Sec. 5, Rule 18]
Remedy: Motion for reconsideration, and if the denial is tainted with grave abuse of
discretion, a petition for certiorari

Note: This is because the order of the court allowing the plaintiff to present evidence ex
parte does not dispose of the case with finality and the order is, therefore, interlocutory
and not appealable. [1 Riano 428, 2016 Bantam Ed. citing Sec. 1(b), Rule 41]

The non-appearance of the defendant in pre- trial is not a ground to declare him in
default. While the effect of the failure of the defendant to appear at the pre-trial is similar
to that of default (possible presentation of evidence ex parte), under the Rules, this
consequence is not to be called a declaration of default. [1 Riano 302, 2016 Bantam
Ed.]

In case of non-appearance of the plaintiff at the pre-trial, the action may be dismissed
under Sec. 5, Rule 18. Can the defendant insist on his counterclaim? Justice Feria
opined that the ―defendant who appears in the absence of the plaintiff may be allowed
to present evidence on his counterclaim, if any.‖ (See Herrera, p. 817)

Paredes v. Verano (October 12, 2006) -- The absence of counsel for defendants at pre-
trial does not ipso facto authorize the judge to declare the defendant as in default and
order the presentation of evidence ex parte. It bears stressing that nothing in the Rules
of Court sanctions the presentation of evidence ex parte upon instances when counsel
for defendant is absent during pre-trial. The Rules do not countenance stringent
construction at the expense of justice and equity. In this case, the defendants were
present but their counsel did not appear despite due notice.
Default by defendant [Sec. 3, Rule 9] Failure to appear by defendant [Sec. 5, Rule 18]
Upon motion of the claiming party with Not required
notice to the defending party
Requires proof of failure to answer Not required
Court may render judgment without Court renders judgment based on the evidence
receiving evidence presented ex parte
Judgment by default Judgment ex parte
Relief awarded must be the same in nature No such limitation
and amount as prayed for in the complaint

Pre-trial Brief/Pre-trial Order

Section 6. Pre-trial brief. – The parties shall file with the court and serve on the adverse
party, in such manner as shall ensure their receipt thereof at least three (3) calendar
days before the date of the pre-trial, their respective pre-trial briefs which shall contain,
among others:
(a) A concise statement of the case and the reliefs prayed for;
(b) A summary of admitted facts and proposed stipulation of facts;
(c) The main factual and legal issues to be tried or resolved;
(d) The propriety of referral of factual issues to commissioners;
(e) The documents or other object evidence to be marked, stating the purpose thereof;
(f) The names of the witnesses, and the summary of their respective testimonies; and
(g) A brief statement of points of law and citation of authorities.

Failure to file the pre-trial brief shall have the same effect as failure to appear at the pre-
trial.

When to file and serve pre-trial brief

The parties shall file with the court and serve on the adverse party to ensure receipt at
least 3 calendar days before the date of pre-trial their pre-trial briefs. [Sec. 6, Rule 18]

Contents of pre-trial brief:

a. A concise statement of the case and the reliefs prayed for;
b. A summary of admitted facts and proposed stipulation of facts; c. The main factual
and legal issues to be tried or resolved;
d. The propriety of referral of factual issues to commissioners;
e. The documents or other object evidence to be marked, stating the purpose thereof;
f. The names of the witnesses, and the summary of their respective testimonies; and
g. A brief statement of points of law and citation of authorities. [Sec. 6, Rule 18

Legal effect of representations and statements in the pre-trial brief

The parties are bound by the representations and statements in their respective pre-trial
briefs. [A.M. 03-1-09-SC (2004)]
Note: Representations and statements in the pre-trial briefs are in the nature of judicial
admissions [Sec. 4, Rule 129]

Effect of failure to file:

Failure to file the pre-trial brief shall have the same effect as failure to appear at the pre-
trial. [Sec. 6, Rule 18] Therefore, the following sanctions are meted out to those failing
to file their respective pre-trial briefs:
1. Waiver of any objections to the faithfulness of the reproductions marked, or their
genuineness and due execution, [Sec. 2, Rule 18]
2. If plaintiff and counsel fail to appear
• The action will be dismissed with prejudice, unless otherwise ordered by the court If
defendant and counsel fail to appear
• The plaintiff shall be allowed to present evidence ex parte within 10 calendar days
from termination of pre-trial, and judgment shall be rendered based on the evidence
offered. [Sec. 5, Rule 18

A.M. No. 03-1-09-SC (August 16, 2004)

Guidelines to be observed by trial judges and clerks of court in the conduct of pre-trial
and use of deposition-discovery measures. Some features are as follows:
1. Summons shall contain a reminder to defendant to observe restraint in filing a motion
to dismiss and instead allege the grounds thereof as defenses in the answer.
2. Issue an order requiring the parties to avail of interrogatories to parties (Rule 25),
request for admission by adverse party (Rule 26), or make use of depositions under
Rule 23 or other measures under Rules 27 and 27 within 5 days from filing of the
answer.
3. Within 5 days from filing of reply, plaintiff must promptly move ex parte that the case
be set for pre-trial conference. If he fails to do so, the Branch COC shall issue notice of
pre-trial.
4. Pre-trial Brief. No evidence shall be allowed to be presented and offered during the
trial in support of a party’s evidence-in-chief other than those that had been earlier
identified and premarked during the pre-trial except if allowed by the court for good
cause shown.

Brief must indicate the approximate number of hours that will be required by the parties
for the presentation of their respective witnesses. Rule on contents of pretrial brief must
be strictly complied with. The parties are bound by representations and statements in
their respective pretrial briefs.

5. Refer the case to the Philippine Mediation Center for purposes of mediation if
available.
6. Pre-marking of exhibits before the Branch COC and attached to the records after
comparison.
7. Minutes of preliminary conference. Note, preliminary conference under Rules on
Summary Procedure is different.
8. Active role of the judge in pre-trial
9. Adhere to the one-day examination of witness rule
10. Most important witness rule
11. Use of affidavits of witnesses as direct examination. In question and answer form.

Legal effect of representations and statements in the pre-trial brief

- The parties are bound by the representations and statements in their respective pre-
trial briefs. [A.M.
03-1-09-SC (2004)]
- Representations and statements in the pre-trial briefs are in the nature of judicial
admissions [Sec. 4, Rule 129]

Failure to file the pre-trial brief shall have the same effect as failure to appear at the pre-
trial.
Section 7. Pre-Trial Order. – Upon termination of the pre-trial, the court shall issue an
order within ten (10) calendar days which shall recite in detail the matters taken up. The
order shall include:
(a) An enumeration of the admitted facts;
(b) The minutes of the pre-trial conference;
(c) The legal and factual issue/s to be tried;
(d) The applicable law, rules, and jurisprudence;
(e) The evidence marked;
(f) The specific trial dates for continuous trial, which shall be within the period provided
by the Rules;
(g) The case flowchart to be determined by the court, which shall contain the different
stages of the proceedings up to the promulgation of the decision and the use of time
frames for each stage in setting the trial dates;
(h) A statement that the one-day examination of witness rule and most important
witness rule under A.M. No. 03-1-09-SC (Guidelines for Pre-Trial) shall be strictly
followed; and
(i) A statement that the court shall render judgment on the pleadings or summary
judgment, as the case may be.

The direct testimony of witnesses for the plaintiff shall be in the form of judicial
affidavits. After the identification of such affidavits, cross-examination shall proceed
immediately.
Postponement of presentation of the parties’ witnesses at a scheduled date is
prohibited, except if it is based on acts of God, force majeure or duly substantiated
physical inability of the witness to appear and testify. The party who caused the
postponement is warned that the presentation of its evidence must still be terminated
within the remaining dates previously agreed upon.

Should the opposing party fail to appear without valid cause stated in the next preceding
paragraph, the presentation of the scheduled witness will proceed with the absent party
being deemed to have waived the right to interpose objection and conduct cross-
examination.
The contents of the pre-trial order shall control the subsequent proceedings, unless
modified before trial to prevent manifest injustice. (7a)

Effects of pre-trial order

The contents of the order shall control the subsequent course of the action, unless:
1. The order is modified before trial to prevent manifest injustice, or [Sec. 7, Rule 18]
2. There are issues impliedly included therein or may be inferable therefrom by
necessary implication. [Philippine Export and Foreign Loan Guarantee Corp. v.
Amalgamated Management and Development Corp., G.R. No. 177729]

F. Mediations

Court-Annexed Mediation (CAM)

- After pre-trial and after the issues are joined, the court shall refer the parties for
mandatory CAM.
- Period: Not exceeding 30 calendar days without extension.
Note: A.M. 11-1-6-SC-PHILJA insofar as it provides that an extended period of another
30 days may be granted by the court upon motion by the mediator and with the
conformity of the parties shall no longer apply.
Effect of failure of mediation: a. Proceed with trial; or b. If the judge is convinced that
settlement is possible, referral to another court to proceed with JDR.

Judicial Dispute Resolutions

Note: A.M. No. 03-1-09 Supreme Court effective August 16, 2004 (Guidelines to be
observed by trial courts judges and clerks of court in the conduct of pre-trial and use of
deposition-discovery measures)

Judicial Dispute Resolution (JDR)

- If the judge of the court to which the case is originally raffled is convinced that
settlement is still
possible, the case may be referred to another court for JDR.
- Period: Non-extendible period of 15 calendar days from notice of failure of CAM. Note
that the period
to conduct JDR is included in the period for the presentation of plaintiff’s evidence. [Sec.
1[a][i], Rule 30]

Effect of failure:
Trial before the original court shall proceed on the dates agreed upon. [Sec. 9, Rule 18]

Note: JDR is no longer mandatory as provided for under A.M. 11-1-6-SC-PHILJA due to
the amended rules. The aforementioned A.M. also provides for a 30-day JDR for first
level courts, a 60-day JDR for second level courts, and discretion on the part of the JDR
judge to order a longer period of JDR. Such provisions are now repealed due to the
Amended Rules providing for a non-extendible shorter period of 15 calendar days for
JDR.

Note: A.M. No. 03-1-09 Supreme Court effective August 16, 2004 (Guidelines to be
observed by trial courts judges and clerks of court in the conduct of pre-trial and use of
deposition-discovery measures)

The One-Day Examination of Witness Rule

- a witness has to be fully examined in one (1) day only, shall be strictly adhered to
subject to the courts' discretion during trial on whether or not to extend the direct and/or
cross- examination for justifiable reasons [Item I-A-5-i, A.M. No. 03-1-09-SC]

Most important witness rule

- The court shall determine the most important witnesses to be heard and limit the
number of witnesses

(Most Important Witness Rule) [Item I-A-5-j, AM No. 03-1-09-SC]

- The court shall require the parties and/or counsel to submit to the Branch COC the
names, addresses and contact numbers of the witnesses to be summoned by subpoena
[Item I-A-5-l, AM No. 03-1-09- SC]

Use of Judicial Affidavits

- The direct testimony of witnesses for the plaintiff shall be in the form of judicial
affidavits. However, even witnesses for the defendant are required to submit judicial
affidavits, which likewise take the place of their direct testimony. [AM No. 12-8-8-SC,
Sec. 2(a)(1)].

Distinction between pre-trial in civil case and pre-trial in criminal case

The Rules on pre-trial are different in petitions for declaration of nullity of marriage
and legal separation. A.M. No. 02-11-11-SC

As to when conducted
Not later than 60 calendar days from the filing of the last responsive pleading. [Sec. 1]
After arraignment and within 30 days from the date the court acquires jurisdiction over
the person of the accused
Exception: If special laws and circulars provide for a shorter period

Pre-trial in a Civil Case Pre-trial in a Criminal

[Rule 18] Case [Rule 118]
As to when conducted Not later than 60 calendar After arraignment and
days from the filing of the within 30 days from the
last responsive pleading. date the court acquires
[Sec. 1 jurisdiction over the person
of the accused
Exception: If special laws
and circulars provide for a
shorter period [Sec. 1]
 As to need of motion There is no longer a need
for the plaintiff to move ex
parte to set the case for
pre- trial. Under the
Ordered by the court and
Amended Rules, the clerk
no motion is required from
of court should issue the
either party [Sec. 1]
notice of pre-trial within 5
calendar days from filing of
the last responsive
pleading. [Sec. 1]
As to whether or not
mandatory Mandatory [Sec. 2] Mandatory [Sec. 1]
As to effect of failure to Of the plaintiff – the case If the counsel for the
appear shall be dismissed with accused or the prosecutor
prejudice, unless the court does not appear at the pre-
orders trial conference and does
Of the defendant – the not offer an acceptable
plaintiff excuse for his lack of
shall allowed to present cooperation, the court may
evidence ex parte, and impose proper sanctions or
judgment shall be penalties. [Sec. 3]
rendered based thereon
[Sec. 5, Rule 18]
As to possibility of an The court shall consider Not in the enumeration to
amicable settlement this matter [Sec. 2(a)] be considered. [Sec. 1]
As to requirement of A pre-trial brief is A pre-trial brief is not
Pre- Trial Brief specifically required to be required under Rule 118.
submitted [Sec. 6]

Judicial Dispute Resolution (JDR)

If the judge of the court to which the case is originally raffled is convinced that
settlement is still possible, the case may be referred to another court for JDR.

Period: Non-extendible period of 15 calendar days from notice of failure of CAM. Note
that the period to conduct JDR is included in the period for the presentation of plaintiff’s
evidence. [Sec. 1[a][i], Rule 30]

Effect of failure: Trial before the original court shall proceed on the dates agreed upon.
[Sec. 9, Rule 18]

Note: JDR is no longer mandatory as provided for under A.M. 11-1-6-SC-PHILJA due to
the amended rules. The aforementioned A.M. also provides for a 30-day JDR for first
level courts, a 60-day JDR for second level courts, and discretion on the part of the JDR
judge to order a longer period of JDR. Such provisions are now repealed due to the
Amended
Rules providing for a non-extendible shorter period of 15 calendar days for JDR.

Confidentiality
All proceedings during CAM and JDR shall be confidential. [Sec. 9, Rule 18] Effect of
non-appearance at CAM or JDR
Note: Non-appearance at CAM or JDR, if necessary, shall be deemed as non-
appearance at pre-trial. [Sec. 3, Rule 18]

Therefore, the following sanctions are meted out to non-appearing parties at CAM or
JDR:
1. Waiver of any objections to the faithfulness of the reproductions marked, or their
genuineness and due execution, [Sec. 2, Rule 18]

2. If plaintiff and counsel fail to appear

• The action will be dismissed with prejudice, unless otherwise ordered by the court If
defendant and counsel fail to appear
• The plaintiff shall be allowed to present evidence ex parte within 10 calendar days
from termination of pre-trial, and judgment shall be rendered based on the evidence
offered. [Sec. 5, Rule 18

XV. RULE 19: Intervention (Sections 1-4)

NOTES:

- Who may intervene (S-1)

- When to intervene (S-2)

Definition of Intervention
A proceeding in a suit or an action by which a third person is permitted by the court to
make himself a party, either:
1. Joining plaintiff in claiming what is sought by the complaint,
2. Uniting with defendant in resisting the claims of the plaintiff, or
3. Demanding something adverse to both of them. [1 Herrera 1117, 2007 Ed., citing
Gutierrez v. Villegas, G.R. No. L-11848 (1962)]

Intervention is never an independent action but is auxillary and supplemental to the

existing litigation. It is merely collateral, accessory, or ancillary to the principal action.

Is intervention an initiatory pleading requiring a certification against forum shopping?

Under Sec. 3, Rule 19, the intervention shall be made by complaint filed and served in
regular form and may be answered as if it were an original complaint. VYE maintains
that the complaint-in-intervention is an initiatory pleading.

Purpose of Intervention
Its purpose is to afford one not an original party, yet having a certain right/interest in the
pending case, the opportunity to appear and be joined so he could assert or protect
such right/interest [Cariño v. Ofilada, G.R. No. 102836 (1993)]

Nature of Intervention
Intervention cannot alter the nature of the action and the issues already joined. [Castro
v. David, 100 Phil 454 (1956)]

Intervention is never an independent action, but is ancillary and supplemental to the

existing litigation. [Saw vs CA, 195 SCRA 740 (1991)] An independent controversy
cannot be injected in the suit by intervention since it would enlarge the issues and
expand the scope of the remedies. [Mactan-Cebu Intl Airport Authority vs Heirs of
Minoza, 641 SCRA 520 (2011)]

Requisites for intervention

1. A motion for leave to intervene filed at any time before rendition of judgment by the
trial court [Sec. 2, Rule 19]
Note: A motion for intervention is a litigious motion. Therefore, the court shall resolve
the motion within 15 calendar days from receipt of the opposition or upon expiration of
the period to file such opposition. The period to file an opposition would be 5 calendar
days from the receipt of such opposition. [Sec. 5, Rule 15]
2. A legal interest:
a. In the matter in litigation;
b. In the success of either of the parties; c. An interest against both; or d. So situated as
to be adversely affected by a distribution or other disposition of property in the custody
of the court or of an officer thereof

3. Intervention will not unduly delay or prejudice the adjudication of rights of the original
parties

4. Intervenor’s rights may not be fully protected in a separate proceeding. [Sec. 1, Rule
19; Lorenza Ortega v. CA, G.R. No. 125302 (1998)]

In Virra Mall Tenants Association Inc. v. Virra Mall Greenhills Association Inc., G.R. No.
182902, October 5, 2011, 658 SCRA 728, the SC citing the case of Executive Secretary
v. Northeast Freight, G.R. No. 179516, 17 March 2009, 581 SCRA 736,
held that – Intervention is not a matter of absolute right but may be permitted by the
court when the applicant shows facts which satisfy the requirements of the statute
authorizing intervention. Under our Rules of Court, what qualifies a person to intervene
is his possession of a legal interest in the matter in litigation or in the success of either
of the parties, or an interest against both; or when he is so situated as to be adversely
affected by a distribution or other disposition of property in the custody of the court or an
officer thereof. As regards the legal interest as qualifying factor, this Court has ruled that
such interest must be of a direct and immediate character so that the intervenor will
either gain or lose by the direct legal operation of the judgment. The interest must be
actual and material, a concern which is more than mere curiosity, or academic or
sentimental desire; it must not be indirect and contingent, indirect and remote,
conjectural, consequential or collateral. However, notwithstanding the presence of a
legal interest, permission to intervene is subject to the sound discretion of the court, the
exercise of which is limited by considering "whether or not the intervention will unduly
delay or prejudice the adjudication of the rights of the original parties and whether or not
the intervenor’s rights may be fully protected in a separate proceeding.

The SC further held that although VMTA could always file a separate case against
Ortigas, original plaintiff in the case, allowing VMTA to intervene will facilitate the orderly
administration of justice and avoid a multiplicity of suits.

Meaning of legal interest

The interest which entitles a person to intervene in a suit must be on the matter in
litigation and of such direct and immediate character that the intervenor will either gain
or lose by the direct legal operation and effect of the judgment [1 Regalado 324-325,
citing 6318 v. Nocom, G.R. No. 175989 (2008)]

The interest must be actual and material, a concern which is more than mere curiosity,
or academic or sentimental desire; it must not be indirect and contingent, indirect and
remote, conjectural, consequential or collateral [Virra Mall Tenants v. Virra Mall, G.R.
No. 182902 (2011)]

Notwithstanding the presence of a legal interest, permission to intervene is subject to

the sound discretion of the court, the exercise of which is limited by considering
"whether or not the intervention will unduly delay or prejudice the adjudication of the
rights of the original parties and whether or not the intervenor’s rights may be fully
protected in a separate proceeding [Virra Mall Tenants v. Virra Mall, G.R. No. 182902
(2011)]

Time to intervene
The motion to intervene may be filed at any time before rendition of judgment by
the trial court. [Sec. 2, Rule 19]
How effected
a. By filing a motion to intervene,
b. Attaching a copy of the pleading-in- intervention, and c. Serving the motion and
pleading-in- intervention on the original parties [Sec. 2, Rule 19]

Pleadings-in-intervention
a. Complaint-in-intervention – If intervenor asserts a claim against either or all of the
original parties
b. Answer-in-intervention – If intervenor unites with the defending party in resisting a
claim against the latter [Sec. 3, Rule 19]
c. Answer to complaint-in-intervention - It shall be filed within 15 calendar days from
notice of the order admitting the complaint- in-intervention, unless a different period is
fixed by the court [Sec. 4, Rule 19]

Although Sec. 2, Rule 19 says the motion to intervene may be filed at any time before
rendition of judgment by the trial court, intervention was allowed even on appeal;
allowed to interven in a case pending before the SC; allowed after judgment where it is
necessary to protect some interest which cannot otherwise be protected; and, may be
allowed for the purpose of preserving the intervenor’s right to appeal.

In Pinlac v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 91486, September 10, 2003, the Republic
through the OSG intervened in the case when the petitioners’ motion for reconsideration
was pending before the SC. According to the SC, the rule on intervention, like all other
rules of procedure is intended to make the powers of the Court fully and completely
available for justice. It is aimed to facilitate a comprehensive adjudication of rival claims
overriding technicalities on the timeliness of the filing thereof. Indeed, in exceptional
cases, the Court has allowed intervention notwithstanding the rendition of judgment by
the trial court. In one case, intervention was allowed even when the petition for review of
the assailed judgment was already submitted for decision in the Supreme Court.

In Mago v. Court of Appeals, intervention was granted even after the decision became
final and executory, thus –...The permissive tenor of the provision on intervention shows
the intention of the Rules to give to the court the full measure of discretion in permitting
or disallowing the same. But needless to say, this discretion should be exercised
judiciously and only after consideration of all the circumstances obtaining in the case.

Remedy for the denial of motion to intervene

An improper denial of a motion for intervention is correctable by appeal [1 Regalado
324, 2010 Ed., citing Ortiz v. Trent, G.R. No. 5099 (1909) and Hospicio de San Jose v.
Piccio, G.R. No. L-8540 (1956)]

But if there is grave abuse of discretion, mandamus will lie, where there is no other
plain, speedy and adequate remedy [1 Regalado 324, 2010 Ed., citing Dizon v. Romero,
G.R. No. L-26252 (1968) and Macias v. Cruz, G.R. No. L-28947 (1973)]

Remedy for granting of the motion to intervene

An improper granting of a motion for intervention may be controlled by certiorari and
prohibition. [1 Regalado 324, 2010 Ed., citing Pflieder v. De Britanica, G.R. No. L-19077
(1964)]

Definition of Intervention A proceeding in a suit or an action by which a third person is

permitted by the court to make himself a party, either:
1. Joining plaintiff in claiming what is sought by the complaint,
2. Uniting with defendant in resisting the claims of the plaintiff, or
3. Demanding something adverse to both of them. [1 Herrera 1117, 2007 Ed., citing
Gutierrez v.Villegas, G.R. No. L-11848 (1962)].
- Intervention cannot alter the nature of the action and the issues already joined. [Castro
v. David, 100 Phil 454 (1956)]
- Intervention is never an independent action, but is ancillary and supplemental to the
existing litigation. [Saw vs CA, 195 SCRA 740]

Requisites:
1. A motion for leave to intervene filed at any time before rendition of judgement by the
trial court
2. A legal interest:
a. In the matter in litigation;
b. In the success of either of the parties;
c. An interest against both; or
d. So situated as to be adversely affected by a distribution or other disposition of
property in the custody of the court or of an officer thereof

3. Intervention will not unduly delay or prejudice the adjudication of rights of the original
parties
4. Intervenor’s rights may not be fully protected in a separate proceeding. [Sec. 1, Rule
19; Lorenza Ortega v. CA, G.R. No. 125302 (1998)]

Cases:
1. Office of the Ombudsman vs. Sison, 612 SCRA
Compare with Ombudsman vs. Chavez, 700 SCRA
OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN,
OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN, petitioner, v. ERNESTO M. DE CHAVEZ,
petitioner, v. MAXIMO D. SISON, ROLANDO L. LONTOC, SR., DR.
respondent PORFIRIO C. LIGAYA, ROLANDO L.
GR 185954 16 February 2010 LONTOC, JR. AND GLORIA M.
Petition for Review on Certiorari MENDOZA, respondents.
Velasco, Jr., J. GR 172206 3 July 2013
Petition for Review on Certiorari Peralta,
J.:
TOPIC: REQUISITES OF INTERVENTION TOPIC: MOTION TO INTERVENE AND
PRINCIPAL CASE FILED: The Isog Han JURISDICTION OF THE OMBUDSMAN
Samar Movement, represented by Fr. Noel
Labendia of the Diocese of Calbayog, PRINCIPAL CASE FILED: Respondents
Catbalogan, Samar, filed a letter-complaint filed a petition for injunction before the RTC
addressed to then Ombudsman, Hon. of Batangas City that the BSU-BOR should
Simeon Marcelo, accusing Governor be enjoined from enforcing the
Milagrosa T. Tan and other local public Ombudsman's Joint Decision and
officials of the Province of Samar, including Supplemental Resolution because the
respondent Maximo D. Sison the provincial same are still on appeal and, therefore, are
budget officer, of highly anomalous not yet final and executory.
transactions entered into by them
amounting to several millions of pesos.
DOCTRINE:
Intervention; Requisites;
To warrant intervention under Rule 19, two
requisites must concur: DOCTRINE:
(1) the movant has a legal interest in the GR: It is true that under our rule on
matter in litigation; and intervention, the allowance or
(2) intervention must not unduly delay or disallowance of a motion to intervene is
prejudice the adjudication of the rights of left to the sound discretion of the court
the parties, nor should the claim of the after a consideration of the appropriate
intervenor be capable of being properly circumstances.
 XPN: However, such discretion is not
decided in a separate proceeding.
without limitations. One of the limits in
the exercise of such discretion is that it
The interest, which entitles one to
must not be exercised in disregard of
intervene, must involve the matter in
law and the Constitution. The CA should
litigation and of such direct and immediate
have considered the nature of the
character that the intervenor will either gain
Ombudsman's powers as provided in
or lose by the direct legal operation and
the Constitution and RA 6770.
effect of the judgment.
The Ombudsman is in a league of its own.
Intervention Is Discretionary upon the
It is different from other investigatory and
Court
prosecutory agencies of the government
In its Decision, the CA did not allow the
because the people under its jurisdiction
Office of the Ombudsman to intervene,
are public officials who, through pressure
because:
and influence, can quash, delay or dismiss
investigations directed against them.
(1) the Office of the Ombudsman is not a
third party who has a legal interest in the
Its function is critical because public
administrative case against petitioner;
interest (in the accountability of public
officers and employees) is at stake. Hence,
(2) the Omnibus Motion for Intervention
as a competent disciplining body, the
was BELATEDLY filed after the CA
Ombudsman has the right to seek redress
rendered its Decision; and
on the apparently erroneous issuance by
this Honorable Court of the Writ of
(3) the Office of the Ombudsman was the
Preliminary Injunction enjoining the
quasi-judicial body which rendered the
implementation of the Ombudsman's Joint
impugned decision.
Decision.

MOTION TO INTERVENE ALLOWED:

The Office of the Ombudsman cannot be
detached, disinterested and neutral
specially when defending its decisions.

Moreover, the Office of the Ombudsman

had a clear legal interest in the inquiry into
whether respondent committed acts
MOTION TO INTERVENE NOT constituting grave misconduct, an offense
ALLOWED: punishable under the Uniform Rules in
The Office of the Ombudsman is not an Administrative Cases in the Civil Service.
appropriate party to intervene in the instant
case— it must be mindful of its role as an It was in keeping with its duty to act as a
adjudicator, not an advocate. champion of the people and preserve the
integrity of public service that petitioner had
to be given the opportunity to act fully within
the parameters of its authority.

The CA should have considered the

nature of the Ombudsman's powers as
provided in the Constitution and RA
6770.

2. Anonuevo vs. Intestate Estate of Jalandoni, 636 SCRA

TOPIC: INTERVENTION: Who can Intervene
PRINCIPAL CASE FILED: BERNARDINO G. JALANDONI representing the estste of
his late brother Rodolfo filed at the RTC a petition for issuance of Letters of
Administration for the property of his late brother.
DOCTRINE:
A court’s power to allow or deny intervention is circumscribed by the basic demand of
sound judicial procedure that only a person with interest in an action or proceeding may
be allowed to intervene. Otherwise stated, a court has no authority to allow a person,
who has no interest in an action or proceeding, to intervene therein

When a court commits a mistake and allows an uninterested person to intervene in a

case—the mistake is not simply an error of judgment, but one of jurisdiction. In such
event, the allowance is made in excess of the court’s jurisdiction and can only be the
product of an exercise of discretion gravely abused. That kind of error may be reviewed
in a special civil action for certiorari.

While a marriage certificate is considered the primary evidence of a marital union, it is

not regarded as the sole and exclusive evidence of marriage. Jurisprudence teaches
that the fact of marriage may be proven by relevant evidence other than the marriage
certificate. Hence, even a0 person’s birth certificate may be recognized as competent
evidence of the marriage between his parents.

The inability of the petitioners and their siblings to present evidence to prove that
Isabel‘s prior marriage was dissolved results in a failure to establish that she has
interest in the estate of Rodolfo.

Clearly, an intervention by the petitioners and their siblings in the settlement

proceedings cannot be justified.

3. Rodriguez vs. CA, 698 SCRA 352

TOPIC: intervention Beyond the Prescribed Period in exceptional circumstances.
PRINCIPAL CASE FILED: Purita Landicho filed before the CFI of Rizal an Application
for Registration of a piece of land located in San Mateo, Rizal
DOCTRINE:
Interventions have been allowed even beyond the period prescribed in the Rule, when
demanded by the higher interest of justice. Interventions have also been granted to
afford indispensable parties, who have not been impleaded, the right to be heard even
after a decision has been rendered by the trial court, when the petition for review of the
judgment has already been submitted for decision before the Supreme Court, and even
where the assailed order has already become final and executory. Its purpose is not to
hinder or delay, but to facilitate and promote the administration of justice.

Although Rule 19 is explicit on the period when a motion to intervene may be filed, the
Court allowed exceptions in several cases, viz.: This rule, however, is not inflexible.
Interventions have been allowed even beyond the period prescribed in the Rule, when
demanded by the higher interest of justice.

Interventions have also been granted to afford indispensable parties, who have not
been impleaded, the right to be heard even after a decision has been rendered by the
trial court, when the petition for review of the judgment has already been submitted for
decision before the Supreme Court, and even where the assailed order has already
become final and executory.

4. Fernandez vs. CA, 691 SCRA 167

TOPIC: NON PARTIES/STRANGERS
Persons who are not parties to any of the consolidated petitions have no
personality to assail the said injunctive writ.
PRINCIPAL CASE FILED: Corazon H. Ricafort (CH Ricafort), Jose Manuel H. Ricafort
(JM Ricafort), Marie Grace H. Ricafort (MG Ricafort), and Maria Teresa R. Santos (MT
Santos) (plaintiffs Ricafort), wife and children of JG Ricafort, claiming to be stockholders
of record, sought to annul the said meeting by filing SEC Case No. 11-164 in the
Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Pasig City, Branch 159.
DOCTRINE:
Section 1 of Rule 19 of the Rules of Court provides that a person who has a legal
interest in the matter in litigation, or in the success of either of the parties, or an interest
against both, or is so situated as to be adversely affected by a distribution or other
disposition of property in the custody of the court or of an officer thereof may, with leave
of court, be allowed to intervene in the action.

Conversely, a person who is not a party in the main suit cannot be bound by an ancillary
writ, such as a preliminary injunction. Indeed, he cannot be affected by any proceeding
to which he is a stranger. Moreover, a person not an aggrieved party in the original
proceedings that gave rise to the petition for certiorari, will not be permitted to bring the
said action to annul or stay the injurious writ.

5. Yao vs. Perello, 414 SCRA

TOPIC: INTERVENTION OF A CREDITOR
PRINCIPAL CASE FILED: A complaint a rescission of a contract to sell filed by
petitioner Yao before the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB) against a
certain corporation, PR Builders, Inc. and its managers, Enrico Baluyot and Pablito
Villarin, private respondent‘s/ Bernadine Villarin‘s husband.
DOCTRINE:
To allow intervention, it must be shown that:
(a) the movant has a legal interest in the matter in litigation or otherwise qualified, and
(b) consideration must be given as to whether the adjudication of the rights of the
original parties may be delayed or prejudiced, or whether the intervenor's rights may be
protected in a separate proceeding or not.

Both requirements must concur as the first is not more important than the second.

Consequently, petitioner‘s claim that he had the right to intervene is without basis.
Nothing in the said provision requires the inclusion of a private party as respondent in
petitions for prohibition.

In the case at bar, it cannot be said that petitioners right as a judgment creditor
was adversely affected by the lifting of the levy on the subject real property.
Records reveal that there are other pieces of property exclusively owned by the
defendants in the HLURB case that can be levied upon.

As provided in the Rules of Court, the motion for intervention may be filed at any time
before rendition of judgment by the trial court.

The mere fact that petitioner failed to move for the reconsideration of the trial courts
resolution is sufficient cause for the outright dismissal of the instant petition. Certiorari
as a special civil action will not lie unless a motion for reconsideration is first
filed before the respondent court to allow it an opportunity to correct its errors, if
any.

6. Pinlac vs. CA, 410 SCRA

TOPIC: Intervention of the LRA.
PRINCIPAL ACTION FILED: A Petition for Quieting of Title filed by petitioners Pinlac et
al over 3 vast parcels of land in Quezon City known as Lot Nos. 1, 2 & 3. Lot No. 1 is
covered by TCT No. 5690, while Lot Nos. 2 and 3 were originally covered by OCT No.
614 and OCT No. 333, respectively.
DOCTRINE:
The rule on intervention is intended to make the powers of the Court fully and
completely available for justice. It is aimed to facilitate a comprehensive adjudication of
rival claims overriding technicalities on the timeliness of the filing.

Indeed, in exceptional cases, the Court has allowed intervention notwithstanding the
rendition of judgment by the trial court. In one case, intervention was allowed even
when the petition for review of the assailed judgment was already submitted for decision
in the Supreme Court.

The intervention of the Republic is necessary to protect public interest as well as

government properties located and projects undertaken on Lot No. 3.

The Constitutional mandate that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or

property without due process of law can certainly be invoked by the Republic
which is an indispensable party to the case at bar.

As correctly pointed out by the Solicitor General, while the provision is intended
as a protection of individuals against arbitrary action of the State, it may also be
invoked by the Republic to protect its properties

7. Chipongian vs. Benitez-Lirio -768 SCRA 204

TOPIC: INVTERVENTION
PRINCIPAL ACTION FILED: Upon the death of Vicente, respondent Victoria, sister of
Vicente, and Feodor Aguilar, nephew of Vicente, started proceedings for the settlement
of the estate of Vicente in the RTC.
DOCTRINE:
Intervention is "a remedy by which a third party, not originally impleaded in the
proceedings, becomes a litigant therein to enable him, her or it to protect or preserve a
right or interest which may be affected by such proceedings." If an intervention makes a
third party a litigant in the main proceedings, his pleading- in-intervention should form
part of the main case.

Accordingly, when the petitioner intervened in Special Proceedings No. SP -797, his
complaint-in-intervention, once admitted by the RTC, became part of the main case,
rendering any final disposition thereof subject to the rules specifically applicable to
special proceedings, including Rule 109 of the Rules of Court, which deals with appeals
in special proceedings.

Section 1 of Rule 41 enunciates the final judgment rule by providing that an appeal
„may be taken from a judgment or final order that completely disposes of the case, or of
a particular matter therein when declared by these Rules to be appealable. In the
context of the final judgment rule, Section 1 of Rule 109 does not limit the appealable
orders and judgments in special proceedings to the final order or judgment rendered in
the main case, but extends the remedy of appeal to other orders or dispositions that
completely determine a particular matter in the case.

The proper mode of appealing a judgment or final order in special proceedings is by

notice of appeal and record on appeal. This is pursuant to Section 2(a), Rule 41 of the
Rules of Court, viz.: Section 2. Modes of appeal. ·(a) Ordinary appeal. The appeal to the
Court of Appeals in cases decided by the Regional Trial Court in the exercise of its
original jurisdiction shall be taken by filing a notice of appeal with the court which
rendered the judgment or final order appealed from and serving a copy thereof upon the
adverse party. No record on appeal shall be required except in special proceedings and
other cases of multiple or separate appeals where the law or these Rules so require. In
such cases, the record on appeal shall be filed and served in like manner.
Considering that the petitioner did not submit a record on appeal in accordance with
Section 3 of Rule 41, he did not perfect his appeal of the judgment dismissing his
intervention. As a result, the dismissal became final and immutable. He now has no one
to blame but himself. The right to appeal, being statutory in nature, required strict
compliance with the rules regulating the exercise of the right. As such, his perfection of
his appeal

XVI. RULES 20 to 22:

NOTES:
A. Calendar of Cases (Sections 1-2)

Section 1. Calendar of cases. – The clerk of court, under the direct supervision of the
judge, shall keep a calendar of cases for pre-trial, for trial, those whose trials were
adjourned or postponed, and those with motions to set for hearing. Preference shall be
given to habeas corpus cases, election cases, special civil actions, and those so
required by law.

Section 2. Assignment of cases. – The assignment of cases to the different branches of

a court shall be done exclusively by raffle. The assignment shall be done in open
session of which adequate notice shall be given so as to afford interested parties the
opportunity to be present. (2)

B. Subpoena (Sections 1-10)

Definition
A process directed to a person requiring him or her:
1. To attend and to testify at the hearing or the
trial of an action, or at any investigation conducted by competent authority, or for the
taking of his or her deposition
2. Also to bring any books, documents, or other things under his or her control. [Sec. 1,
Rule 21]

Subpoena Summons
A process directed to a person requiring A direction that the defendant answer
him to attend and to testify. It may also within the time fixed by the ROC [Sec. 2,
require him to bring with him any books, Rule 14]
documents, or other things under his
control [Sec. 1, Rule 21]
Directed to a person [Sec. 1, Rule 21] Directed to the defendant [Sec. 2, Rule
14]
Costs for court attendance and the Tender of costs not required by Rule 14
production of documents and other
materials subject of the subpoena shall
be tendered or charged accordingly. [Sec.
6, Rule 21]

Who may issue

1. Court before whom the witness is required to attend
2. Court of the place where the deposition is to be taken
3. Officer or body authorized by law to do so in connection with investigations
conducted by said officer or body, or
4. Any justice of the SC or of the CA, in any case or investigation pending within the
Philippines. [Sec. 2, Rule 21]
Form and contents
1. Shall state the name of the court and the title of the action or investigation
2. Shall be directed to the person whose attendance is required
3. For subpoena duces tecum, shall also contain a reasonable description of the books,
documents or things demanded which must appear to the court prima facie relevant.
[Sec. 3, Rule 21]

When issued against prisoners

When applied for, the judge or officer shall examine and study carefully the application
to determine whether it is made for a valid purpose. [Sec. 2, Rule 21]

When Supreme Court authorization required

When the subpoena for appearance or attendance in any court is issued against a
prisoner:
1. Sentenced to death, reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment, and
2. Confined in any penal institution. [Sec. 2, Rule 21]

Personal appearance in court; same effect as subpoena

A person present in court before a judicial officer may be required to testify as if he or
she were in attendance upon a subpoena. [Sec 7, Rule 21]

Subpoena for depositions

Proof of service of notice to take a deposition shall constitute sufficient authorization for
the issuance of subpoenas for the persons named in such notice.
Note: In order to issue a subpoena duces tecum, an order of the court shall be
necessary. [Sec 5, Rule 21]

Viatory Right
- The right not to be compelled to attend upon a subpoena by reason of the distance
from the residence
of the witness to the place where he is to testify is sometimes called the viatory right of
a witness [1
Regalado 334-335, 2010 Ed.]
- Note: Such right applies only in civil cases, not criminal cases. [Genorga v. Quitain,
A.M. No. 981-CFI
(1977)]

Subpoena duces tecum

A process directed to a person requiring him to bring with him books, documents, or
other things under his control [Sec. 1, Rule 21]

The subpoena duces tecum is, in all respects, like the ordinary subpoena ad
testificandum, with the exception that it concludes with an injunction that the witness
shall bring with him and produce at the examination the books, documents, or things
described in the subpoena [see Sec. 1, Rule 21]

Note the requirements for a subpoena duces tecum, see item (3) of “Form and
contents” above.

Grounds for quashal of subpoenas: If subpoena duces tecum, it may be quashed on the
ground that
(a) it is unreasonable and oppressive;
(b) the relevancy of the books, documents or things does not appear;
(c) if the person in whose behalf the subpoena is issued fails to advance the reasonable
cost of the production thereof; or,
(d) the witness fees and kilometrage allowed by the Rules were not tendered when the
subpoena was served Subpoena ad testificandum

A process directed to a person requiring him to attend and to testify at the hearing or the
trial of an action, or at any investigation conducted by competent authority or for the
taking of his deposition [Sec. 1, Rule 21]
Note: This is the technical and descriptive term for the ordinary subpoena. [1 Regalado
330, 2010 Ed.]

Grounds for quashal of subpoenas: If subpoena ad testificandum, it may be quashed on

the ground that
(a) the witness is not bound thereby; or
(b) the witness fees and kilometrage allowed by the Rules were not tendered when the
subpoena was served.

Service of subpoena
Service of a subpoena shall be made in the same manner as personal or substituted
service of summons [Sec. 6, Rule 21]

Formalities
a. The original is exhibited to the person served;
b. A copy is delivered to him; and
c. Costs for court attendance and the production of documents and other materials
subject of the subpoena shall be tendered or charged accordingly. [Sec. 6, Rule 21]

When made: must be made so as to allow the witness a reasonable time for preparation
and travel to the place of attendance [Sec. 6, Rule 21]

Compelling attendance of witnesses; contempt

The court which issued the subpoena may issue a warrant to the sheriff or his or her
deputy to arrest the witness and to bring him or her before the court or officer where his
or her attendance is required, upon
a. Proof of service, and
b. Failure of witness to attend. [Sec. 8, Rule 21] Costs

The cost of such warrant and seizure of such witness shall be paid by the witness if the
court issuing it shall determine that his or her failure to answer the subpoena was willful
and without just excuse [Sec. 8, Rule 21]

Failure to obey
Effect of failure by any person without adequate cause to obey a subpoena served upon
him or her:
a. Contempt of court who issued the subpoena, or
b. Punishment in accordance with the applicable law or rule if the subpoena was not
issued by a court. [Sec. 9, Rule 21]

When Sec. 8 and Sec. 9 will not apply

Provisions regarding the compelling of attendance and contempt shall not apply to a:
a. Witness who resides more than 100 km from his or her residence to the place where
he or she is to testify by the ordinary course of travel; or
b. Detention prisoner if no permission of the court in which his or her case is pending
was obtained. [Sec. 10, Rule 21]

Quashing of subpoena
For quashing subpoena duces tecum
1. A motion is promptly made and, in any event, at or before the time specified therein
2. Grounds
a. Subpoena is unreasonable and oppressive, or
b. Relevancy of the books, documents or things does not appear, or
c. Person in whose behalf the subpoena is issued fails to advance the reasonable cost
of the production thereof
d. Witness fees and kilometrage allowed by these Rules were not tendered when the
subpoena was served. [Sec. 4, Rule 21]

For quashing subpoena ad testificandum

a. Witness is not bound thereby, or
b. Witness fees and kilometrage allowed by the ROC were not tendered when the
subpoena was served. [Sec. 4, Rule 21]

C. Computation of Time (Sections1-2)

RULE 22 COMPUTATION OF TIME

Applicability
In computing any period of time:
a. Prescribed or allowed by the Rules,
b. By order of the court, or
c. By any applicable statute. [Sec. 1, Rule 22]

How to compute time

The day of the act/event from which the designated period begins to run is the excluded
and the date of performance included.
Note: If the last day of the period falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday in the
place where the court sits, the time shall not run until the next working day. [Sec. 1,
Rule 22]

Effect of interruption
Should an act be done which interrupts the running of the period, the allowable period
after such interruption shall start to run on the day after notice of cessation of the cause
thereof.
Note: The day of the act that caused the interruption, shall be excluded in the
computation of the period. [Sec. 2, Rule 22]