Remedial Law} Review Notes of Prof Domondon} Made 2001} 180 Pages

8/13/2019 Remedial Law} Review Notes of Prof Domondon} Made 2001} 180 Pages

1/180

EMEDIAL LAW by

ABELARDO T. DOMONDON

HOW TO USE THE PRE-WEEK NOTES

This work does not use the conventional method o discussin! the sub"ect on a#Rule by Rule$ %ection by %ection# method. &nstead$ it uses the 'rocedural a''roach$

which tries to 'resent$ as ar as 'racticable$ the ste's to be ollowed in the 'rosecutionor deense o actions. The words in bold are the e(act wordin!s o the Rules o)ourt$ so the reader does not have to cross*reer to the codal 'rovisions. +here thereader is 'ressed or time he should read only the main headin!s in bold letters and

browse the te(t.

There are certain analytical 'rocesses that must be undertaken in order to solveact centered Bar ,uestions. The 'rocesses 'oint the direction as to how the Barcandidate should analy-e the Bar ,uestions and how he should ormulate his answer.

&t is su!!ested that the reader should master the 'rocesses by a''lyin! theconce'ts contained in the re*+eek Notes..

There are two !rou's o ,uestions that are usually asked in )ivil rocedure$rovisional Remedies$ %'ecial )ivil Actions$ %'ecial roceedin!s and )riminalrocedure. These two !rou's could be analy-ed by answerin! certain ,uestions.

1. ANALYTICAL QUESTIONS FOR SOLVING FACT CENTERED

PROBLEMS IN CIVIL PROCEDURE, PROVISIONAL REMEDIES,

SPECIAL CIVIL ACTIONS, SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS AND CRIMINAL

PROCEDURE.

/or the /&R%T 0RO1$ the ollowin! ,uestions need to be answered2a. +hat is the sta!e o the 'roceedin!s 3

b. +hat does the e(aminer want 345 +ere 'rior 'rocedures correctly ollowed 365 +hat succeedin! 'rocedural ste's should be undertaken 3

The resolution o the %E)OND 0RO1 re,uires res'onses to the ollowin!2

a. 7as the 'roceedin!s been 'ro'erly commenced 3b. Are the 'arties and 'leadin!s correct 3c. &s there an issue concernin! 're*trial 'roceedin!s 3d. Are there 'roblems with the trial or "ud!ment 3e. Do 'ost*trial issues e(ist 3


2/180

2. FACT CENTERED PROBLEMS IN EVIDENCE MAY BE RESOLVED

BY ANSWERING THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS:

/act centered 'roblems in Evidence may be resolved by answerin! the ollowin!,uestions2

a. +hat is the 'ur'ose o the oer 3b. &s the evidence described in the 'roblem relevant 3c. &s the evidence e(cluded by any 'rovision o law or s'eciic 'rovision

o the Rules o )ourt 3d. & the evidence is e(cluded by any 'rovision o law or s'eciic

'rovision o the Rules o )ourt does it all under any e(ce'tion which couldresult in its admission 3

e. &s the wei!ht o evidence re,uired to 'rove a act met3

+hen readin! the re*+eek Notes$ the Bar candidate should cover the te(t$

look at the headin! in bold letters and should try to recollect the conce'ts. 7e thenremoves the cover and checks i his recollection is accurate.

& he has time the Bar candidate should write down the answers to the Reviewroblems to test his ability to recollect and write down answers within the timelimitation. Each ,uestion should be answered in si( 895 minutes. The Reviewroblems are the author:s orecasted ,uestions. &t is to be noted that some o theReview roblems were co'ied rom 'revious Bar ;uestions.

CIVIL P OCEDU EGENE AL P INCIPLES

1. What is the object of remedial law ?

%100E%TED AN%+ER2 The ob"ect o 'rocedural law is not to cause undue'rotraction o the liti!ation$ but

a. to acilitate the ad"udication o conlictin! claims andb. to serve$ rather than deeat$ the ends o "ustice. 8%anto Tomas 1niversity 7os'ital

v. %urla$ et al.$ 0.R. No. 46$ 'rom. Au!ust 4=$ 4


3/180

c. or the 'ur'ose o enorcin! ri!hts or obtainin! redress or the invasion o ri!hts.

THE ULE- MAKING POWE OF THESUP EME COU T

COU TS, IN GENE AL. What is the function of courts ?

%100E%TED AN%+ER2The unction o courts is to decide actual controversies$a''lyin! the law$ and not to !ive o'inions u'on abstract 'ro'ositions. 80uarduno v. Dia-$9 hil. =65 They a''ly or inter'ret the laws. They do not ormulate 'olicy$ which is the'rovince o the le!islative and e(ecutive branches o !overnment. 8a!'alain 7aulers$ &nc.v. 7onorable Tra"ano$ etc.$ et al.$ 0.R. No. 4CC64$ 'rom. uly 4$ 4


4/180

45 The )ourt o A''eals may entertain a second motion or reconsiderationo its decision althou!h the ilin! o such motion violates a 'rohibition thereo. 8Laov. )ourt o A''eals$ $ et al.$ 0.R. No. =4CG )o v. )ourt o A''eals$ et al.$ 0.R. No.99=G and the Associated An!lo*American Tobacco )or'oration v. )ourt oA''eals$ et al.$ 0.R. Nos. 9*


5/180

d. C)!"! 78"%" +8" R$6"! o P%o#"$%" o 'o+ )6. The Rules o )ivilrocedure !enerally do not a''ly to land re!istration cadastral and election codes$naturali-ation and im'lementin! 'rocedures e(ce't by analo!y or in a su''letory characterand whenever 'racticable and convenient. Election contests are sub"ect to the )omelecRules o 'rocedure. 8Barrosa v. 7on. Am'i! r.$ etc.$ et al.$ 0.R. No. 4C>64>$ 'rom. March

4=$ 65E(am'les245 The su''letory a''lication o the non*orum sho''in! re,uirements under

the Rules o )ivil rocedure to election cases does not automatically warrant thedismissal o the case with 're"udice. Reason2 %trict a''lication o the non*orumsho''in! rule would not work to the best interest o the 'arties and the electorate.

An election contest$ unlike an ordinary civil action$ is clothed with 'ublicinterest. The 'ur'ose o an election 'rotest is to ascertain whether the candidate'roclaimed by the board o canvassers is the lawul choice o the 'eo'le. Anelection contest involves not only the ad"udication o 'rivate and 'ecuniary onterestso rival candidates but 'aramount to their claims is the dee' 'ublic concern involved

and the need o dis'ellin! the uncertainty over the real choice o the electorate.8&bid.565 The a''ellate court could consider documents attached to the stateKs brie

in an a''ealed naturali-ation case$ even i not 'resented and oered as evidence inthe trial court as re,uired under %ec. C$ Rule 4C6. The reason or the rule'rohibitin! the admission o evidence not ormally oered is to aord the o''osite'arty the chance to ob"ect to their admisibility. There is no denial o due 'rocessbecause ob"ections to the authenticity o the documents could have been made in thebries iled with the a''ellate court. 8)hia v. Re'ublic$ et al.$ 0.R. No. 46=6$'rom. March 6=$ 65

9. What is the etent of judicial power

%100E%TED AN%+ER2 &t includes the duty o the courts o "ustice to settleactual controversies involvin! ri!hts which are le!ally demandable and enorceable.8Article J&&&$ %ection 4$ 4= hili''ine )onstitution5

;. What is a !uasi"judicial function?

%100E%TED AN%+ER2 A 'ower that rests in "ud!ment or discretion$ so that it iso "udicial nature or character$ but does not involve the e(ercise o unctions o a "ud!e$ or isconerred u'on an oicer other than a "udicial oicer. 8%andoval v. )ommission onElections$ et al.$ 0.R. No. 4CC>6$ 'rom. anuary 69$ 65 NOTE% AND )OMMENT%2 A ,uasi*"udicial tribunal cannot i!nore there,uirements o 'rocedural due 'rocess in resolvin! 'etitions. 8&bid.5

CIVIL P OCEDU E, IN GENE ALTHE FLOW OF CIVIL P OCEDU E.

)ivil 'rocedure is basically a ste' by ste' activity which a student should master in orderto !ras' the whole 'icture$ as well the various interrelated sub"ects.

This is so$ because certain 'rocedures occur rom time to time while the action or suit isbein! heard. /or e(am'le$ dierent kinds o motions may be iled. /urthermore$ certainacts could be done only within certain re!lementary 'eriods which i not com'lied with mayresult to denial by the court o 'rayers or relie.

&t is or these reasons the Notes avoid usin! the conventional method o discussin! thesub"ect matter on a #Rule by Rule$ %ection by %ection# method. &nstead it uses the'rocedural a''roach$ which tries to 'resent$ as ar as 'racticable$ the ste's to be ollowed inthe 'rosecution or deense o causes o actions.

The ollowin! outline may be reerred to as the #/low o )ivil rocedure$# that shouldbe mastered by the student in order to have a thorou!h !ras' o the interrelationshi's amon!the conce'ts discussed.


6/180

BEFORE FILING THE SUIT

A. &n 0eneral2 The criteria or invokin! "udicial 'rocess 4. Actions in !eneral

a. &s there a cause o action 3

) b. Does the ri!ht o action subsist 3 Do the ollowin! e(ist 3 45 Esto''el65 LachesC5 rescri'tion5 /orum sho''in!5 Res "udicata

6. Are there available ade,uate relies and remedies3a. &s there a need or 'rovisional remedies 3

B. +ho are the 'arties to a suit 345 arties in !eneral65 )riteria or invokin! "udicial 'rocess

a. Threshold re,uirements45 Le!al ca'acity65 Real 'arty in interestC5 Locus standi

C5 oinder o 'artiesa. inds o 'artiesb. oinder o initial 'arties

45 )om'ulsory "oinder65 ermissive "oinder

c. &m'leader45 Third*ourth$ etc. 'arty

d. %'ecial "oinder devices45 )lass suit65 &nterventionC5 &nter'leader

). Determine a''lication o doctrine o 'reconditions$ 'rior resort$ alternativemodes o dis'ute resolution$

4. )om'romise6. Katarunggang PambarangayC. E(haustion o administrative remedies. Arbitration and alternative modes o dis'ute resolution

D. %election o court4. Dierent kinds o civil actions

a. Ordinary and s'ecialb. In rem$ in personam$ quasi-in remc. Real$ 'ersonald. Local and transitory

6. 7ierarchy o courtsC. urisdiction. Jenue. %ummary 'rocedure

E. leadin!s and motions4. leadin!s in !eneral

a. /ormal Re,uirementsb. Manner o makin! alle!ations in 'leadin!s

6. The com'lainta. oinder o causes o action

45 ermissive65 )om'ulsory

C. /ilin! and service o 'leadin!s and other 'a'ers. Motions in !eneral

9


7/180

a. /ilin!$ service and hearin! o motions/. De'ositions and discoveries

FILING OF THE ACTION.

A. )ommencement o the action

B. Docket ees). Rale o cases

AFTER FILING OF THE SUIT

A. Obtainin! "urisdiction over 'arties4. %ummons in !eneral6. Methods o service

B. Motions that may be iled by the 'lainti4. To withdraw com'laint or to dismiss6. To amend or su''lement the com'laint

AFTER SERVICE OF SUMMONS BUT BEFORE ANSWERA. laintiKs notices$ motions and others4. To withdraw com'laint6. To amend or su''lement the com'laintC. To declare in deault O''osition to deendant:s various motions

B. DeendantKs motions and 'leadin!s ater service o summons but beore answer4. Motions

a. /or bill o 'articularsb. To e('un!e the com'laint or 'ortions thereoc. To dismissd. /or e(tension o time to ile answere. Lit order o deault

6. leadin!sa. Answerb. )ounterclaimc. Third*arty com'laind. )ross*claim

C. Othersa. De'ositions and discoveriesb. O''ositions to 'lainti:s various motions

AFTER DEFENDANT


8/180

a. re*trial brieb. De'osition and discoveries

PRE-TRIAL

A. lainti:s motions

4. To 'resent evidence ex-parte and render "ud!mentB. Deendant:s motion4. Motion to dismiss

). )ommon motions4. To 'ost'one6. /or consolidation or severanceC. /or trial by commissioner

E. E('andin! the sco'e o the suit4. oinder o claims or causes o action6. oinder o 'arties

DEPOSITIONS AND DISCOVERIESA. De'ositionsB. &nterro!atories to 'arties). Admission by adverse 'artyD. roduction or ins'ection o thin!s or documentsE. hysical and mental e(amination o 'ersons

TRIAL.

A. Trial4. Order o trial

B. )ommon motions4. To 'ost'one6. To amend to conorm to evidence

AFTER TRIAL, BEFORE =UDGMENT

A. )ommon motion4. To submit memorandum

B .DeendantKs motion6. /or "ud!ment on demurrer to evidence

=UDGMENT

AFTER =UDGMENT.A. )ommon motions

4. /or reconsideration6. /or new trial

B. Others4. Notice o a''eal6. etition or relie rom "ud!ment

APPEAL

A. &n !eneral4. reliminary conce'ts6. Modes and 'eriods o a''eals

B. A''eals rom "ud!ments or inal orders o munici'al trial courts4. &n !eneral6. rocedure or a''eals o "ud!ments o munici'al trial courts in e(ercise o

ori!inal "urisdictionC. rocedure or a''eals o decisions o munici'al trial courts in e(ercise o

dele!ated "urisdiction). A''eals rom decisions o the Re!ional Trial )ourts

>


9/180

4. &n !eneral6. rocedure or ordinary a''eals o decisions o the Re!ional Trial )ourt in

e(ercise o its ori!inal "urisdiction to the )ourt o A''eals. etition or review rom decisions o the Re!ional Trial )ourt in the

e(ercise

o its a''ellate "urisdiction to the )ourt o A''eals. etition or certiorari to the %u'reme )ourtD. A''eals rom decisions o the )ourt o Ta( A''eals and ,uasi*"udicial a!encies

4. &n !eneral6. etition or review to the )ourt o A''ealsC. etition or certiorari to the %u'reme )ourt

E. A''eals rom decisions o the )ourt o A''eals4. &n !eneral6. A''eal by certiorari to the %u'reme )ourt

E>ECUTIONS AND SATISFACTION OF =UDGMENTS

A. &n !eneral4. )once'ts6. inds o e(ecution

a. E(ecution as a matter o ri!htb. Discretionary e(ecution

C. 7ow e(ecution is eected$ in !eneral. ro'erties e(em't rom e(ecution

B. rocedure or e(ecution4. &n case o death o 'arty6. /or "ud!ments or moneyC. O "ud!ment or s'eciic act. O s'ecial "ud!ments

). E(ecution sales4. %ales on e(ecution6. )onveyance o 'ro'erty sold on e(ecutionC. Redem'tion o 'ro'erty sold on e(ecution

D. Remedies o "ud!ment creditor in aid o e(ecutionE. %atisaction o "ud!ment

BEFO E FILING THE SUITIS THE E A CAUSE OF ACTION ?The 'rimary criteria that must be com'lied with beore ilin! a suit is the e(istenceo a cause o action by the suitor a!ainst the adverse 'arty. +ithout a cause o action thesuit must ail because the com'laint would be susce'tible to the threshold deense o amotion to dismiss or the lack o cause o action could be raised in the answer.

The two deenses a!ainst lack o a cause o action$ are thereore2a. A motion to dismiss$ orb. As an airmative deense in an answer.

& the lack o cause o action is a''arent on the ace o the com'laint or otherinitiatory 'leadin!$ then a motion to dismiss may be iled on the !round$ T8)+ +8" 6")&'()!!"%+&'( +8" #6)&5 !+)+"! 'o #)$!" o )#+&o'. 8%ec. 4 ?!@. Rule 49$ RO)5 On the other

hand i the !round is not raised in a motion to dismiss it 5) ?" 6")" )! )' )&%5)+&0"""'!" &' +8" )'!7"% )', &' +8" &!#%"+&o' o +8" #o$%+, ) %"6&5&')% 8")%&'( 5) ?"8) +8"%"o' )! & ) 5o+&o' +o &!5&!! 8) ?""' &6". 84st 'ar.$ %ec. 9$ Rule 49$ RO)5

O course$ even i the lack o cause o action is not a''arent on the ace o thecom'laint or initiatory 'leadin!$ but the same is 'leaded in an answer then ailure on the 'arto com'lainant 8the 'lainti5 to show the e(istence o a cause o action durin! the course othe trial would ultimately lead to a dismissal o his com'laint.


10/180

@. What are the elements of a cause of action ?

%100E%TED AN%+ER2 The elements o a cause o action are2a. A le!al %&(8+in avor o the 'lainti by whatever means and under whatever law

it arises or it createsGb. A correlative obli!ation on the 'art o the named deendant to res'ect or not to

violate this ri!htGc. An act or omission on the 'art o such deendant 0&o6)+&0"o the ri!ht o the'lainti or constitutin! a breach o the obli!ation o the deendant to the 'lainti 8Re'ubliclanters Bank$ et al.$ v. &A)$ et al.$ 4C4 %)RA 9C


11/180

(1%012.13% but '() demanded from him a chec of (/,%+++.++ which would include his

future bills% and was threatenin# to suspend his credit card. &tty. Ricardo issued a

December /,% /010 postdated chec in the amount of (/,%+++.++ which was received by

an employee of '() on 4ovember 5*% /010.

-n 4ovember 51% /010 '() sent a letter to &tty. Ricardo by ordinary mail

informin# him of the temporary suspension of his credit card privile#es and unless hesettles his account within , days from receipt of the letter% his membership will be

permanently cancelled. $here is no showin# that &tty. Ricardo received the letter before

December 1% /010.

Confident that he had settled his account with the issuance of the postdated chec%

&tty. Ricardo invited some #uests on December 1% /010 and entertained them at Cafe

&driatico. When he presented his credit card for the bill amountin# to (2*,.*5% said card

was dishonored. -ne of the #uests% Mary Ellen% paid the bill usin# a 6nibanard.

6nder the circumstances% is &tty. Ricardo entitled to dama#es as a result of the

social humiliation and embarrassment he suffered ?

%100E%TED AN%+ER2 No. &t was Atty. Ricardo:s ailure to settle his obli!ation

which caused the sus'ension o his credit card and subse,uent dishonor at )ae Adriatico.7e can not now 'ass the blame to B& or not notiyin! him o the sus'ension o his card.As shown by the acts$ the a''lication contained the sti'ulation that B& could automaticallysus'end a card whose billin! has not been 'aid or more than thirty days.

As a matter o act$ as early as 6> October 4


12/180

DOES THE IGHT OF ACTION STILL SUBSIST ? E%TOEL

1. What is meant by the doctrine of estoppel ?

%100E%TED AN%+ER2 An admission or re'resentation is rendered conclusiveu'on the 'erson makin! it and cannot be denied or dis'roved as a!ainst the 'erson makin!it$ and cannot be denied or dis'roved as a!ainst the 'erson relyin! thereon. A 'arty havin!'erormed airmative acts u'on which another 'erson based his subse,uent actions$ cannotthereore reute his acts or rene!e on the eects o the same$ to 're"udice o the latter.8Ducat v. )ourt o A''eals$ et al.$ 0.R. No. 44**4C>$ 'rom. anuary 6$ 65 NOTE% AND )OMMENT%2 a. E/)56" o "!+o"6. The trial court reerred the matter o a com'utation othe e(cess 'ayments to %0J. The Maniestation and 1r!ent Motion to %et arameters o)om'utation iled by the 'etitioner is indicative o his conormity with the order o the

reerral. & the 'etitioner thou!ht that the order was wron!$ he should have taken recourse tothe )ourt o A''eals. The 'etition cannot be allowed to make a mockery o "udicial'rocesses$ by chan!in! his 'osition rom one o a!reement to disa!reement$ to suit hisneeds. & the 'arties ac,uiesed in submittin! an issue or determination by the trial court$they are esto''ed rom ,uestionin! the "urisdiction o the same court to 'ass u'on the issue.8&bid.5 urisdiction over the 'erson must be seasonably raised$ i.e.$ that it is 'leaded in amotion to dismiss or by way o an airmative deense. Joluntary a''earance shall bedeemed a waiver o this deense. 7owever$ assertion o airmative deenses shall not beconstrued as esto''el or waiver o the deense o "urisdiction over the 'erson o thedeendant. Esto''el by "urisdiction must be une,uivocal and intentional. 8Millenium

&ndustrial )ommercial )or'oration v. tan$ 0.R. No. 4C4=6$ 'rom. /ebruary 6>$ 6 citin!La Naval Dru! )or'oration v. )ourt o A''eals$ et al.$ 0.R. No. 46=>$ 'rom. /ebruary6>$ 65

LA)7E%

13. What is laches ?

%100E%TED AN%+ER2 Laches is ne!li!ence or omission to assert a ri!ht withina reasonable time$ warrantin! the 'resum'tion that the 'arty entitled to assert it has eitherabandoned or declined to assert it.

a. E!!"'+&)6 "6"5"'+! o laches are2

845 conduct on the 'art o the deendant$ or o one under whom he claims$!ivin! rise to the situation com'lained oG

865 delay in assertin! com'lainantKs ri!ht ater he had knowled!e o thedeendantKs conduct and ater he has an o''ortunity to sueG

8C5 lack o knowled!e or notice on the 'art o the deendant that thecom'lainant would assert the ri!ht on which he bases his suitG and

85 in"ury or 're"udice to the deendant in the event relie is accorded to thecom'lainant. 8Maestrado$ etc. et al.$ v. )ourt o A''eals$ etc. et al.$ 0.R. No.4CCCG Maestrado$ et al. v.. Roa$ r.$ et al.$ 0.R. No. 4CCC6$ 'rom. March


13/180

c. P%"!#%&+&o' &!+&'($&!8" %o5 6)#8"!:45 rescri'tion is concerned with the act o delay +7&LE laches is

concerned with the eect.65 rescri'tion is a matter o time +7&LE laches is 'rinci'ally a ,uestion o

the ine,uity o 'ermittin! a claim to be enorced$ this ine,uity bein! ounded on

some chan!e in the condition o the 'arty or the relation o the 'arties.C5 rescri'tion is statutory +7&LE laches is not. Laches a''lies in e,uity+7&LE 'rescrit'ion a''lies at law.

C5 rescri'tion is based on i(ed time$ while laches is not. 8)utanda$ et al.$ v.7eirs o )utanda$ et al.$ 0.R. No. 4


14/180

instant case$ 'rescribes in 4 years rom date o issuance o decree o re!istration. 7owever$this rule does not a''ly when the 'lainti is in actual 'ossession o the land.

b. An action or the nulliication o a )ertiicate o %ale could not be instituted as thisis tantamount to invalidatin! a 'rivious declaration o the validity o an auction sale. The)ertiicate o %ale is "ust a certiication o what was done durin! th auction sale. 87eirs o

%eras'i v. )ourt o A''eals$ et al.$ 0.R. No. 4C96$ 'rom. A'ril 6>$ 65NOTE% AND )OMMENT%2 An action or reconveyance o a 'arcel o land basedon im'lied or constructive trust 'rescribes in ten 845 years$ the 'oint o reerence bein! thedate o re!istration o the deed or the date o the issuance o the certiicate o title over the'ro'erty$ but this rule a''lies only when the 'lainti or the 'erson enorcin! the trust is notin 'ossession o the 'ro'erty$ since i a 'erson claimin! to be the owner thereo is in actual'ossession o the 'ro'erty$ as the deendants are in the instant case$ the ri!ht to seekreconveyance$ which in eect seeks to ,uiet title to the 'ro'erty$ does not 'rescribe. T8"%")!o' o% +8&! &!that one who is in actual 'ossession o a 'iece o land claimin! to be theowner thereo may wait until his 'ossession is disturbed or his title is attacked beore takin!ste's to vindicate his ri!ht$ the reason or the rule bein!$ that his undisturbed 'ossession

!ives him a continuin! ri!ht to seek the aid o a court o e,uity to ascertain and determinethe nature o the adverse claim o a third 'arty and its eect on his own title$ which ri!ht canbe claimed only by one who is in 'ossession. The action or recovery o title or 'ossession o real 'ro'erty or an interest thereinwhich can only be brou!ht within ten 845 years ater the cause o action has accrued isac,uisitive$ not e(tinctive 'rescri'tion. /or e(tinctive 'rescri'tion$ the a''licable law isArticle 444 o the )ivil )ode which 'rovides that$ real actions over immovables 'rescribeater thirty 8C5 years$ without 're"udice to what is established or the ac,uisition oownershi' and other real ri!hts by 'rescri'tion. 87eirs o %eras'i v. )ourt o A''eals$ et al.$0.R. No. 4C96$ 'rom. A'ril 6>$ 65

Moreover$ i the 'lainti in an action or ,uietin! o title is in 'ossession o the'ro'erty bein! liti!ated$ such action is im'rescri'tible. One who is in actual 'ossession o aland$ claimin! to be the owner thereo may wait until his 'ossession is disturbed or his titleis attacked beore takin! ste's to vindicate his ri!ht because his undisturbed 'ossession!ives him a continuin! ri!ht to seek the aid o the courts to ascertain the nature o theadverse claim and its eects on his title. 8Maestrado$ etc. et al.$ v. )ourt o A''eals$ etc. etal.$ 0.R. No. 4CCCG Maestrado$ et al. J.. Roa$ r.$ et al.$ 0.R. No. 4CCC6$ 'rom. March


15/180

H;uestions necessarily involved in the decision on a ormer a''eal will be re!ardedas the la of te case on a subse,uent a''eal$ althou!h the ,uestions are not e('resslytreated in the o'inion o the court$ as the 'resum'tion is that all the acts in the case bearin!on the 'oint decided have received due consideration whether all or none o them arementioned in the o'inion.I 8 )..%. 46>9*>=5 8&talics su''lied5

LI/I$ P01201/IA

1. What is meant by litis pendentia as a #round for dismissal of actions ?

%100E%TED AN%+ER2 Litis pendentia is a Latin term which literally means # a'endin! suit.# 8/eliciano v. )ourt o A''eals$ et al.$ 0.R. No. 46C6


16/180

also filed before the R$C a new action for !uietin# of title involvin# the same parcel of

land but not the house.

$he defendants also filed before the R$C a new action for !uietin# of title

involvin# the same property. Should the action for !uietin# of title justify the suspension

of the ejectment suit ? Eplain.

%100E%TED AN%+ER2 Fes$ on e,uitable considerations as an e(ce'tion to the!eneral rule that a 'endin! civil action invlvin! ownershi' o the same 'ro'erty does not"ustiy the sus'ension o the e"ectment 'roceedin!s.

The e"ectment suit is one o unlawul detainer and not o orcible entry. Thee"etmnet o the deendants would mean a demolitiono their house$ a matter that is likely tocreate conusion$ disturbance$ inconveniences and e('enses. Necessarily$ the airmance othe M)T) decision would cause the 'lainti to !o throu!h the whole !amut o enorcin! itby 'hysically removin! the deendants rom the 'remises. The 'lainti is claimin!ownershi' only o the land$ not o the house. Needlessly$ the liti!ants as well as the courtswill be wastin! much time and eort by 'roceedin! at a state wherein the outcome is at besttem'orary$ but the result o enorcement is 'ermanent$ un"ust and 'ro'bably irre'arable.

8Ama!an$ et al.$ v. Maraya!$ et al.$ 0.R. No. 4C>C==$ 'rom. /ebruary 6>$ 65NOTE% AND )OMMENT%2 &n the above case the %u'rem )ourt considered the'revailin! e(ce'tional circumstances. A! ) ("'"%)6 %$6", ) "'&'( #&0&6 )#+&o' &'0o60&'(o7'"%!8& o +8" !)5" %o"%+ o"! 'o+ *$!+& +8" !$!"'!&o' o "*"#+5"'+

%o#""&'(!.

1nlawul detainer and orcible enry suits under Rule = are desi!ned to summarilyrestore 'hysical 'ossession o a 'iece o land or buildin! to one who has been ille!ally ororcibly de'rived thereo$ without 're"udice to the settlement o the 'artiesK o''osin!claimso 3uridical 'ossession in a''ro'riate 'roceedin!s. These actions are intended toavoid disru'tion o 'ublic order by those who would take the law in their hands 'ur'ortedlyto enorce their claimed ri!ht o 'ossession. &n these cases$ the issue is 'ure 'hysical or deacto 'ossession$ and 'ronouncemens made on ,uestions o ownershi' are 'rovision innature.

The underlyin! reasons why a 'endin! civil action involvin! ownershi' o the same'ro'erty sub"ect o the e"ectment 'roceedin!s does not result to a sus'ension o thee"ectment 'roceedin!s are that the actions in the RT) do not involve 'hysical or de acto'ossession$ and$ on not a ew occasions$ that the case in the RT) was merely a 'loy to delaydis'osition o the e"ectment 'roceedin!$ or that the issues 'resnted in the ormer could ,uites easily be set u' as deenses in the e"ectmnt action and there resolved. . 8Ama!an$ et al.$ v.Maraya!$ et al.$ 0.R. No. 4C>C==$ 'rom. /ebruary 6>$ 65

21. (hilippine Woman8s Christian $emperance 6nion =(WC$6> is the owner of a

parcel of land with a deed of restriction annotated on the $C$ that reads @ the

property shall be used as a site for an institution to be nown as the &biertas

a#ainst &biertas % for

injunction with dama#es. (WC$6 contended that &


17/180

on the title% hence &4 and De necht$ et al.$ v. 7on. %ayo$ et al.$ 0.R. No.4


18/180


19/180

)n /005% Mariano filed the fourth ejectment suit alle#in# that he is lwasin# the

property to &lmario% that the lessee has violated the terms of the lease a#reement by not

payin# rentals since December% /012 which has accunulated to (/2%,3.3,. $hat he has

made several demands upon &lmario to pay his arrears and to vacate the premises the

latest of which is throu#h a Aanuary /% /005 letter.

&lmario is now raisin# the doctrine of res judicata contendin# that this latestejectment suit is barred by the final and eecutory decisions in previous cases. Rule on

&lmarioBs defense.

%100E%TED AN%+ER There is no res 3udicatabecause o the lack o identity ocauses o action between the latest and 'revious cases.

The irst e"ectment case had or a cause o action based on the need or the 'remises.The second e"ectment case involved a dierent cause o action$ that is$ or non*'ayment orentals u' to /ebruary 46. The third case had or cause o action the need or the 'remisesand non*'ayment o rentals rom November 4= u' to May 4>. &n the latest e"ectmentsuit the cause o action is the non*'ayment o rentals rom December 4= accumulatin! to4=$9.9.

)learly$ the cause o action and the circumstances 'resent in the instant case are notthe same but dier markedly rom those in 'revious suits cited. Reliance on the doctrine ores 3udicata is mis'laced. 8%ia'ian v. )ourt o A''eals$ et al.$ 0.R. No. 44$ 'rom.March 4$ 65

23. 'achrach Corporation entered into two lease contracts with the (hilippine

:overnment% then under the control and mana#ement of the Director of ;ands% for a

term of 00 years% the first lease to epire /0 Aune 5+/2 and the other on /3 7ebruary

5+/1. Durin# the &!uino administration% the mana#ement and control of the entire (ort

&rea was transferred to the (hilippine (orts &uthority =((&>% which forthwith issued a

memorandum increasin# the rental rates of 'achrach by /%,++.

&s a result of 'achrach8s refusal to pay% ((& instituted and ejectment suit which

resulted to a decision in its favor. &n appeal to the R$C proved unavailin# for 'achrach

as well as a subse!uent petition for review filed with the Court of &ppeals. 'achrach then

sou#ht for a reconsideration of the Court of &ppeals8 decision.

Durin# the pendency of the motion for reconsideration 'achrach filed a complaint

with the Manila R$C for refusin# to honor a compromise a#reement said to have been

perfected between 'achrach and ((& that superseded the ejectment case. 'achrach

prayed for specific performance.

((& sou#ht the dismissal of the specific performance case on the #round of

pendency of another action between the same parties for the same cause. Decide.

%100E%TED AN%+ER2 A:s motion should be denied. There is no identity osub"ect matter and causes o action between the unlawul detainer case and the s'eciic'erormance case. &n the unlawul detainer case$ the sub"ect matter is the contract o lease between the'arties while the breach thereo$ arisin! rom Bachrach:s non*'ayment o rentals$ constitutesthe suit:s cause o action. &n the s'eciic 'erormance case$ the sub"ect matter is the com'romise a!reementalle!edly 'erected between the same 'arties while he case o action emanates rom theaverred reusal o A to com'ly therewith. 8Bachrach )or'oration v. )ourt o A''eals$ etal.$ 0.R. No. 46>C=5 NOTE% AND )OMMENT%2

a. T8" #o'#"+ o ?)% ? o%5"% *$(5"'+2 Assumin! that the court whichrendered the "ud!ment has "urisdiction$ said "ud!ment is$

45 with res'ect to the matter directly ad"ud!ed$65 or as to any other matter that could have been raised in relation thereto$

4


20/180

C5 conclusive between the 'arties and their successors in interest by titlea5 subse,uent to the commencement o the action or s'ecial

'roceedin!$b5 liti!atin! or the same thin! and under the same title and in the

same ca'acity. 8%ec. = ?b@$ Rule C$ 6 citin! %mith Bell and )om'any 8hils.5$ &nc. v. )ourt o A''eals$ 4


21/180

29. Distin#uish from each other res judicata% law of the case and staredecisis.

%100E%TED AN%+ER2 Res "udicata sim'ly means inality o "ud!ments$ or thatissues decided ion a case$ once a decision has become inal and e(ecutory cannot be liti!ateda!ain by the same 'arties in a subse,uent action involvin! the same sub"ect matter 8enalosa

v.Tua-on$ 66 hil. CC5G +7&LE Law o the case means that le!al conclusions announcedon a irst a''eal$ whether on the !eneral law or the law as a''lied to the concrete acts$ notonly 'rescribe the duty and limit the 'ower o the trial court to strict obedience andconormity thereto$ but they become and remain the law o the case in all sta!es$ whether inthe lower court or in the a''ellate court on a subse,uent a''eal 8Parate v. Director o Lands$C< hil. ==5 while $tare decisismeans the doctrine that when the court has once laid down a 'rinci'leo law as a''licable to a certain state o acts$ it will adhere in 'rinci'le and a''ly it to alluture cases where the acts are substantially the same. 80overnment v. alandoni$ < O.0.4>5

/OR1M %7O&N0

2;. What is forum shoppin# ?

%100E%TED AN%+ER2 +hen$ as a result o an adverse o'inion in one orum$ a'arty seeks a avorable o'inion 8other than by a''eal or certiorari5 in another$ or when a'arty re'etitively avails himsel o Hseveral "udicial remedies in dierent courts$simultaneously or successively$ all substantially ounded on the same transactions and thesame essential acts and circumstances$ and all raisin! substantially the same issues either'endin! in$ or already resolved adversely by$ some other court.I 8%'s. Diu v. &ba"au$ et al.$0.R. No. 4C69=$ 'rom. anuary 4


22/180

action pendant. 8/irst hili''ine &nternational Bank$ etc.$ v. )ourt o A''eals$ et al.$0.R. No. 44>


23/180

%100E%TED AN%+ER2 Fes. +hile there is no identity o causes o action$ +ebbsou!ht e(actly identical relies when a 'rayer or the in"unctive writ was likewise 'rayed orin the Makati )ourt. 8Jiva roductions$ &nc. v. )ourt o A''eals$ et al.$ 69< %)RA 995

2. @:@ filed an action a#ainst @W@ for !uietin# of title. Durin# the pendency of

the action% @:@ filed another suit also a#ainst @W@ to eject him from the property subject

of the action for !uietin# of title. )s there forum"shoppin# ?

%100E%TED AN%+ER2 No. /or orum sho''in! to e(ist$ both actions mustinvolve the same transactions$ essential acts and circumstances and the actions must raiseidentical causes o action$ sub"ect matter$ and issues.

An action or ,uietin! reers to ownershi' while the action or e"ectment concerns'ossession. %urely there are dierent causes o action 80achon$ et al.$ v. Devera$ r.$ etc.$ etal.$ 0.R. No. 4499


24/180

On the other hand i the !round is not raised in a motion to dismiss it may be 'leadedas an airmative deense in the answer and$ in the discretion o the court$ a 'reliminaryhearin! may be had thereon as i a motion to dismiss had been iled. 84st 'ar.$ %ec. 9$ Rule49$ RO)5

2. @&@ husband of @'%@ instituted an action for ejectment in the Re#ional $rialCourt of the 4ational Capital Audicial Re#ion in his name a#ainst @C@ to recover the

ownership and possession of a parcel of land which was the paraphernal property of

@'.@ @C@ filed a motion asin# that @'@ be made a party in the action. $he court denied

@C8s@ motion and proceeded with the trial of the case. )s the court8s rulin# sustainable ?

State the reasons for your answer.

%100E%TED AN%+ER2 No. %'ouses shall sue and be sued "ointly e(ce't only inthe cases 'rovided by law. There is no showin! in the 'roblem that there is a "udicialse'aration o 'ro'erty$ or that there was a se'aration o 'ro'erty a!reed u'on in themarria!e settlements or that the husband has been a''ointed by a court as the administratoro the wie:s 'ro'erty.

. What is the purpose why suits must be brou#ht in the name of the real

party in interest ?

%100E%TED AN%+ER2 &n order to end liti!ations. & the suit is not brou!ht in thename o the real 'arty in interest$ no controversy would be resolved because another suitcould always be instituted or or a!ainst the #true# real 'arty in interest.

As the latin ma(im !oes$ interest rei publicae ut finis sit litium. The interest othe %tate demands end to liti!ation. NOTE% AND )OMMENT%2

a. L"()6 &'+"%"!+, #o'#"+ o. The )ourt will only e(ercise its 'ower o "udicialreview i the case is brou!ht beore it by a 'arty who has the le!al standin! to raise the le!al,uestion. HLe!al standin!I denotes a 'ersonal and substantial interest in the case such thatthe 'arty has sustained or will sustain direct in"ury as a result o the act that is bein!challen!ed. The term HinterestI means material interest as distin!uished rom a mereincidental interest. &n the 'resent case$ aside rom the act that 'etitioners were not 'arties in the'roceedin!s beore the lower court$ they have not cited any acce'table or valid basis tosu''ort their le!al standin! to ,uestion the 'robate courtKs order. %ince res'ondent estate isthe undis'uted owner o the sub"ect 'rivate lots$ the ri!ht o the administrator to have thesame enced cannot be ,uestioned by 'etitioners who do not have any vested ri!ht over thesub"ect lots. The act that 'etitioners are nei!hborin! lot owners whose access to 'ublicroads will alle!edly be aected by the encin! o the sub"ect lots$ merely !ives them anincidental interest over the ,uestioned order o the 'robate court and cannot serve as basis tosu''ort their le!al standin! to elevate the order o the 'robate court to the )ourt o a''ealsand beore this )ourt. &n this re!ard$ it is worth mentionin! that the only 'erson who canri!htully o''ose the issuance o the encin! 'ermit is the )ity En!ineer o )aloocan.8Tan!$ et al.$ v. )ourt o A''eals$ et al.$ 0.R. No. 44=6$ 'rom. /ebruary 44$ 65

b. L"()6 &'+"%"!+ )' &'+"%"!+, "&'". The term interest is material interest$ aninterest in issue to be aected by the decree as distin!uished rom mere interest in the,uestion involved$ or a mere incidental interest. Moreover$ the interest o the 'arty must be'ersonal and not one based on a desire to vindicate the constitutional ri!ht o some third orunrelated 'arty. 8%'ouses Tankiko$ et al.$ v. )e-ar$ et al.$ 0.R. No. 4C46==$ 'rom. /ebruary6$ 4


25/180

%100E%TED AN%+ER2 No$ it is not a real 'arty in interest. &t has no real$ actual$material or substantial interest in the sub"ect matter o the action. The beneits are not reallymeant or the Association$ but or the members o the Association. Thus$ a 'erson who is nota 'arty to a contract and or whose beneit it was not e('ressly made cannot maintain anaction on it$ even i the contract$ i 'erormed by the 'arties to it$ would incidentally inure to

his beneit.&t is the individual members who have 'ersonal and individual ri!hts as tenantsthereore they are the real 'arties in interest. 87ouse &nternational Buildin! TenantsAssociation$ &nc. v. &ntermediate A''ellate )ourt$ et al.$ 44 %)RA =C5

4. Spouses $ondas actin# both in their capacity as officers of


26/180

A %")6 )%+ &' &'+"%"!+ &! +8" )%+ 78o !+)'! +o ?" ?"'"&+" o% &'*$%" ? +8"

*$(5"'+ &' +8" !$&+, o% +8" )%+ "'+&+6" +o +8" )0)&6! o +8" !$&+. 84stsentence$Ibid.5

;. William 6y and Rodel Roas% as a#ents of the owners of ei#ht parcels of land

entered into a series of sale for these lands with the 4ational


27/180

)onstitution and the laws$ to determine whether 'ublic oicers have abused the discretion!iven to them. 8ilosbayan$ &nc. v. 0uin!ona$ r.$ 6C6 %)RA 445

. :on9ales% filin# suit as a citi9en and tapayer% !uestioned the validity of

Eecutive -rder 4o. 3*% creatin# the (reparatory commission on Constitutional Reforms

=(CCR> in order% Ito study and recommend proposed amendments andHor revisions to the/012 Constitution% and the manner of implementin# the same.J :on9ales claims% that the

(resident encroached upon the le#islatureBs powers to create a public office and to

propose amendments to the charter by formin# the (CCR. 6nder section 2 of E.-. 4o.

3*% the amount of (* million was Iappropriated for the operational epenses of the

Commission to be sourced from funds of the -ffice of the (resident% subject to the usual

accountin# and auditin# rules and re#ulations.J

)s :on9ales clothed with locus standi as a tapayer to !uestion the validity of E.-.

4o. 3* ?

%100E%TED AN%+ER2 No. 0on-ales has not shown that he has sustained or isin dan!er o sustainin! any 'ersonal in"ury attributable to the creation o the ))R. & at all$

it is only )on!ress$ not 0on-ales$ which can claim Hin"uryI since its 'owers are alle!ed tohave been encroached u'on by the resident. 0on-ales has sustained no direct$ or even anyindirect in"ury. Neither does he claim that his ri!hts or 'rivile!es have been or are in dan!ero bein! violated$ nor that he shall be sub"ected to any 'enalties or burdens as a result o the))RKs activities.

A ta('ayerKs action is 'ro'erly brou!ht only when there is an e(ercise by )on!resso its ta(in! or s'endin! 'ower. There is no such e(ercise in the instant case because theunds were taken rom unds intended or the Oice o the residnt$ in the e(ercise o the)hie E(ecutiveKs 'ower to transer unds 'ursuant to %ection 6 85 o Article J& o the)onstitution. 80on-ales v. 7on. Narvasa$ etc.$ et al.$ 0.r. No. 4>C$ 'rom. Au!ust 4$65

NOTE% AND )OMMENT%2 There is no Ha''ro'riationI by )on!ress so to s'eak.A''ro'riation in its strict sense$ is Hthe le!islative authori-ation 'rescribed by the)onstitution that money may be 'aid out o the Treasury$I while Ha''ro'riation made bylawI reers to the Hact o the le!islature settin! a'art or assi!nin! to a 'articular use a certainsumn to be used in 'aymnt o debt or dues rom the %tate to its creditors.I 8Ibid.5

3. Who is an indispensable party ?

%100E%TED AN%+ER2 An indis'ensable 'arty is a 'arty in &'+"%"!+ 7&+8o$+78o5 'o &')6 "+"%5&')+&o' #)' ?" 8) o )' )#+&o'. 8%ec. =$ Rule C$ RO)5 They mustalways be "oined either as 'laintis or deendants. 8Ibid.5 NOTE% AND )OMMENT%2A 'arty is not an indis'ensable 'arty i his interest inthe controversy or sub"ect matter is distinct and divisible rom the interest o the other'arties and will not necessarily be 're"udiced by a "ud!ment which does com'lete "ustice tothe 'arties in court. 8%ervicewide %'ecialists$ &nc.$ v. )ourt o A''eals$ 64 %)RA =5

31. $he spouses Ramon and Rosario died intestate in /03* and /033% survived by

their heirs% Carmen% Aosefa% &n#el% &mparo married to


28/180

the children of Ramon and Rosario because it was not included in the project of partition

because ;ot 4o. ,125 was still in the name of the deceased Ramon and Rosario.

Aosefa and Carmen then filed an action for !uietin# of title. )t is now contended

that Aosefa and Carmen are not the proper parties to brin# an action for !uietin# of title%

since the Certificate of $itle to ;ot ,125 is not in their names. )s this contention tenable?

%100E%TED AN%+ER2 No. ersons havin! le!al as well as e,uitable title to orinterest in a real 'ro'erty may brin! action to ,uiet title and HtitleI here does not necessarilydenote a certiticate o title issued in avor o the 'erson ilin! the suit. 8Maestrado etc.$ etal.$ v. )ourt o A''eals$ etc. et al.$ 0.R. No. 4CCCG maestrado$ et al.$ v. Roa$ r.$ 0.R. No.4CCC6$ 'rom. March $ Rule C$ RO)5

3. :ive eamples of a necessary party.

%100E%TED AN%+ER2 %ome e(am'les o necessary 'arties are2a. A solidary debtor is not an indis'ensable 'arty but merely a necessary 'arty. The

creditor can 'roceed se'arately a!ainst any o the solidary debtors$ who then can 'roceeda!ainst his co*debtors or reimbursement i com'lete relie is to be obtained.

b. &n an action to recover 'ossession o a 'arcel o land$ the 'ossessor 8tenant$ etc.5$is the indis'ensable 'arty while the owner is merely the necessary 'arty.

c. &n an action or the recovery o the ownershi' o a 'arcel o land$ the owner is theindis'ensable 'arty and the 'ossessor 8the tenant5 is merely the necessary 'arty.

33. Distin#uish a necessary party from an indispensable party%100E%TED AN%+ER2 The ollowin! are the distinctions between indis'ensable

'arties and necessary 'arties2a. The interest o indis'ensable 'arties is such that no inal determination o the

action can be had without them +7&LE the interest o necessary 'arties is such thatcom'lete relie may not be had without them.

b. Non*"oinder o an indis'ensable 'arty may sub"ect the suit to dismissal +7&LE suchis not the case with non*"oinder o a necessary 'arty.

34. $ Rule C o the 4$ Rule C o the

6>


29/180

4


30/180

?" +8" +o+)6&+ o +8" #6)&5! &' )66 +8" #)$!"! o )#+&o' &%%"!"#+&0" o 78"+8"% +8" #)$!"!

o )#+&o' )%o!" o$+ o +8" !)5" o% &"%"'+ +%)'!)#+&o'! 8'ar. 4$ %ec. CC$ B.. Bl!. 46


31/180

65 The court then orders the inclusion o the indis'ensable 'arty oro''ortunity aorded or amendment by the 'leader.

C5 & the 'lainti to whom the order to include the indis'ensable 'arty isdirected reuses to com'ly with the order o the court$ the com'laint may bedismissed u'on motion o the deendant or u'on the court:s own motion 8%ec. C$ Rule

4=$ RO)G Dael v. Teves$ 4C9 %)RA 46$ 'rom. anuary 66$ 'rom. anuary 6


32/180

45 There is only one ri!ht or cause o action 'ertainin! or belon!in! incommon to many 'ersons$ not se'arately or severally to distinct individuals.

65 The ob"ect o the suit is to obtain relie or or a!ainst numerous 'ersons asa !rou' or as an inte!ral entity$ and not as se'arate$ distinct individuals whose ri!htsor liabilities are se'arate rom and inde'endent o those aectin! the others.

C5 The numerousness o 'arties involved that it is im'racticable to "oin all as'arties. 8Liana:s %u'ermarket v. NLR)$ et al.$ 0.R. No. 4444$ 'rom. May C4$4


33/180

DEATH OF A PA TY, T ANSFE OF INTE EST ANDCHANGE OF STATUS OF PA TIES

49. What is the nature of claims that survive the death of a party ?

%100E%TED AN%+ER2These are the claims that could 'roceed as i the 'ros'ective 'lainti or deendant isstill alive. Thus$ the e(ecutor$ administrator or any le!al re'resentative o the deceased maybrin! or deend suits.

4;. :ive some eamples of claims that survive the death of a party.

%100E%TED AN%+ER2 Actionsa. Fo% +8" %"#o0"% o% %o+"#+&o' o +8" %o"%+ o% %&(8+! o +8" "#")!".

8%ec. 6$ Rule >=$ RO)5b. +o %"#o0"% %")6 o% "%!o')6 %o"%+, o% )' &'+"%"!+ +8"%"o', %o5 +8" "!+)+",

o%

c. +o "'o%#" ) 6&"'on real or 'ersonal 'ro'erty andd. +o %"#o0"% )5)("! o% )' &'*$% +o "%!o' o% %o"%+, %")6 o% "%!o')6.

8%ec. 4$ Rule >=$ RO)5.NOTE% AND )OMMENT%2a. T8" 6&+5$! +"!+ &' "+"%5&'&'( 78"+8"% )' )#+&o' !$%0&0"! ""'! o' +8"

')+$%" o +8" )#+&o' )' +8" )5)(" !$" o%.

&n the causes o action which survive$ the wron! com'lained aects 'rimarily and'rinci'ally 'ro'erty and 'ro'erty ri!hts$ the in"uries to the 'erson bein! merely incidental$+7&LE in the causes o action which do not survive$ the in"ury com'lained o is to the'erson$ the 'ro'erty and ri!hts o 'ro'erty aected bein! incidental. 8Rui-$ et al.$ v. The)ourt o A''eals$ et al.$ 0.R. No. 449=$RO).

NOTE% AND )OMMENT%2a. Co'+%)#+$)6 5o'" #6)&5! !$%0&0". & the action or recovery o money arisin!

rom contract$ e('ress or im'lied$ is not yet iled$ it could not iled a!ainst the e(ecutor$administrator or le!al re'resentative. &t should be iled as a claim a!ainst the estate.

7owever$ i the case is already iled$ and the death occurred beore entry o inal"ud!ment in the court in which the case was 'endin!$ the case shall be allowed to continue.8%ec. 6$ Rule C$ RO)5

& the action or recovery o money did not arise rom contract$ e('ress or im'lied$ it

does not survive. b. C6)&5! +8)+ o 'o+ !$%0&0" )%" &!5&!!" "0"' & )++)#85"'+ 6"0&" o'""')'+! %o"%+. REA%ON2 The 'ur'ose o the attachment which is to secure theoutcome o the trial no lon!er e(ists$ and so with the reasons or the issuance o the writ oattachment$ insoar as the deceased is concerned. 8Malolos v. Asia aciic /inance)or'oration$ 4= %)RA 945

CC


34/180

c. A! ) ("'"%)6 %$6" "%!o')6 )#+&o'! o 'o+ !$%0&0". E(ce'tion2 action or therecovery o money arisin! rom contract$ e('ress or im'lied$ i the deendant dies beoreentry o inal "ud!ment. 8%ec. 6$ Rule C$ RO)5

9. 6y filed a complaint for sum of money and dama#es a#ainst the Iestate of

Carlos 4#o as represented by survivin# spouse Ms. Sulpicia Fentura.J Fentura moved todismiss on the #round of defendantBs lac of le#al personality. & motion to dismiss was

seasonably filed by Fentura. 6y then amended his complaint deletin# the estate of Carlos

4#o and named Fentura as the defendant. Should the complaint be dismissed ? Should

the amended complaint be allowed ?

%100E%TED AN%+ER2 Fes$ the com'laint should be dismissed. No$ theamended com'laint should not be allowed.

Neither a dead 'erson nor his estate may be a 'arty in a court action. A deceased'erson does not have such le!al entity as is necessary to brin! action so much so that amotion to suibstitute cannot lie and should be denied by the court.

An action be!un by a decedentKs estate cannot be said to have been be!un by a le!al

'erson$ since an estate is not a le!al entityG such a n action is a nullity and a motion to amendthe 'arty 'lainti will not likewise lie. There is nothin! to amend. )onsiderin! that ca'acityto be sued is a correlative o the a'acity to sue$ to the same e(ent$ a decedent does not havehe ca'acity to be sued and may not be named a 'arty deendant in a court action.

The 'ro'er action should be in the orm o a claim to be iled in the testate orintestate estate 'roceedin!s o the deceased s'ouse. 8Jentura v. 7on. Militante$ et al.$ 0.R.No. 9C4$ 'rom. October $ 4>$ 'rom. %e'tember 9$ 4


35/180

c. The court re,uires the le!al re'resentative o the deceased 'lainti to e('lain whythe action should not be dismissed because o the death o the 'lainti$ where the claim doesnot survive.

d. & the claim is e(tin!uished by the 'lainti:s death the case is dismissed. & theclaim survives the death o the 'lainti$ the case continues$ with the substitution o the

deceased 'lainti by his le!al re'resentative 8s5$ or his heirs.e. W8"' +8" )#+&o' &! o% %"#o0"% o 5o'" )%&!&'( %o5 #o'+%)#+, "/%"!! o%&56&", )' +8" "#""'+ &"! ?"o%" "'+% o &')6 *$(5"'+ &' +8" #o$%+ &' 78 +8"

)#+&o' 7)! "'&'( )+ +8" +&5" o !$#8 ")+8, &+ !8)66 'o+ ?" &!5&!!" ?$+ !8)66 &'!+")

?" )66o7" +o #o'+&'$" $'+&6 "'+% o &')6 *$(5"'+.

A )0o%)?6" *$(5"'+ o?+)&'" ? +8" 6)&'+& +8"%"&' !8)66 ?" "'o%#" &' +8"

5)''"% "!"#&)66 %o0&" &' +8" R$6"! o Co$%+ o% %o!"#$+&'( #6)&5! )()&'!+ +8"

"!+)+" o "#")!" "%!o'!. 8%ec. 6$ Rule C$ RO)5NOTE% AND )OMMENT%2

a. P%o#"$%" )' ""#+ o ")+8 o %"0)&6&'( 6)&'+& )+"% "'+% o *$(5"'+o% o%"%:

45 The counsel re'orts the deathG65 There is substitution by the le!al re'resentative or heirs o the deceased'lainti$ whether the claim survives or not.

C5 The substitute e(ecutor$ administrator or successor in interest may a''lyor the issuance o a writ o e(ecution. 8%ec. = ?a@$ Rule C


36/180

which is enorced a!ainst the deendant:s e(ecutor$ administrator or successorin interest. 8%ec. = ?b@$ Rule C9$RO)G y En )hen! v. 7errera$ = %)RA 4C=5

b. P%o#"$%" )' ""#+! o ")+8 o ) ""')'+ )+"% "/"#$+&o':45 The counsel re'orts the deathG65 There is substitution by the le!al re'resentative or heirs o the deceased

'lainti$ whether the claim survives or not.C5 The 'ro'erty actually levied is sold or the satisaction o the "ud!ment

obli!ation and the 'erson makin! the sale shall account to the deceased deendant:se(ecutor or administrator or any sur'lus in his hands. 8%ec. = ?c@$ Rule C Rule on the issue.

5> )f the opposition is without merit% can the writ of eecution be validly issued

?

*> )f it cannot be issued% what is the remedy of & ?

%100E%TED AN%+ER2 45 The claim survives because it is u'on a contractual money claim. 8%ec. 6$ RuleC$ RO)5 )onse,uently o''osition is without merit. 65 No$ because a "ud!ment or money cannot be enorced by a writ o e(ecution.

C5 The avorable "ud!ment obtained by the 'lainti A$ shall be enorced in themanner es'ecially 'rovided in the Rules o )ourt or 'rosecutin! claims a!ainst the estate odeceased 'ersons. 8%ec. 6$ Rule C$ RO)5

DOCT INE OF P ECONDITIONS, P IO ESO T ANDALTE NATIVE MODES OF DISPUTE ESOLUTIONDOCTRINE OF PRECONDITIONS OR PRIOR RESORT.

The doctrine which re,uires that certain matters or controversies be resolvedutili-in! non"udicial methods beore resort could be had to "udicial intervention. /ailure todo so could result in a dismissal o the action on the !round o 'rematurity o ailure tocom'ly with a condition 'recedent or ilin! the claim. 8%ec. 4 ?"@$ Rule 49$ RO)5

/or e(am'le$ 'rior resort to settlement under the Katarunggang Pambarangay$e(haustion o administrative remedies$ earnest eorts towards a com'romise$ etc.$ are

re,uired in certain instances beore ilin! a suit in court.

DOCTRINE OF ALTERNATIVE MODES OF DISPUTE RESOLUTION.

These are the methods other than "udicial 'rocess or the settlement o dis'utes orcontroversies between 'arties.

These methods include amon! others mediation$ conciliation$ arbitration$ etc.

C9


37/180

This doctrine diers rom the doctrine o 'reconditions or 'rior resort as the ormeris a mandatory re,uirement or ilin! suits while the latter is voluntary in character andbecomes mandatory only i a!reed u'on by the 'arties.

P ECONDITIONS AND P IO ESO T94. &re there instances where there is a re!uirement for efforts to compromise

prior to the institution of s suit ?

%100E%TED AN%+ER2 Fes$ no suit between members o the same amily shall'ros'er unless it should a''ear rom the veriied com'laint or 'etition that earnest eortstoward a com'romise have been made$ but the same have ailed. & it is shown that no sucheorts were in act made$ the case must be dismissed.

This rule shall not a''ly to cases which may not be the sub"ect o com'romise underthe )ivil )ode. 8Art. 44$ The /amily )ode5 NOTE% AND )OMMENT%2

a. S$&+! ?"+7""' 5"5?"%! o +8" !)5" )5&6 +8)+ )%" !$?*"#+ +o "o%+! +o7)%!

) #o5%o5&!" )%" +8o!": 45 Between husband and wieG 65 Between 'arents and childrenG C5 Between other ascendants and ascendantsG and

5 Between brothers and sisters$ whether o the ull or hal*blood. 8Art. 4$The /amily )ode5

The author submits that the re,uirement or eorts towards a com'romise does notinclude ille!itimate relations because o the natural anti'athy between ille!itimates andle!itimates. This view is buttressed by reerence to Art. 4 o the /amily that there,uirement does not a''ly to collateral relatives$ e(ce't as between brothers and sisters.87owever$ see no. C below which inter'rets the law as includin! Hhal*bloodI relationshi'5

O course$ there may some disa!reement to the above views considerin! the /ili'inoe(tended amily system. But where does the line sto' 3 b. C)!"! 'o+ !$?*"#+ +o #o5%o5&!"2No com'romise u'on the ollowin! ,uestionsshall be valid2 45 The civil status o 'ersonsG 65 The validity o a marria!e or le!al se'arationG C5 Any !round or le!al se'arationG 5 /uture su''ortG 5 The "urisdiction o courtsG

95 /uture le!itime. 8Art. 6C$ )ivil )ode o the hili''ines5

99. Spouses &u#usto and Maria


38/180

towards a com'romise. 8%'ouses 7ontiveros v. Re!ional Trial )ourt$ etc.$ et al.$ 0.R. No.469$ 'rom. une 6$ R.A. No. =495The reerral must be made irres'ective o the amount and nature o the dis'ute and

whether the case alls within the "urisdiction o the Munici'al Trial )ourt or the Re!ionalTrial )ourt.

b. D&!$+"! 78 '"" 'o+ ?" ?%o$(8+ o% baran#ay conciliation:45 +hen the 'arty is the !overnment$ or any subdivision or instrumentality

thereo.65 +hen one 'arty is a 'ublic oicer or em'loyee$ and the dis'ute relates to

the 'erormance o his 'ublic unctions.C5 +here the dis'ute involves real 'ro'erties located in dierent cities or

munici'alities unless the 'arties thereto a!ree to submit their dierences to amicable

settlement by an a''ro'riate lupon.

5 Dis'utes involvin! 'arties who actually reside in barangayso dierentcities or munici'alities e(ce't where such barangayunits ad"oin each other and the

C>


39/180

'arties thereto a!ree to submit their dierences to amicable settlement by ana''ro'riate lupon.

5 %uch other dis'utes which the resident o the hili''ines may determinein the interest o "ustice or u'on the recommendation o the %ecretary o ustice.8%ec. >$ R.A. No. =495

95 Labor dis'utes. This would deeat the salutary 'ur'ose o the Labor )odewhich mandates that the Labor Arbiters must irst conciliate and mediate in order toe('editiously resolve the dis'ute. To re,uire reerral to the8arangaywould resultto delay in resolvin! labor dis'utes. 8Montoya v. Escayo$ 4=4 %)RA 65

=5 +here the dis'ute involves "uridical 'ersons.c. I'!+)'#"! 78"%" +8" )%+&"! 5) (o &%"#+6 +o #o$%+ 7o&+8o$+ %""%%)6 +o

?)%)'() !"++6"5"'+:

45 +here actions are cou'led with 'rovisional remedies such as 'reliminaryin"unction$ attachment$ delivery o 'ersonal 'ro'erty$ and su''ort pendente lite.

65 +here the action may otherwise be barred by the statute o limitations.8%ec. 46 ?b@$ R.A. No. =495

d. R$6"! o 0"'$" o% baran#ay #o'#&6&)+&o':45 Dis'utes between 'ersons actually residin! in the same barangayshall bebrou!ht or amicable settlement beore the lupon o said barangay.

b. Those involvin! actual residents o dierent barangayswithin the samecity or munici'ality shall brou!ht in the barangaywhere the res'ondent or any o theres'ondents actually resides$ at the election o the com'lainant.

c. All dis'utes involvin! real 'ro'erty or any interest therein shall be brou!htin the barangaywhere the real 'ro'erty or the lar!er 'ortion thereo is situated.

d. Those arisin! at the work'lace where the contendin! 'arties are em'loyedor at the institution where such 'arties are enrolled or study$ shall be brou!ht in thebarangay where such work'lace or institution is located. 8%ec. 5 ThePang7atshall e(ert all eorts to settle and resolve the dis'ute withiniteen 845 days rom the day it convenes$ e(tendible in its discretion or another

C


40/180

'eriod not to e(ceed iteen 845 more days. 8%ec. 4 ?e@$ R.A. No. =49G %ec. 4?b@$ Rule J&$Katarunggang PambarangayRules5

=C$ 'rom. %e'tember 4$ 4


41/180

9. -n Aune /3% /003% a complaint for ejection was filed before the M$C by

&mparo% assisted by counsel. $he parties reside in baran#ays of different cities which do

not adjoin each other. $he defendant filed a motion for referral to the proper baran#ay

for arbitration andHor conciliation which the court #ranted throu#h its -rder dated

4ovember 2% /003 directin# the parties to conciliate before the Chairman of baran#ay

2% Lone 2*% Ermita% Manila. Meanwhile% &tty. Raul entered his appearance as counseland filed a motion to set aside the -rder of 4ovember 2% /003. $he Court denied the

same and referred the case to the said baran#ay for conciliation proceedin#s under

penalty of the case bein# dismissed. $he CourtBs action was premised upon section 3+1 of

Republic &ct 4o. 2/+ =$he Gatarun#an (ambaran#ay provisions of the ;ocal

:overnment Code>% which provides that% I$he Court in which non"criminal cases not

fallin# within the authority of the lupon under this Code are filed% may at any time before

trial% motu proprio% refer the case to the lupon concerned for amicable settlement.J

Was the action of the Court correct?

%100E%TED AN%+ER2 No. Reerrin! a matter covered by the above cited'rovision that alls under the Rule o summary 'rocedure to the Lu'on is an unsound

e(ercise o discretion. The Rule o summary rocedure was 'romul!ated or the 'ur'ose oachievin! an He('editious and ine('ensive determination o the case.I 80achou v. De vera$r.$ %)RA 5 The act that unlawul detainer cases all under summary 'rocedure$ s'eedyresolution thereo is thus deemed a matter o 'ublic 'olicy. Thus$ the Rule rowns ondelays. Maniestly$ the act o reerrin! the sub"ect case to the lu'on subverts the very natureo the Rule and deeats the ob"ective o e('editin! the ad"udication thereo. 8/arrales$ et al.$v. ud!e )amarista$ A.M. MT*


42/180

a. D&!5&!!)6 7&+8o$+ %"*$" 5) ?"#o5" &')6. The dismissal without're"udice o a com'laint does not however mean that said dismissal order was any less inal.%uch order o dismissal is com'lete in all details$ and thou!h without 're"udice$ nonethelessinally dis'osed o the matter. &t was not merely an interlocutory order but a inaldis'osition o the com'laint. 8Banares &&$ et al.$ v. Balisin!$ et al.$ 0.R. No. 4C696$ 'rom.

March 4C$ 65+hen a case covered by the 4


43/180

e. /or reasons o law$ comity$ and convenience. 81nion Bank o the hili''ines v.)ourt o A''eals$ et al.$ 0.R. No. 4C4=6=9$ the %u'reme )ourt has countenanced the settlement o dis'utes throu!h arbitration.8B/ )or'oration v. )ourt o A''eals$ et al.$ 0.R. No. 464$ 'rom. March 6=$ 4


44/180

&ts 'otential as one o the alternative dis'ute resolution methods that are nowri!htully vaunted as #the wave o the uture# in international relations$ is reco!ni-edworldwide. 8Ibid.5

To brush aside a contractual a!reement callin! or arbitration in case o disa!reementbetween the 'arties would be a ste' backward. 8%ea*Land %ervice$ &nc. v. )ourt o A''eals$

et al.$ 0.R. No. 469646$ 'rom.$ March 6$ 65Arbitration as an alternative method o dis'ute resolution is encoura!ed by the%u'reme )ourt. Aside rom unclo!!in! "udicial dockets$ it also hastens solutions es'eciallyo commercial dis'utes. 8Allied Bankin! )or'oration v. )ourt o A''eals$ et al.$ 0.R. No.46C>=4$ 'rom. Au!ust C4$ 4


45/180

65 &n actions quasi in remservice o summons by 'ublication is inorder to aord the deendant due 'rocess +7&LE service o summons inactions in personam or the 'ur'ose o obtainin! "urisdiction.

C5 &n actions quasi in remthe recovery is limited only to the value othe 'ro'erty attached +7&LE in actions in personam there is no such

limitation.

;;. What determines the nature of the action ?

%100E%TED AN%+ER2 Nature o action determined by alle!ations in com'laintsand the character o the relie sou!ht. 8Bayani v. anay Electric )o.$ &nc. 0.R. No. 4C$'ro$ A'ril 46$ 65

HIE A CHY OF COU TS;@. What is meant by the concept of hierarchy of courts ? Eplain briefly.

%100E%TED AN%+ER2 +hile the %u'reme )ourt$ the )ourt o A''eals$ and the

Re!ional Trial )ourts have concurrent ori!inal "urisdiction to issue writs o certiorari'rohibition$ mandamus quo arranto and abeas corpus such concurrence does not accordliti!ants unrestrained reedom o choice o the court to which a''lication thereor may bedirected.

There is a hierarchy o courts which is determinative o the venue o a''eals andshould also serve as a !eneral determinant o the a''ro'riate orum or 'etitions or thee(traordinary writs. 8earson$ etc.$ et al.$ v. &ntermediate A''ellate )ourt$ et al.$ 0.R. No.=$ 'rom. %e'tember C$ 4


46/180

45 & com'ellin! reasons$ or the nature and im'ortance o the issues raised$warrant$ or "ustiy direct reerral to the %u'reme )ourt. 8earson$ etc.$ et al.$ v.&ntermediate A''ellate court$ et al.$ 0.R. No. =$ 'rom. %e'tember C$ 4


47/180

o0"% "+&+&o'! o% certiorari% %o8&?&+&o', mandamus% !uo warranto%)' habeas corpus.

8%ec. ?4@$ Article J&&&$ 4= hili''ine )onstitution5+hile the Rules o )ourt is not a "urisdiction law$ it should be considered that T8"

7%&+ o habeas corpus5) ?" (%)'+" ? +8" S$%"5" Co$%+, o% )' 5"5?"% +8"%"o,

o' )' ) )' )+ )' +&5", o% ? +8" Co$%+ o A")6! o% )' 5"5?"% +8"%"o &' +8"

&'!+)'#"! )$+8o%&" ? 6)7, )' & !o (%)'+" &+ !8)66 ?" "'o%#")?6" )'78"%" &' +8"P8&6&&'"!, )' 5) ?" 5)" %"+$%')?6" ?"o%" +8" #o$%+ o% )' 5"5?"% +8"%"o, o%

?"o%" ) R"(&o')6 T%&)6 Co$%+, o% )' *$(" +8"%"o o% 8")%&'( )' "#&!&o' o' +8"

5"%&+!. I+ 5) )6!o ?" (%)'+" ? ) R"(&o')6 T%&)6 Co$%+, o% ) *$(" +8"%"o, o' )'

) )' )+ )' +&5", )' %"+$%')?6" ?"o%" 8&5!"6, "'o%#")?6" o'6 7&+8&' 8&! *$&)6

&!+%+. 8%ec$ 6$ Rule 46$ RO)5NOTE% AND )OMMENT%2 +hile it seems that there may be concurrent ori!inal

"urisdiction$ the conce't o hierarchy o courts eectively ne!ates the e(istence oconcurrent ori!inal "urisdiction. 7owever$ there may still e(ist concurrent ori!inal"urisdiction$ i the %u'reme )ourt takes co!ni-ance o any o the above cases$ des'ite theconce't o hierarchy o courts.

@2. What is territorial jurisdiction of the trial courts ?

%100E%TED AN%+ER28a5 Metro'olitan trial courts$ munici'al trial courts and munici'al circuit trial courts

shall e(ercise their "urisdiction within the city$ munici'ality or circuit or which the "ud!ethereo is a''ointed or desi!nated.

8b5 A re!ional trial court shall e(ercise its "urisdiction within the area deined by the%u'reme )ourt as the territory over which the 'articular branch concerned shall e(ercise itsauthority. 8%ec. A.6.$ &nterim Rules$ %.). Res. dated anuary 44$ 4C5

@. What determines the character of the subject matter whether the court has

jurisdiction ? Eplain briefly.

%100E%TED AN%+ER2 The com'laint determines the character o the sub"ectmatter whether the court has "urisdiction.

A court:s "urisdiction cannot be made to de'end u'on deenses set u' in the answer$in a motion to dismiss$ or in a motion or reconsideration but only u'on the alle!ations othe com'laint 8Tamano v. 7on. Orti-$ et al.$ 0.R. No. 4699C$ 'rom. une 6


48/180

&t certainly does not mean that lack o "urisdiction o a court in a case may be raiseddurin! the 'roceedin!s o another case$ in another court and even by anybody at all.8Ara!on$ etc.$ et al.$ v. )ourt o A''eals$ et al.$ 6= %)RA 9C5

c. A66 RTC ?%)'#8"! )%" o'" #o$%+. The various branches o the )ourt o /irst&nstance o )ebu under the /ourteenth udicial District$ are coordinate and e,ual courts$ and

the totality o which is only one )ourt o /irst &nstance. The "urisdiction is vested in thecourt$ not in the "ud!es. And when a case is iled in one branch$ "urisdiction over the casedoes not attach to the branch or "ud!e alone$ to the e(clusion o the other branches. Trialmay be held or 'roceedin!s continued by abd beore another branch or "ud!e. &t is or thisreason that section = o the udiciary Act e('ressly !rants to the %ecretary o ustice ?nowthe %u'reme )ourt5$ the administrative ri!ht or 'ower to a''ortion the cases amon! thedierent branches$ both or the convenience o the 'arties and or the coordination o thework by the dierent branches o the same court. The a''ortionment and distribution ocases does not involve a !rant or limitation o "urisdiction$ the "urisdiction attaches andcontinues to be vested in the )ourt o /irst &nstance o the 'rovince$ and the trials may beheld by any branch or "ud!e o the court. 8Lim'o v. )ourt o A''eals$ et al.$ 0.R. No.

46>6$ une 49$ 65

@3. What is the eclusive oi#inal jurisdiction of the four =3> lower trial courts

in

civil cases under the Epanded Aurisdiction ;aw =R.&. 4o. 20/> ?

a. E(clusive ori!inal "urisdiction over civil actions and 'robate 'roceedin!s$ testateand intestate includin! !rant o 'rovisional remedies in 'ro'er cases$ where the value o the'ersonal 'ro'erty$ estate$ or amount o the demand

45 Does not e(ceed Two 7undred Thousand 'esos 86$.5$ or65 &n Metro Manila where such 'ersonal 'ro'erty$ estate$ or amount o the

demand does not e(ceed /our 7undred Thousand 'esos 8$.5$"/#6$!&0" o interest$ dama!es o whatever kind$ attorney:s ees$ liti!ation e('enses andcosts$ the amount o which must be s'eciically alle!ed$ rovided$ that interest$ dama!es owhatever kind$ attorney:s ees$ liti!ation e('enses$ and costs shall be included in thedetermination o the ilin! ees.

b. E(clusive ori!inal "urisdiction over cases o orcible entry and unlawul detainer2rovided$ that when$ in such cases$ the deendant raises the ,uestion o ownershi' in his'leadin!s and the ,uestion o 'ossession cannot be resolved without decidin! the issue oownershi'$ the issue o ownershi' shall be resolved only to determine the issue o'ossessionG and

c. E(clusive ori!inal "urisdiction in all civil actions which involve title to or'ossession o real 'ro'erty$ or any interest therein where the assessed value o the 'ro'ertyor interest therein2

45 Does not e(ceed Twenty Thousand 'esos 86$.5$ or65 &n Metro Manila$ where such assessed value does not e(ceed /ity

Thousand 'esos 8$.5"/#6$!&0" o interest$ dama!es o whatever kind$ attorney:s ees$ liti!ation e('enses andcosts2 rovided$ that in cases o land not declared or ta(ation 'ur'oses the value o such'ro'erty shall be determined by the assessed value o the ad"acent lots. 8%ec. CC$ B.. Bl!.46


49/180

&n Metro Manila$ the amount is $.. 8Ibid.5 There is no chan!e in "urisdictional amounts.

@4. What is meant by the totality rule which is applicable only to the four =3>

lower trial courts =the Municipal $rial Court% the Municipal Circuit $rial Court% the

Municipal $rial Court in Cities% and the Metropolitan $rial Court> ?%100E%TED AN%+ER2+here there are several claims or causes o actionbetween dierent 'arties embodied in the same com'laint$ the amount o the demand shallbe the totality o the claims in all the causes o action$ irres'ective o whether the causes oaction arose out o the same or dierent transactions. 8%ec. CC ?4@$ B.. Bl!. 46


50/180

@@. What is the eclusive or#inal jurisdiction of Re#ional $rial Courts in civil

cases ?

%100E%TED AN%+ER2 #Re!ional Trial )ourts shall e(ercise e(clusive ori!inal"urisdiction2

845 &n all civil actions in which the sub"ect o the liti!ation is inca'able o 'ecuniaryestimationG865 &n all civil actions which involve the title to$ or 'ossession o$ real 'ro'erty$ or

any interest therein$ where the assessed value o the 'ro'erty involved e(ceeds TwentyThousand 'esos 86$.5 or$ or civil actions in Metro Manila$ where such valuee(ceeds /ity thousand 'esos 8$.5 e(ce't actions or orcible entry into andunlawul detainer o lands or buildin!s$ ori!inal "urisdiction o which is conerred u'on theMetro'olitan Trial )ourts$ Munici'al Trial )ourts$ Munici'al )ircuit Trial )ourtsG

8C5 &n all actions in admiralty and maritime "urisdiction where the demand or claime(ceeds Two hundred thousand 'esos 86$.5 or$ in Metro Manila$ where suchdemand or claim e(ceeds /our hundred thousand 8$.5G

85 &n all matters o 'robate$ both testate and intestate$ where the !ross value o theestate e(ceeds Two hundred thousand 'esos 86$.5 or$ in 'robate matters in MetroManila$ where such !ross value e(ceeds /our hundred thousand 'esos 8$.5G

85 &n all actions involvin! the contract o marria!e and marital relationsG895 &n all cases not within the e(clusive "urisdiction o any court$ tribunal$ 'erson or

bodye(ercisin! "urisdiction o any court$ tribunal$ 'erson or body e(ercisin! "urisdiction o anycourt$ tribunal$ 'erson or body e(ercisin! "udicial or ,uasi*"udicialG

8=5 &n all civil actions s'ecial 'roceedin!s allin! within the e(clusive "urisdiction oa uvenile and Domestic Relations )ourt and o the )ourt o A!rarian Relations as now'rovided by lawG and 8>5 &n all other cases in which the demand$ e(clusive o interest$ dama!es owhatever kind$ attorney:s ees$ liti!ation e('enses$ and costs or the value o the 'ro'erty incontroversy e(ceeds Two hundred thousand 86$.5 or$ in such other cases in MetroManila where the demand$ e(clusive o the abovementioned items e(ceeds /our hundredthousand 'esos 8$.5. 8%ec. 4


51/180

R)+&o')6": The second class cases$ besides the determination o dama!es$demand an in,uiry into other actors which the law has deemed to be more within thecom'etence o courts o irst instanced 8now re!ional trial courts5$ which were thelowest courts o record at the time the irst or!anic laws o the udiciary 8Act 4C9 othe hili''ine )ommission o une 44$ 4


52/180

not sub"ect to 'ecuniary estimation does not vest "urisdiction with the Re!ional Trial )ourt.8)ru- v. Tan$ >= hil. 96=5

1. &% a resident of Da#upan City secured a favorable jud#ment in an ejectment

case a#ainst % a resident of Nue9on City% from the Metropolitan $rial Court of Manila.

$he jud#ment% entered on /, Aune /00% had not as yet been eecuted. )n Auly 5++/% & decided to enforce the jud#ment of the Metropolitan $rial Court of

Manila.

With what court should & institute the proceedin#s ? 8Bar2 4


53/180

c. Co56)&'+! o% o0"%#8)%(&'( o "6"#+% %)+"!. The Re!ional Trial )ourt is acourt o !eneral "urisdiction. On the other hand$ Re'ublic Act No. 94=C$ as amended byresidential Decree No. 469 em'owered the ERB to re!ulate and i( the 'ower rates to bechar!ed by electric com'anies. The 'ower to i( rates o electric consum'tion does notcarry with it the 'ower to determine whether or not 'etitioner is !uilty o overchar!in!

customers or consum'tion o electric 'ower. This alls within the "urisdiction o the re!ularcourts.The ,uestion o determinin! the breakdown and itemi-ation o the 'ower ad"ustment

billed by an electric 'ower com'any to its customers is not a matter that 'ertains to theERBKs su'ervision$ control or "urisdiction to re!ulate and i( 'ower rate but alls within the"urisdiction o the re!ular courts. 8)a!ayan Electric ower and Li!ht )om'any$ &nc. v.)ollera $ et al.$ 0.R. No. 464>$ 'rom. A'ril 46$ 65

E(am'le2 Re!ular courts would have "urisdiction where the com'laint only alle!edthat )a!ayan Electric ower and Li!ht )om'any$ &nc. 8a 'ublic utility com'any5 char!edthe ull rate o electric consum'tion des'ite absence o any increases in the cost o ener!y.& the 'ublic utility com'any used the de'osits$ discounts$ surchar!es$ 'ower cost ad"ustment

8)A5 and the currency e(chan!e rate ad"ustment 8)ERA5 rates as instruments to obtainundue 'roits throu!h various loan activities and beneits 'rovided to its em'loyees$ then thecause o action a!ainst the 'ublic utility may have to be liti!ated beore the re!ular courts.8)a!ayan Electric ower and Li!ht )om'any$ &nc. v. )ollera$ et al.$ 0.R. No. 46 4>$'rom. A'ril 46$ 65

d. V&o6)+&o' o +8" O5'&?$! E6"#+% Co". 1nder %ec. 69> o the OmnibusElectric )ode$ RT)Ks have e(clusive "urisdiction to try and decide any criminal action or'roceedin! or violation o the )ode$ He(ce't those relatin! to the oense o ailure tore!ister or ailure to vote.I This is so even i the 'enalty does not e(ceed si( years. &t isevident rom %ec. C6$ B 46


54/180

The contract o carria!e between Mendo-a and %in!a'ore Airlines althou!h'erormed by dierent carriers under a series o airline tickets$ includin! that issued by'etitioner$ constitutes a sin!le o'eration. Members o the &ATA are under a !eneral 'ool'artnershi' a!reement wherein they act as a!ent o each other in the issuance o tickets tocontracted 'assen!ers to boost ticket sales worldwide and at the same time 'rovide

'assen!ers easy access to airlines which are otherwise inaccessible in some 'arts o theworld. Bookin! and reservation amon! airline members are allowed even by tele'hone andit has become an acce'ted 'ractice amon! them. A member airline which enters into acontract o carria!e consistin! o a series o tri's to be 'erormed by dierent carriers isauthori-ed t receive the are or the whole tri' and throu!ht the re,uired 'rocess o interlinesettlement o accounts by way o the &ATA clearin! house an airline is duly com'ensated orthe se!ment o the tri' serviced.

Thus$ when American Airlines acce'ted the unused 'ortion o the con"unction ticket$entered it in the &ATA clearin! house and undertook the trans'ort o Mendo-a over the routecovered by the unused 'ortion o the con"unction ticket$ i.e. 0eneva to New Fork$ AmericanAirlines tacitly reco!ni-ed its commitment under the &ATA 'ool arran!ement to act as a!ent

o the 'rinci'al contractin! airlines$ %in!a'ore Airlines$ as to the se!ment o the tri' the'etitioner a!reed to undertake. As such$ American Airlines thereby assumed the obli!ationto take the 'lace o the carrier ori!inally desi!nated in the ori!inal con"unction ticket.

The American Airlines ar!ument that it is not desi!nated carrier in the ori!inalcon"unction ticket and that it issued its own ticket is not decisive o its liability. The newticket was sim'ly a re'lacement or the unused 'ortion o the con"unction ticket$ both ticketsbein! or the same amount o 1%6$=9 and havin! the same 'oints o de'arture anddestination. By constitutin! itsel as an a!ent o the 'rinci'al carrier$ American AirlinesKundertakin! should be taken as 'art o a sin!le o'eration under the contract o carria!ee(ecuted by the 'rivate res'ondent and %in!a'ore Airlines in Manila. 8American Airlines v.)ourt o A''eals et al.$ 0.R. No. 449*$ 'rom. March


55/180

a. & any o the deendants does not reside and is not ound in the hili''ines$ b. And the action aects

45 The 'ersonal status o the 'lainti$ or65 +here the 'ro'erty or any 'ortion thereo is situated or is ound. 8%ec. C$

Rule $ RO)5

The venue o 'ersonal actions by a non*resident 'lainti a!ainst a resident deendantis7here the deendant may be summoned and his 'ro'erty leviable u'on e(ecution in caseo avorable$ inal and e(ecutory "ud!ment. 8in! Mau +i v. %yci'$ 0.R. No. L*>


56/180

a. I'!+)'#"! 78"%" ) !"#& %$6" %o0&" o% ) 0"'$" o+8"% +8)' +8)+ $'"%R$6" 3:

45 V"'$" o% +8" !"++6"5"'+ o +8" "!+)+" o "#")!" "%!o'! . & thedecedent is an inhabitant o the hili''ines at the time o his death$ whether a citi-enor an alien$ his will shall be 'roved$ or letters o administration !ranted$ and his

estate settled in the Re!ional Trial )ourt in the 'rovince in which he resides at thetime o his death$ and i he is an inhabitant o a orei!n country$ in the Re!ional Trial)ourt o any 'rovince which he had estate. 84st sentence$ %ec. 4$ Rule =C$ RO)5

65 E!#8")+ %o#""&'(!. +hen a 'erson dies intestate$ sei-ed o real or'ersonal 'ro'erty in the hili''ines$ leavin! no heir or 'erson by law entitled to thesame$ the %olicitor 0eneral or his re'resentative in behal o the Re'ublic o thehili''ines$ may ile a 'etition in the Re!ional Trial )ourt o the 'rovince where thedeceased last resided or in which he had estate$ i he resided out o the hili''ines.8%ec. 4$ Rule 5 udicial a''roval o voluntary reco!nition o minor natural children.+here "udicial a''roval o a voluntary reco!nition o a minor natural child isre,uired$ such child or his 'arents shall obtain the same by ilin! a 'etition to thateect with the Re!ional Trial )ourt o the 'rovince in which the child resides. 8%ec.4$ Rule 4$Ibid.5


57/180

cancellation or correction o any entry relatin! thereto$ with the Re!ional Trial )ourto the 'rovince where the corres'ondin! civil re!istry is located. 8%ec. 4$ Rule 4>$Ibid.5

465 etition or de'osition beore action. &n the court o the 'lace o theresidence o any e('ected adverse 'arty. 8%ec. 4$ Rule 6$Ibid.5

. 6nimasters% a corporation has for its principal place of business $acloban

City while Gubota has its principal place of business in Nue9on City. 6nimasters then

instituted suit a#ainst Gubota in $acloban City. Gubota now files a motion to dismiss

considerin# the contractual a#reement that% @&ll suits arisin# out of this reement shall

be filed withHin the proper Courts of Nue9on City.@ Resolve the motion to dismiss.

%100E%TED AN%+ER2 Denied. The a!reement does not contain additionalwords and e('ressions deinitely and unmistakably denotin! the 'arties desire and intentionthat actions between them should be ventilated only at the 'lace selected by them$ ;ue-on)ity * or other contractual 'rovisions clearly evincin! the same desire and intention. Thus$the sti'ulation should be construed$ not as coninin! suits between the 'arties only to that

one 'lace$ ;ue-on )ity$ but as allowin! suits either in ;ue-on )ity or Tacloban )ity$ at theo'tion o the 'lainti 1nimasters. 81nimasters )on!lomeration$ &nc. v. )ourt o A''eals$ etal.$ 69= %)RA =5

NOTE% AND )OMMENT%2a. R"$&%"5"'+! o% 5)')+o% o% %"!+%+&0" )(%""5"'+ ? +8" )%+&"! +o ?"

"+"%5&')+&0" o 0"'$".+here the 'arties have45 validly a!reed in writin!65 beore the ilin! o the actionC5 on the e(clusive venue thereo. 8%ec. ?b@$ Rule $ RO) arran!ement and

numberin! su''lied55 The waiver must not be contrary to 'ublic 'olicy or 're"udicial to third

'ersons. 81nimasters )on!lomeration$ &nc. v. )ourt o A''eals$ et al.$ 69= %)RA=


58/180

C5 #Jenue or all suits$ whether or breach thereo or dama!es or any causebetween the LE%%OR and LE%%EE$ and 'ersons claimin! under each$ 8shall be5the courts o a''ro'riate "urisdiction in asay )ity.# REA%ON2 The lan!ua!e usedleaves no room or inter'retation. &t clearly evinces the 'arties: intent to limit to the#courts o a''ro'riate "urisdiction o asay )ity# the venue o all suits between the

lessor and the lessee and those between 'arties claimin! under them. This means awaiver o their ri!ht to institute action in the courts 'rovided or in Rule $ %ec. 6.80esmundo v. RB Realty )or'oration$ 6C %)RA 4C5

d. PERMISSIVE )(%""5"'+ o' 0"'$"2 The 'arties may ile their suit not only inthe 'lace a!reed u'on but also in the 'laces i(ed by law 8s'eciically Rule o the Rules o)ourt5. 81nimasters )on!lomeration$ &nc. v. )ourt o A''eals$ et al.$ 69= %)RA = %)RA =5

5 #All actions arisin! out$ or relatin! to this contract may be instituted in the)ourt o irst &nstance o the )ity o Na!a.# REA%ON2 The 'arties did not a!ree toile their suits solely and e(clusively with the )ourt o /irst &nstance o Na!a 8nowRe!ional Trial )ourt5G they merely a!reed to submit their dis'utes to the said courtwithout waivin! their ri!ht to seek recourse in the courts s'eciically indicated in%ec. 6$ Rule o the Rules o )ourt. 8)a'ati v. Ocam'o$ 44C %)RA =


59/180

!. W)&0"% o 0"'$": That venue is im'ro'erly laid is amon! the !rounds or amotion to dismiss. 8%ection 4?c@$ Rule 49$ RO)5. & not raised in a motion to dismiss it maybe 'leaded as an airmative deense in the answer and$ in the discretion o the court$ a'reliminary hearin! may be had thereon as i a motion to dismiss had been iled. 8%ec. 9$Ibid.5

7owever$ D""'!"! )' o?*"#+&o'! 'o+ 6")" "&+8"% &' ) 5o+&o' +o &!5&!! o% &'+8" )'!7"% )%" ""5" 7)&0". 84st sentence$ %ec. 4$ Rule


60/180

12. What are the pleadin#s allowed under summary procedure ?

%100E%TED AN%+ER2 T8" o'6 6")&'(! )66o7" +o ?" &6" )%" +8"). #o56)&'+,

?. )'!7

Remedial Law} Review Notes of Prof Domondon} Made 2001} 180 Pages

Documents