University of Santo Tomas Faculty of Civil Law
REMEDIAL LAW Pre-week Notes 2017 ACADEMICS COMMITTEE SECRETARY GENERAL: CAMILLE ANGELICA B. GONZALES EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE: EMNIE VALERIE B. DURAN, IRVIN L. PALANCA, MARIELLA A. MARASIGAN, LARA NICOLE T. GONZALES
REMEDIAL LAW COMMITTEE COMMITTEE HEAD: TRISHA JESICA R. CABACUNGAN SUBJECT HEADS: MA. JASMINA A. LABACO, MAE SHARMANE T. PASTRANA AND JANINE AIRA A. ARENAS
MEMBERS: KARLYN MAE E. AGCAOILI, MELIZA VICTORIA C. ARIAS, AVA MA. DULCE S. TENDENILLA, KRISTINA TERESA M. DE JESUS, PHILIP JOSEPH C. PADLAN, MAE-DAWN G. ALBANO, ZAIRA NANCY N. DUQUILLA, MICA JOY S. FAJARDO, JENINAH A. CALIMLIM, JAIRUS VINCENT Z. BERNANDEZ, CZARAH LORAINE F. DY, HOWELL D. ICO, BETHANY V. MANGAHAS, MA. BIANCA G. MANGAHAS, FERDINAND B. MANSIBANG, KRISTINE ANGELA M. SURLA.
ATTY. MARK KEVIN U. DELLOSA ADVISERS
UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2017 QUESTIONS WITH THE SAME TOPIC ASKED IN THE 2015 AND 2016 BAR EXAMINATIONS JURISDICTION OF COURTS Lender extended to Borrower a P100,000.00 loan covered by a promissory note. Later, Borrower obtained another P100,000.00 loan again covered by a promissory note. Still later, Borrower obtained a P300,000.00 loan secured by a real estate mortgage on his land valued at P500,000.00. Borrower defaulted on his payments when the loans matured. Despite demand to pay the P500,000.00 loan, Borrower refused to pay. Lender, applying the totality rule, filed against Borrower with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila, a collection suit for P500,000.00. At the trial, Borrower's lawyer, while cross-examining Lender, successfully elicited an admission from the latter tha t the two promissory notes have been paid. Thereafter, Borrower's lawyer filed a motion to dismiss the case on the ground that as proven, only P300,000.00 was the amount due to Lender and which claim is within the exclusive srcinal jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Trial Court. He further argued that lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter can be raised at any stage of the proceedings. a.) Did Lender correctly apply the totality rule and the rule on joinder of causes of action? b.) Should the court dismiss the case? (2015 BAR)
No, the Family Court judge was not correct when he declined to resolve the constitutionality of R.A. No. 9262.The Supreme Court has held that despite its designation as a Family Court, a Regional Trial Court remains to possess authority as a court of general jurisdiction to resolve the constitutionality of a statute. (Garcia v. Drilon, June 25, 2013) State at least five (5) civil cases that fall under the exclusive srcinal jurisdiction of the Regional Trial Courts (RTCs). (2016 BAR) The following civil cases fall under the exclusive srcinal jurisdiction of the RTCs: 1. Actions where the demand or the value of the property in controversy exceeds P300,000, or, in Metro Manila, P400,000, exclusive of damages, attorney’s fees, litigation expenses, interests, and costs. 2. Real actions where the assessed value of the real property involved exceeds P20,000, or in Metro Manila, P50,000. 3. Actions whose subject matter is incapable of pecuniary estimation. 4. Probate cases where the gross value of the estate exceeds P300,000, or in Metro Manila, P400,000. 5. Actions not falling within the exclusive jurisdiction of any other court, tribunal, body, or person, exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions. SUMMONS
a) Yes, Lender correctly applied the totality rule and the rule on joinder of causes of action. Under the rule on joinder of causes of action, a party may in one pleading assert as many causes of action as he may have against an opposing party. Under the totality rule, where the claims in all the causes of action are principally for recovery of money, the aggregate amount claimed shall be the test of jurisdiction. Here, the causes of action by Lender are all against Borrower and all the claims are principally for recovery of money. Hence, the aggregate amount claimed, which is P500,000.00, shall be the test of jurisdiction and thus, it is the RTC of Manila which has jurisdiction. Although the rules on joinder of causes of action state that the joinder shall not include special civil actions, the remedy resorted to with respect to the third loan was not foreclosure but collection. Hence, joinder of causes of action would still be proper.
Circe filed with the RTC a complaint for the foreclosure of real estate mortgage against siblings Scylla and Charybdis, co-owners of the property and cosignatories to the mortgage deed. The siblings permanently reside in Athens, Greece. Circe tipped off Sheriff Pluto that Scylla is on a balikbayan trip and is billeted at the Century Plaza Hotel in Pasay City. Sheriff Pluto went to the hotel and personally served Scylla the summons, but the latter refused to receive summons for Charybdis as she was not authorized to do so. Sheriff Pluto requested Scylla for the email address and fax number of Charybdis which the latter readily gave. Sheriff Pluto, in his return of the summons, stated that "Summons for Scylla was served personally as shown by her signature on the receiving copy of the summons. Summons on Charybdis was served pursuant to the amendment of Rule 14 by facsimile transmittal of the summons and complaint on defendant's fax number as evidenced by transmission verification report automatically generated by the fax machine indicating that it was received by the fax number to which it was sent on the date and time indicated therein." Circe, 60 days after her receipt of Sheriff Pluto's return, filed a Motion to Declare Charybdis in default as the latter did not file any responsive pleading. On one hand, Scylla seasonably filed her answer setting forth therein as a defense that Charybdis had paid the mortgage debt. a.) Should the court declare Charybdis in default? b.) On the premise that Charybdis was properly declared in
b) No, the court should not dismiss the case. The Supreme Court has held that subject-matter jurisdiction is determined by the amount of the claim alleged in the complaint and not the amount substantiated during the trial (Dionisio v Sioson Puerto, 31 October 1974). Here, the amount claimed was P500,000.00. Even if the claim substantiated during the trial was only P300,000.00, said amount is not determinative of subject-matter jurisdiction. Hence, the argument that lack of subject-matter jurisdiction can be raised at any time is misplaced since the RTC has jurisdiction. Juliet, invoking the provisions of the Rule on Violence Against Women and their Children, filed with the RTC designated as a Family Court a petition for issuance of a Temporary Protection Order (TPO) against her husband, Romeo. The Family Court issued a 30-day TPO against Romeo. A day before the expiration of the TPO, Juliet filed a motion for extension. Romeo raised in his opposition, among others, the constitutionality of R.A. No. 9262 (VAWC Law) arguing that the law authorizing the issuance of a TPO violates the equal protection and due process clauses of the 1987 Constitution. The Family Court judge, in granting the motion for extension of the TPO, declined to rule on the constitutionality of R.A. No. 9262. He reasoned that Family Courts are without jurisdiction to pass upon constitutional issues as it is a special court of limited jurisdiction. Moreover, R.A. No. 8369, the law creating the Family Courts, does not provide for such jurisdiction. Is the Family Court judge correct when he declined to resolve the constitutionality of R.A. No. 9262? (2015 BAR)
default, what is the effect of Scylla's answer to the complaint? (2015 BAR) a) No, the court should not declare Charybdis in default. Under the Rules of Court, the amendment of Rule 14 allowing service of summons by facsimile transmittal refers only to service of summons upon a foreign private juridical entity (Section 12, Rule 14) , not to a non-resident defendant (Section 15, Rule 14).Service of summons by facsimile cannot be effected under Section 15 unless leave of court was obtained specifically permitting service by facsimile transmittal. Here, the defendant is not a foreign private juridical entity but a non-resident defendant and no leave of court was obtained to serve summons by facsimile. Hence, there was no valid service of summons, and thus, the court could not declare Charybdis in default.
1
REMEDIAL LAW b) As an effect of Scylla’s answer to the complaint, the court shall try the case against both Scylla and Charybdis based on the answer filed by Scylla. Under Section 3(c) of Rule 9, when a pleading asserting a claim states a common cause of action against several defending parties, some of whom answer and the others fail to do so, the court shall try the case against all upon the answers thus filed and render judgment upon the evidence presented. Here, there was a common cause of action against Scylla and Charybdis since both were cosignatories to the mortgage deed. Hence, the court should not render judgment by default against Charybdis but should proceed to try the case upon the answer filed and the evidence presented by Scylla.
service, which includes service by publication, may be availed of in actions where the subject of which is property within the Philippines, in which the defendant has or claims a lien or interest, or in which the relief demanded consists in excluding the defendant from any interest therein. Here, the action for reconveyance has for its subject a real property in the Philippines, in the defendant’s name, and in which the relief sought is to annul the defendant’s title and vest it in the plaintiff. While Jojo is correct in saying that the action for reconveyance is in personam (Republic v. CA, 315 SCRA 600, 606), the test of whether an action is covered by Sec. 15 of Rule 14 is not its technical characterization asin remor quasi in rembut whether it is among those mentioned in s aid provision. (See Baltazar v. Court of Appeals, 168 SCRA 354, 363)
Juan sued Roberto for specific performance. Roberto knew that Juan was going to file the case so he went out of town and temporarily stayed in another city to avoid service of summons. Juan engaged the services of Sheriff Matinik to serve the summons but when the latter went to the residence of Roberto, he was told by the caretaker thereof that his employer no longer resides at the house. The caretaker is a high school graduate and is the godson of Roberto. Believing the caretaker's story to be true, Sheriff Matinik left a copy of the summons and complaint with the caretaker. Was there a valid substituted service of summons? Discuss the requirements for a valid service of summons. (2016 BAR)
MODES OF DISCOVERY Ernie filed a petition for guardianship over the person and properties of his father, Ernesto. Upon receipt of the notice of hearing, Ernesto filed an opposition to the petition. Ernie, before the hearing of the petition, filed a motion to order Ernesto to submit himself for mental and physical examination which the court granted. After Ernie's lawyer completed the presentation of evidence in support of the petition and the court's ruling on the formal offer of evidence, Ernesto's lawyer filed a demurrer to evidence. Ernie's lawyer objected on the ground that a demurrer to evidence is not proper in a special proceeding.xxx If Ernesto defies the court's order directing him to submit to physical and mental examinations, can the court order his arrest? (2015 BAR)
Yes, there was a valid service of summons. In a case involving similar facts, the Supreme Court held that there was a valid substituted service of summons since the defendant was engaged in deception to thwart the orderly administration of justice. Here, the defendant was also engaged in deception since he temporarily stayed in another city to avoid service of summons and his caretaker falsely said he no longer resides in the house. (Sagana v. Francisco, Oct 2, 2009)
No, the court cannot order Ernesto’s arrest. Under Section 3(d) of Rule 29, a court cannot direct the arrest of a party for disobeying an order to submit to a physical or mental examination. The court may impose other penalties, such as
The are: requirements for a valid substituted service of summons
rendering by default or issuing an order physical orjudgment mental condition of the disobedient partythat shallthe be taken as established in accordance with the claim of the party obtaining the order.
1. The defendant, for justifiable reasons, cannot be personally served with summons within a reasonable time.
[a] Briefly explain the procedure on "Interrogatories to Parties" under Rule 25 and state the effect of failure to serve written interrogatories. [b] Briefly explain the procedure on "Admission by Adverse Party" under Rule 26 and the effect of failure to file and serve the request. (2016 BAR)
2. Copies of the summons shall be left at the defendant’s residence with some person of suitable age and discretion residing therein, or by leaving the copies at defendant’s office or regular place of business with some competent person in charge thereof. [Note: The call should be read as referring only to a valid substitutedservice of summons; otherwise, the answer would be kilometric as there are several ways to serve summons under Rule 14.]
(a) The procedure on “Interrogatories to Parties” under Rule 25 is briefly explained as follows: (1) A party desiring to elicit material and relevant facts from an adverse party shall file and serve upon the latter written interrogatories to be answered by the latter; (2) The interrogatories shall be answered fully in writing and shall be signed and sworn to by the person making them. The interrogatories shall be answered within 15 days from service thereof. The answers may be used for the same purposes provided for in Section 4 of Rule 23 on depositions; (3) Objections to any
Tristan filed a suit with the RTC of Pasay against Arthur King and/or Estate of Arthur King for reconveyance of a lot declared in the name of Arthur King under TCT No. 1234. The complaint alleged that "on account Arthur King's residence abroad up to the present and the uncertainty of whether he is still alive or dead, he or his estate may be served with summons by publication." Summons was published and nobody filed any responsive pleading within sixty (60) days therefrom. Upon motion, defendants were declared in default and judgment was rendered declaring Tristan as legal owner and ordering defendants to reconvey said lot to Tristan. Jojo, the courtdesignated administrator of Arthur King's estate, filed a petition for annulment of judgment before the CA praying that the decision in favor of Tristan be declared null and void for lack of jurisdiction. He claims that the action filed by Tristan is an action in personam and that the court did not acquire jurisdiction over defendants Arthur King and/or his estate. On the other hand, Tristan claims that the suit is an action in rem or at least, an action quasi in rem. Is the RTC judge correct in ordering service of summons by publication? Explain. (2016 BAR)
interrogatories may be made within 10 days after service thereof. The effect of the failure to serve written interrogatories is that unless allowed by the court for good cause shown and to prevent a failure of justice, a party not served with written interrogatories may not be compelled by the adverse party to give testimony in open court, or to give a deposition pending appeal.
(b) The procedure on “Admission by Adverse Party” under Rule 25 is briefly explained as follows: (1) At any time after issues have been joined, a party may file and serve upon any other party a written request for the admission by the latter of the genuineness of any material and relevant document or the truth of any material and relevant matter of fact; (2) Each of the matters of which an admission is requested shall be deemed admitted unless, within the period designated in the request, which shall not be less than 15 days after service thereof, the party to whom the request is directed files and
Yes, the RTC judge is correct in ordering service of summons by publication. Under Sect. 15 of Rule 14, extraterritorial
2
UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2017 testimonial evidence. It is simply a witness’ testimony reduced to writing in affidavit form. This is shown by Sec. 6 of the Judicial Affidavit Rule which states that the offer of testimony in judicial affidavit shall be made at the start of the presentation of the witness. Hence, the motion for reconsideration on the ground that Juan’s judicial affidavit was documentary evidence which was not orally offered is without merit.
serves upon the requesting party a sworn statement either denying specifically the matters of which an admission is requested or setting forth in detail why he cannot truthfully either admit or deny t hose matter; (3) Objections t o any request for admission shall be submitted to the court within the period for and prior to the filing of his sworn statement. The effect of the failure to file and serve request for admission is that, unless allowed by the court for good cause shown and to prevent a failure of justice, a party who fails to file and serve a request for admission on the adverse party of material and relevant facts at issue which are, or ought to be, within the personal knowledge of the latter, shall not be allowed to present evidence on such facts.
What are the contents of a judicial affidavit? (2016 BAR) The contents of a judicial affidavit are as follows: (a) The name, age, residence or business address, and occupation of the witness;
[a] What is the "most im portant witness" rule pursuant to the 2004 Guidelines of Pre-trial and Use of DepositionDiscovery Measures? Explain. [b] What is the "one-day examination of witness" rule pursuant to said 2004 Guidelines? Explain. (2016 BAR)
(b) The name and address of the lawyer who conducts or supervises the examination of the witness and the place where the examination is being held;
(a) The “most important witness” rule pursuant to the 2004 Guidelines of Pre-trial and Use of Deposition-Discovery Measures provides that the judge shall, during the pre-trial conference, determine the most important witnesses to be heard and limit the number of witnesses. (b) The “one-day examination of a witness” rule pursuant to the 2004 Guidelines of Pre-trial and Use of Deposition-Discovery Measures provides that a witness has to be fully examined in one day only, subject to the court’s discretion to extend the direct and/or cross-examination for justifiable reasons.
(c) A statement that the witness is answering the questions asked of him, fully conscious that he does so under oath, and that he may face criminal liability for false testimony or perjury; (d) Questions asked of the witness and his corresponding answers, consecutively numbered, that: [1.] show the circumstances under which the witness acquired the facts upon which he testifies; [2.] elicit from him those facts which are relevant to the issues that the case presents; and [3.] identify the attached documentary and object evidence and establish their authenticity in accordance with the Rules of Court;
JUDICIAL AFFIDAVIT RULE Pedro was charged with theft for stealing Juan's cellphone worth P10,000.00. Prosecutor Marilag at th e pre-trial submitted the judicial affidavit of Juan attaching the receipt for the purchase of the cellphone to prove civil liability. She also submitted the judicial affidavit of Mario, an eyewitness who narrated therein how Pedro stole Juan's cellphone. At the trial, Pedro's lawyer objected to the prosecution's use of judicial affidavits of her witnesses considering the imposable penalty on the offense with which his client was charged a.) Is Pedro's lawyer correct in objecting the use of judicial affidavit of Mario? b.) Is Pedro's lawyer correct in objecting the use of judicial affidavit of Juan?
(e) The signature of the witness over his printed name; and, (f) A jurat with the signature of the notary public who administers the oath or an officer who is authorized by law to administer the same. RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CASES A law was passed declaring Mt. Karbungko as a protected area since it was a major watershed. The protected area covered a portion located in Municipality A of the Province I and a portion located in the City of Z of Province II. Maingat is the leader of Samahan ng Tagapag-ingat ng Karbungko (STK), a people's organization. He learned that a portion of the mountain located in the City of Z of Province II was extremely damaged when it was bulldozed and leveled to the ground, and several trees and plants were cut down and burned by workers of World Pleasure Resorts, Inc. (WPRI) for the construction of a hotel and golf course. Upon inquiry with the project site engineer if they had a permit for the project, Maingat was shown a copy of the Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC) issued by the DENR-EMB Regional Director (RD-DENREMB).Immediately, Maingat and STK filed a petition for the issuance of a writ of continuing mandamus against RD-
At the conclusion of the prosecution's presentation of evidence, Prosecutor Marilag orally offered the receipt attached to Juan's judicial affidavit, which the court admitted over the objection of Pedro's lawyer. After Pedro's presentation of his evidence, the court rendered judgment finding him guilty as charged and holding him civilly liable for P20,000.00. Pedro's lawyer seasonably filed a motion for reconsi deration of the decision asserting that the court erred in awarding civil liability on the basis of Juan's judicial affidavit, a documentary evidence which Prosecutor Marilag failed to orally offer. c.) Is the motion for reconsideration meritorious? (2015 BAR)
DENR-EMB WPRI withcourt, the RTC of RD-DENR-EMB Province I, a designated and environmental as the negligently issued the ECC to WPRI. On scrutiny of the petition, the court determined that the area where the alleged actionable neglect or omission subject of the petition took place in the City of Z of Province II, and therefore, cognizable by the RTC of Province II. Thus, the court dismissed outright the petition for lack of jurisdiction. a.) Was the court correct in motu proprio dismissing the petition? Assuming that the court did not dismiss the petition, the RD-DENR-EMB, in his Comment, moved to dismiss the petition on the ground that petitioners failed to appeal the issuance of the ECC and to exhaust administrative remedies provided in the DENR Rules and Regulations. b.) Should the court dismiss the petition? (2015 BAR)
a) No, Pedro’s lawyer is not correct in objecting the use of judicial affidavit of Mario. The Judicial Affidavit Rule applies to criminal actions where the maximum of the imposable penalty does not exceed six years. Here, the penalty for theft of property not exceeding P12,000.00 does not exceed 6 years. Hence, the Judicial Affidavit Rule applies. b) No, Pedro's lawyer is not correct in objecting the use of judicial affidavit of Juan. The Judicial Affidavit Rule applies with respect to the civil aspect of the criminal actions, whatever the penalties involved are. Here, the purpose of introducing the judicial affidavit of Juan was to prove his civil liability. c) No, the motion for reconsideration is not meritorious. A judicial affidavit is not documentary evidence but a
3
REMEDIAL LAW before the Supreme Court over a complaint for damages before the RTC of Marinduque or vice-versa. What action will you recommend? Explain. (2016 BAR)
a) No, the court was not correct in motu proprio dismissing the petition for lack of jurisdiction. In a case involving similar facts, the Supreme Court held that the requirement wherein the petition be filed in the area where the actionable neglect or omission took place relates to venue and not to subjectmatter jurisdiction. Since what is involved is improper venue and not subject-matter jurisdiction, it was wrong for the court to dismiss outright the petition since venue may be waived. (Dolot v. Paje, August 27, 2013)
I will recommend the filing of a Petition for the Issuance of a Writ of Kalikasan. The following are the advantages of such petition over a civil complaint for damages. Firstly, there will be no issue regarding the legal standing or legal capacity of the AKAI to file the action. Section 1, Rule 7 of the Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases (RPEC) provides that the writ of kalikasan is available to a people’s organization, non governmental organization, or any public interest group. On the other hand, the legal capacity of AKAI to file an action for damages in behalf of its members may be questioned since a corporation has a personality separate from that of its members.
b) No, the court should not dismiss the petition. The Supreme Court has held that in environmental cases, the defense of failure to exhaust administrative remedies by appealing the ECC issuance would apply only if the defect in the issuance of the ECC does not have any causal relation to the environmental damage. Here, the issuance of the ECC has a direct causal relation to the environmental damage since it permitted the bulldozing of a portion of the mountain and the cutting down and burning of several trees and plants. (See Paje v. Casiño, February 3, 2015)
Secondly, the petitioner in a petition for writ of kalikasan is exempt from the payment of docket fees, unlike in a civil complaint for damages.
Hannibal, Donna, Florence and Joel, concerned residents of Laguna de Bay, filed a complaint for mandamus against the Laguna Lake Development Authority, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, the Department of Public Work and Highways, Department of Interior and Local Government, Department of Agriculture, Department of Budget, and Philippine National Police before the RTC of Laguna alleging that the continued neglect of defendants in performing their duties has resulted in serious deterioration of the water quality of the lake and degradation of the marine life in the lake. The plaintiffs prayed that said government agencies be ordered to clean up Laguna de Bay and restore its water quality to Class C waters as prescribed by Presidential Decree No. 1152, otherwise known as the Philippine Environment Code. Defendants raised the defense that the cleanup of the lake is not a ministerial function and they cannot be compelled by mandamus to perform the same. The RTC of Laguna rendered a decision declaring that it is the duty of the agencies to clean up Laguna de Bay and issued a permanent writ of mandamus ordering said agencies to perform their duties prescribed by law relating to the cleanup of Laguna de Bay. [a] Is the RTC correct in issuing the writ of mandamus? Explain. [b] What is the writ of continuing mandamus? (2016 BAR)
Thirdly, in a petition for writ of kalikasan, the petitioners may avail of the precautionary principle in environmental cases which provides that when human activities may lead to threats of serious and irreversible damage to the environment that is scientifically plausible but uncertain, an action shall be taken to avoid or diminish the threat. In effect, the precautionary principle shifts the burden of evidence of harm away from those likely to suffer harm and onto those desiring to change the status quo. In a civil complaint for damages, the burden of proof to show damages is on the plaintiff.
(a) Yes, the RTC is correct. In MMDA v. Concerned Residents of Manila Bay, 18 December 2008,the SC held that the cleaning or rehabilitation of Manila Bay can be compelled by mandamus. While the term issued by the RTC of Laguna is a permanentwrit of mandamus, this should be considered only as a semantic error and what the RTC really intended to issue is a writ of continuingmandamus. There is no such thing as a permanent writ of mandamus since the writ shall cease to be effective once the judgment is fully satisfied.
Aldrin entered into a contract to sell with Neil over a parcel of land. The contract stipulated a P500,000.00 down payment upon signing and the balance payable in twelve (12) monthly installments of P100,000.00. Aldrin paid the down payment and had paid three (3) monthly installments when he found out that Neil had sold the same property to Yuri for P1.5 million paid in cash. Aldrin sued Neil for specific performance with damages with the RTC. Yuri, with leave of court, filed an answer-inintervention as he had already obtained a TCT in his name. After the trial, the court rendered judgment ordering Aldrin to pay all the instalments due, the cancellation of Yuri's title, and Neil to execute a deed of sale in favor of Aldrin. When the judgment became final and executory, Aldrin paid Neil all the installments but the latter refused to execute the deed of sale in favor of the former. Aldrin filed a "Petition for the Issuance of a Writ of Execution" with proper notice of hearing. The petition alleged, among others, that the decision had become final and executory and that he is entitled to the issuance of the writ of execution as a matter of right. Neil filed a motion to dismiss the petition on the ground that it lacked the required certification against forum shopping. Should the court grant Neil's Motion to Dismiss? (2015 BAR)
Finally, the judgment in a petition for writ of kalikasan is immediately executor, unlike in a civil complaint for damages. The advantage of the civil complaint for damages is that the court may award damages to the petitioners for the injury suffered which is not the case in a petition for writ of kalikasan. At any rate, a person who avails of the writ of kalikasan may also file a separate suit for the recovery of damages. VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION AGAINST FORUM SHOPPING
(b) The writ of continuing mandamus is a writ issued by a court in an environmental case directing any agency or instrumentality of the government or officer thereof to perform an act or series of acts decreed by final judgment which shall remain effective until judgment is fully satisfied. The officers of "Ang Kapaligiran ay Alagaan, Inc." (AKAI) availed your services to file an action against ABC Mining Corporation which is engaged in mining operations in Sta. Cruz, Marinduque. ABC used highly toxic chemicals in extracting gold. ABC's toxic mine tailings were accidentally released from its storage dams and were discharged into the rivers of said town. The mine tailings found their way to Calancan Bay and allegedly to the waters of nearby Romblon and Quezon. The damage to the crops and loss of earnings were estimated at P1 Billion and the damage to the environment was estimated at P1 Billion. As lawyer for the organization, you are requested to explain the advantages derived from a petition for writ of kalikasan
No, the court should not grant Neil’s Motion to Dismiss. Under Section 5 of Rule 7, a certification against forum shopping is required only for initiatory pleadings or petitions. Here, the “Petition for the Issuance of a Writ of Execution,” although
4
UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2017 Defendant filed a motion for summary judgment on the ground that there are no triable genuine issues of facts. b.) Should the court grant defendant's motion for summary judgment? (2015 BAR)
erroneously denominated as a petition, is actually a motion for issuance of a writ of execution under Rule 39. Hence, the motion to dismiss on the ground of lack of certification against forum shopping should be denied.
a) No, judgment on the pleadings is not proper. Under Section 2 of Rule 8, a party may set forth two or more statements of a defense, alternatively or hypothetically. The Supreme Court has held that inconsistent defenses may be pleaded alternatively or hypothetically provided that each defense is consistent with itself. (Baclayon v. Court of Appeals, February 26, 1990) Hence, plaintiff’s contention that defendant’s answer failed to tender an issue as his defenses are sham for being inconsistent is without merit.
Tailors Toto, Nelson and Yenyen filed a special civil action for certiorari under Rule 65 from an adverse decision of the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) on the complaint for illegal dismissal against Empire Textile Corporation. The petitoners were terminated on the ground that they failed to meet the prescribed production quota at least four (4) times. The NLRC decision was assailed in a special civil action under Rule 65 before the Court of Appeals (CA). In the verification and certification against forum shopping, only Toto signed the verification
b) Yes, the court should grant defendant’s motion for summary judgment. Under Section 2 of Rule 35, a defendant may at any time, move with supporting admissions for a summary judgment in his favor. Here, the plaintiff had impliedly admitted the genuineness and due execution of the acknowledgment receipt, which was the basis of defendant’s defense, by failing to specifically deny it under oath. Hence, the defendant may move for a summary judgment on the basis that the plaintiff had admitted that the defendant had already paid his obligation amounting to P1 Million.
and certification, while Atty. Arman signed for Nelson. Empire filed a motion to dismiss on the ground of defective verification and certification. Decide with reasons. (2016 BAR) The motion to dismiss on the ground of defective verification should be denied. The Supreme Court has held that a lawyer may verify a pleading in behalf of the client. Moreover, verification is merely a formal and not a jurisdictional requirement. The court should not dismiss the case but merely require the party concerned to rectify the defect.
Royal Bank (Royal) filed a complaint for a sum of money against Ervin and Jude (defendants) before the RTC of Manila. The initiatory pleading averred that on February 14, 2010, Ervin obtained a loan from Royal in the amount of P1 Million, as evidenced by Promissory Note No. 007 (PN) signed by Ervin. Jude signed a Surety Agreement binding herself as surety for the loan. Royal made a final demand on February 14, 2015 for the defendants to pay, but to no avail. Royal prayed that defendants Ervin and Jude be ordered to pay the amount of P1 Million plus interests. In their answer, Ervin admitted that he obtained
The motion to dismiss on the ground of defective certification against forum-shopping should likewise be denied. Under reasonable or justifiable circumstances, when all the plaintiffs or petitioners share a common interest and invoke a common cause of action or defense, the signature of only one of them in the certification against forum shopping substantially complies with the Rule. (Jacinto v. Gumaru, June 2, 2014). Here, the petitioners have a common interes t and invoke a common cause of action, that is, their illegal dismissal by Empire Textile Corporation for failure to meet production quotas.
the loan from Royal and signed the PN. Jude also admitted that she signed the Surety Agreement. Defendants pointed out that the PN did not provide the due date for payment, and that the loan has not yet matured as the maturity date was left blank to be agreed upon by the parties at a later date. The defendants filed a Motion for a Judgment on the Pleadings on the ground that there is no genuine issue presented by the parties' submissions. Royal opposed the motion on the ground that the PN's maturity is an issue that must be threshed out during trial. (a) Resolve the motion with reasons. (b) Distinguish "Summary Judgment" and "Judgment on the Pleadings." (2016 BAR)
JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS AND SUMMARY JUDGMENT Plaintiff sued defendant for collection of P1 million based on the latter's promissory note. The complaint alleges, among others: 1) Defendant borrowed P1 million from plaintiff as evidenced by a duly executed promissory note; 2) The promissory note reads: "Makati, Philippines Dec. 30, 2014
(a) The Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings should be denied. Under the Rules of Civil Procedure, a motion f or judgment on the pleadings may be filed only by the plaintiff or the claimant. Here, it was the defendants, not the plaintiff Royal Bank, which filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings. Hence, the motion should be denied.
For value received from plaintiff, defendant promises to pay plaintiff P1 million, twelve (12) months from the above indicated date without necessity of demand. Signed Defendant"
(b) A summary judgment is distinguished from a judgment on
A copy of the promissory note is attached as Annex "A."
the pleadings as follows:
Defendant, in his verified answer, alleged among others: 1) Defendant specifically denies the allegation in paragraphs 1 and 2 of the complaint, the truth being defendant did not execute any promissory note in favor of plaintif; or, 2) Defendant has paid the P1 million claimed in the promissory note (Annex "A" of the Complaint) as evidenced by an "Acknowledgment Receipt" duly executed by plaintiff on January 30, 2015 in Manila with his spouse signing as witness. A copy of the "Acknowledgment Receipt" is attached as Annex "1" hereof. The plaintiff filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings on the ground that the defendant's answer failed to tender an issue as the allegations on his defenses are sham for being inconsistent; hence, no defense at all. Defendant filed an opposition claiming his answer tendered an issue. a.) Is judgment on the pleadings proper?
1. A summary judgment is proper even if there is a remaining issue as to the amount of damages, while a judgment on the pleadings is proper if it appears that there is no genuine issue between the parties. 2. A summary judgment is based not only on the pleadings but also upon affidavits, depositions, and admissions showing that, except as to the amount of damages, there is no genuine issue, while a judgment on the pleadings is based exclusively upon the pleadings without the presentation of any evidence. 3. A motion for summary judgment requires 10-day notice (Sec. 3, Rule 35),while a motion for judgment on the pleadings is subject to a 3-day notice rule (Sec. 4, Rule 15). 4. A summary judgment may be prayed for by a defending party (Sec. 2, Rule 35), while a judgment on the pleadings may be prayed for only by a plaintiff or claimant.
5
REMEDIAL LAW GENERAL PRINCIPLES Substantive Law vs. Remedial Law
Substantive Law Remedial Law Part of the law which creates, defines or regulates rights Prescribes the methods of enforcing those rights and obligations concerning life, liberty or property (Primicias v. Ocampo, 81 Philcreated by substantive law (Bustos v. Lucero, 81 Phil 640) by 650) or the powers of agencies or instrumentalities for the providing a procedural system for obtaining redress for the administration of public affairs, which when violated gives rise to invasion of rights and creation of duties, and by laying out rules as a cause of action (Bustos v. Lucero, 81 Phil 640). to how suits are filed, tried, and decided upon by courts (Riano, 2014). Creates vested rights Does not create vested rights GR: May be applied retroactively
Generally prospective in application
NOTE:A person has no vested right in any particular remedy, and a litigant cannot insist on the application to the trial of his case, other than the existing rules of procedure (Tan Jr. v. CA, G.R. No. 136368, January 16, 2002).
XPNs: 1. The statute itself expressly or by necessary implication provides that pending actions are excepted from its operation; 2. If it would impair vested rights; 3. Under appropriate circumstances, courts may deny the retroactive application of procedural laws in the event that to do so would not be feasible or would work injustice; 4. If to do so would involve intricate problems of due process or impair the independence of the courts (Tan Jr. v. CA, G.R. No. 136368, January 16, 2002). The SC is expressly empowered to promulgate procedural rules.
Enacted by Congress
NOTE:If the rule creates a right such as the right to appeal, it may be classified as substantive law; but if it operates as a means of implementing an existing right, then the rule deals merely with procedure (Fabian v. Desierto, G.R. No. 129742, September 16, 1998).
Doctrine of Non-Interference or Doctrine of Judicial Stability No court can interfere by injunction with the judgments or orders of another court of concurrent jurisdiction having the power to grant the relief sought by the injunction (Atty. Cabili v. Judge Balindog, A.M. No. RTJ-10-2225, September 6, 2011). The doctrine does not apply where a third party claimant is involved (Santos v. Bayhon, G.R. No. 88643, July 23, 1991).
Rule-Making Power of the Supreme Court The Supreme Court has the sole prerogative to amend, repeal, or even establish new rules for a more simplified an inexpensive process, and the speedy disposition of cases. (Neypes vs. CA, G.R. No. 141524, September 14, 2005)
The rationale for the rule is founded on the concept of jurisdiction – a court that acquires jurisdiction over the case and renders judgment therein has jurisdiction over its judgment, to the exclusion of all other courts, for its execution and over all its incidents, and to control, in furtherance of justice, the conduct of ministerial officers acting in connection with this judgment (De Leon v. Hon. Salvador, et al., 146 Phil. 1051).
Limitations of the Rule-Making Power The Rules shall – 1. provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure for the speedy disposition of cases; 2. be uniform for the courts of the same grade; and, 3. not diminish, increase, or modify substantive rights. (Sec. 5(5), Art. VIII, 1987 Constitution )
Principle of Judicial Hierarchy
Courts of Law vs. Courts of Equity
Courts of Law Any tribunal duly administering the laws of the land
Decides a case according to the promulgated law
The principle provides that lower courts shall initially decide a case before it is considered by a higher court. A higher court will not entertain direct resort to it unless the redress desired cannot be obtained in the appropriate courts (Santiago v. Vasquez, G.R. Nos. 99289-90, January 27, 1993).
Courts of Equity Any tribunal administering justice outside the law, being ethical rather than jural and belonging to the sphere of morals rather than of law. It is grounded on the precepts of conscience and not on any sanction of positive law, for equity finds no room for application where there is law (Herrera, 2007). Adjudicates a controversy according to the common precepts of what is right and just without inquiring into the terms of the statutes
JURISDICTION Does the filing of pleadings seeking affirmative reliefs constitute voluntary appearance?
YES. Seeking affirmative relief constitutes voluntary appearance, and the consequent submission of one’s person to the jurisdiction of the court. However,pleadings whose prayer is precisely for the avoidance of the jurisdiction of the court only leads to a special appearance. These pleadings are: 1.
6
In civil cases , motions to dismiss on the ground of lack of jurisdiction over the person of the defendant, whether or not other grounds for dismissal are included;
UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2017 2.
3.
In criminal cases , motions to quash a complaint on the ground of lack of jurisdiction over the person of the accused; and, Motion to quash a warrant of arrest.
1.
The first two are consequences of the fact that failure to file them would constitute a waiver of the defense of lack of jurisdiction over the person. The third is a consequence of the fact that it is the very legality of the court process forcing the submission of the person of the accused that is the very issue. (Miranda v. Tuliao, G.R. No. 158763, March 31, 2006 ).
2.
Can jurisdiction over subject matter be waived? No, it cannot be waived (Sec. 1, Rule 9),except in exceptional
3.
cases the other party barred by estoppel laches (Tijamwhen v. Sibonghanoy, G.R. is No. L-21450, April 15,by 1968).
Estoppel by laches. SC barred a belated objection to jurisdiction that was raised only after an adverse decision was rendered by the court against the party raising the issue of jurisdiction and after seeking affirmative relief from the court and after participating in all stages of the proceedings (Tijam v. Sibonghanoy, G.R. No. L-21450, April 15, 1968). Public policy. One cannot question the jurisdiction which he invoked, not because the decision is valid and conclusive as an adjudication, but because it cannot be tolerated by reason of public policy (Filipinas Shell Petroleum Corp. v. Dumlao, G.R. No. L-44888, February 7, 1992). A party who invokes the jurisdiction of the court to secure affirmative relief his opponents repudiate or question theagainst same after failing to cannot obtain such relief (Tajonera v. Lamaroza, G.R. Nos. L-48907 & 49035, January 19, 1982).
In jurisdiction over the subject matter, is tenancy relationship presumed?
Under the Omnibus Motion Rule, a motion attacking a pleading like a motion to dismiss shall include all grounds then available and all objections not so included shall be deemed waived (Sec. 8, Rule 15). Even in the absence of lack of jurisdiction raised in a motion to dismiss, a party may, when he files an answer, still raise the lack of jurisdiction as an affirmative defense because such defense is not barred under the Omnibus Motion Rule.
Tenancy relationship is not presumed and it is not enough that it is alleged. There must be evidence to prove that it exists and that all its elements are established (Salmorin v. Zaldivar, G.R. No. 169691, July 23, 2008). When does an error of judgment not render a judgment void or at least, voidable? When the party raising the issue is barred by estoppel. (BPI vs. ALS Management & Development Corporation, G.R. No. 151821, April 14, 2004) Doctrine of Primary Jurisdiction Courts will not resolve a controversy involving a question which is within of an administrative tribunal, especially wherethe thejurisdiction question demands the exercise of sound administrative discretion requiring the special knowledge and experience of said tribunal in determining technical and intricate matters of fact (Villaflor v. CA, G.R. No. 95694, October 9, 1997).
Effect of estoppel on objections to jurisdiction
The Doctrine inTijam v. Sibonghanoy on estoppel by . The ruling in Tijam that a laches is NOT the general rule party is estopped from questioning the jurisdiction applies only to exceptional circumstances. What is still controlling is that jurisdiction over the subject matter of the action is a matter of law andparties may not be conferred by consent or Lagreement of the (Calimlim v. Ramirez, G.R. No. 34362, November 19, 1982). How is jurisdiction over the res acquired? It is acquired either by:
Doctrine of Ancillary Jurisdiction 1. 2.
It involves the inherent or implied powers of the court to determine issues incidental to the exercise of its primary jurisdiction.
3.
NOTE:Under its ancillary jurisdiction, a court may determine all questions relative to the matters brought before it, regulate the manner in which a trial shall be conducted, determine the hours at which the witnesses and lawyers may be heard, and grant an injunction, attachment or garnishment.
4.
The seizure of the property under legal process; As a result of the institution of legal proceedings, in which the power of the court is recognized and made effective (Banco Español Filipino v. Palanca, 37 Phil. 291) ; The court by placing the property of thing under its custody (custodia legis) . Example: attachment of property; and, The court through statutory authority conferring upon it the power to deal with the property or thing within the court’s territorial jurisdiction. Example: Suits involving the status of the parties or suits involving the property in the Philippines of non-resident defendants (Riano, 2011).
Doctrine of Adherence of Jurisdiction or Continuity of Jurisdiction
When is the Totality or Aggregate Rule not applicable?
Under this doctrine, once jurisdiction has attached, it cannot be ousted by subsequent happenings or events, although of a character which would have prevented jurisdiction from attaching in the first instance. The court, once jurisdiction has been acquired, retains that jurisdiction, until it finally disposes of the case (Padlan vs. Dinglasan, G.R. No. 180321, March 20, 2013).Even the finality of the judgment does not totally deprive the court of jurisdiction over the case. What the court loses is the power to amend, modify, or alter the judgment. Even after the judgment has become final, the court retains the jurisdiction to enforce and execute it. (Republic vs. Atlas Farms, G.R. No. 141975, November 20, 2000)
The totality rule is not applicable if the claims are separate and distinct from each other and did not arise from the same transaction. In the case Flores v. Mallare Philips, G.R. No. L66620, September 24, 1986 , the SC did not apply the totality test where there are two claims filed by Flores - the first cause of action was against Ignacio Binongcal and the second was against Fernando Calion for allegedly refusing to pay an amount representing cost of truck tires. When is a claim for damages determinative of the jurisdictional amount? If the main action is for the recovery of sum of money and the damages being claimed are merely the consequences of the main cause of action, the same are not included in determining the jurisdictional amount.
Exceptions to the rule that objections to jurisdiction over the subject matter may be raised at any stage of the proceedings and even for the first time on appeal
7
REMEDIAL LAW The "independent" character of these civil actions does not do away with the reservation requirement. In other words, prior reservation is a condition sine qua nonbefore any of these independent civil actions can be instituted (San Ildefonso Lines, Inc. v. CA, G.R. No. 119771, April 24, 1998) Otherwise, they will be deemed to have been instituted with the criminal case ( Hambon v. CA, G.R. No. 122150, March 17, 2003).
However, in cases where the claim for damages is the main cause of action, or one of the causes of action, the amount of such claim shall be considered in determining the jurisdiction of the court (Albano, 2010) . How are appeals from judgments and final orders of quasijudicial agencies made?
Can there be a right of action where there is no cause of action?
Appeals from judgments and final orders of quasi-judicial agencies are now required to be brought to the Court of Appeals on a verified petition for review, under the requirements and conditions in Rule 43 which was precisely formulated and adopted to provide for a uniform rule of appellate procedure for quasi-judicial agencies.
The rule is “there is no right of action where there is no cause of action”.
Where are appeals involving orders arising from administrative disciplinary cases and criminal cases srcinating from the Office of the Ombudsman filed?
Cause of Action It is the act or omission by which a party violates a right of another (Sec. 2, Rule 2)(1999 Bar) .
1. Administrative cases - before the CA under Rule 43 2. Criminal cases - before the SC under Rule 65
The question as to whether a plaintiff has a cause of action is determined by the averments in the pleadings pertaining to the acts of the defendant. Whether such acts give him a right of action is determined by substantive law (Herrera, 2007).
Section 27 of RA 6770 cannot validly authorize an appeal to the SC from decisions of the Office of the Ombudsman in administrative disciplinary cases. It consequently violates the proscription in Sec. 30, Art. VI of the Constitution against a law which increases the appellate jurisdiction of the SC (Fabian vs. Desierto, G.R. No. 129742, September 16, 1998). That the decisions or findings of the Ombudsman are appealable only to the Supreme Court (Sec. 14(2) R.A. 6770) was already declared unconstitutional (Conchita Carpio Morales v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 217126-27, November 10, 2015).
NOTE:The test in determining the identity of causes of action is whether the same evidence would support and establish both the present and former cause of action (Goodland Company, Inc., v. Asia United Bank, G.R. No. 191388, March 9, 2011). Splitting of cause of action It is the act of instituting two or more suits on the basis of the same of action (Sec. Rule 2).It is theseveral act of dividing a singlecause or indivisible cause4,of action into parts or claims and bringing several actions thereon (Riano, 2014).
CIVIL PROCEDURE Ordinary civil action
The practice of splitting a cause of action is discouraged because it breeds multiplicity of suits, clogs the court dockets, leads to vexatious litigation, operates as an instrument of harassment, and generates unnecessary expenses to the parties. It applies not only to complaints but also to counterclaims and cross-claims (Riano, 2014).(1999, 2005 Bar)
It is one in which a party sues another for the enforcement or protection of a right or the prevention or redress of a wrong (Sec. 3(a), Rule 1) . It is governed by ordinary rules (Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, th8 ed.; Words and Phrases, Vol. 2). Special civil action It is one in which a party sues another for the enforcement or protection of a right or the prevention or redress of a wrong wherein it has special features not found in ordinary civil actions. It is governed by ordinary rules but subject to specific rules prescribed under Rules 62-71. (Riano, 2011).
Effect of splitting a cause of action The filing of one or a judgment upon the merits in any one is available as a ground for the dismissal of the others (Sec. 4, Rule 2).
Criminal action
Remedy against splitting of cause of action
It is one by which the state prosecutes a person for an act or omission punishable by law (Sec. 3(b), Rule 1).
File a motion to dismiss, on the ground of litis pendentiaor on the ground of res judicata .
What are the consequences of the independent character of actions under Articles 32, 33, 34 and 2176 of the Civil Code? a.
b.
c.
Requisites of joinder of causes of action 1.
The right to bring the foregoing actions based on the Civil Code need not be reserved in the criminal prosecution, since they are not deemed included therein. The institution or the waiver of the right to file a separate civil action arising from the crime charged does not extinguish the right to bring an independent civil action. Even if a civil action is filed separately, the ex-delicto civil liability in the criminal prosecution remains (Riano, 2011).
2. 3.
8
The party shall comply with the rules on joinder of parties (Sec. 6, Rule 3); a. Right to relief arises out of the same transaction or series of transaction b. There is common question of law or fact The joinder shall not include special civil actions governed by special rules; Where the causes of action are between the same parties but pertain to different venues or jurisdictions, the joinder may be allowed in the RTC provided one of the causes of action falls within the jurisdiction of said court and venue lies therein; and
UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2017 4.
of judicial power (Marcelino Florete, Jr., et al. vs. Rogelio Florete, et al, G.R. No. 174909, January 20, 2016).
Where claims in all causes of action are principally for recovery of money, the aggregate amount claimed shall be the test for jurisdiction (Sec. 5, Rule 2).
Effect of non-joinder of a necessary party Is joinder of causes of action compulsory? 1. A joinder of causes of action is only permissive, not compulsory; hence, a party may desire to file a single suit for each of his claims (Riano, 2014).
2.
Misjoinder of causes of action 3. There is a misjoinder when two or more causes of action were joined in one complaint when they should not be so joined. This is not a ground for dismissal of an action. A misjoined on motion of aproceeded party, or onwith the initiative cause of theof action court, may, be severed and separately (Sec. 6, Rule 2).
The court may order the inclusion of the omitted necessary party if jurisdiction over his person may be obtained; The failure to comply with the order for his inclusion, without justifiable cause, shall be deemed a waiver of the claim against such party; The non-inclusion of a necessary party does not prevent the court from proceeding in the action, and the judgment rendered therein shall be without prejudice to the rights of such necessary party.
Is the non-joinder of an indispensable or a necessary party a ground for the dismissal of the action? No, it is not ipso factoa ground for the dismissal of the action. The court should order the joinder of such party and noncompliance with the said order would be a ground for the dismissal of the action (Feria & Noche, 2013).
PARTIES TO CIVIL ACTIONS Real party-in-interest
Requisites of a class suit To be a real party-in-interest, the interest must be ‘real,’ which is a present substantial interest as distinguished from a mere expectancy or a future, contingent subordinate or consequential interest (Rayo v. Metrobank, G.R. No. 165142, December 10, 2007).It is an interest that is material and direct, as distinguished from a mere incidental interest in the question (Samaniego v. Aguila, G.R. No. 125567, June 27, 2000). Do resident marine mammals have the legal standing to sue?
1. 2. 3.
4.
The need to give the resident marinewhich mammals has been eliminated by our Rules, allowlegal any standing Filipino citizen, as steward of nature, to bring a suit to enforce environmental laws. It is worth noting here that the stewards are joined as real parties in the petition and not just in representation of the named cetacean species. The stewards Ramos and Eisma-Osorio, having shown in their petition that there may be possible violations of laws concerning the habitat of the resident marine mammals, are therefore declared to possess the legal standing to file this petition (Resident Marine Mammals of the Protected Seascape Tanon Strait v. Secretary Angelo Reyes, G.R. No. 180771, April 21, 2015).
30, 1993)(2005 Bar) Remedy if the class suit is not proper The remedy of the parties is either to bring suit individually or join them all as parties under the rule on permissive joinder of parties.
Effect of the death of a party upon a pending action 1. 2.
Compulsory joinder of parties The joinder of parties becomes compulsory when the one involved is an indispensable party. Clearly, the rule directs a compulsory joinder of indispensable parties (Riano, 2014). (2009 Bar)
3.
Requisites for permissive joinder of parties? 1.
2.
Subject matter of the controversy is one of common or general interest to many persons; Parties affected are so numerous that it is impracticable to bring them all before the court; Parties bringing the class suit are sufficiently numerous or representative of the class and can fully protect the interests of all concerned; Representatives sue or defend for the benefit of all (Sec. 12, Rule 3; Sulo ng Bayan v. Araneta, G.R. No. L-31061, August 17, 1976; Oposa v. Factoran, G.R. No. 10 1083, July
Purely personal action – the death of either of the parties extinguishes the claim and the action is dismissed. Action that is not purely personal – claim is not extinguished and the party should be substituted by his heirs, executor or administrator. In case of minor heirs, the court may appoint a guardian ad litemfor them. Action for recovery of money arising from contract and the defendant dies before entry of final judgment – it shall not be dismissed but shall instead be allowed to continue until entry of judgment. A favorable judgment obtained by the plaintiff shall be enforced in the manner provided in the rules for prosecuting claims against the estate of a deceased person (Sec. 20, Rule 3). (1999 Bar)
Right to relief arises out of the same transaction or series of transactions (connected with the same subject matter of the suit); There is a question of law or fact common to all the plaintiffs or defendants (2002 Bar) .
Is there a need to summon the substitute defendant? No, he need not be summoned. The order of substitution shall be served upon the parties substituted for the court to acquire jurisdiction over the substitute party (Riano, 2014).If there is notice of death, the court should await the appointment of legal representative; otherwise, subsequent proceedings are void. However,formal substitution of the heirs in place of the deceased is no longer necessary if the heirs continued to appear and participated in the proceedings of the case (Cardenas vs. Heirs of the Late Spouses Aguilar, G.R. No. 191079, March 2, 2016).
Is there a valid judgment if indispensable parties are not joined? No valid judgment if they are not joined. The absence of an indispensable party renders all subsequent actions of the court null and void for want of authority to act, not only as to the absent parties but even as to those present (Riano, 2014). The joinder of all indispensable parties under any and all conditions, their presence being a sine qua non of the exercise
---
9
REMEDIAL LAW Under OCA Circular No. 42-2005 and Rule 141 of the Rules of Court, indigent litigants are exempted from the payment of legal fees. Because of the aforementioned rule, Good Shepherd Foundation avails of said exemption on the ground that it is an association who works with and for the indigents since 1985. Can the Court grant to the Foundation who works for indigent and underprivileged people the same option granted to indigent people?
the mortgagors filed a motion for reconsideration wherein they reiterated the previous grounds and added the ground of improper venue, contending that the action for deficiency was a real action which should have been filed in Manila. Said motion for reconsideration was denied. The mortgagors went up to the Court of Appeals (CA) via petition for certiorari. The CA granted the same and ordered the dismissal of the action on the ground of improper venue as the case is a real action that should have been filed in Manila. Was the CA’s decision correct?
NO. The clear intent and precise language of the Sec. 21, Rule 3, Rules of Court, and Sec. 19, Rule 141, Rules of Court indicate that only a natural party litigant may be regarded as an indigent litigant. The Good Shepherd Foundation, Inc., being a corporation vested by the State with a juridical personality separate and distinct from that of its members, is
NO. First, an action for recovery of deficiency after extrajudicial foreclos ure of a real estate mortgage is a personal action since it does not affect the title to or possession of real property or any interest therein. Hence, the
a juridical person. Among to acquire and possess property of allothers, kinds it ashas wellthe aspower incur obligations and bring civil or criminal actions, in conformity with the laws and regulations of their organization. As a juridical person, therefore, it cannot be accorded the exemption from legal and filing fees granted to indigent litigants. (Re: Query of Mr. Roger C. Prioreschi Re Exemption from Legal and Filing Fees of the Good Shepherd Foundation, Inc., AM. No. 09-6-9-SC, August 19, 2009, Bersamin, J.)
action brought in Makati where the has its was mainproperly office. Second, assuming arguendo thatmortgagee there was improper venue, the ground was waived by the mortgagors since they did not timely raise it in their motion to dismiss. Here, the ground for improper venue was raised belatedly in the motion for reconsideration, not in the motion to dismiss. Hence, the objection is waived in pursuant to Section, 1, Rule 9 (BPI Family Bank v. Yujuico, July 22, 2015, Bersamin J.) ---
VENUE PLEADINGS If the non-resident defendant does not reside but is found in the Philippines, where is the venue of the action filed against him? 1. Personal actions– the venue is where the plaintiff or any of the principal plaintiffs resides, or where the nonresident defendant may be found, at the election of the plaintiff. (Riano, 2014, citing Sec. 2, Rule 4, Rules of Court). 2. Real actions– shall be commenced and tried in the proper court which has jurisdiction over thethereof, area wherein the real property involved, or a portion is situated. (Id. citing Sec. 1, Rule 4, Rules of Court).
as theofalleged transaction the term the office of the were past undertaken officers of during defendant corporation, subject to its special and affirmative defenses. Moreover, he raised the special and affirmative defenses of lack of personal jurisdiction, improper venue, lis pendens, and forum shopping. Was the manner of denial effective as a specific denial?
Venue of action if the non-resident defendant does not reside and is not found in the Philippines 1.
2.
Plaintiff sued defendant corporation for non- payment of hospital equipment delivered to it. The allegations in the complaint stated that the defendant’s total obligation as of February 15, 2009 was P123,901,650 but was reduced to P54,654,195.54 as it already paid 67,357,683.23 to the plaintiff. The defendant, in its answer, denied said allegations for lack of knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth or falsity thereof, inasmuch
If the action affects the personal status of the plaintiff – the action may be commenced and tried in the court of the place where the plaintiff resides. If it involves any property of the non-resident defendant – the action may be commenced and tried where the property or any portion thereof is situated (Sec. 3, Rule 4).
Effect of a stipulation on venue agreed upon by parties The mere stipulation on the venue of an action is not enough to preclude parties from bringing the case in other venue. In the absence of restrictive words, the stipulation should be deemed as merely an agreement on an additional forum, not as limiting venue venue.stipulations While theyin are considered and enforceable, a contract do not,valid as a rule, supersede the general rule set forth in Rule 4 in the absence of qualifying or restrictive words. If the language is restrictive, the suit may be filed only in the place agreed upon by the parties (Spouses Lantin v. Lantion, G.R. No. 160053, August 28, 2006).
---
NO. Considering that the allegations in the complaint contained matters that the defendant ought to know or could have easily known, the answer did not specifically deny such material averments. It is settled that denials based on lack of knowledge or information on matters clearly known to the pleader, or ought to be known by him, or could have been easily known by him are insufficient, and constitute ineffective or sham denials. The fact that the defendant qualified its admissions and denials by subjecting them to its special and affirmative defenses of lack of jurisdiction over its person, improper venue, litis pendentia and forum shopping was of no moment because these affirmative defenses, by their nature, involved matters extrinsic to the merits of the plaintiff’s and thus, (Fernando did not negate the material v. averments claim of the complaint. Medical Enterprises Wesleyan University Philippines, 20 January 2016, Bersamin J.)
--Compulsory Counterclaim vs. Permissive Counterclaim
Compulsory Counterclaim Permissive Counterclaim One which arises out of or is It does not arise out of nor is necessarily connected with it necessarily connected the transaction or with the subject matter of occurrence that is the the opposing party’s claim. subject matter of the opposing party’s claim (Sec.7, Rule 6) Barred if not set up in the Not barred even if not set up action (Sec. 2, Rule 9) in the action
BPI Family Bank (BPI) filed with the RTC of Makati an action to recover deficiency against the real estate mortgagors after the extrajudicial foreclosure sale had resulted in deficiency. The subject realty mortgage was located in Manila while BPI has its main office in Makati. The mortgagors filed a motion to dismiss on the grounds of failure to state a cause of action and res judicata. However, the RTC denied the motion. Consequently,
10
UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2017 Need not be answered; No default Not an initiatory pleading. The court has jurisdiction to entertain both as to the amount and nature (Sec. 7, Rule 6; Ibid.).
on the ground of res judicata. In the Manila case, the petitioners filed a compulsory counterclaim asserting that the extrajudicial foreclosure of mortgage had been devoid of basis in fact and in law; and that the foreclosure and the filing of action had been made in bad faith, and in wanton violation of his rights. His pleading thereby showed that the cause of action he later pleaded in the Makati case, (ie., annulment of foreclosure sale) was identical to the compulsory counterclaim he had set up in the RTC of Manila (Mendiola v. Court of Appeals, July 18, 2012, Bersamin J.)
It must be answered, otherwise, the party may be declared in default Initiatory pleading. Must be within the jurisdiction of the court where the case is pending and cognizable by regular courts of justice, otherwise, defendant will have to file it in separate proceeding which requires payment of docket fee.
--Third-party complaint vs. Rules on bringing in new parties
Test in determining whether a counterclaim is compulsory 1.
2.
3.
4.
Third-party complaint
Issues of fact and law - Are the issues of fact and law raised by the claim and by the counterclaim largely the same? Res judicata - Would res judicata bar a subsequent suit on defendants’ claims, absent the compulsory counterclaim rule? Evidence - Will substantially the same evidence support or refute plaintiffs’ claim as well as the defendants’ counterclaim? and Logical relation - Is there any logical relation between the claim and the counterclaim?
It is proper when not one of the third-party defendants therein is a party to the main action (Riano, 2011).
Rules parties on bringing in new If one or more of the defendants in a counterclaim or crossclaim is already a party to the action, then the other necessary parties may be brought in under the rules on bringing in new parties.
When should a third party complaint be admitted? A positive answer to all four questions would indicate that the counterclaim is compulsory. (Alba, Jr. vs. Malapajo, et al, G.R. No. 198752, January 13, 2016)
The soundness of admitting a third-party complaint hinges on causal connection between the claim of the plaintiff in his complaint and a claim for contribution, indemnity or other relief of the defendant against the third- party defendant. (Paramount Life and General Insurance Corp vs. Castro, et al., G.R. No. 195728, April 19, 2016)
Effects of the dismissal of the complaint 1.
2.
3.
If no motion to dismiss has been filed , any of the grounds for dismissal under Rule 16 may be pleaded as an affirmative defense in the answer, and in the discretion of the court, a preliminary hearing may be had thereon as if a motion to dismiss has been filed (Sec. 6, Rule 16). After hearing, when the complaint is dismissed, the counterclaim, whether compulsory or permissive, is not dismissed. When the plaintiff himself files a motion to dismiss his complaint after the defendant has pleaded his answer with a counterclaim. If the court grants the motion, the dismissal shall be limited to the complaint. It shall be without prejudice to the right of the defendant to prosecute his counterclaim in a separate action unless within 15 days from notice of the motion, manifests his preference to have his counterclaim resolved in the same action (Sec. 2, Rule 17). When the complaint is dismissed through the fault of the plaintiff and at a time when a counterclaim has already been set up, the dismissal is without prejudice to the right of the defendant to prosecute his counterclaim in the same or separate action (Sec. 3, Rule 17; Riano, 2014) . ---
--Paras was a passenger of a bus operated by Inland. The Inland bus was bumped by Philtranco bus negligently driven by its employee. Paras suffered injuries and incurred substantial hospitalization and medical expenses. As a result, Paras filed with the RTC a complaint against Inland based on contract of carriage. Inland, with leave of court, filed a third-party complaint against Philtranco based on quasi-delict. The RTC rendered a judgment absolving Inland from the liability and finding that the collision was due to the negligence of the Philtranco driver and ordering Philtranco to pay damages to Paras. On appeal, Philtranco challenged the decision contending that it cannot be held liable directly to Paras since Paras' suit is against Inland and is based on culpa contractual while Inland’s the third party complaint against it is based on quasi-delict. Moreover, Philtranco argues that since it was merely subrogated to Inland, there should first be a finding of Inland's liability to Paras before Philtranco can be held liable. Is Philtranco's argument correct?
NO. Under Section 11, Rule 3, a third-party complaint is a claim that a defending party may, with leave of court, file against a person not a party to the action for contribution, indemnity, subrogation or any other relief, in respect of his opponent’s claim. Under this rule, a person not a party to the action may be impleaded by the defendant either (a) on an allegation of liability to the latter; b) direct liability to the plaintiff, or (c) both (a) and (b). The first situation is covered by the phrase "for contribution indemnity or subrogation" while the second and third are subsumed under the catch-all "or any other relief in respect of his opponent's claim." It is worth adding that allowing the recovery of damages by Paras based on quasi-delict despite his complaint being upon contractual breach served the judicial policy of avoiding multiplicity of suits and circuity of actions by disposing of the
Pilipinas Shell (Shell) filed a petition for extrajudicial foreclosure against petitioners, who are the m ortgagors in the case. After the foreclosure sale, Shell filed an action for deficiency against the petitioners in the RTC of Manila. The petitioners, in the meantime, commenced an action to annul the extrajudicial foreclosure sale with the RTC of Makati. The RTC of Manila ruled in favor of Shell and said judgment became final and executory. Subsequently, the RTC of Makati ruled in favor of the petitioners and annulled the said sale as no auction sale was actually conducted. May the judgment of the RTC of Makati be set aside and if so, on what ground? The RTC of Makati should have been earlier disallowed to proceed on the ground of litis pendentia, or, once the decision in the Manila case became final, should have been dismissed
11
REMEDIAL LAW entire subject matter in a single litigation. (Philtranco Service Enterprises v. Paras, April 25, 2012, Bersamin, J.)
If denied -Petition for certiorari under Rule 65
What happens once a party files a Motion for Intervention, and the same was denied but he did not appeal such denial?
Remedies from an order of default
Such p arty has no standing to appeal the court’s decision. A prospective intervenor’s right to appeal applies only to the denial of his intervention. Not being a party to the case, a person whose intervention the court denied has no standing to question the decision of the court, but only the trial court's orders denying his intervention, not the decision itself. (Republic vs. Heirs of Diego Lim, et al., G.R. No. 195611, April 18, 2016).
After judgment before judgment becomes final and executory
1. New Trial (Rule 37) 2. Appeal (Rule 40 or 41) Grounds: 1. Failure of the plaintiff to prove the material allegations of the complaint; 2. Decision is contrary to law;
Forum Shopping
3. The amount of judgment is excessive or different in kind from that prayed for (Otero v. Tan, G.R. No. 200134, August 15, 2012).
It is an act of a party against whom an adverse judgment has been rendered in one forum of seeking and possibly getting a favorable opinion in another forum, other than by appeal or the special civil action of certiorari (Sps. Carpio v. Rural Bank of Sto. Tomas Batangas, G.R. No. 153171, May 4, 2006). (2006 Bar)
After judgment has become final and executory
Elements: 1. Identity of the parties or, at least, of the parties who represent the same interest in both actions; 2. Identity of the rights asserted and relief prayed for, as the latter is founded on the same set of facts; and 3. Identity of the two preceding particulars such that any judgment rendered in the other action will amount to res judicata in the action under consideration or will constitute litis pendentia. (Commissioner of Customs, et al. vs. PSCP, et al., G.R. No. 205002, April 20, 2016)
Defendant has been wrongly or improvidently declared in default
Consequence of forum shopping If the forum shopping is not considered willful and deliberate, the subsequent case shall be dismissed without prejudice on the ground of either litis pendentiaor res judicata . However, if the forum shopping is willful and deliberate, both (or all, if there are more than two) actions shall be dismissed with prejudice (Chua v. Metropolitan Bank & Trust Co., G.R. No. 182311, August 19, 2009). Effect of an order of default for failure to file an answer 1.
2.
3.
The party declared in default loses his standing in court and prevents him from taking part in the trial (Sec. 3(a), Rule 9); While the defendant can no longer take part in the trial, he is nevertheless entitled to notices of subsequent proceedings (Sec. 3(a), Rule 9). It is submitted that he may participate in the trial, not as a party but as a witness; and A declaration of default is not an admission of the truth
When is an amendment a matter of right? Amendment is considered as a matter of right at any time before a responsive pleading is served or, in the case of a reply, at any time within 10 days after it is served(Sec. 2, Rule 10).It is settled that a motion to dismiss is not the responsive pleading contemplated by the Rule. A plaintiff may file an amended complaint even after the srcinal complaint was ordered dismissed, provided that the order of dismissal is not yet final (Riano, 2014, citing Bautista v. Maya-Maya Cottages, Inc., G.R. No. 148411, November 29, 2005). When are amendments required to be with leave of court? 1. 2.
If the amendment is substantial (Sec. 3, Rule 10); A responsive pleading had already been served (Siasoco v. CA, G.R. No. 132753, February 15, 1999).
Instances when an amendment may be made to conform to or authorize presentation of evidence
(Monarch or the validity of No. the 92735, plaintiff’s Insurance v. CA, G.R. June claims 8, 2000) .
1.
Remedies from an order of default
When issues not raised by the pleadings are tried with the express or implied consent of the parties;
NOTE: Failure to amend does not affect the result of the trial of said issue.
Remedies from an order of default After notice of order and before judgment
1. Petition for Relief from judgment (Rule 38). 2. Annulment of Judgment ( Rule 47) He may avail of the special civil action of certiorariunder Rule 65.
Motion under oath to set aside the order of default on the grounds of FAME and he has meritorious defense
2.
If denied – he may move for reconsideration; Grounds: FAME
Amendment may also be made to authorize presentation of evidence if evidence is objected to at the trial on the ground that it is not within the issues made by the pleadings, if the presentation of the merits of the action and the ends of substantial justice will be subserved thereby (Sec. 5, Rule 10) .
Amended Pleading vs. Supplemental Pleading
Amended Pleading
12
Supplemental Pleading
UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2017 Refers to the facts existing Refers to facts occurring at the time of filing of after the filing of the srcinal pleading srcinal pleading Supersedes the srcinal Merely supplements the srcinal pleading May be amended without Always with leave of court leave of court before a responsive pleading is filed.
1.
Actions in personam a. To acquire jurisdiction over the person of the defendant; and b. To give notice to the defendant that an action has been commenced against him (Umandap v. Sabio, Jr., G.R. No. 140244, August 29, 2000).
2.
Actions in rem and quasi in rem – not to acquire jurisdiction over the defendant but mainly to satisfy the constitutional requirement of due process (Gomez v. CA, G.R. No. 127692, March 10, 2004).
When does a specific denial require an oath? 1.
2.
A denial of an actionable document except when the adverse party is not a party to the document or when compliance with an order for an inspection of the
Requirements of substituted service of summons
srcinal document is refused. (Sec. 8, Rule 8)(2000 Bar) (Riano, 2014); A denial of allegations of usury in a complaint to recover usurious interest (Sec. 11, Rule 8).
1. 2.
--3.
FILING AND SERVICE OF PLEADINGS. JUDGMENTS AND OTHER PAPERS
The on substituted service the sheriff mustparty show relying that defendant cannot be servedorpromptly or there is impossibility of prompt service; The sheriff must describe in the Return of Summons the facts and circumstances surrounding the attempted personal 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 residing therein” and must have the “relation of confidence” to the defendant; If the substituted service will be done at defendant’s office or regular place of business, then it should be served on a competent person in charge of the place (Manotoc v. CA, G.R. No. 130974, August 16, 2006).
Fortune Life filed its petition for money claim in the COA, however, on November 15, 2012, the latter denied said petition. The petitioner received a copy of the COA decision on December 14, 2012, and filed its motion for reconsideration on January 14, 2013, believing that fresh period rule applies because i ts Rule 64 petition is akin to a petition for review brought under Rule 42. However, the COA denied the motion, the denial being received by the petitioner on July 14, 2014. Hence, the petitioner filed the petition for certiorari carrying only th e affidavit of service executed by one Pascua, Jr., who declared that he had
4.
served copies of the petition by registered mail. Did the petitioner comply with the rule on proof of service?
Voluntary appearance cures the G.R. defectNo. in 206147, the service of 13, summons. (Guy vs. Atty. Gacott, Jnuary 2016)
What is the implication of a defendant’s voluntary appearance in relation to summons? The defendant’s voluntary appearance shall be equivalent to service of summons and the consequent submission of one’s person to the jurisdiction of the court ( Sec. 20, Rule 14) .
NO. The petition for certiorari only carried the affidavit of service executed by one Pascua, Jr., who declared that he had served copies of the petition by registered mail with registered receipts attached. The petition only bore, however, the cut print-outs of what appeared to be the registry receipt numbers of the registered matters, not the registry receipts themselves. Section 13, Rule 13 of the Rules of Court requires to be appended the registry receipts, not their reproductions. Hence, the cut print-outs did not substantially comply with the rule. (Fortune Life Insurance Company, Inc. vs. Commission on Audit (COA) Proper, GR No. 213525, January 27, 2015, Bersamin, J.) SUMMONS What is considered a reasonable time? To the plaintiff, reasonable time means no more than seven
Personal service of summons proper It is proper only if the suit is one strictly in personam. Requisites of extra-territorial service of summons (2009 Bar) 1. 2. 3.
The defendant is a non-resident; He is not found in the Philippines; and, The action against him is either in remor quasi in rem.
If the action is in personam, this mode of service will not be available. There is no extraterritorial service of summons in an action in personam. Hence, extraterritorial service upon a non-resident in an action for injunction which is in personam is not proper (Kawasaki Port Service Corp. vs. Amores, G.R. No. 58340, July 16, 1991); (Banco Do Brasil vs. CA, G.R. No. 121576-
78, June 16, 2000).
(7) days since an expeditious processing of a complaint is what a plaintiff wants. To the sheriff, reasonable time means 15 to 30 days because at the end of the month, it is a practice for the branch clerk of court to require the sheriff to submit a return of the summons assigned to the sheriff for service. The Sheriffs Return provides data to the Clerk of Court, which the clerk uses in the Monthly Report of Cases to be submitted to the Office of the Court Administrator within the first ten (10) days of the succeeding month. Thus, one month from the issuance of summons can be considered reasonable time with regard to personal service on the defendant.
How is summons served upon prisoners and minors? Service shall be effected upon him by the officer having the management of such jail or institution who is deemed deputized as a special sheriff for said purpose (Sec. 9, Rule 14). Service shall be made upon him personally and on his legal guardian if he has one, or if none, upon his guardian ad litem whose appointment shall be applied for by the plaintiff. In the case of a minor, service may also be made on his father or mother (Sec. 10, Rule 14).
Alias Summons Summons issued by the court when the srcinal summons cannot be served or when wrongfully served.
---
Purposes of summons
13
REMEDIAL LAW Co filed a libel case against Abante Tonite including its editors and reporters. The sheriff went to the office of Abante Tonite in the morning but was informed by the secretary that the editors were always out and unavailable and that the reporters were always roving outside and gathering news. Consequently, the sheriff went to said office in the afternoon but was again informed by the secretary with the same reason. Because of said instance, he left a copy of the summons and complaint with the secretary. Was there a valid substituted service of summons?
It is made to the court in behalf of one or the other of the parties to the action, in the absence and usually without knowledge of the other party or parties. (Riano, 2014).
NOTE: They are usually permissible in procedural matters and also in situations and under circumstances of emergency; and an exception to a rule requiring notice is sometimes made where notice of the resulting delay might tend to defeat the objective of the motion (Sarmiento v. Zaratan, G.R No. 167471, February 5, 2007) . An example is a motion to set the case for a pre-trial.
YES. If, for justifiable reasons, the defendant cannot be served in person within a reasonable time, substituted service of summons may be effected. Given the circumstance that the
Pro-forma motion
defendants werecould always outmade of office, was clear time. that personal service not be within it a reasonable Substituted service was, thus, justified. (Macasaet v. Co, June 5, 2013, Bersamin J.)
is considered as one filed merely proceedings (Marikina Development Corp., to v. delay Flojo,theG.R. No. 110801, December 8, 1995).Such motion, if filed, is not entitled to judicial cognizance, and does not stop the running of the period for filing the requisite pleading (Cruz v. CA, G.R. No. 123340, August 29, 2002).
It is that which does not comply with the rules on motion and
MOTION Contents of a motion 1. 2. 3.
MOTION TO DISMISS Who shall file a motion to dismiss?
The relief sought to be obtained; The ground upon which it is based; and, If required by the Rules or necessary to prove facts alleged therein, shall be accompanied by supporting affidavits and other papers (Sec. 3, Rule 15).
A motion must be filed by a party thereto except: 1. Those cases where the court may dismiss a case motu proprio (i.e. lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter; litis pendentia ; res judicata ; and prescription) (Sec. 1, Rule 9); 2. Failure to prosecute for an unreasonable length of time (Sec. 3, Rule 17); and 3. Rule on Summary Procedure (Sec. 4, 1991, Revised Rule on Summary Procedure).
Notice of hearing A seasonable service of a copy of the motion on the adverse party with a notice of hearing indicating the time and place of hearing is a mandatory requirement that cannot be dispensed with. A motion that does not contain a notice of hearing is a mere scrap ofand paper and presents merits the attention consideration of no thequestion court. It which is not even a motion for it does not comply with the rules, and, hence, even the clerk has no right to receive it. (Mendez vs. Shari’a District Court, G.R. No. 201614, January 12, 2016). It is intended to prevent surprise and to afford the adverse party a chance to be heard before the motion is resolved by the court. (Ibid.)
Requisites of Res Judicata 1. 2. 3. 4.
The former judgment must be final; The court which rendered it has jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties; It is a judgment must be on the merits; and, There is, between the first and second actins, an identity of parties, subject matter and causes of action.
Omnibus Motion Rule Res Judicata as a ground for dismissal All available grounds for objection then available in attacking a pleading, order, judgment, or proceeding should be invoked, otherwise, they shall be deemed waived (Sec. 8, Rule 15) except when the grounds include: 1. Lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter; 2. Litis pendentia ; 3. Res judicata;and 4. Prescription (Sec. 1, Rule 9)
It is based on two grounds, namely: (1) public policy and necessity, which makes it to the interest of the State that there should be an end to litigation – republicae ut sit litium; and (2) the hardship on the individual of being vexed twice for the same cause – neme debet bis vexari et eadem causa (Fels, Inc. v. Prov. of Batangas, G.R. No. 168557, February 19, 2007).
Litigated motion
Motion to Dismiss vs. Demurrer to Evidence in Civil Cases
It is a and motion which the substantial rightsparty of the parties is one madeaffects with notice to the adverse to give an opportunity to oppose before a ruling on the motion is made by the court. A hearing is required (Sec. 4, Rule 15). Examples are motion to dismiss; a motion for judgment on the pleadings and a summary judgment. Ex-parte motion It is one which does not require that the parties be heard and which the court may act upon without prejudging the rights of the other party. This kind of motion is not covered by the hearing requirement of the Rules (Riano, 2014, citing Sec. 4, Rule 15; Republic v. Diaz-Enriquez, G.R. No. 181458, March 20, 2013).
14
RuleDismiss) 16 (Motion to Grounded on preliminary objections May be filed by any defending party against whom a claim is asserted in the action Should be filed within the time for but prior to the filing of the answer of the defending party to the pleading asserting the claim
Rule 33 Demurrer (in Civil Cases) to Evidence Based on insufficiency of evidence May be filed only by the defendant against the complaint of the plaintiff May be filed only after the plaintiff has completed the presentation of his evidence (Riano, 2014).
UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2017 If denied, defendant answers, or else he may be declared in default. If granted,plaintiff may appeal or if subsequent case is not barred, he may re-file the case. It depends on the ground if it is with or without prejudice (Rule 41, Sec 1).
trial is subject to the sound discretion of a judge. Unless and until a clear and manifest abuse of discretion is committed by the judge, his appreciation of a party’s reasons for his nonappearance will not be disturbed (Clodualda D. Daaco V. Valeriana Rosaldo YuG.R. No. 183398 June 22, 2015).
If denied, defendant may present evidence. Denial is not appealable because the order is interlocutory (Riano, 2014).
Effect of failure to file a pre-trial brief It shall have the same effect as failure to appear at the pretrial (A.M. No. 03-1-09-SC, July 13, 2004). Hence, if it is the plaintiff who fails to file a pre-trial brief, such failure shall be a cause for dismissal of the action. If it is the defendant who fails to do so, such failure shall be a cause to allow the plaintiff to present his evidence ex parte.
If granted, but on appeal the order of dismissal is reversed, the defendant loses his right to present evidence (Riano, 2014).
DISMISSAL OF ACTIONS The dismissal of the to file pre-trial brief is discretionary on complaint the part for of failure the trial court (Ramos v. Spouses Lavendia, G.R. No. 176706, October 8, 2008).
Two – Dismissal Rule It applies when the plaintiff has: 1. Twice dismissed the actions by filing a second notice of dismissal; 2. Based on or including the same claim; and 3. In a court of competent jurisdiction (Riano, 2014).
Pre-trial in civil case vs. Pre-trial in criminal case
The second notice of dismissal will bar the re-filing of the action because it will operate as an adjudication of the claim upon the merits.
PRE-TRIAL Nature of a Pre-trial
Pre-trial in civil case It is set when the plaintiff moves ex parte to set the case for pre-trial (Sec. 1, Rule 18).
Pre-trial in criminal case It is ordered by the court and no motion to set the case for pre-trial is required from either the prosecution or the defense (Sec. 1, Rule 118).
The motion to set the case for pre-trial is made after the last pleading has been served and filed (Ibid.)
The pre-trial is ordered by the court after arraignment and within 30 days from the date the court acquires jurisdiction over the person of the accused (Ibid.). It does not include the possibility of amicable
It is mandatory. (Sec. 2, Rule 18) . Effect of non-compliance with service of notice of pre-trial
It considers the possibility of an amicable settlement as an
If no notice of pre-trial is served, all the proceedings at the pre-trial are null and void. Hence, the absence of the requisite notice of pre-trial to the defendant’s c ounsel, or to the defendant himself, in case he has no counsel, nullifies the order allowing the plaintiff to present his evidence ex parte (Sec. 3, Rule 18.).
important objective 2(a), Rule 18) .
(Sec
Requires the proceeding during the preliminary conference to be recorded in the minutes of preliminary conference to be signed by both parties and/or counsel. The rule allows either the party or his counsel to sign the minutes (A.M. No. 03-109-SC). Sanctions for nonappearance in a pre-trial are imposed upon the plaintiff and the defendant in a civil case (Sec. 4, Rule 18). It is specifically required to be submitted in a civil case (Sec. 6, Rule 18).
Effect of failure to appear during pre-trial
Plaintiff’s failure to appear during the pre -trial shall be a cause for dismissal of the action, with prejudice, unless otherwise ordered by the court. On the other hand, Defendant’s non -attendance during the pre-trial shall be a cause to allow the plaintiff to present evidence ex parteand the court to render judgment on the basis thereof (Sec. 5, Rule 18). The legal ramification of defendant's failure to appear for pretrial is still detrimental to him while beneficial to the plaintiff. The plaintiff is given the privilege to present his evidence without objection from the defendant, the likelihood being that the court willforfeited decide the in favor of the to plaintiff, defendant having opportunity rebut the or present its own evidence. (Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company vs. Fadcor, Inc., et al., G.R. No. 197970, January 25, 2016) The plaintiff can appeal from the order of dismissal. Accordingly, it is only when the order of dismissal is without prejudice that the remedy is to re-file the complaint (Sec. 1(g), Rule 41). The defendant may move for the reconsideration of the order and if the denial is tainted with grave abuse of discretion, he may file a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 (Riano, 2014).
settlement of criminal liability as one of its purposes (Ibid.). All agreements or admissions made or entered during the pre-trial conference shall be reduced in writing and signed by both the accused and counsel, otherwise, they cannot be used against the accused (Sec. 2, Rule 118).
The sanctions in a criminal case are imposed upon the counsel for the accused or the prosecutor (Sec. 3, Rule 118). It is not specifically required in a criminal case.
INTERVENTION It is a legal proceeding by which a third person is permitted by the court to become a party by intervening in a pending action after meeting the conditions and requirement set by the Rules of Court. This person who intervenes is one who is not srcinally impleaded in the action (First Philippine Holdings Corp. v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 88345, February 1, 1996). The motion to intervene may be filed any time before rendition of judgment by the trial court. A copy of the pleading-in-intervention shall be attached to the motion and served on the srcinal parties (Sec. 2, Rule 19).
In certain instances, however, the non-appearance of a party may be excused if a valid cause is shown. What constitutes a valid ground to excuse litigants and their counsels at the pre-
Is intervention an independent proceeding? (2000 Bar)
15
REMEDIAL LAW It is not an independent proceeding but is ancillary and supplemental to an existing litigation (Saw v. CA, G.R. No. 90580, April 8, 1991) . Its purpose is to enable a stranger to an action to become a party to protect his interest (Santiago Land Development Corporation v. CA, G.R. No. 106194, August 7, 1997). Denial of a motion to intervene does not constitute res judicata.The remedy of the intervenor is to file a separate action. Can an intervention alter the nature of action? An intervention cannot alter the nature of the action, and the issues are already joined (Castro v. David, G.R. No. L-8508,
November 29, 1956;2011 ( Bar).
How is a subpoena quashed?
Subpoena duces tecum: Upon motion promptly made and, in any event, at or before the time specified therein: 1. If it is unreasonable and oppressive; 2. The relevancy of the books, documents or things does not appear; 3. If the person in whose behalf the subpoena is issued fails to advance the reasonable cost of the production thereof; (Sec. 4, Rule 21) or, 4. That the witness fees and kilometrage allowed by the Rules were not tendered when the subpoena was served.
Subpoena ad testificandum: 1. 2.
That the witness is not bound thereby; or That the witness fees and kilometrage allowed by the Rules were not tendered when the subpoena was served. (Sec. 4, Rule 21)
--May a lawyer intervene in a case in order to protect his rights under a contingent fee agreement?
MODES OF DISCOVERY YES. The lawyer has right to protect his interests pursuant to Section 26, Rule 38 (Malvar v. Kraft Foods Phils. Inc., 9 September 2013, Bersamin J.) In this case, a client, entering into a compromise with the adverse party, filed a motion to withdraw its case and terminated the services of the law firm.
Purpose of the modes of discovery
A process directed to a person requiring him to bring with him any books, documents, or other things under his control. (Sec. 1, Rule 21)
The modes of discovery are designed to serve as an additional device aside from a pre-trial, to narrow and clarify the basic issues between the parties, to ascertain the facts relative to the issues, and to enable the parties to obtain the fullest possible knowledge of the issues and facts before civil trials and thus prevent the said trials to be carried on in the dark. It is intended to make certain that all issues necessary to the disposition of a case are properly raised (Tinio v. Manzano, G.R. No. 132102, May 19, 1999). As contemplated by the Rules, the device may be used by all the parties to the case.
Subpoena ad testificandum
What are the limitations?
It is a process directed to a person requiring him to attend and to testify at the hearing or trial of an action or at any investigation conducted by competent authority or for the taking of his deposition. (Sec. 1, Rule 21)
1. 2. 3.
SUBPOENA Subpoena duces tecum
Deposition Pending Action (Rule 23)/ Deposition de benne esse
Those matters which are privileged; Those under protection order; The modes of discovery must not be conducted in bad faith.
By leave of court after jurisdiction has been obtained over any defendant or over property which is the subject of the action, or without such leave after an answer has been served, the testimony of any person, whether a party or not, may be taken, at the instance of any party, by deposition upon oral examination or writteninterrogatories. (2010 Bar)
Note: The attendance of witnesses may be compelled by the use of subpoena. Depositions before action or pending appeal
Aperson who desires to perpetuate his own testimony or that of another person regarding any matter that may be cognizable in any court of the Philippines, may file a verified petition in the court of the place of the residence of any expected adverse party. If the court finds that the perpetuation of the
(Rule 24)/Deposition in perpetuam rei memoriam
testimony is proper to avoid a failure or delay of justice, it may make an order allowing the depositions to be taken (Sec. 7, Rule 24).
Written interrogatories to adverse parties (Rule 25)
Under the same conditions specified in Sec. 1, Rule 23 , any party desiring to elicit material and relevant facts from any adverse parties shall file and serve upon the latter written interrogatories to be answered by the party served or, if the party served is a public or private corporation or a partnership or association, by any officer thereof competent to testify in its behalf.
16
UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2017 Admission by adverse party (Rule 26)
At any time after issues have been joined, a party may file and serve upon any other party a written request for the admission by the latter of the genuineness of any material and relevant document or of the truth of any material and relevant matter of fact.
NOTES:
There is an implied admission unless, within a period designated in the request, which shall not be less than 15 days after service thereof, or within such further time as the court may allow on motion, the party to whom the request is directed has not files and serves upon the party requesting the admission a sworn statement either denying specifically the matters of which an admission is requested or setting forth in detail the reasons why he cannot truthfully either admit or deny those matters (Sec. 2, Rule 26).
The court may allow the party making the admission to withdraw or amend the admission upon such terms as may be just (Sec. 4, Rule 26).
Any admission made by a party pursuant to such request is for the purpose of the pending action only and shall not constitute an admission by him for any other purpose nor may the same be used against him in any other proceeding (Sec. 3, Rule 26) .
Production or inspection of documents or things (Rule 27)
Upon motion of any party showing good cause therefor, the court in which an action is pending may order any party to produce and permit the inspection and copying of any designated documents or order any party to permit entry upon designated land or other property in his possession or control for the purpose of inspecting or photographing the property or any designated relevant object or operation thereon. (2002, 2009 Bar) .
Physical and mental
In an action in which the mental or physical condition of a party is in controversy, the court in which
examination of persons. (Rule 28)
the action is pending may in its discretion order him to submit to a physical or mental examination by a physician.(2005 Bar)
17
REMEDIAL LAW
Are the modes of discovery cumulative?
YES, they are cumulative. They are neither alternative nor mutually exclusive.
Production or Inspection of Documents or Things vs. Subpoena Duces Tecum
Do the rules apply to special proceedings?
Production or Inspection of Documents or Things
YES, Rules of Discovery also apply to special proceedings (Sec. 2 Rule 72). (2008 Bar)
Essentially discovery
Effect of substitution of parties?
Limited to the parties to the action.
It does not affect the right to use depositions previously taken; and when an action has been dismissed and another
preparation (Feria & Noche, 2013) . Can the answers in the interrogatories be treated as judicial admissions?
Binding Effect
Should not be privileged; Should constitute or contain evidence material to any matter involved in the action and which are in his (the party ordered) possession, custody, or control (Sec. 1, Rule 27);
3.
In the petition, the papers and documents to be produced must be sufficiently described.
Petitioners filed a complaint against respondents Abra Valley Colleges, Inc. (Abra Valley) and its offi cers for inspection of corporate books and records. Respondents filed an answer raising the affirmative defense that petitioners are not stockholders-of-record of Abra Valley. Petitioners filed a motion for production/inspection of documents to compel the respondents to produce the stock-and-transfer book (STB), but the RTC denied the same on the ground that STB may be examined only by a stockholder-of-record. Was the denial proper?
Depositions Upon Written Interrogatories to Parties (Sec. 25, Rule 23) vs. Interrogatories to Parties (Rule 25)
Interrogatories
1. 2.
---
YES, the answers may now be used as judicial admissions of the adverse party (Ibid.).
Scope
application.
Limitations on the request for production or inspection of documents or things
The framers of the new court rules intended that the rules should provide ample facilities for discovery of facts before trial so that surprise at the trial and possible miscarriage of justice might be avoided. A purpose of this rule was to obtain admissions and thus limit subjects of controversy at trial and avoid unnecessary testimony and waste of time in
Interrogatories to Parties(Rule 25)
Party only
NO, the rules of discovery, including Section 2, Rule 27, are to be accorded with broad and liberal interpretation. The RTC should have favorably acted on the petitioner’s motion for production/inspection of documents in order to enable the petitioners to obtain the fullest possible knowledge of the
No intervention Served
It may be directed to any person whether a party or not. Issued upon an ex parte
This mode of discovery does not authorize the opposing party or the clerk of court or other functionaries of the court to distrain the articles or deprive the person who produced the same of their possession, even temporarily (Tanda v. Aldaya, G.R. No. L-13423, November 23, 1959).
Purpose of interrogatories to parties
deposition
Means of compelling production of evidence
In production or inspections of documents or things, can the articles be distrained? Can the person who produced the same be deprived of its possession?
A deposition officer has no authority to rule on the objection. Evidence objected to shall be taken subject to the objection, which will be ruled upon by the court when the deposition is offered in evidence (Feria & Noche, 2013).
Procedure
of
with notice to the adverse party.
How are objections to evidence treated under this rule?
Deponent
mode
Issued only upon motion
action the parties same subject is representatives afterward brought betweeninvolving the same or their or successors-in-interest, all depositions lawfully taken and duly filed in the former action may be used in the latter as if srcinally taken therefor (Sec. 5, Rule 23).
Depositions Upon Written Interrogatories to Parties(Sec. 25, Rule 23) Party or ordinary witness With intervention of the officer authorized by the court to take
a
SubpoenaDuces Tecum
directly
upon the adverse party (Sec. 1, Rule 25).
issues and facts to be determined in the case and thereby prevent the trial from being carried on in the dark. Doing so would not have caused any prejudice to the respondents, after all, even the petitioners had not filed the motion for production/inspection of documents, the respondents would themselves also be expected to produce the STB in court in order to substantiate their af firmative defense that the petitioners were not stockholders-of-record. Verily, the fact that there was no entry or record in the STB showing that the petitioners be stockholders of Abra Valley is not a valid justification for the respondents not to produce the same. Otherwise, the disputable presumption under Section 3(e) Rule 131 that “evidence willfully suppressed would be adverse if produced” could arise against them. (Insigne v. Abra Valley Colleges, Inc., 29 July 2015, Bersamin J.)
Not served upon the adverse party directly They are instead delivered to the officer before whom the deposition is to be taken (Sec. 26, Rule 23). Direct, cross, redirect, Only one set of re-cross examination interrogatories No fixed time 15 days to answer unless extended or reduced by the court Binding to anyone who Binding only to is present during the the parties. deposition.
18
UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2017 PHYSICAL AND MENTAL EXAMINATION OF PERSONS
NOTE:The remedy of the party, in this case, is to file a motion to be relieved of the consequences of the implied admission. The amendment of the complaint per se cannot set aside the legal effects of the request for admission since its materiality has not been affected by the amendment.
Effect if the party examined requests and obtains a report on the results of the examination 1.
2.
He has to furnish the other party a copy of the report of any previous or subsequent examination of the same physical and mental condition (Sec. 3, Rule 28); He waives any privilege he may have in that action or any other involving the same controversy regarding the testimony of every other person who has so examined or may thereafter examine him (Sec. 4, Rule 28) .
TRIAL It is a judicial process of investigating and determining the legal controversies starting with the production of evidence by the plaintiff and ending with his closing arguments. Should there be no amicable settlement or a compromise forged between the parties, the case will be set for trial. (Riano, 2011)
Consequences of refusal to comply with modes of discovery
Refusal to answer any question upon oral examination
Requisites of motion to postpone trial FOR ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE
1. 2. 3.
Order to compel an answer; Contempt; Require payment of reasonable fees incurred by the proponent; 4. Designated facts shall be taken to be established for the purposes of the action in accordance with the claim of the party obtaining the order. 5. Dismiss the action or the proceeding; 6. Render a judgment by default against the disobedient party; 7. Refuse to allow the disobedient party to support or oppose claims or defenses; 8. Strike out all or any part of the pleading of the disobedient party; 9. Stay further proceedings until order is obeyed; or 10. Order the arrest of the refusing party. Refusal to produce document or thing for inspection,
2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.
1.
2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.
1. 2.
A motion for postponement must be filed; The motion must be supported by an affidavit or sworn certification showing: a. The evidence is material or relevant; and b. That due diligence has been used to procure it. (Sec. 3, Rule 30) NOTE: If the adverse party admits the facts sought to be given in evidence, the trial shall not be postponed even if he objects or reserves the right to their admissibility. FOR ILLNESS OF PARTY OR COUNSEL 1. 2.
A motion for postponement must be filed; The motion must be supported by an affidavit or sworn certification showing:
a. The presence of the party or counsel at the trial is indispensable; and b. That the character of his illness is such as to render his non-attendance excusable. (Sec. 4, Rule 30)
copying or photographing 1.
1. 2.
Designated facts shall be taken to be established for the purposes of the action in accordance with the claim of the party obtaining the order; Refuse to allow the disobedient party to support or oppose claims or defenses; Strike out all or any part of the pleading of the disobedient party; Dismiss the action or the proceeding; Render a judgment by default against the disobedient party; Stay further proceedings until order is obeyed; Render a judgment by default against the disobedient party; or Order the arrest of the refusing party. Refusal to submit to physical or mental examination
When does a reverse order of trial occur? Where the defendant, in his answer, relies upon an affirmative defense, a reverse order of trial shall take place. Since the defendant admits the plaintiff’s claim but seeks to avoid liability based on his affirmative defense he shall proceed first to prove his exemption. (Yu v. Mapayo, G.R. No. L-29742, March 29, 1972) Consolidation vs. Severance
Consolidation Severance Involves several actions Contemplates a single action having a common question of having a number of claims, law or fact which may be counterclaims, cross-claims,
Designated facts shall be taken to be established for the purposes of the action in accordance with the claim of
jointly tried (Sec.1, Rule 31).
the party obtaining the order; Prohibit the disobedient party to introduce evidence of physical and mental conditions; Strike out all or any part of the pleading of the disobedient party; Dismiss the action or the proceeding; Render a Judgment by default against the disobedient party; Stay further proceedings until order is obeyed; Render a Judgment by default against the disobedient party Refusal to the request for admission by adverse party
third-party complaints, or issues which may be separately tried (Sec. 2, Rule 31). ---
Doris filed a complaint for ejectment in the MTC on the ground of non-payment of rentals against Minda. After 2 days, Minda filed in the RTC a complaint against Doris for specific performance to enforce th e option to purchase the parcel of land subject of the ejectment case. What is the effect of Minda's action on Doris' complaint? Explain. (2000 Bar Question)
Each of the matters of which an admission is requested is deemed admitted (Sec. 5, Rule 26) . Require payment of reasonable fees incurred by the proponent (Secs. 1-4).
There is no effect. The ejectment case involves possession de facto only. The action to enforce the option to purchase will not suspend the action of ejectment for non-payment of
19
REMEDIAL LAW rentals. (Wilmon Auto Supply Corp. v. CA, G.R. No. 97637, April 10, 1992) How filed --Delegation to Clerk of Court vs. Trial by Commissioner
Delegation to Clerk of Court Delegation is made during trial.
Trial by Commissioner Commissioner can be appointed even after the case has become final and executory.
Clerk of court must be a
Commissioner need not be a
lawyer.
lawyer.
Clerk of court cannot rule on objections or on the admissibility of evidence.
Commissioner can rule on objections or on admissibility of evidence.
Leave of court
Not required
If granted
The plaintiff may appeal from the order of dismissal of the case (Sec. 1, Rule 33).
If denied
The defendant may proceed to adduce his evidence.
DEMURRER TO EVIDENCE (Civil Case) After the plaintiff has completed the presentation of his evidence, the defendant may move for dismissal on the ground that upon the facts and the law the plaintiff has shown no right to relief. (Sec. 1, Rule 33). Effect of the denial of the said motion to dismiss 1.
2.
3.
The defendant shall have the right to present his evidence (Sec. 1, Rule 33). This means that the denial of the demurrer to evidence does not deprive the defendant the opportunity to adduce evidence in his behalf; The court shall set the date for the reception of the defendant’s evidence -in-chief. It should not proceed to grant the relief demanded by the plaintiff (Northwest Airlines, Inc. v.CA, G.R. No. 112573, February 9, 1995); An order denying a demurrer to evidence is not appealable because it is interlocutory;
In election cases, when a party who files a demurrer to evidence is subsequently denied, he cannot insist on the right to present evidence because the provision of the Rules governing demurrer to evidence does not apply to an election case (Gementiza v. COMELEC G.R. No. 140884, March 6, 2001).The Rules, under the express dictum in Sec. 4 of Rule 1, provides that it shall not apply to election cases, land registration, cadastral, naturalization and insolvency proceeding (Riano, 2014).
What is the effect of its grant? 1.
The case shall be dismissed;
NOTE: The plaintiff may file an appeal and if the appeal was granted (reversed the order of dismissal), the defendant loses his right to present evidence (Sec. 1, Rule 33; Republic v. Tuvera, G.R. No. 148246, February 16, 2007). 2.
Criminal Case The court may dismiss the action on the ground of insufficiency of evidence (1) on its own initiative after giving the prosecution the opportunity to be heard or (2) upon demurrer to evidence filed by the accused with or without leave of court (Sec. 23, Rule 119). With or Without (Sec. 23, Rule 119) The plaintiff cannot make an appeal from the order of dismissal due to the constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy. The defendant may adduce his evidence only if the demurrer is filed with leave of court. If there was no leave of court, accused can no longer present his
NOTE: It can be subject to petition for certiorariin case of grave abuse of discretion or an oppressive exercise of judicial authority (Katigbak v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 140183 July 10, 2003). 4.
Civil Case After the plaintiff has completed the presentation of his evidence, the defendant may move for dismissal on the ground that upon the facts and the law the plaintiff has shown no right to relief (Sec. 1, Rule 33).
Upon appeal, the appellate court reversing the order granting the demurrer should not remand the case to the trial court. Instead, it should render judgment based on the evidence submitted by the plaintiff (Radiowealth Finance Corporation v. Del Rosario, G.R. No. 138739, July 6, 2000).
Demurrer to evidence in a Civil Case v. Demurrer to evidence in a Criminal Case
20
evidence and submits the case for decision based on the prosecution’s evidence (Sec. 23, Rule 119)
JUDGMENTS AND FINALS ORDERS Doctrine of Immutability of Judgment or Finality of Judgment. Settled is the rule that when a judgment is final and executory, it becomes immutable and unalterable. It may no longer be modified in any respect, except to correct clerical errors or to make nunc pro tuncentries, or when it is a void judgment. Outside of these exceptions, the court which rendered judgment only has the ministerial duty to issue a writ of execution. A decision that has attained finality becomes the law of the case regardless of any claim that it is erroneous. An order of execution which varies the tenor of the judgment or exceeds the terms thereof is a nullity (Mayor Marcial Vargas and Engr. Raymundo Del Rosario v. Fortunato Cajucom G.R. No. 171095, June 22, 2015). The doctrine is founded on considerations of public policy and sound practice that, at the risk of occasional errors, judgments must become final at some definite point in time. However, the same is not applicable in order to serve substantial justice considering: a. matters of life, liberty, honor or property, b. the existence of special or compelling circumstances, c. the merits of the case, d. a cause not entirely attributable to the fault or negligence of the party favored by the suspension of the rules, e. a lack of any showing that the review sought is merely frivolous and dilatory, and
UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2017 f.
the other party will not be unjustly prejudiced thereby (Pinewood Marine Inc. v. EMCO Plywood Corporation, G.R. No. 179789, June 17, 2015).
Rendition of Judgment? (2004 Bar)
decision on the whole controversy. It leaves something to be done by the court before the case is finally decided on the merits. What is the remedy to question interlocutory order? (2004 Bar)
Rendition of judgment is the filing of the same with the clerk of court. Even if the judgment has already been put in writing and signed, it is still subject to amendment if it has not yet been filed with the clerk of court. Hence, before its filing, it does not yet constitute the real judgment of the court (Ago v. CA, G.R. No. L-17898, October 31, 1962).
NOTE:Partial summary judgments are interlocutory. There is still something to be done, which is the trial for the adjudication of damages, but the defendant may properly challenge thru aofspecial civil action for certiorari under Rulesaid 65.order ( Province Pangasinan v. Court of Appeals , 220 SCRA 726 [1993J; Guevarra v. Court of Appeals , 209 Phil. 241 [1983])
not raised?
Generally, a judgment must conform to the pleading. Therefore, a judgment going outside the issues and purporting to adjudicate something on which the parties were not heard is invalid. Where a court enters a judgment or awards relief beyond the prayer of the complaint or the scope of its allegations, the excessive relief is not merely irregular but is void for want of jurisdiction, and is open to collateral attack However,there could be such rendition when such issues were tried with the express or implied consent of the parties.
Kinds of Judgment 1.
When can there be a judgment without a trial?
2.
3. 4.
5. 6. 7.
improvident
File a petition for certiorariunder Rule 65 and not under Rule 45. A petition for review under Rule 45 is the proper mode of redress to question only final judgments. One cannot appeal an interlocutory order.
Could there be a rendition of a judgment based on issues
1.
an
Where the pleadings of the parties tender no issue at all, a judgment on the pleadings may be directed by the court (Rule 34); Where from the pleadings, affidavits, depositions and other papers, there is actually no genuine issue, the court may render a summary judgment (Rule 35);
2.
Where thesettlement parties have entered intothe a compromise an amicable either during pre-trial or or while the trial is in progress (Rule 18; Art. 2028, NCC) ; Where the parties agree in writing, upon the facts involved in the litigation, and submit the case for judgment on the facts agreed upon, without the introduction of evidence. If, however, there is no agreement as to all the facts in the case, trial may be held only as to the disputed facts (Sec. 6, Rule 30); Where the complaint has been dismissed with prejudice (Sec. 5, Rule 16; Sec. 3, Rule 17; last. par.; Sec. 5, Rule ; 7) Where the civil case falls under the operation of the Rules on Summary Procedure (Rule 17); When the case falls under the Rule on Small Claims.
3.
4.
5.
Judgment upon compromise– It is one conferred on the basis of a compromise agreement entered into between the parties. It is a judgment on the merits. It has the effect of res judicataand is immediately executory and not appealable. But it may be set aside on grounds provided under Art. 2038 of NCC, e.g. mistake, fraud, violence, intimidation, undue influence or falsity of documents (Aromin v. Floresca, G.R. No. 160994, July 27, 2006). Judgment by confession– It is one rendered by the court when a party expressly agrees to the other party’s claim or acknowledges the validitytoof the claim against Judgment on demurrer evidence (Rule him; 33) – A judgment rendered by the court dismissing a case upon motion of the defendant, made after plaintiff has rested his case, on the ground that upon the facts presented by the plaintiff and the law on the matter, plaintiff has not shown any right to relief; Conditional judgment – It is one where the effectivity of which depends upon the occurrence or non-occurrence of an event; Final judgment – It is one which disposes of the whole subject matter or terminates the particular proceedings or action, leaving nothing to be done by the court but to enforce by execution what has been determined.
Judgment
Several Judgment vs. Separate Judgment
Judgment may be understood in 2 senses:
Several Judgment Proper where the liability of each party is clearly separable and distinct from
Separate Judgment Proper when more than one claim for relief is presented in an action and a
his co-parties the claims against such each that of them could have been the subject of a separate suit, and the judgment for or against one of them will not necessarily affect the other.
determination as the to claim the issues material to has been made. The action shall proceed as to the remaining claims.
1.
Judgment that disposes of a case in a manner that leaves nothing more to be done by the court in respectfrom thereto. In this sense, order a final which judgment is distinguished an interlocutory does not finally terminate or dispose of the case. It has also the effect of ending the litigation, and an aggrieved party may then appeal from the judgment;
2.
By implication from Sec. 1 of Rule 9, the word final may refer to a judgment that is no longer appealable and is capable of being executed because the period to appeal has elapsed without a party having perfected an appeal, or if there has been an appeal, it has already been resolved by a highest possible tribunal.
NOTE: A several judgment is not proper in actions against solidary debtors.
Memorandum Decision What is an Interlocutory Order? (2006 Bar) It refers to decisions which adopt by reference the findings of facts and conclusions of law of inferior tribunals. In this jurisdiction, it has been held that memorandum decisions do
It is an order which decides some point or matter between the commencement and end of the suit but is not the final
21
REMEDIAL LAW NOTE:The hearing contemplated (with 10-day notice) is for the purpose of determining whether the issues are genuine or not, and not to receive evidence on the issues set up in the pleadings. The matter may be resolved, and usually is, on the basis of affidavits, depositions, admissions (Galicia v. Polo, G.R. No. L-49668, Nov. 14, 1989; Carcon Devt. Corp. v. CA, G.R. No. 88218, December 17, 1989).
not transgress the constitutional requirement in Art. VIII, Sec. 14, on clearly and distinctly stating the facts and the law on which the decision is based. Nonetheless, it would be more prudent for a memorandum decision not to be simply limited to the dispositive portion but to: 1. 2. 3.
State the nature of the case; Summarize the facts with references to the record; and Contain a statement of the applicable laws and jurisprudence and the tribunal’s assessments and conclusions on the case. This practice would better enable a court to make an appropriate consideration of whether the dispositive portion of the judgment sought to be enforced is consistent with the findings of facts and conclusions of law made by the tribunal that rendered
2.
NOTE: There is genuine issue when an issue of fact is presented which requires presentation of evidence as distinguished from a sham, fictitious, contrived or false
the and Natural Gas Commission v. CA, G.R. No. decision 114323, (Oil September 28, 1999).
claim (Villuga v. KellyJuly Hardware and Construction Supply Inc., G.R. No. 176570, 18, 2012).
Judgment on the pleadings
The party presenting the motion for summary judgment must be entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.
It is a judgment on the facts as pleaded, and is based exclusively upon the allegations appearing in the pleadings of the parties and the accompanying annexes (Comglasco Corporation/Aquila Glass V. Santos Car Check Center Corporation G.R. No. 202989, March 25, 2015 ).
Grounds for judgment on the pleadings 1.
The answer fails to tender an issue because of: a. General denial of the material allegations of the complaint; b. Insufficient denial of the material allegations of the complaint;
2.
The answer admits material allegations of the adverse
Except for the amount of damages, there must be no genuine issue as to any material fact;
How is a partial summary judgment treated? A partial summary judgment envisioned by the Rules is an interlocutory order that was never meant to be treated separately from the main case. It will not ripen into a final and executory judgment, despite failure to file a certiorari petition to challenge the judgment. The remedy against a partial summary judgment is an appeal to be taken by the parties once the court a quo has completely resolved all the issues involved in the present case in a final judgment. (Philippine Business Bank v. Chua, G.R. No. 178899, November 15, 2010). Judgment on the Pleadings vs. Summary Judgment
. party’s pleadings (Sec. 1, Rule 34) Denials based on lack of knowledge or information of matters clearly known to the pleader, or ought to be known to it, or could have easily been known by are it insufficient, and constitute ineffective or sham denials (Fernando Medical Enterprises, Inc. vs. Wesleyan University Philippines, G.R. No. 207970, January 20, 2016, Bersamin J.) What are the instances when judgment on the pleadings is not applicable? 1. 2. 3.
Actions for declaration of nullity of marriage, annulment of marriage or for legal separation; Unliquidated damages; Insufficiency of fact – amendment is the remedy
Summary judgment
Judgment on the Pleadings Summary Judgment (Rule 34) (Rule 35) Based solely on the Based on the pleadings, pleadings. depositions, admissions and affidavits. Generally available only to Available to both plaintiff and the plaintiff, unless the defendant. defendant presents a counterclaim. The answer fails to tender an issue or there is an admission of material allegations.
There is no genuine issue between the parties, i.e. there may be issues but these are irrelevant.
3-day notice required.
10-day notice required.
On the merits
It is proper where, upon motion filed after the issues had been joined and on the basis of the pleadings and papers filed,
for
motion
May be interlocutory (i.e. partial summary judgments) or on the merits.
the court fact findsexcept that there no amount genuine ofissue as to (Ley any material as to isthe damages Construction & Dev. Corp. v. Union Bank of the Phil., G.R. No. 133801, June 27, 2000) .
Can summary judgment be rendered when the answer does not tender an issue?
A claimant may at any time after the pleading in answer thereto has been served, and the defendant may, at any time, move with supporting affidavits, depositions or admissions for a summary judgment in his favor upon all or any part thereof (Secs. 1 and 2, Rule 35).
Even if the answer does not tender an issue, and therefore a judgment on the pleadings is not proper, a summary judgment may still be rendered if the issues tendered are not genuine, are shams, fictitious, contrived up, set-up in bad faith, patently unsubstantial (Vergara v. Suelto, G.R. No. L74766, December 21, 1987).
Requisites of summary judgment
1.
POST-JUDGMENT REMEDIES
The motion shall be served at least 10 days before the time specified for the hearing. The adverse party may serve opposing affidavits, depositions, or admissions at least 3 days before the hearing;
The following are remedies before a judgment or final order becomes final and executor: 1. 2.
22
Motion for new trial; Motion for reconsideration; or
UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2017 3.
Appeal
The remedy is to appeal from the judgment or final order and not to appeal the order denying the motion because it is not appealable. The movant has a fresh period of 15 days from receipt or notice of the order denying or dismissing the motion for reconsideration within which to file a notice of appeal.
When is the rule on motion for new trial? This is filed within the period to file an appeal based on the ground of extrinsic fraud, accident, mistake, excusable negligence or newly-discovered evidence.
Is a second motion for new trial allowed? Requisites of newly discovered evidence (Berry Rule) 1. 2. 3.
A second motion for new trial, based on a ground not existing or available when the first motion was made, may be filed within the time provided in Section 5, Rule 37 excluding the time during which the first motion had been pending.
The evidence was discovered after trial; Such evidence could not have been discovered and produced at the trial with reasonable diligence; and, Such evidence is material, not merely cumulative, corroborative or impeaching, and is of such weight that if
Is a second motion for reconsideration of a judgment or
admitted would probably the judgment (CIR A. Soriano Corporation, G.R.change No. 113703, January 31, v. 1997).
final order allowed?
NO. No party shall be allowed a second motion for reconsideration of a judgment or final order. (Sec. 5, Rule 37)
Are newly discovered evidence necessarily be newly created ones?
When is a second motion for reconsideration allowed?
NO. Newly discovered evidence need not be newly created evidence. It may and does commonly refer to evidence already in existence prior or during trial but which could not have been secured and presented during the trial despite reasonable diligence on the part of the litigant (Tumang v. CA, G.R. Nos. 82346-47, April 17, 1989). This shall be supported by affidavits of witnesses or by duly authenticated documents.
1.
2.
Effect if the Motion for New Trial is granted If the motion for new trial is granted, the srcinal judgment is vacated and the action shall stand for trial de novo. But the recorded evidenceand taken upon the trial, far asshall the same is material competent toformer establish thesoissues, be used at the new trial without retaking the same (Sec. 6, Rule 37).
Motion for reconsideration of an interlocutory order, unless it is a mere reiteration of arguments already passed upon by the court (San Juan, Jr. v. Cruz, G.R. No. 167321, July 31, 2006) If filed before the Supreme Court, and only after meeting the following requirements: a. with express leave b. for extraordinarily persuasive reasons c. by a vote of at least 2/3 of the actual membership of the SC en banc d. before the ruling sought to be reconsidered becomes final by operation of law or by the Courts declaration (League of Cities of the Philippines v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 176951, June 28, 2011, Bersamin, . J.)
Is a motion for new trial or reconsideration a pre-requisite for an appeal?
NO. The use of the term “may” in Sec. 1, Rule 37 means that the same is permissive and not mandatory. As such, a party aggrieved by the trial court’s decision may either move for reconsideration or appeal to the Court of Appeals. (Heirs of Timbol, Jr. v. PNB)
What is the effect of its denial? If the motion is denied, the remedy is to appeal from the judgment or final order, and not to appeal the order denying the motion for new trial, because the order is not appealable (Sec. 9, Rule 37). The movant has a fresh period of fifteen days from receipt or notice of the order denying or dismissing the motion for new trial within which to file a notice of appeal.
the motion for new trial and motion for NOTE: Generally, reconsideration are unextendible. However, motions for extension of time to file a motion for new trial or reconsideration may be filed only in connection with cases before the SC, which may, in its sound discretion, either grant or deny the extension requested. No such motion may be filed before any lower courts (Sps. Rogelio v. PCIB, GR No. 182735, December 4, 2009).
When is a Motion for Reconsideration filed? This is filed within the period for appeal based on any of the following grounds: a. damages are excessive; b. evidence is insufficient; or, c. the decision or order is contrary to law (Sec. 1, Rule 37).
Fresh Period Rule or Neypes Rule The to allow a fresh counted period offrom 15 days Court withindeems whichittopractical file the notice of appeal, the receipt of the order dismissing a motion for new trial or motion for reconsideration to standardize the appeal periods provided in the Rules and to afford litigants fair opportunity to appeal their cases (Neypes v. CA, G.R. No. 141524, September 14, 2005).It applies to:
The motion shall specifically point out the portion of the judgment not supported by evidence or which are contrary to law. Otherwise, it will be considered as a pro formamotion and will not have the effect of suspending or interrupting the period to appeal. What is the effect if the motion for reconsideration is granted?
1. 2. 3. 4.
The court may amend the judgment or final order, accordingly. The amended judgment is in the nature of a new judgment which supersedes the srcinal judgment, and is not a mere supplemental decision (Esquivel v. Alegre, G.R. No. 79425, April 17, 1989) .
5. 6.
Rule 40– MTC to RTC Rule 41– Appeals from RTC Rule 42– Petition for Review from RTC to CA Rule 43 – Appeals from CTA and Quasi-Judicial Agencies to CA Rule 45– Appeals by certiorarito the SC Rule 122, Sec. -6Appeals in Criminal Cases (Yu v. Samson Tatad, G.R. No. 170979, Feb. 9, 2011)
What is the remedy of its denial? The fresh period rule does not apply to:
23
REMEDIAL LAW
1.
2.
Administrative appeals (San Lorenzo Ruiz Builders and Developers Group Inc. v. Ma. Cristina F. Bayang, G.R. No. 194702, April 20, 2015). Rule 64 - Review of Judgments and Final Orders or Resolutions of the Commission on Elections and the Commission on Audit (Fortune Life Insurance Co., Inc. v. COA, G.R. No. 213525, January 27, 2015, Bersamin, J.)
Does it apply to administrative proceedings?
Is appeal considered a right? An appeal is not a constitutional right, but a mere statutory privilege. As such, perfection of an appeal in the manner and within the period permitted by law is not only mandatory, but jurisdictional. (Orchard Gold & Country Club, et al. vs. Yu and Yuhico, G.R. No. 191033, January 11, 2016) However, procedural rules may be waived or dispensed with in order to serve and achieve substantial justice. Relaxation of the rules may be had when the appeal:
NO. The Neypes Rule applies to Rule 40, 41, 42, 43, and 45, which are judicial proceedings under the Rules of Civil Procedure. It cannot be made applicable to an appeal from a decision of the Provincial Adjudicator to the DARAB, as
1. 2.
provided under Section 1, Rulesame XIV of is the 2003 Rulesbut of Procedure, because the not DARA judicial, administrative in nature. (Jocson vs. San Miguel, G.R. No. 206941, March 9, 2016)
with the prescribed degree of thoughtlessness in not complying with the procedure. Final Judgment Rule
APPEALS IN GENERAL
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 (Sec. 1, Rule 41).
Dual Function of Appellate Courts 1.
2.
On its face, appears to be absolutely meritorious; or When there are persuasive or compelling reasons to relieve a litigant of an injustice not commensurate
Review for Correctness Function: To review a case on appeal to render substantial justice. Focuses on the doctrine of res judicata. Institutional Function: To contribute to the progressive development of the law for the guidance of the courts in deciding future similar cases. Focuses on the doctrine of stare decisis. (Bersamin, Appeal and Review in the Philippines)
Exceptions to the Final Judgment Rule 1. 2.
3.
4.
Harmless Error Rule The court at every stage of the proceeding must disregard any error or defect which does not affect the substantial rights of the parties. (Sec. 6, Rule 51)
Statutory Exception: when provided for in the Rules of Court Discretionary Exception: when allowed or refused by the Supreme Court, acting pursuant to its appellate jurisdiction Collateral Order Exception: when the decision determines a collateral matter regarding rights of the parties to the action which is too important to be denied review (e.g. judgment against respondent in indirect contempt Immediatecases) Harm Exception: when postponement of an act subject of appeal will produce an immediate and irreparable harm against the appellant(Bersamin, Appeal and Review in the Philippines)
MODES OF APPEAL Matters that are not appealable 1. 2. 3. 4.
5. 6.
7.
8. 9.
May a mixed question of law and question of fact be raised under Rule 45?
Order denying a petition for relief or any similar motion seeking relief from judgment; Interlocutory order; Order disallowing or dismissing an appeal; Order denying a motion to set aside a judgment by consent, confession or compromise on the ground of fraud, mistake or duress, or any other ground vitiating consent; Order of execution; Judgment or final order for or against one or more of several parties or in separate claims, counterclaims, cross-claims and third-party complaints, while the main
A petition for review on certiorarishall raise only questions of law, which must be distinctly set forth (Sec. 1, Rule 45). Question of Law vs. Question of Fact There is a question of law in the given case when the doubt or difference arises as to what the law is on a certain state of facts. There is a question of factwhen the doubt or difference arises as to the truth or falsehood of alleged facts.
case is pending, unless the court allows an appeal therefrom; Order dismissing an action without prejudice, e.g. motion to dismiss on improper venue (Sec. 1, Rule 41, as amended by A.M. No. 07-7-12-SC) ; and A judgment based on compromise is not appealable and is immediately executory. A decision on a petition for declaration of presumptive death, being a judgment rendered in a summary proceeding under the Family Code, is immediately final and executory. As a matter of course, no appeal can be had from such judgment in a summary proceeding. (Republic vs. Sarenogon, Jr., G.R. No. 199194, February 10, 2016)
In those instances where the judgment or final order is not appealable, the aggrieved party may file the appropriate special civil action under Rule 65 (Sec. 1, Rule 41).
24
A to be one of of law, not involve anthe examination of question, the probative value themust evidence presented by litigants or any of them (Landines vs. People and de Ramon, G.R. No. 167333, January 11, 2016, Bersamin, J. ).
XPNs: 1. when the findings are grounded entirely on speculation, surmises or conjectures; 2. when the inference made is manifestly mistaken, absurd or impossible; 3. when there is grave abuse of discretion; 4. when the judgment is based on a misapprehension of facts; 5. when the findings of facts are conflicting; 6. when in making its findings the CA went beyond the issues of the case, or its findings are contrary to the admissions of both the appellant and the appellee; 7. when the findings are contrary to those of the trial court;
UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2017 8.
when the findings are conclusions without citation of specific evidence on which they are based; when the facts set forth in the petition as well as in the petitioner's main and reply briefs are not disputed by the respondent; 10. when the findings of fact are premised on the supposed absence of evidence and contradicted by the evidence on record; and 11. when the CA manifestly overlooked certain relevant facts not disputed by the parties, which, if properly considered, would justify a different conclusion. (Landines vs. People and de Ramon, G.R. No. 167333, January 11, 2016, Bersamin,. J.) 9.
determine whether to give due course to the appeal or not by having all the material necessary to make such determination before it. An appeal under Rule 43 is a discretionary mode of appeal, which the CA may either dismiss if it finds the petition to be patently without merit, or prosecuted manifestly for delay, or that the questions raised therein are too unsubstantial to require consideration; or may process by requiring the respondent to file a comment on the petition. These rules are not to be belittled or dismissed simply because their non-observance may result in prejudicing a party’s substantive rights. (Maniebo vs. Court of Appeals, GR No. 158708, August 10, 2010, Bersamin, J.)
--What determines the proper remedy of a party? Period 43, andof 45appeal via notice of appeal under Rule 40, 41, 42,
It is the nature of the case that determines the proper remedy to be filed and the appellate court where such remedy should be filed by a party aggrieved by the decisions or orders of the Office of the Ombudsman. If it is an administrative case, appeal should be taken to the Court of Appeals under Rule 43 of the Rules of Court. If it is a criminal case, the proper remedy is to file with the Supreme Court an srcinal petition for certiorari under Rule 65. (Perez v. Ombudsman, GR. No. 131445, May 27, 2004).
A party-litigant may either file his notice of appeal with the court that rendered the judgment within 15 days from receipt of court’s decision, or file it within 15 days from receipt of the final order denying his motion for new trial or motion for reconsideration. Period of appeal in a writ of habeas corpus
---
Appeal in habeas corpuscases shall be taken within 48 hours from receipt of the court’s decision or fi nal order denying motion for reconsideration or new trial.
P won in an ejectment suit against D. The MTC refused to give due course to the notice of appeal filed by D and as a result, the latter filed a special civil action for certiorari in the RTC. The RTC granted the same. P appealed to the CA by way of petition for review under Rule 42. The CA dismissed the appeal holding that the proper remedy was Rule 41 and not Rule 42. Was the dismissal correct?
Period of appeal via record on appeal? The period is 30 days counted from receipt of court’s decision or the final order denying his motion for new trial or motion for reconsideration
YES. A petition for review under Rule 42 is not the proper remedy to assail a decision of the RTC in a petition for certiorari under Rule 65, since the RTC in the case acted in the exercise of its srcinal jurisdiction. The appeal should be by way of Rule 41, or by an ordinary appeal (Heirs of Garcia v. Mun. of Iba, Zambales, G.R. No. 162217, July 22, 2015, Bersamin, J.)
---
Requirements to perfect an appeal 1. 2. 3. 4.
The filing of a notice of appeal The payment of docket and other legal fees; In some cases, the filing of a record on appeal; and All of which must be done within the period allowed for filing an appeal.
Failure to observe any of these requirements is fatal to one’s appeal. (National Transmission Corp vs. Heirs of Ebesa, G.R. No. 186102, February 24, 2016)
Maniebo was formally charged by CSC-RO4 with possession of spurious report of rating, falsification, grav e misconduct and dishonesty, and was subsequently meted with the penalty of dismissal from service. She appealed to the CSC wherein the latter affirmed with the decision of CSC-RO4. She consequently sought for reconsideration but the CSC denied her motion. As a result, the petitioner appealed to the CA through a petition for review attaching the following annexes: 1) Certified true copy of CSC Resolution denying the petitioner’s motion for reconsideration; 2) Original copy of the notice of appeal filed in the CSC; 3) Photocopy of the petitioner’s appeal to the CSC 4) The petitioner’s affidavit of merit.
When does the court lose its jurisdiction? In appeal by notice of appeal, the court loses jurisdiction over the case upon the perfection of the appeal and the expiration of the time to appeal of the other parties. In appeal by record on appeal, the court loses jurisdiction only over the subject matter thereof upon the approval of the record on appeal and expiration of the time to appeal of the other parties. Effect of a perfected appeal
The CA dismissed the petition for review due to the petitioner’s failure to accompany it with the requisite certified true copies of the material portions of the record. Did the CA err in dismissing the petition based on technicality?
NO. Section 6, Rule 43 of the Rules of Court clearly requires the petition for review to be accompanied by a clearly legible duplicate srcinal or a certified true copy of the award, judgment, final order or resolution appealed from, together with certified true copies of such material portions of the record referred to therein and other supporting papers. The requirement is intended to immediately enable the CA to
Judgment is not vacated by appeal, but is merely stayed and may be affirmed, modified or reversed or findings of facts or conclusions of law may be adopted by reference. However, this is not applicable to civil cases under the Rules on Summary Procedure which provides that the decision of the RTC in civil cases governed by said Rule. Also including forcible entry and unlawful detainer cases, shall be immediately executory without prejudice to a further appeal that maybe taken therefrom. Also, under Rule 43, an appeal from quasi-judicial bodies shall not stay the judgment unless the CA directs otherwise. Effect of non-payment of appellate docket fees
25
REMEDIAL LAW APPEAL FROM JUDGMENT OR FINAL ORDERS OF THE CA
Payment of docket fee is jurisdictional. Without such payment, the appellate court does not acquire jurisdiction over the subject matter of the action and the decision sought to be appealed from becomes final and executory (Regalado v. Go, G.R. No. 167988, February 6, 2007).
What are the instances where the CA may act as a trial court?
XPNs:
1.
1.
2.
The failure to pay appellate court docket fee within the reglementary period allows only discretionary dismissal, not automatic dismissal, of the appeal; Such power should be used in the exercise of the court’s sound discretion (Rep. v. Sps. Luriz, G.R. No. 158992, January 26, 2007).
2.
Residual jurisdiction of the court
3.
It refers to the authority of the trial court to issue orders for the protection and preservation of the rights of the parties even if the trial court loses jurisdiction over the case or the subject matter involved in the appeal. Provided, that this is done by the court prior to the transmittal of the srcinal records or record on appeal (Fernandez v. CA, G.R. No. 131094, May 16, 2005).
4. 5.
6. Duration of the exercise of residual powers 7. 1. 2.
Ordinary Appeal – until the records are transmitted to the appellate court; Petition for review – until the CA gives due course to the petition.
8.
In annulment of judgment under Secs. 5 and 6, Rule 47. Should the CA find prima faciemerit in the petition, the same shall be given due course and summons shall be served on the respondent, after which trial will follow, where the procedure in ordinary civil cases shall be observed. When a motion for new trial is granted by the CA, the procedure in the new trial shall be the same as that granted by a RTC (Sec. 4, Rule 53). A petition for. habeas corpusshall be set for hearing (Sec. 12, Rule 102) In petition for writs of amparo and habeas data , a hearing can be conducted. Under Sec. 12, Rule 124 of the Rules of Criminal Procedure, the CA has the power to try cases and conduct hearings, receive evidence and perform any and all acts necessary to resolve factual issues which fall within its srcinal and appellate jurisdiction. The CA can grant a new trial based on the ground of newly-discovered evidence (Sec. 14, Rule 124). The CA under Sec. 6, Rule 46, whenever necessary to resolve factual issues, may conduct hearing thereon or delegate the reception of the evidence of such issues to any of its members or to an appropriate agency or office. Human Security Act
Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45, Review of Judgments, Final Orders or Resolutions Rule 64 and Certiorari under Rule 65
Petition for Review of Judgments, Final Orders or Special Civil Action (Rule 45) on Certiorari ReviewResolutions (Rule 64) (Rule 65)for Certiorari Mode of appeal which seeks to review Independent Special Civil Action; Special civil action; an srcinal action . It final judgments and orders (Sec. 2, Rule appellate jurisdiction. may be directed against an interlocutory 41). order or matters where no appeal may be taken from (Sec. 1, Rule 41). It shall be filed within 15 days from notice of judgment or final order appealed from.
30 days from the notice of the judgment or final order or resolution sought to be reviewed.
It shall be filed not later than 60 days from notice of judgment, order or resolution sought to be assailed or from denial of an MR or MNT.
Non-extendible period It may be extended for another 60 days If MR is denied, the petition must be filed within the remaining period, but which shall not be less than 5 days reckoned from notice of denial of MR. Stays the judgment appealed
sought
to be
Does not stay the judgment or order subject of the petition unless enjoined or restrained.
Does not stay the judgment or order subject of the petition unless enjoined or restrained.
The parties are the srcinal parties with the appealing party as the petitioner and the adverse party as respondent without impleading the lower court or its judge (Sec. 4(a), Rule 45).
The petitioner and private respondent are the srcinal parties to the action.
The tribunal, board, officer exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions is impleaded as respondent (Sec. 5 Rule 65).
Filed with the SC.
Filed with the SC.
The COA and COMELEC shall impleaded as public respondents.
be Filed with the RTC (Sec. 21, BP 129); With the CA (Sec. 9, BP 129); With the SC (Sec. 5(1) Article VIII, 1987 Constitution).
26
UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2017 Is an order granting a petition for relief appealable?
RELIEF FROM JUDGMENTS, ORDERS AND OTHER PROCEEDINGS
An order granting petition for relief is interlocutory and non-appealable (Regalado, 2012).
Motion for New Trial/Reconsideration vs. Petition for Relief from Judgment
What should constitute an Affidavit of Merit?
Motion for New Trial / Reconsideration (Rule 37) Available before judgment becomes final and executory. Applies to judgments or final orders only. Grounds for motion for new trial: (FAME + E) 1. Fraud, accident, mistake or excusable negligence (FAME); 2. Newly discovered evidence (Sec. 1). Grounds for motion for reconsideration: 1. The damages awarded are excessive; 2. That the evidence is insufficient to justify the decision or final order, or 3. That the decision or final order is contrary to law (Sec. 1). Filed within the time to appeal.
The order of denial is not appealable. The remedy is to appeal from the judgment or final order on the merits. Motion need not be verified.
Petition for Relief from Judgment (Rule 38) Available after judgment has become final and executory. Applies to judgments, final orders and other proceedings: Grounds for petition for relief from judgment: (FAME) Fraud, accident, mistake or excusable negligence.
An affidavit of merit must not only contain facts constituting the movant's good and substantial defenses but must also state the nature and character of the fraud, accident, mistake or excusable negligence on which the motion for relief was based. A petition for relief without a separate affidavit of merit is sufficient where facts constituting petitioner’s substantial cause of action or defense, as the case may be, are alleged in a verified petition since the oath elevates the petition to the same category as a separate affidavit (Samonte v. SF Naguiat Inc. G.R. No. 165544, October 2, 2009). When should a petition for relief from judgment be filed? A petition for relief from judgment must be filed within 60 days after petitioner learns of the judgment, final order, or proceeding and within six (6) months from entry of judgment or final order. The double period required under Section 3, Rule 38 is jurisdictional and should be strictly complied with. A petition for relief from judgment filed beyond the reglementary period is dismissed outright. This is because a petition for relief from judgment is an exception to the public policy of immutability of final judgments. (Madarang v. Sps. Morales, G.R. No. 199283, June 9, 2014).
Filed within 60 days from knowledge of the judgment and within 6 months from entry of judgment. The order of denial is not appealable; the remedy is appropriate special civil action under Rule 65.
ANNULMENT OF JUDGMENTS OR FINAL ORDERS AND RESOLUTIONS A petition for annulment of judgment is a remedy in equity so exceptional in nature that it may be availed of only when: 1. Other remedies are wanting; and 2. Only if the judgment, final order or final resolution sought to be annulled was rendered by a court lacking jurisdiction, or through extrinsic fraud or denial of due process. (Spouses Teano vs. Municipality of Navotas, G.R. No. 205814, February 15, 2016)
Petition must be verified.
Can a party file a petition for relief after the denial of a motion for new trial?
Grounds for annulment of judgment A party who has filed a timely motion for new trial cannot file a petition for relief after the former is denied. The two remedies are exclusive of one another (Sec. 9, Rule 38; Francisco v. Puno, G.R. No. L-55694, October 23, 1981).
27
1.
Lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter and over the person– This may be barred by estoppel by laches, which is that:
REMEDIAL LAW a.
failure to do something which should be done or to claim or enforce a right at a proper time; or b. neglect to do something which one should do or seek or enforce a right at a proper time. Denial of due process (Alaban v. CA, G.R. No. 156021, September 23, 2005) . Extrinsic fraud or collateral fraud – However, this could not be a valid ground if it was availed of, or could have been availed of, in a motion for new trial or petition for relief.
2. 3.
validly adopted. Did the RTC act properly in dismissing the action on that ground?
NO. The RTC did not have jurisdiction to determine or to review the validity of the decree of adoption issued by the erstwhile CFI by virtue of equal rank and category between the RTC and the CFI. The proper court with jurisdiction to do was the CA, which has been vested by Section 9 Batas Pambansa Blg. 129 with the exclusive srcinal jurisdiction over actions for the annulment of the judgments of the RTC. (Oribello v. CA, 5 August 2015, Bersamin J.)
Effect of a compromise agreement
--A compromise agreement has the effect and authority of res judicatabetween the parties, and is immediately final and executory unless rescinded upon grounds that vitiate consent. Once stamped with judicial imprimatur, it is more than a mere contract between the parties. Any effort to annul the judgment based on compromise on the ground of extrinsic fraud must proceed in accordance with Rule 47 of the Rules of Court. (Tung Hui Chung and Tong Hong Chung vs. Shih Chiu Huang, G.R. No. 170679, March 9, 2016, Bersamin, J.) Judgment, Final Orders for Resolutions of RTC vs. Judgments, Final Orders or Resolutions of MTC
To whom is the remedy of annulment of judgment available? It is available only to a party in whose favor the remedies of new trial, reconsideration, appeal, and petition for relief from judgment are no longer available through no fault of said party. As such, the petitioner, being a non-party in the case sought to be annulled, could not bring the action for annulment of judgment (Dare Adventure Farm Corp. v. CA, G.R. No. 161122, September 24, 2012 Bersamin, J.) Rule on collateral attack on a Judgment
Judgments, Final Orders or Judgments, Final Orders or Resolutions of RTC Resolutions of MTC
GR: The validity of a judgment or order of a court cannot be collaterally attacked. XPNs: It may be attacked collaterally on the following grounds: 1. Lack of jurisdiction; or 2. The irregularity of its entry is apparent from the face of the record.
As to the court that has exclusive srcinal jurisdiction CA (B.P. 129, Sec. 9, Par. 2)
RTC (B.P. 129, Sec. 19, par. 6)
As to discretion to dismiss the petition outright
EXECUTION, SATISFACTION AND EFFECT OF JUDGMENTS
The CA may dismiss the
The RTC has no discretion.
case outright which is discretionary (Rule 47, Sec.
Rule 47, Sec. 10 does not make Sec. 5 of the same
Execution
5.)
rule applicable to petitions
Execution is a process provided by law for the enforcement of a final judgment. It is the fruit and end of suit (Cagayan de Oro Coliseum v. CA, G.R. No. 129713, Dec. 15, 1999; Ayo v. Violago-Isani, A.M. No. RTJ-99-1445, June 21, 1999).
for annulment before the RTC.
---
A writ of execution must conform substantially to every essential particular of the judgment promulgated. An execution not in harmony with the judgment is bereft of validity. (Stronghold Insurance vs. Pamana Island Resort, G.R. No. 174838, June 1, 2016)
Remedios, claiming that she is the adopted daughter of the deceased Toribio, filed with the RTC an action for partition of Toribio’s estate. Petitioner filed an answer alleging that Remedios was not validly adopted as the adoption decree issued by the CFI was
When is Execution a matter of right?
fraudulently secured. The RTC dismissed the action for partition on the ground that Remedios was not
28
UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2017 1. 2. 3. 4.
The judgment has become final and executory (Sec. 1, Rule 39); Judgment debtor has renounced or waived his right to appeal; The period for appeal has lapsed without an appeal having been filed; Having been filed, the appeal has been resolved and the records of the case have been returned to the court of srcin (Florendo v. Paramount Insurance Corp, now MAA General Insurance Inc., G.R. No. 167976, January 20, 2010).
justice may warrant under the circumstances (Sec. 5, Rule 39). How is the discretionary execution stayed? It may be stayed upon approval by the proper court of a sufficient supersedeasbond filed by the party against whom execution is directed, conditioned upon the performance of the judgment or order allowed to be executed in case it shall be finally sustained in whole or in part. The bond thus given may be proceeded against on motion with notice to the surety (Sec. 3, Rule 39 ).
Remedy if a motion for execution is denied Are judgments stayed by appeal? The remedy is mandamus. The issuance of writ of execution is a ministerial duty of the court under Sec. 1 of Rule 39, compellable by a writ of mandamus (Greater Metropolitan Manila Solid Waste Management Committee v. Jancom Environmental Corporation, G.R. No. 163663, June 30, 2006). Requisites for Discretionary Execution 1. 2. 3. 4.
There must be a motion filed by the prevailing party with notice to the adverse party; There must be a hearing of the motion for discretionary execution; There must be good reasons to justify the discretionary execution; and The good reasons must be stated in a special order (Sec. 2, Rule 39).
Generally,a Judgment is stayed by appeal. However, there are instances when judgment is immediately executory (IRASO) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
EXAMINATION OF JUDGMENT OBLIGOR WHEN JUDGMENT IS UNSATISFIED Effect when the judgment was returned unsatisfied
Where is an application for discretionary execution filed?
1.
1.
2.
2.
Injunction Receivership Accounting Support, and Such other judgments declared to be immediately executory unless otherwise ordered by the trial court (e.g. Rule 70, Sec. 19).
The motion for discretionary execution shall be filed with the trial court: a. While it has jurisdiction over the case; and b. While it is in possession of either the srcinal record or the record on appeal; or, After the trial court has lost jurisdiction, the motion for execution pending appeal may be filed in the appellate court (Bangkok Republic Company Limited v. Lee, G.R. No. 159806, January 20, 2006).
3.
4. In either instance, and whether it is a regular judgment or a special judgment such as several, separate or partial judgment, the same procedure and the requirement of a special order stating good reasons for discretionary execution shall be observed (Regalado, 2010).
5.
Remedy when the judgment is reversed or annulled
6.
The trial court may, on motion, issue such orders of restitution or reparation of damages as equity and
29
The judgment creditor may cause examination of the judgment debtor as to his property and income (Sec. 36, Rule 39) ; The judgment creditor may cause examination of the debtors of the judgment debtor as to any debt owed by him or to any property of the judgment debtor in his possession (Sec. 37, Rule 39); If the court finds, after examination, that there is property of the judgment debtor either in his own hands or that of any person, the court may order the property applied to the satisfaction of the judgment (Sec. 37, Rule 39) ; If the court finds the earnings of the judgment debtor are more than sufficient for his family’s needs, it may order payment in fixed monthly installments (Sec. 40, Rule 39) ; The court may appoint a receiver for the property of the judgment debtor not exempt from execution or forbid a transfer or disposition or interference with such property (Sec. 41, Rule 39) ; If the court finds that the judgment debtor has an ascertainable interest in real property either as mortgagor, mortgagee, or otherwise, and his interest can be ascertained without controversy,
REMEDIAL LAW
7.
the court may order the sale of such interest (Sec. 42, Rule 39) ; and, If the person alleged to have the property of the judgment debtor or be indebted to him, claims an adverse interest in the property, or denies the debt, the court may authorize the judgment creditor to institute an action to recover the property, forbid its transfer and may punish disobedience for contempt (Sec. 43, Rule 39) .
NOTE: This is the regular form of attachment which refers to corporeal property in the possession of the party (Regalado, 2012). Levy on executio n
It is the act of taking possession and control by the sheriff or proper officer of sufficient property of the losing party to satisfy the decision, order, or award. A sale not preceded by a valid levy is void and the purchaser acquires no title.
Garnish ment
It is the levy of money, goods, or chattels, and/or an interest thereon, belonging or owing to a losing party in the possession or control of a third party.
ENFORCEMENT AND EFFECT OF FOREIGN JUDGMENTS OR FINAL ORDERS Effect of a foreign order 1. 2.
Against a specific thing – conclusive upon title to the thing. Against a person– presumptive evidence of a right as between the parties and their successors-ininterest by a subsequent title (Sec. 48, Rule 39).
In both instances, the judgment may be repelled by evidence of want of jurisdiction, want of notice to the party, collusion, fraud, or clear mistake of law or fact.
The proceeding by garnishment is a specie of attachment for reaching credits belonging to the judgment debtor and owing to him from a stranger to the litigation. By means of the citation the stranger becomes a forced intervenor; and the court, having acquired jurisdiction over him by means of the citation, requires him to pay his debt, not to his former creditor, but to the new creditor, who is the creditor in the main litigation (Domingo Bautista v. Jose Ma. Barredo, G.R. No. L-206 53, April 30, 1965).
How is a judgment of a foreign court enforced? Judgment of foreign courts may only be enforced in the Philippines through an action validly heard in the RTC. Thus, it is actually the judgment of the Philippine court enforcing the foreign judgment that shall be executed.
PROVISIONAL REMEDIES Provisional remedies under the Rules of Court (SARIR) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
NOTE: Garnishment does not involve the actual seizure of the property which remains in the hands of the garnishee. It refers to money, stocks, credits and other incorporeal property which belong to the party but are in the possession or under control of a third person. Garnishment does not lie against the funds of the regular departments or offices of the Government, but funds of public corporations are not exempt from garnishment (PNB v. Palaban, et al., G.R. No. L-33112, June 15, 1978; Regalado, 2012).
Preliminary Attachment (Rule 57); Preliminary Injunction (Rule 58); Receivership (Rule 59); Replevin (Rule 60); Support (Rule 61).
PRELIMINARY ATTACHMENT Kinds of attachment Prelimin ary Attachm ent
It is one issued at the commencement of the action or at any time before entry of the judgment, as security for the satisfaction of any judgment that may be recovered in the cases provided for by the Rules. The court takes custody of the property of the party against whom the attachment is directed.
Can a property of an incompetent under guardianship in custodia legis be attached?
30
UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2017 YES, provided that, a copy of the writ of attachment shall be filed with the proper court and the notice of the attachment shall be served upon the custodian of such property.
No claim for damages for the taking or keeping the property may be enforced against the bond unless the action is therefor is filed within 120 days from the filing of the bond (Rule 60, Sec. 7).
How is the writ of preliminary attachment discharged or dissolved?
Effect when a property is wrongfully attached Where there is wrongful attachment, the defendant may recover actual damages even without proof that the plaintiff acted in bad faith in obtaining the attachment. However, if it is alleged and established that the attachment was not merely wrongful but also malicious, the defendant may recover moral damages and exemplary damages as well (Spouses Yu v. Ngo Yet Te, G.R. No. 155868, February 6, 2007).
Once the preliminary attachment is issued, the same rule provides for two ways by which it can be dissolved or discharged. First, the writ of preliminary attachment may be discharged upon security given, i.e. a counter-bond. Second, it must be shown to have been irregularly or improperly issued (Magaling v. Ong, G.R. No. 173333, August 13, 2008). Remedies available if the property is being claimed by third person (TII) 1.
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION Preliminary Injuction vs. Temporary Restraining Order
A terceriaor third party claim - The third person whose property was levied on must make an affidavit of his title thereto, or right to the possession thereof, stating the grounds of such right and title and serves such affidavit upon the sheriff while the latter has possession of the attached property and a copy thereof upon the attaching party;
Preliminary Injunction Effective during the pendency of the action unless earlier dissolved
GR: The sheriff is not bound to keep the property. XPN: The sheriff is bound to keep the property when the attaching party, on demand of the sheriff, files a bond approved by the court to indemnify the thirdparty claimant in a sum not less than the value of the property levied upon. 2. 3.
Independent action to recover his property; or Motion for intervention – available only before judgment is rendered (Ong v. Tating, G.R. No. L61042, April 15, 1987).
Is the timing of the filing of the third-party claim is important?
YES because the timing determines the remedies that a third party is allowed to file. A third party claimant under Sec. 16 of Rule 39 may vindicate his claim to the property in a separate action since intervention is no longer allowed upon rendition of judgment. A third party claimant under Sec. 14 of Rule 57, on the other hand, may vindicate his claim to the property by intervention because he has a legal interest in the matter in litigation (Fort Bonifacio Development Corporation v. Yllas Lending Corporation, G.R. No. 158997, October 6, 2008).
31
NOTE:The trial court, the Court of Appeals, the Sandiganbayanor the Court of Tax Appeals that issued a writ of preliminary injunction against a lower court, board, officer, or quasijudicial agency shall decide the main case or petition within 6 months from the issuance of the writ (Sec. 5, Rule 58, as amended by A.M. No. 07-7-12-SC). Restrains or requires the performance of particular acts. Notice and hearing always required (Sec. 5, Rule 58).
Temporary Restraining Order This is non-extendible (Sec. 5, Rule 58) : 1. If issued by RTC/MTC – 20 days from notice to the person restrained; 2. If issued by CA– 60 days from notice; 3. If issued by SC– until lifted. NOTE: Prohibition against the renewal applies only if the same is sought under and by reason of the same ground for which it was srcinally issued (Regalado, 2008).
Maintain status quo ante
GR: Notice and hearing required XPN: To prevent urgent/irreparable injury, TRO may be issued by an executive judge or presiding judge for 72 hours and a summary
REMEDIAL LAW
Can be issued to compel the performance of an act
GR: Contemporaneous service of summons;- Prior or simultaneous service of summons.
hearing be subsequently conducted within such period. Cannot be issued to compel the performance of an act
XPNs: a. Summons could not be served personally or by substituted service; b. Adverse party is a resident but is temporarily absent from the Philippines; c. Adverse party is a non-resident;
When is a Status quo order availed of? It is resorted to when the projected proceedings in the case made the conservation of the status quo desirable or essential but the affected party neither sought such relief nor did the allegations in his pleading sufficiently make out a case for a TRO.
5.
The plaintiff praying for the writ must further establish that he has a present and unmistakable right to be protected and there is a special and paramount necessity for the writ to prevent serious damage [Sec. 4 (c), Rule 58].
Temporary Restraining Order vs. Status Quo Order
TRO Summary hearing
Prevents the doing of an act
Requires the posting of a bond, unless exempted by court
Preliminary Prohibitory Injunction vs. Preliminary Mandatory Injunction
Status Quo Order Issued motu proprio on equitable considerations.
Preliminary Prohibitory Preliminary Mandatory Injunction Injunction Requires a person to Requires a person to refrain from a particular perform a particular act act
More in the nature of a cease and desist order since it neither directs the doing or undoing of acts Does not require posting of a bond
The act has not yet been performed.
The act has already been performed and this act has violated the rights of another (Riano, 2012).
the
Preliminary Injunction vs. Main Action for Injunction Requisites of writ of preliminary injunction or temporary restraining order 1.
Preliminary Injunction (Ancillary Remedy)
Verified issuance application (Sec. 4, Rulestating 58); the grounds for its
NOTE: The grounds for the issuance of the writ of preliminary injunction are exclusive. 2.
3.
4.
Applicant must establish that he has a right to relief, a right in esse or a right to be protected and the act against which the injunction is directed is violative of such right; Applicant must establish that there is a need to restrain the commission or continuance of the acts complained of and if not enjoined would work injustice to the applicant; Applicant must post a bond, unless exempted by the court. This TRO bond is executed in favor of the person enjoined to answer for all damages which the latter may sustain by reason of injunction or restraining order if the court should finally decide that the applicant was not entitled to the writ or order;
Main Action for Injunction
Provisional remedy; It is not a cause of action itself but merely an adjunct to a main suit.
Independent/Primary Action
Seeks to preserve the status quountil the merits can be heard
Perpetually restraining or commanding the performance of an act after trial
--What is a status quo ante order? How is it distinguished from a TRO? A status quo ante order is an equitable remedy intended to maintain the status quo ante, i.e. the last actual, peaceable, uncontested state of things which preceded the controversy. It is distinguished from a TRO in that it is issued by the court motu proprio, that is, there is no application therefor; or the allegations of the pleadings do not make out a case for the issuance of
32
UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2017 a TRO. Also, unlike a TRO, no bond is required for the issuance of a status quo ante order. (Mega-World Properties & Holdings Inc. v. Magestic Finance & Investment Co., 9 December 2015, Bersamin J.)
--In a dispute between a developer and the landowner, the trial court issued a status quo ante order directing the developer to post security guards on the property subject of the joint-venture agreement. Was the issuance of the status quo ante order proper?
NO. The purpose of the status quo ante order is to maintain the status quo ante, that is, the last actual, peaceable, uncontested state of things prior to the controversy. Here, the last actual, peaceable, uncontested state of things prior to the controversy was the fact that there were no security guards on the premises. Furthermore, a status quo ante order, by its nature, cannot require the doing (or undoing) of acts. (Mega-World Properties & Holdings Inc. v. Magestic Finance & Investment Co., 9 December 2015, Bersamin J.) --RECEIVERSHIP It is a provisional remedy wherein the court appoints a representative to preserve, administer, dispose of and prevent the loss or dissipation of the real or personal property during the pendency of an action. It may be the principal action itself or a mere provisional remedy; it can be availed of even after the judgment has become final and executory as it may be applied for to aid execution or carry judgment into effect.
NOTE: Receivership under Rule 59 is a receivership that is ancillary to a main action. Purpose of receivership Its object is the prevention of imminent danger to the property. If the action does not require such protection or preservation, the remedy is not receivership (Evelina Chavez v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 174356, January 20, 2010).
33
REMEDIAL LAW Where does receivership under Rule 59 apply?
NOTE:The affidavit must contain the following: a. Applicant is the owner of the property claimed, particular description of such entitlement to possession; b. Property is wrongfully detained, alleging cause of detention according to applicant’s knowledge, information and belief; c. Property has not been taken for tax assessment or fine, or seized by writ of execution, preliminary attachment, in custodia legis,if so seized, that is exempt or should be released from custody; d. Actual market value of the property (Sec. 2, Rule 60).
The receivership under Rule 59 is directed to the property which is the subject of the action and does not refer to the receivership authorized under the banking laws and other rules or laws. Rule 59 presupposes that there is an action and that the property subject of the action requires its preservation (Riano, 2012). Grounds for the discharge of a receiver 1.
Posting of counter-bondby adverse party (Sec. 3, Rule 59);
3. NOTE:Where counter-bondis insufficient or defective, receiver may be re-appointed (Sec. 5, Rule 59 ). 2. 3. 4. 5.
The applicant must give a bond, executed to the adverse party and double the value of the property (Sec. 2, Rule
60).
Appointment of receiver was made without sufficient cause (Sec. 3, Rule 59 ); Insufficient or defective applicant’s bond ( Sec. 5, Rule 59); Insufficient or defective receiver’s bond ( Sec. 5, Rule 59 ); Receiver no longer necessary (Sec. 8, Rule 59 ).
Is it required that the applicant be the owner? The applicant need not be the owner of the property. It is enough that he has a right to its possession (Yang v. Valdez, G.R. No. 102998, July 5, 1996).
SPECIAL CIVIL ACTIONS How is a Receivership terminated?
INTERPLEADER 1. 2.
3.
By the court motu propioor on motion by either party; Based on the following grounds: a. Necessity for receiver no longer exists; b. Receiver asserts ownership over the property (Martinez v. Graño, G.R. No. L-25437, August 14, 1926); After due notice and hearing to all interested party (Sec. 8, Rule 59).
Requisites of an Interpleader 1. 2. 3. 4.
REPLEVIN
The plaintiff claims no interest in the subject matter or his claim thereto is not disputed; There must be at least two or more conflicting claimants; The parties to be interpleaded must make effective claims; and The subject matter must be one and the same (Sec. 1, Rule 62).
The remedy is afforded not to protect a person against double liability but to protect him against double vexation in respect of one ’s liability (Beltran v. People’s Homesite & Housing Corp., G.R. No. L-25138, August 28, 1969; Regalado, 2008).
It is an action whereby the owner or person entitled to the possession of goods or chattels may recover those goods or chattels from one who has wrongfully distrained, taken or detained such goods or chattels (Black’s 6th).
DECLARATORY RELIEFS AND SIMILAR REMEDIES Replevin may be a main action or a provisional remedy. As a principal action its ultimate goal is to recover personal property capable of manual delivery wrongfully detained by a person. The main action for replevin is primarily possessory in nature and generally determines nothing more than the right of possession (Riano, 2012).
Declaratory relief It is a special civil action brought by: a.
The writ of replevin like the one issued in the present case may be served anywhere in the Philippines (Fernandez v. International Corporate Bank, now Union Bank of the Philippines, G.R. No. 131283, October 7, 1999 ).
b.
A person interested under a deed, will, contract or other written instrument; or Whose rights are affected by a statute, executive order or regulation, ordinance, or any other governmental regulation.
When should a declaratory relief be availed of? When may the writ be issued? This action should be brought before breach or violation, The writ in of the replevin only obtained when defendant action may has not yetbe filed his answer to the the complaint where it is necessary to: 1. 2.
Protect plaintiff’s right of possession to property; Prevent defendant from destroying, damaging disposing of the property.
asking court to determine any question of rights construction or validitythe arising, and for a declaration of his or duties thereunder (Sec. 1, Rule 63).
NOTE:The enumeration of subject matter is exclusive. or Can this special civil action converted to an ordinary action?
Requisites for a writ to be issued
1.
2.
YES. If before the final termination of the case, a breach or violation of an instrument, or a statute, executive order or regulation, ordinance, or any other governmental regulation should take place (Sec. 6, Rule 63),an action for declaratory relief will be converted into an ordinary action.
The application for the writ must be filed at the commencement of the action or at any time before the defendant answers (Sec. 1, Rule 60); The application must contain an affidavit where the applicant particularly describes the property that he is the owner of the property or that he is entitled to the possession thereof;
Declaratory relief is NOT proper if the purpose of the action is to seek enlightenment of the true import of a judgment. In
34
UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2017 Commission On Audit (COA) Proper, GR No. 213525, January 27, 2015, Bersamin, J.)
this situation, the proper remedy is to file an action for clarificatory judgment. Where is it filed?
CERTIORARI, PROHIBITION AND MANDAMUS What are the instances when the petitions for certiorari, mandamus and prohibition are NOT available?
A party may file an action in the appropriate RTC. Hence, the SC has no srcinal jurisdiction over petition for declaratory relief. It may only entertain the petition if it raises questions that need to be resolved for the common good (Riano, 2013).
1.
Similar remedies? 2.
1. 2.
An action for the reformation of an instrument–RTC; An action to quiet title to real property or remove clouds therefrom – MTC or RTC depending on the assessed
3.
3.
value of the An action to property; consolidate ownership – RTC
4.
REVIEW OF JUDGMENTS AND FINAL ORDERS OR RESOLUTION OF THE COMELEC AND COA
Rule on summary procedure as to interlocutory order issued by the lower court (Sec. 19(g), Rules on Summary Procedure); Writ of amparo against any interlocutory order (Sec. 11(l), Rule on Writ of Amparo) ; Petition for writ of habeas data against any interlocutory order (Sec. 13(l), A.M. No. 08-1-16) ; Small claims cases against order issued by the lower court (Sec. 14(g) interlocutory of A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC) .
CERTIORARI Petition for certiorariunder Rule 65 is an srcinal action in itself. It is not the same as petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 which is a mode of appeal.
Mode of review A judgment or final order or resolution of the Commission on Elections and the Commission on Audit may be brought by the aggrieved party to the Supreme Court on certiorariunder Rule 65, except as hereinafter provided (Sec. 2, Rule 64 ).
Requisites of a valid certiorari 1.
When is Rule 64 applicable?
2.
It is only applicable to judgments, final orders, or resolution of the: (a) COMELEC; and (b) COA. The judgment, final order, or resolution of the Civil Service Commission is appealable to the CA by filing a verified petition for review under Rule 43.
3.
Fortune its petition for money claim denied in the COA, however,Life on filed November 15, 2012, the latter said petition. The petitioner received a copy of the COA decision on December 14, 2012, and filed its motion for reconsideration on January 14, 2013, believing that fresh period rule applies because i ts Rule 64 petition is akin to a petition for review brought under Rule 42. However, the COA denied the motion, the denial being received by the petitioner on July 14, 2014. Hence, the petitioner filed the petition for certiorari carrying only th e affidavit of service executed by one Pascua, Jr., who declared that he had served copies of the petition by registered mail. Did the “fresh period rule” apply to the petition for certiorari under Rule 64?
The petition is directed against a tribunal, board or officer exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions; Such tribunal, board or officer has acted without or in excess of jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion; and, There is neither appeal nor any plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law for the purpose of annulling or modifying the proceeding. There must be capricious, arbitrary and whimsical exercise of power for it to prosper (Sec. 1 Rule 65; Aggabao v.
Comelec, G.R. No. 163756, January 26, 2005; Riano, 2009). NOTE: Where the remedy of appeal is available to the aggrieved party, certiorari will not be entertained. It cannot be used as replacement for the lost remedy of appeal. As a rule, motion for reconsideration is required before filing a petition for certiorarito give the public the opportunity to correct errors imputed to it. However, there are cases when an MR is not required: 1. 2.
When the order is a patent nullity; Question raised in the certiorari proceeding has been duly raised and passed upon in the lower court; Urgent necessity; and The subject matter of the action is perishable.
NO. The reglementary periods under Rule 42 and Rule 64 are different. In the former, the aggrieved party is allowed 15 days to file the petition for review from receipt of the assailed decision or final order, or from receipt of the denial of a motion for new trial or reconsideration. In the latter, the petition is filed within 30 days from notice of the judgment or
3. 4.
final order resolution sought to be reviewed. The under filing of a motion for or new trial or reconsideration, if allowed the procedural rules of the Commission concerned, interrupts the period; hence, should the motion be denied, the aggrieved party may file the petition within the remaining period, which shall not be less than five days in any event, reckoned from the notice of denial.
201852, April 5, 2016)
NOTE: It is an improper remedy to assail the Resolutions in questions issued by the Energy Regulation Commission in its quasi-legislative power . (Rosales, et al. vs. ERC, et al. G.R. No.
The petitioner filed its motion for reconsideration on January 14, 2013, which was 31 days after receiving the assailed decision of the COA on December 14, 2012. Pursuant to Section 3 of Rule 64, it had only five days from receipt of the denial of its motion for reconsideration to file the petition. Considering that it received the notice of the denial on July 14, 2014, it had only until July 19, 2014 to file the petition. However, it filed the petition on August 13, 2014, which was 25 days too late. (Fortune Life Insurance Company, Inc. vs.
35
Causing filed a complaint-affidavit in the Office of the Regional Election Director claiming that the office order issued by Mayor Brion was illegal. Subsequently, the COMELEC En Banc dismissed the complaint-affidavit for lack of probable cause to charge Mayor Brion. Hence, Causing filed a petition for certiorari. Did Causing validly file the petition for certiorari?
NO. The well-established rule is that the motion for reconsideration is an indispensable condition before an aggrieved party can resort to the special civil action for certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court. The filing of the motion for reconsideration before the resort to certiorari will lie is intended to afford to the public respondent the opportunity to correct any actual or fancied error attributed
REMEDIAL LAW to it by way of re-examination of the legal and factual aspects of the case. Though the rule is not absolute, a perusal of the circumstances of the case shows that none of the foregoing exceptions was applicable herein. Hence, Causing should have filed a motion for reconsideration because there was nothing in the COMELEC Rules of Procedure that precluded the filing of a motion for reconsideration in election offense cases. (Causing vs. Comelec, GR No. 199139, September 09, 2014, Bersamin, J.)
Is there a need for exhaustion of administrative remedies before mandamus can lie?
Mandamus will not be issued when administrative remedies are still available except: 1. If the party is in estoppel (Vda. de Tan v. Veterans Backpay Commission, G.R. No. L-12944, March 30, 1959); 2. Only questions of law are raised (Madrigal v. Lecaroz, G.R. No. L-46218, October 23, 1990).
PROHIBITION This is a preventive remedy unlike a petition for certiorari which is a corrective remedy. The purpose of this petition is to prevent encroachment, excess usurpation or assumption of
Is mandamus applicable to discretionary duties?
Mandamus is only applicable to ministerial duties. However,
jurisdiction on the part of the tribunal, court, body or officer.
mandamus used to the of not requiring the performancecan of a be discretionary dutyextent to act but to require performance of such duty in a particular manner except when: 1. There has been gross abuse of discretion; 2. Manifest injustice; or, 3. Palpable excess of authority (Kant Wong v. PCGG, G.R. No. 79484, December 7, 1987).
Requisites of a valid prohibition 1. 2. 3.
4.
There must be a controversy; Respondent is exercising judicial, quasi-judicial functions or ministerial functions; Respondents acted without or in excess of its jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction; and, There must be no appeal or other plain, speedy and adequate remedy (Sec. 2, Rule 65).
Remedy where a motion to dismiss is wrongfully denied
NOTE: A motion to stay or quash the writ of execution is a plain, speedy, and adequate remedy. Therefore, filing a special civil action for prohibition without first availing of the same made the petition defective. (Orix Metro Leasing and Finance Corporation vs. Cardline, Inc., et al., G.R. No. 201417, January 13, 2016) Will the filing of a prohibition immediately enjoin the subject? The mere filing thereof will not immediately enjoin the performance of an act sought to be prevented. The party must file a petition to obtain WPO/TRO pending final resolution of the petition for prohibition.
MANDAMUS
3. 4.
5.
There must be a clear legal right or duty; The act to be performed must be within the powers of the respondent to perform; The respondent must be exercising a ministerial duty; The duty or act to be performed must be existing (a correlative right will be denied if not performed by the respondent); and, There is no appeal or other plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law (Sec. 3, Rule 65).
Grounds for mandamus 1.
2.
Quo Warranto under Rule 66 vs. Quo Warranto in Electoral Proceedings Quo warranto under Rule 66 Issue is legality of the
Quo warranto in Electoral Proceedings Issue is eligibility of the
occupancy of the office by virtue of a legal appointment (Riano, 2012) Grounds: usurpation, forfeiture, or illegal association (Sec. 1, Rule 66)
person elected (Riano, 2012).
Presupposes that the respondent is already actually holding office and action must be commenced within 1 year from cause of ouster or from the time the right of petitioner to hold office arose. Petitioner is person entitled to office (Riano, 2012).
Requisites of a valid mandamus 1. 2.
Prohibition, and not mandamus, is the remedy where a motion to dismiss is wrongfully denied (Enriquez v. Macadaeg, G.R. No. L-2422, September 30, 1949).
When any tribunal, corporation, board, officer or person unlawfully neglects the performance of an act which the law specifically enjoins as a duty resulting from an office, trust or station; or, When any tribunal, corporation, board, officer or person unlawfully excludes another from the use and enjoyment of a right or office to which the other is entitled (Sec. 3, Rule 65).
Grounds: ineligibility or disqualification to hold the office (Sec. 253, Omnibus Election Code) Petition must be filed within 10 days from the proclamation of the candidate (Riano, 2012).
Person adjudged entitled to the office may bring a separate action against the
Petitioner may be any voter even if he is not entitled to the office (Riano, 2012). Actual or compensatory damages are recoverable in quo warranto proceedings
respondent to recover damage. (Sec 11, Rule 66).
under the Omnibus Election Code.
NOTE: If the dispute is as to the counting of votes or on matters connected with the conduct of the election, quo warrantois not the proper remedy but an election protest. Which court has jurisdiction? 1.
Generally, mandamus will not lie to enforce purely private contract rights, and will not lie against an individual unless some obligation in the nature of a public or quasi-public duty is imposed. To preserve its prerogative character, mandamus is not used for the redress of private wrongs, but only in matters relating to the public (Uy Kiao Eng v. Nixon Lee, G.R. No. 176831, January 15, 2010).
It can be brought only in the SC, CA, or in the RTC exercising jurisdiction over the territorial area where the respondent or any of the respondents resides;
NOTE: The petition may be brought in the SB in certain cases but when in aid of its appellate jurisdiction (PD 1606, Sec. 4, as amended by R.A No. 8249; Riano, 2009).
36
UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2017 2.
When the Solicitor General commences the action, it may be brought in a RTC in the City of Manila, in the CA, or in the SC (Sec. 7, Rule 66 ).
the value of the improvements and/or structures using the replacement cost method.
--Petitioners, who are complainants before the prosecutor’s office in Davao City, filed a petition for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus against the Secretary of Justice to set aside the issuance of a department order which directed all prosecutors to forward all cases already filed against Celso de los Angeles of the Legacy Group to the Secretariat of Special Panel created by the Department of Justice in Manila. Was the filing of the petition proper? Petitionsthat for certiorari and prohibition are directed only NO. to tribunals exercise judicial or quasi-judicial functions. The issuance of the department order was purely administrative or executive function of the Secretary of Justice. Nor is mandamus proper to control or review the exercise of discretion. (Dacudao v. Secretary of Justice, 8 January 2013, e.b., Bersamin J.)
NOTE: The intent of RA 8974 to supersede the system of deposit under Rule 67 with the scheme of immediate payment in cases involving national government infrastructure projects is indeed very clear (MCWD v. J. King and Sons, G.R. No. 175983, April 16, 2009). Just compensation Just compensation is defined as the full and fair equivalent of the property sought to be expropriated. The measure is not the taker’s gain but the owner’s loss. The compensation, to be just, must be fair not only to the owner but also to the taker. Even as without undervaluation would deprive of his property due process, so too wouldthe its owner overvaluation unduly favor him to the prejudice of the public ( National Power Corporation v. De la Cruz, G.R. No. 156093, February 2, 2007). Reckoning point for determining just compensation The value of just compensation shall be determined as of the date of the taking of the property or the filing of the complaint, whichever came first (Sec. 4, Rule 67).
EXPROPRIATION When Expropriation proper?
Effect of non-payment of just compensation Only when: 1. The owner refuses to sell; or, 2. If the latter agrees, agreement as to the price cannot be reached.
1.
Due process of law;
Non-payment of just compensation does not entitle the private landowner to recover possession of the expropriated lots. However, in cases where the government failed to pay just compensation within 5 years from the finality of judgment in the expropriation proceedings, the owners concerned shall have the right to recover possession of their property (Republic v. Lim, G.R. No. 161656, June 29, 2005 ).
2. 3.
Payment of just compensation; Taking must be for public use. and,
Inverse condemnation
Requisites for a valid expropriation
Properties subject to expropriation
Inverse condemnation refers to the action for recovery of just compensation filed by the property owner in a situation wherein the State, local government, unit or public utility seizes or takes private property for public use without filing beforehand a complaint for expropriation. It is called inverse because it is the property owner rather than the State which initiated the proceedings for the payment of just compensation. (National Power Corporation v. Makabangkit, 24 August 2011, Bersamin J.)
All properties can be expropriated, except money and choses in action.
“Choses in action” means A right to personal things of which the owner has not the possession, but merely a right of action for their possession (Black’s Law, 2004). Two stages in action for expropriation 1.
FORECLOSURE OF REAL ESTATE MORTGAGE
Determination of the authority of the plaintiff to expropriate – This determination includes an inquiry into the propriety of the expropriation – its necessity and the public purpose.
It is the remedy used for the satisfaction of any monetary obligation, which a person owes to another, by proceeding against the property used to secure said obligation. Requisites of a valid foreclosure of REM
The first stage willcourt end infinds the issuance of an or order NOTE: of expropriation if the for plaintiff in dismissal of the complaint if it finds otherwise.
1. 2.
2.
Determination of just compensation through the court-appointed commissioners (Riano, 2007). 3.
New system of immediate compensation.
payment
of initial
just
RA 8974 provides a modification of Sec. 2, Rule 67 where the Government is required to make immediate and direct payment to the property owner upon the filing of the complaint to be entitled to a writ of possession. As a relevant standard for initial compensation, the market value for the property as stated in the tax declaration or the current relevant zonal valuation of the BIR, whichever is higher, and
A finding of the amount due the plaintiff including interest, cost and other charges approved by the court; Order to defendant to pay said amount within a period of not less than 90 days nor more than 120 days from entry of judgment; and, If the defendant defaults, the court should order the sale at public auction of the mortgaged property (Sec. 2, Rule 68).
Cause of action in a foreclosure suit Generally, non-payment of the mortgage loan, but it may be on other grounds which under the contract warrant the foreclosure, such as the violation of some of other conditions therein (Regalado, 2010).
37
REMEDIAL LAW How is the deficiency recovered?
certificate of foreclosure sale which in no case shall be more than three (3) months after foreclosure, whichever is earlier. The pendency of the action stops the running of the right of redemption. Said right continues after perfection of an appeal until the decision of the appeal (Consolidated Bank and Trust Corp. v. IAC, G.R. No. 73341, August 21, 1987).
If there is a balance due to the plaintiff after applying the proceeds of the sale, the court, upon motion, shall render judgment against the defendant for any balance for which, by the record of the case, he may be personally liable to the plaintiff. Execution may issue immediately if the balance is all due at the time of the rendition of the judgment. If not due, the plaintiff shall be entitled to execution at such time as the balance remaining becomes due under the terms of the srcinal contract, which time shall be stated in the judgment (Sec. 6, Rule 68; Riano, 2009).
PARTITION Requisites of a valid partition 1. 2.
Right to compel the partition; Complaint must state the nature and extent of plaintiff's title and a description of the real estate of which partition is demanded; and,
3.
All other persons interested in the joined as defendants (Sec. 1, Rule 69).property must be
Liability of a third party mortgagor in case of deficiency judgment If such third person did not assume personal liability for the payment of the debt, the extent of recovery in the judgment of foreclosure shall be limited to the purchase price at the foreclosure sale and no deficiency judgment can be recovered against said person (Phil. Trust Co. v. Tan Suisa, 52 Phil 852).
Instances when a co-owner may not demand partition
1.
Instances when court cannot render deficiency judgment 1. 2.
3. 4.
2.
Case is covered by the Recto Law (Art. 1484, NCC) ; Mortgagor is a non-resident and who at the time of the filing of the action for foreclosure and during the pendency of the proceedings was outside the Philippines, unless there is attachment; Mortgagor dies, the mortgagee may file his claim with the probate court under Sec. 7, Rule 86; and, Mortgagee is a third person but not solidarily liable with the debtor.
3. 4.
5.
Judicial Foreclosure vs. Extrajudicial Foreclosure
Judicial Foreclosure Requires court intervention There is only an equity of redemption except when the mortgagee is a bank Governed by Rule 68
There is an agreement among the co-owners to keep the property undivided for a certain period of time but not exceeding ten years (Art. 494, NCC ); When partition is prohibited by the donor or testator for a period not exceeding 20 years ( Art. 494; Art. 1083, NCC); When partition is prohibited by law (Art. 494, NCC ); When property is not subject to physical division and to do so would render it unserviceable for the use for which it is intended ( Art. 495, NCC ); When the condition imposed upon voluntary heirs before they can demand partition has not yet been fulfilled ( Art. 1094, NCC ).
Effect of non-inclusion of a co-owner in an action for partition
Foreclosure No Extrajudicial court intervention necessary Right of redemption exists
1.
2. Governed by Act 3135
Before judgment – Not a ground for a motion to dismiss. The remedy is to file a motion to include the party. After judgment – Makes the judgment therein void because co-owners are indispensable parties.
May creditors or assignees of co-owners intervene?
NOTE: A mortgagee may bring a personal action for the amount due, instead of a foreclosure suit, in which case, he will be deemed to have waived his right to proceed against the property in a foreclosure proceeding (Movido v. RFC, G.R. No. L-11990, May 29, 1959).
They may intervene and object to a partition affected without their concurrence. But they cannot impugn a partition already executed unless there has been fraud or in case it was made notwithstanding a formal opposition presented to prevent it (Sec. 12, Rule 69).
Equity of Redemption vs. Right of Redemption
What is the prescription of the action?
Equity of Redemption Right of the defendant mortgagor to extinguish the mortgage and retain
Right of Redemption Right of the debtor, his successor in interest or any judicial creditor or judgment
Action to demand partition of a co-owned property does not prescribe. Prescription of action does not run in favor of a coowner or co-heir against his co-owner or co-heirs as long as there is a recognition of the co-ownership expressly or
ownership of the property by paying the debt within a period of not less than 90 nor more than 120 days from the entry of judgment or even after the foreclosure sale but prior to confirmation
creditor of said debtor or any person having a lien on the property subsequent to the mortgage or deed of trust under which the property is sold to redeem the property within 1 year from the registration of the sheriff’s certificate of foreclosure sale Governed by Secs. 29-31, Rule 39
impliedly (Art. 494, NCC) .
Governed by Rule 68
NOTE:A co-owner may acquire ownership of the property by prescription where there exists a clear repudiation of the coownership and the co-owners are apprised of the claim of adverse and exclusive ownership (Heirs of Restar v. Heirs of Cichon, 475 SCRA 731; Riano, 2009). FORCIBLE ENTRY AND UNLAWFUL DETAINER Requisites of forcible entry
NOTE: In extrajudicial foreclosure, the mortgagor has the right to redeem the property within one year from the registration of the deed of sale. However, Sec. 47 of the General Banking Act provides that in case of extrajudicial foreclosure, juridical persons shall have the right to redeem the property until, but not after, the registration of the
1. 2.
38
A person is deprived of possession of any land or building; by force, intimidation, threat, strategy, or stealth (FISTS); and,
UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2017 3.
Action is brought within one (1) year from the unlawful deprivation (Sec. 1, Rule 70).
ruled, however, that the demand upon a tenant may be oral (Jakihaca v. Aquino, 181 SCRA 67) .
Requisites of unlawful detainer
Forcibel Entry vs. Unlawful Detainer
1.
Forcible Entry (Detentacion) Demand to vacate is not required before the filing of the action because occupancy is illegal from the very beginning (Riano, 2009). The plaintiff must prove that he was in prior physical possession of the premises
Possession of any land or building is unlawfully withheld from a lessor, vendor, vendee, or other person after the expiration or termination of the right to hold possession by virtue of any contract express or implied;
NOTE:It has been held that prior physical possession by the plaintiff is not an indispensable requirement in an unlawful detainer case brought by a vendee or other person against whom the possession of any land is unlawfully withheld after the expiration or termination of a rightG.R. to No. hold19652, possession. (William GoSps v. . Maninang Albert Looyuko, July 1, 2013, citing v. CA, 373 Phil. 304) 2. 3.
Action is brought within one (1) year after such unlawful deprivation or withholding of possession; and, Demand to pay or comply with the conditions of the lease and to vacate is made upon the lessee (Sec. 1, Rule 70).
NOTE: If the complaint does not allege facts showing compliance with the prescribed one-year period to file an action for unlawful detainer, then it cannot properly qualify as such action over which the MTC can exercise jurisdiction. Such allegations are jurisdictional and crucial. It may then be an accion publiciana or accion reivindicatoria (Estate of Manantan v. Somera, G.R. No. 145867, April 7, 2009).
NO. Even if there is no formal contract between the parties, there canare still be anbyunlawful detainer because implied contracts covered ejectment proceedings. Possession by tolerance creates an implied promise to vacate the premises upon the demand of the owner (Peran v. CFI of Sorsogon, G.R. No. 57259, October 13, 1983). When can a lessor proceed against a lessee? Unless otherwise stipulated, such action by the lessor shall be commenced only after demand to pay or comply with the conditions of the lease and to vacateis made upon the lessee, or by serving written notice of such demand upon the person found on the premises if no person be found thereon, and the lessee fails to comply therewith after 15 days in the case of land or 5 days in the case of buildings (Sec. 2, Rule 70) . What constitutes a demand in unlawful detainer?
2.
The plaintiff need not have been in prior physical possession.
until he was deprived thereof by the defendant. GR: The 1 year period is Period is counted from the counted from the date of date of the last demand or last actual entry on the land. letter of demand in case of non-payment of rentals or XPN: When entry is by violation of the conditions of stealth, the period must be the lease (Riano, 2009). counted from the demand to vacate upon learning of the stealth (Riano, 2009).
Accion Interdictal vs. Accion Publiciana vs. Accion Reivindicatoria
Is a formal contract a prerequisite in unlawful detainer?
1.
Unlawful Detainer (Desahucio) Demand is jurisdictional if the ground is non-payment of rentals or failure to comply with the lease contract.
To pay and to vacate – If the suit is based on defendant’s failure to pay the rentals agreed upon; To comply and to vacate – If suit is predicated upon the -compliance defendant’s non lease contract (Riano, 2012). with the conditions of the
The notice giving the lessee the alternative either to pay the increased rental or otherwise vacate the land is not the demand contemplated by the Rules of Court in unlawful detainer cases. When after such notice, the lessee elects to stay, he thereby merely assumes the new rental and cannot be ejected until he defaults in said obligation and necessary demand is first made (Peñas, Jr. v.Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 112734, July 7, 1994 ). What is the form of the demand?
Accion Interdictal
Accion Publiciana
Accion Reivindicatoria An action for the recovery of ownership, which
Summary action for the recovery of physical
A plenary action for the recovery of the real right of
possession where the dispossession has not lasted for more than 1 year. (possession de facto) All cases of forcible entry and unlawful detainer irrespective of the amount of damages or unpaid rentals sought to be recovered should be brought to the MTC.
possession when the dispossession has lasted for more than 1 year. (possession de jure) RTC has jurisdiction if the value of the property exceeds Php 20,000 or Php 50,000 in Metro Manila.
necessarily includes recovery possession.
MTC has jurisdiction if the value of the property does not exceed the above amounts.
MTC has jurisdiction if the value of the property does not exceed the above amounts.
the of
RTC has jurisdiction if the value of the property exceeds Php 20,000 or Php 50,000 in Metro Manila.
Ejectment cases are summary proceedings intended to provide an expeditious means of protecting actual possession or right to possession of property.
NOTE: Ejectment suits can be maintained with respect to all kinds of land, but agricultural lands under tenancy are now subject to the land reform laws, and cases arising thereunder are within the jurisdiction of Regional Trial Court acting as Special Agrarian Court (Regalado, 2010). Rule in case of tacita reconduccion in relation to unlawful detainer Under Art. 1670 of NCC, if at the end of lease, the lessee continues to enjoy the property leased for 15 days with consent of the lessor, and no notice to the contrary has been given, it is understood that there is an implied new lease.
The demand may be in the form of a written notice served upon the person found in the premises. The demand may also be made by posting a written notice on the premises if no person can be found thereon (Sec. 2, Rule 70) . It has been
39
REMEDIAL LAW When there is tacit reconduccion , the lessee cannot be deemed as unlawfully withholding the property. There is no unlawful detainer (Riano, 2012). Is judgment in forcible entry and unlawful detainer cases conclusive as to the title to the property? 3.
NO. The judgment rendered in an action for forcible entry or unlawful detainer is conclusive only as to possessionof the property. Said judgment does not bind the title or affect the ownership of the land or building. A distinct and separate action between the same parties respecting title to the land or building may be had (Sec. 18, Rule 70).
4.
5. 6.
CONTEMPT It is disobedience to the court by acting in opposition to its authority, justice and dignity. It signifies not only willful disregard or disobedience of court’s orders, but such conduct as tends to bring the authority of court and administration of law into disrepute or in some manner to impede the due administration of justice (Regalado v. Go, G.R. No. 167988, Febraury 6, 2007; Riano, 2012). Kinds of contempt 1.
2.
According to nature (depending on the nature and effect of the contemptuous act) a. Civil b. Criminal According to the manner of commission
7.
any real property by the judgment or process of any court of competent jurisdiction, enters or attempts or induces another to enter into or upon such real property, for the purpose of executing acts of ownership or possession, or in any manner disturbs the possession given to the person adjudged to be entitled thereto; Any abuse of or any unlawful interference with the processes or proceedings of a court not constituting direct contempt under section 1 of this Rule; Any improper conduct tending, directly or indirectly, to impede, obstruct, or degrade the administration of justice; Assuming to be an attorney or an officer of a court, and acting as such without authority; Failure to obey a subpoena duly served; The rescue, or attempted rescue, a person or property in the custody of an officer by ofvirtue of an order or process of a court held by him (Sec. 3, Rule 71) .
NOTES: 1. Failure by counsel to inform the court of the death of his client constitutes indirect contempt within the purview of Sec. 3, Rule 71, since it constitutes an improper conduct tending to impede the administration of justice. 2. If a person charged with indirect contempt fails to appear on that date after due notice without justifiable reason, the court does not declare the respondent in default. Instead, court shall order his arrest just like the accused in a criminal case (Riano, 2012).
Direct Contempt vs. Indirect Contempt
Direct Contempt Committed in the presence of or so near a court. Summary in nature and no appeal Remedy is certiorari or prohibition Certiorari/Prohibition suspends execution provided there is a bond
Indirect Contempt When shall imprisonment be imposed?
Not committed in the presence of the court.
When the contempt consists in the refusal or omission to do an act which is yet in the power of the respondent to perform, he may be imprisoned by order of the court concerned until he performs it (Sec.8, Rule 71 ).
Punished after being charged and heard Remedy is appeal
Does a city council have the power to subpoena witness and to punish non-attendance for contempt?
Immediately executory unless a bond is filed
NO. A city council does not have the power since there is neither a constitutional nor statutory conferment on it of such powers. Unlike Congress whose contempt power is sui generis and inheres in it as a coordinate branch of the government, no such power can be implied in the legislative functions delegated to local legislative bodies, especially since the contempt power is essentially of a judicial nature (Negros Oriental II Electric Cooperative, Inc., et al., v. Sangguniang Panlungsod of Dumaguete, et al., G.R. No. 72492. November 5, 1987).
What court has jurisdiction? 1.
2.
3.
Where the act was committed against the RTC or a court of equivalent or higher rank, or against an officer appointed by it, the charge may be filed with such court; Where the act was committed against a lower court, the charge may be filed with the RTC in which the lower court is sitting. It may also be filed in lower court against which the contempt was allegedly committed. The decision of the lower court is subject to appeal to RTC; Where the act was committed against persons or entities
Is contempt akin to libel? May the principle of privileged
exercising quasi-judicial functions, the charge shall be filed in RTC of the place wherein the contempt was committed (Sec. 12, Rule 71; Riano, 2009).
communication be invoked in a contempt proceeding? In People v. Castelo, the Court ruled that contempt is akin to libel and that the principle of privileged communication may be invoked in a contempt proceeding. The Court ruled:
What are the acts deemed punishable as indirect contempt?
While the present case involves an incident of contempt the same is akin to a case of libel for both constitute limitations upon freedom of the press or freedom of expression guaranteed by our Constitution. So what is considered a privilege in one may likewise be considered in the other. The same safeguard should be extended to one whether anchored in freedom of the press or freedom of expression. Therefore, this principle regarding privileged communications can also be invoked in favor of the appellant. (Philip Sigrid A. Fortun v. Prima Jesusa B. Quinsayas, et al.; G.R. No. 194578. February 13, 2013)
After a charge in writing has been filed, and an opportunity given to the respondent to comment thereon within such period as may be fixed by the court and to be heard by himself or counsel, a person guilty of any of the following acts may be punished for indirect contempt: 1. 2.
Misbehavior of an officer of a court in the performance of his official duties or in his official transactions; Disobedience of or resistance to a lawful writ, process, order, or judgment of a court, including the act of a person who, after being dispossessed or ejected from
40
UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2017 matters covered by the remedy. Thus, the Court’s order to the CA to conduct a factual hearing was not an affirmation of the propriety of the remedy of habeas corpus (In the Matter of the Petition for Habeas Corpus of Alejano vs. Cabuay, G.R. No. 160792, August 25, 2005) .
SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS What is a Special Proceeding?
A special proceeding is an action “by which a party seeks to establish a status, right, or a particular fact,” has one definite party, who petitions or applies for a declaration of a status, right, or particular fact, but no definite adverse party. (Montañer vc CA, G.R. No. 174975, January 20, 2009)
NOTE:It must be kept in mind that in both habeas corpus and certiorari proceedings is whether an inferior court has exceeded its jurisdiction, the former involves a collateral attack on the judgment and “reaches the body but not the record,” while the latter assails directly the judgment and “reaches the record but not the body.” (Velasco vs. CA G.R.No.118644 July 7, 1995)
Subject Matter of Special Proceedings 1. 2. 3.
Settlement of the estate of deceased persons; Escheat; Guardianship and custody of children;
What is the scope of the writ?
4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11.
Trustees; Adoption; Rescission and revocation of adoption; Hospitalization of insane persons; Habeas Corpus; Change of name; Voluntary dissolution of corporations; Judicial approval of voluntary recognition of minor natural children; 12. Constitution of family home; 13. Declaration of absence and death; and 14. Cancellation or correction of entries in the civil registry (Sec. 1, Rule 72 ).
Habeas corpusextends to: 1. Cases of illegal confinement or detention by which a person is deprived of his liberty; and 2. Cases by which the rightful custody of the person is withheld from the person entitled thereto (Sec. 1, Rule 102). Ormilla, together with Rivera and Navarro, were convicted of two counts of rape and sentenced to reclusion perpetua for each count. He is presently confined at the National Penitentiary in Muntinlupa and has served approximately 17 years of his sentence. Ormilla filed a petition for the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus so he could apply for pardon or parole. However, the Director of Bureau of Corrections contended that the penalty imposed under R.A. No. 8353 for rape committed by two or more persons is reclusion perpetua to death. Under Article 70 of the RPC, the duration of perpetual penalties is 30 years. Since Ormilla was sentenced to reclusion perpetua for each count of rape, the aggregate of the two penalties is 60
NOTE: The list under Rule 72, Section 1 is not exclusive. Any petition which has for its main purpose the establishment of a status, right or a particular fact may be included as a special proceeding. Other special proceedings under various laws include: summary proceedings under the Family Code, adoption, liquidation, writs of amparo, habeas data , kalikasan, etc.
complete the service his first years. Ormilla hasbeen yet in to sentence, as he has confinement for onlyof17 years. May the writ of habeas corpus be granted to Ormilla?
WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
NO. The writ of habeas corpus may also be availed of where, as a consequence of a judicial proceeding, (a) there has been a deprivation of a constitutional right resulting in the restraint of a person; (b) the court had no jurisdiction to impose the sentence; or (c) an excessive penalty has been imposed, as such sentence is void as to such excess. None of the mentioned circumstances is present in the instant case. (In The Matter Of The Application For The Writ Of Habeas Corpus Reclassifying Sentence To R.A. No. 8353 In Behalf Of, Rogelio Ormilla, Et. Al v. The Director, Bureau of Corrections, G.R. No. 170497, January 22, 2007)
Writ of Habeas Corpus It is a writ directed to the person detaining another and commanding him to produce the body of the prisoner at a certain time and place with the day and the cause of his caption and detention, to do, submit to, and receive whatsoever, the court or judge awarding the writ shall consider in that behalf. Essentially a writ of inquiry, granted to test the right under which a person is detained, and to relieve a person if such restrain is illegal.
Anita Mangila and four others were charged with syndicated estafa and the cases were filed in the Municipal Trial Court in Cities. They were alleged to be recruiting and promising employment without lawful authority from the POEA. Judge Pangilinan conducted a preliminary
It is regarded as “palladium of liberty”, a prerogative writ which does not issue as a matter of right but in the sound discretion of the court or judge. (Mangila v. Judge Pangilinan, G.R. No. 160739, July 17, 2013, Bersamin, J.)
investigation complainants. Aftera warrant examining Palayon, one ofon the the complainants, he issued of arrest of Mangila and her cohorts. Mangila was arrested and detained in the headquarters of the NBI. Mangila filed in the Court of Appeals a petition for habeas corpus to obtain her release from detention. Her petition averred that the remedy was available. Is she correct?
Kinds of writ of habeas corpus 1.
Preliminary citation is issued when a government officer has the person in his custody, the illegality of which is not patent, to show cause why the writ of habeas corpus should not issue.
2.
Peremptory writ is issued when the cause of the detention appears to be patently illegal and the noncompliance therewith is punishable (Lee Yick Hon v. Collector of Customs, G.R. No. 16779, March 30, 1921).
NO. A writ of habeas corpus is a prerogative writ which is issued in the sound discretion of the court or judge. Judge Pangilinan issued the order of arrest after examining Palayon, one of the complainants, against Mangila and her cohorts. If he, as the investigating judge, considered Palayon’s evidence sufficient for finding probable cause against Mangila and her cohorts wherein the Court justifiably presumes from his act of referring the case to the Office of the City Prosecutor on the day immediately following the preliminary investigation he conducted, her petition for habeas corpus could not be the
In a habeas corpuspetition, the order to present an individual before the court is a preliminary step in the hearing of the petition. The respondent must produce the person and explain the cause of his detention. However, this order is not a ruling on the propriety of the remedy or on the substantive
41
REMEDIAL LAW proper remedy by which she could assail the adequacy of the adverse finding. A restraint that is lawful and pursuant to a court process cannot be inquired through habeas corpus. (Mangila v. Judge Pangilinan, G.R. No. 160739, July 17, 2013, Bersamin, J.)
b.
What is the purpose of the writ? The essential object and purpose of the writ of habeas corpus is to inquire into all manner of involuntary restraint as distinguished from voluntary and to relieve a person therefrom if such restraint is illegal.
Violation of freedom from threat by the apparent threat to life, liberty and security of their person from the following facts: a. Threat of killing their families if they tried to escape b. Failure of the military to protect them from abduction c. Failure of the military to conduct effective investigation (Secretary of Justice v. Manalo, G.R. No. 180906, October 7, 2008)
May temporary release constitute restraint?
Jurisprudence has laid down additional purposes of the writ, to wit:
Yes, provided the following elements are present: a.
1. To obtain relief from illegal confinement; 2. To liberate those who may be imprisoned without sufficient cause; and, 3. To deliver them from unlawful custody. (Villavicencio v. Lukban, G.R. No. L-14639, March 25, 1919)
b. c. d.
NOTE:The writ of habeas corpus is not designed to interrupt the orderly administration of the laws by a competent court acting within the limits of its jurisdiction, but is available only for the purpose relieving from illegal restraint.
Where a person continued torights; be unlawfully denied one or more of hisisconstitutional Where there is present denial of due process; Where the restraint is not merely involuntary but appear to be unnecessary; and, Where a deprivation of freedom srcinally valid has in light of subsequent developments become arbitrary (Moncupa v. Enrile, G.R. No. L-63345, January 30, 1986)
Can the Supreme Court and Court of Appeals take cognizance of a case of habeas corpus with respect to custody of minors?
While generally, the writ of habeas corpus will not be granted when there is an adequate remedy like writ of error, appeal, or certiorari, it may still be available in exceptional cases (Herrera, citing 39 C.J.S. Habeas corpus §13, 486-488) Is the writ of habeas corpus and certiorari ancillary to each other?
Yes. Although the Family Court where the petitioner resides or where the minor may be found has exclusive and srcinal jurisdiction to hear petitions for habeas corpuswith respect to custody of minors, the SC and the CA can take cognizance of such petition in order that it can be enforceable within the Philippines.
Yes. The writ of habeas corpusand certiorarimay be ancillary
However, the return can be heard in the FC/RTC (if there is
to each other where necessary to give effectof to the supervisory powers of the higher courts. A writ habeas corpus reaches the body and the jurisdictional matters, but not the record. A writ of certiorarireaches the record but not the body. Hence, a writ of habeas corpusmay be used with the writ of certiorarifor the purpose of review (Galvez v. CA, G.R. No. 114046, Oct. 24, 1994).
no FC in the judicial there isthe no issue need to filebe a separate petition forregion), custodyand because can ventilated in the petition for the writ.
NOTE: The general rule is that parents should have custody over their minor children. But the State has the right to intervene where the parents, rather than care for such children, treat them cruelly and abusively, impairing their growth and well-being and leaving them emotional scars that they carry throughout their lives unless they are liberated from such parents and properly counselled. (In The Matter Of The Petition For Habeas Corpus Of Minor Shang Ko Vingson Yu Shirly Vingson Shirly Vingson Demaisip V. Jovy Cabcaban. Udk No. 14817, January 13, 2014)
The person released by virtue of habeas corpusmay no longer be imprisoned again for the same offense, except by the lawful order or process of a court having jurisdiction of the cause or offense (Sec. 17, Rule 102) . What kind of restraint is contemplated under the writ? Actual and effective and not merely nominal or moral restraint is required. (Zagala v. Illustre, G.R. No. 23999 November 21, 1926) Is actual physical restraint always required? Actual physical restraintfreedom is not always any NO. restraint which will prejudice of actionrequired; is sufficient. (Moncupa v. Enrile, G.R. No. L-63345, January 30, 1986)
From November 7, 2009 to December 19, 2009, Salibo and other Filipinos were allegedly in Saudi Arabia for the Haji Pilgrimage. Salibo returned to the Philippines on December 20, 2009. On August 3, 2010, Salibo learned that police officers of Datu Hofer Police Station in Maguindanao suspected him to be Butukan S. Malang. Malang w as one of the 197 accused of 57 counts of for allegedly participating in the November 23,murder 2009 Maguindanao Massacre and had a pending warrant of arrest issued by the trial court.
GR: Release of detained person, whether permanent or temporary, makes the petition for habeas corpus moot. XPNs: a. Doctrine of Constructive Restraint – Unless there are restraints attached to his release which precludes freedom of action in which case the Court can still inquire into the nature of his involuntary restraint The essential object and purpose of the writ of habeas corpus is to inquire into all manner of involuntary restraint. Any restraint which will preclude freedom of action is sufficient. (Villavicencio v. Lukban, G.R. No. L14639, March 25, 1919)
42
Salibo presented himself before th e police officers to clear his name and explain that he was not Malang and that he could not have participated in the massacre because he was at Saudi Arabia at that time. He presented his passport, boarding passes and other documents to prove that Salibo was in Saudi from November 7 to December 19, 2009. However, the police officers apprehended Salibo. Does the writ of habeas corpus apply in a case of mistaken identity?
YES. Habeas Corpus is the proper remedy for a person deprived of liberty due to mistaken identity. In such cases, the person is not under any lawful process and is continuously
UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2017 being illegally detained. Salibo was not arrested by virtue of any warrant charging him of an offense. He was not restrained under a lawful process or an order of the court. He was illegally deprived of liberty and has correctly availed himself of a Petition for Habeas Corpus. (In the Matter of the Petition for Habeas Corpus of Datukan Malang Salibo v. Warden, Quezon City Jail, G.R. No. 197597, April 08, 2015)
2.
3. 4. 5.
Who may apply for the petition of the writ? 1. 2.
The party for whose relief it is intended; or By some person on his behalf (Rule 102, Sec. )3 Some person – any person who has a legally justified interest in the freedom of the person whose liberty is restrained or who shows some authorization to make
6.
If jurisdiction appears after the writ is allowed despite any informality or defect in the process, judgment, or order; or Person is charged with or convicted of an offense in the Philippines; or Suffering from imprisonment under lawful judgment. (Rule 102, Sec. 4) If it appears that the prisoner was lawfully committed, and is plainly and specifically charged in the warrant of commitment with an offense punishable by death (Rule 102, Sec. 14) Even if the arrest of a person is illegal, due to supervening events may bar release: a. Issuance of a judicial process (Sayo v. Chief of Police of Manila, G.R. No. L-2128, May 12, 1948)
the application (Velasco v. CA, G.R. No. 118644, July 7, 1995)
NOTE: The writ may also be availed by judicial guardians (Hernandez v. San Juan-Santos, G.R. No. 166470, August 07, 2009).
b.
Who makes the Return and what are its Contents? c. It is made by the person or officer in whose custody the prisoner is found, alleging the following: 1. Whether he has or has not the party in his custody or power, or under restraint 2. If he has the party in his custody or power, or under restraint, the authority and the true and whole cause thereof, set forth at large, with a copy of the writ, order execution, or other process, if any, upon which the party is held 3. If the party is in his custody or power or is restrained by him, and is not produced, particularly the nature and gravity of the sickness or infirmity of such party by
Judicial is defined a writ,issued warrant, subpoena,process or other formal aswriting by authority of law. (Malaloan v. CA, G.R. No. 104879, May 6, 1994) The filing before a trial court a complaint which issued a hold departure order and denied motion to dismiss and to grant bail (Velasco v. CA, G.R. No. 118644, July 7, 1995) Filing of an information for the offense for which the accused is detained bars the availability of writ of habeas corpus (Velasco v. CA, G.R. No. 118644, July 7, 1995)
When is habeas corpus not applicable?
Habeas corpusis not applicable when the purpose is to: 1. 2. 3. 4.
Enforce a right of service; Determine whether a person has committed a crime; Determine a disputed interstate boundary line; Punish respondent;
reason of which cannot, without danger, be bought before the court orhejudge
5. 6.
What must be alleged in the Return if the person or officer has custody of the prisoner and transferred the custody of the latter to another?
7. 8.
Recover ordenial other money Assert ordamages vindicate of rightaward; to bail (In re: Azucena Garcia, G.R. No. 141443, Nov. 18, 2000) ; Correct errors in appreciation of facts or law; and, To enforce marital rights including coverture and living in conjugal dwelling (Ilusorio v. Bildner, G.R. No. 139808, May 12, 200).
If he has the party in his custody or power, or under restraint, and has transferred such custody or restraint to another, particularly to whom, at what time, for what cause, and by what authority such transfer was made. (Rule 102, Sec. 10)
WRIT OFAMPARO A.M. NO. 07-9-12-SC What is a Writ of Amparo?
NOTE:The return or statement shall be signed by the person who makes it; and shall also be sworn by him if the prisoner is not produced, and in all other cases, unless the return is made and signed by a sworn public officer in his official capacity. (Rule 102, Sec. 11)
It is a remedy available to any person whose right to life, liberty and security is violated or threatened with violation by an unlawful act or omission of a public official or employee, or of a private individual or entity. The writ shall cover extralegal killings and enforced disappearances or threats thereof (Sec. 1, A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC).
When is the Return considered as an evidence and when is it considered only a plea?
The remedy provides rapid judicial relief as it partakes of a When the prisoner is in custody a warrant of commitment in pursuance of law, under the return shall be considered prima facieevidence of the cause of restraint.
summary proceeding thatreliefs requires only substantial evidence to make the appropriate available to the petitioner. It is not an action to determine criminal guilt requiring proof beyond reasonable doubt, or liability for damages requiring preponderance of evidence, or administrative responsibility requiring substantial evidence that will require full and exhaustive proceedings (Deliberations of the Committee on the Revision of the Rules of Court, Aug. 10, 2007, Aug. 24, 2007, Aug. 31, 2007 and September 20, 2008) .
If he is restrained of his liberty by any alleged private authority, the return shall be considered only as a plea of the facts therein set forth, and the party claiming the custody must prove such facts. (Rule 102, Sec. 13) When is the writ disallowed or discharged?
Who may file? 1.
The person alleged to be restrained of his liberty is in custody of an officer or Under process issued by the court or judge or By virtue of a judgment or order of a court of record and said court had jurisdiction to issue the process, render the judgment or make the order; or
1. 2.
43
Aggrieved party; or, Qualified person or entity in the following order: a. Any member of the immediate family namely: the spouse, children and parents of the aggrieved party; b. Any ascendant, descendant or collateral relative of the aggrieved party within the fourth civil degree of
REMEDIAL LAW
c.
consanguinity or affinity, in default of those mentioned in the preceding paragraph; or Any concerned citizen, organization, association or institution if there is no known member of the immediate family or relative of the aggrieved party
the same or give information on the fate or whereabouts of said missing persons, with the intention of removing them from the protection of the law for a prolonged period of time. Simply put, the petitioner in an amparo case has the burden of proving by substantial evidence the indispensable element of government participation. (Egardo Navia, Ruben Dio and Andrew Buising vs. Virginia Pardico, for and in behalf in representation of Benhur Pardico., G.R. No. 184467, June 19, 2012)
Effect of filing of the writ The filing of a petition by the aggrieved party suspends the right of all other authorized parties to file similar petitions. (Sec. 2)
What are the contents of the return?
Where should the petition be filed? 1.
RTC where the threat, act or omission was committed or
2.
any of its element occurred; Sandiganbayan theor writ of habeas corpus, —unlike because public officials and employees will be respondents in amparo petitions; or Court of Appeals; or Supreme Court; or Any justice of such courts (Sec. 3)
3. 4. 5.
1. The lawful defenses to show that the respondent did not violate or threaten with violation the right to life, liberty and security of the aggrieved party, through any act or 2. omission; The steps or actions taken by the respondent to determine the fate or whereabouts of the aggrieved party and the person responsible for the threat, act or omission; 3. All relevant information in the possession of the respondent pertaining to the threat, act or omission against the aggrieved party; and, 4. If the respondent is a public official or employee the return shall further state the actions that have been or will still be taken: a. to verify the identity of the aggrieved party; b. to recover and preserve evidence related to the death or disappearance of the person identified in the petition which may aid in the prosecution of the person or persons responsible; c. to identify witnesses and obtain statements from them concerning the death or disappearance; d. to determine the cause, manner, location and time of death or disappearance as well as any pattern or practice that may have brought about the death or
NOTE:May be filed on any day, including Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays; from morning until evening. Where is the writ enforceable? The writ shall be enforceable anywhere in the Philippines. (Sec. 3) Are docket fees required to be paid when filing the petition? No. Petitioner shall be exempted from payment of docket fees and other lawful fees when filing the petition. (Sec. 4)
disappearance; to identify and apprehend the person or persons involved in the death or disappearance; and f. to bring the suspected offenders before a competent court.; and 5. The return shall also state matters relevant to the investigation, its resolution and the prosecution of the case.
Contents of the petition 1. 2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
e.
The personal circumstances of the petitioner; The name and personal circumstances of the respondent responsible for the threat, actor omission or if the name is unknown or uncertain, the respondent may be described by an assumed appellation; The right to life, liberty and security of the aggrieved party violated or threatened with violation by an unlawful act or omission of the respondent, and how such threat or violation is committed with the attendant circumstances detailed in supporting affidavits; The investigation conducted, if any, specifying the names, the personal circumstances and addresses of the investigating authority or individuals, as well as the manner and conduct of the investigation, together with any report; The actions and recourses taken by the petitioner to determine the fate or whereabouts of the aggrieved party and the identity of the person responsible for the
When should the Return be filed? Respondent must file a verified written return within 72 hours after service of writ, together with supporting affidavits. No general denial allowed. (Sec. 9) What is the effect of failure to file a return? In case the respondent fails to file a return, the court, justice, or judge shall proceed to hear the petition ex parte. (Sec. 12) What is the Omnibus Waiver Rule?
threat, actprayed or omission; The relief for. and, May include a general prayer and equitable reliefs.
The Omnibus Waiver Rule states that all defenses not raised in the return (answer) are deemed waived (Sec. 10, Ibid.). It is different from the Omnibus Motion Rule which states that defenses not raised in a Motion to Dismiss are deemed waived.
When shall the writ be issued? Upon filing of petition, the writ shall be immediately issued if on its face it ought to issue.
NOTE: A motion to dismiss is a prohibited pleading in an application for a writ of amparo. The filing of a motion to dismiss even on the ground of lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties is proscribed to avoid undue delay. The grounds of a motion to dismiss should be included in the return and resolved by the court, using its reasonable discretion as to the time and merit of the motion (Sec. 11, Ibid.).
What is the quantum of proof in the application for the issuance of the writ? For the protective writ of amparo to issue, allegation and proof that the persons subject thereof are missing are not enough. It must also be shown and proved by substantial evidence that the disappearance was carried out by, or with the authorization, support or acquiescence of, the State or a political organization, followed by a refusal to acknowledge
Return is the proper responsive pleading; memorandum is a prohibited pleading
44
UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2017 What is the effect of the Doctrine Responsibility in amparo proceedings?
The insistence on filing an answer was inappropriate. It is the return that serves as the responsive pleading for petitions for the issuance of Writs of Amparo. The requirement to file an answer is contrary to the intention of the court to provide a speedy remedy to those whose right to life, liberty and security are violated or are threatened to be violated (Ibid).
of
Command
If command responsibility were to be invoked and applied to these proceedings, it should, at most, be only to determine the author who, at the first instance, is accountable for, and has the duty to address, the disappearances or harassments complained of, so as to enable the Court to devise remedial measure that may be appropriate under the premises to protect rights covered by the writ of amparo (Rubrico v. Macapagal-Arroyo, GR. No. 183871, February 18, 2010).
A memorandum, on the other hand, is a synthesis of the claims of the party litigants and is a final pleading usually required before the case is submitted for decision. One cannot substitute for the other since these submissions have different functions in facilitating the suit. More importantly, a memorandum is a prohibited pleading under the Rule on the writ of Amparo (Ibid).
The doctrine of command responsibility may be used to determine whether respondents are accountable for and have the duty to address the abduction of petitioner in order to enable the courts to v.devise remedial to protect his rights (Rodriguez Arroyo, GR. measures No. 191805 and 193160, November 15, 2011).
Archiving and Revival of Cases If the case cannot proceed for valid cause, the court shall not dismiss the petition but shall archive it. If after the lapse of two (2) years from the notice of archiving, the petition shall be dismissed for failure to prosecute. (Sec. 20)
Is a separate action barred?
NO. The Rule shall neither preclude the filing of separate criminal, civil or administrative actions(Sec. 21)
What are Extralegal killings? But a claim for damages should instead be filed in a proper civil action.
These are killings committed without due process of law, legal safeguards or judicial proceedings (Secretary of National Defense v. Manalo, G.R. No. 180906, Oct. 7, 2008).
Is the amparo proceeding criminal in nature? What step should be taken in case of criminal prosecution?
What is enforced disappearance? What are its elements?
NO. The amparo proceeding is not criminal in nature and will not determine the criminal guilt of the respondent. If the evidence so warrants, the amparo court may refer the case to the Department of Justice for criminal prosecution.
(1) The arrest, detention, or abduction of persons; (2) By, or with the authorization, support or acquiescence of, a State or a political organization; (3) Followed by a refusal to acknowledge that deprivation of freedom or to give information on the fate or
Effect of filing a criminal action
of those (4) whereabouts With the intention ofpersons; removing from the protection of the law for a prolonged period of time [Section 3(g) of RA No. 9851; Edgardo Navia vs. Virginia Pardico, G.R. No. 184467, June 19, 2012] Is a petition for a writ of amparo the proper recourse for obtaining parental authority and custody of a minor child?
When a criminal action has been commenced, no separate petition for the writ shall be filed. Reliefs under the writ shall be available by motion in a criminal case. Procedure under this Rule shall govern the disposition of the reliefs available under the writ of amparo. (Sec. 22)
NO. The writ of amparo is confined only to cases of extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances, or to threats thereof. (Infant Julian Yusa Y Caram, Represented By His Mother, Ma. Christina Yusa y Caram v. Atty. Marijoy D. Segui, Atty. Sally D. Escutin, Vilma B. Cabrera, AND Celia C. Yangco, G.R. No. 193652, 05 August 2014) Distinguish the Privilege of the Writ of Amparo from the Actual Order called the Writ of Amparo
Explain the Rules on Consolidation. When a criminal action is filed subsequent to the filing of a petition for the writ, the latter shall be consolidated with the criminal action. When a criminal action and a separate civil action are filed subsequent to a petition for a writ of amparo, the latter shall be consolidated with the criminal action.
The privilege includes the availment of the entire procedure outlined in the Rule. After examining the petition and its
After consolidation, the procedure under this Rule shall
attached affidavits, the return the evidence in the summary hearing, the and judgment shouldpresented detail the required acts from the respondent that will mitigate, if not totally eradicate, the violation of or threat to the petitioner’s life, liberty or security.
continue to apply petition. (Sec. 23) to the disposition of the reliefs on the
What are the interim reliefs available to the petitioner? When shall it be issued?
A judgment which simply grants “the privilege of the writ” cannot be executed. It is tantamount to a failure of the judge to intervene and grant judicial succour to the petitioner. Petitions filed to avail of the privilege of the writ of amparo arise out of very real and concrete circumstances. Judicial responses cannot be as tragically symbolic or ritualistic as granting the privilege of the writ of amparo (Secretary Leila M. De Lima, Director Nonnatus R. Rojas and Deputy Director Reynaldo O. Esmeralda v. Magtanggol B. Gatdula; G.R. No. 204528, February 19, 2013).
1. 2. 3. 4.
Temporary Protection Order (TPO). It is issued upon motion or motu proprio. Inspection Order. Issued only upon verified motion and after due hearing. Production Order. Issued only upon verified motion and after due hearing. Witness Protection Order. Issued upon motion or motu proprio.
What are the grounds for opposition on the Production Order?
45
REMEDIAL LAW No docket and other lawful fees shall be required from an indigent petitioner. The petition of the indigent shall be docked and acted upon immediately, without prejudice to subsequent submission of proof of indigency not later than fifteen (15) days from the filing of the petition. (Sec. 5)
It is a matter of (1) National Security or (2) Privileged Information. What are the interim reliefs available to the respondent? The Inspection Order (Sec. 14) and Production Order (Sec. 15).
When must a Return be filed? The respondent shall file a verified written return together with supporting affidavits within five (5) work days from service of the writ, which period may be reasonably extended by the Court for justifiable reasons.
WRIT OF HABEAS DATA (A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC) What is a Writ of Habeas Data?
What are the contents of the Return? It is a remedy available to any person whose right to privacy in life, liberty or security violated or or threatened unlawful act or omission of aispublic official employee,by or an of a private individual or entity engaged in the gathering, collecting or storing of data or information regarding the person, family, home and correspondence of the aggrieved party (Sec. 1, A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC).
1. 2.
It is an independent and summary remedy designed to protect the image, privacy, honor, information, and freedom of information of an individual, and to provide a forum to enforce one’s right to the truth and to informational privacy. It seeks to protect a person’s right to control information regarding oneself, particularly in instances in which such information is being collected through unlawful means in order to achieve unlawful ends. (Gamboa v. Chan, G.R. No. 193636, July 24, 2012)
3.
The lawful defenses such as national security, ofstate secrets, privileged communication, confidentiality the source of information of media and others; In case of respondent in charge, in possession or in control of the data or information subject of the petition: a. Disclosure of the date or information about the petitioner: the nature of such data or information, and the purpose of its collection; b. the steps or actions taken by the respondent to ensure the security and confidentiality of the data or information; and c. the currency and accuracy of the date or information held; and Other allegations relevant to the resolution of the proceeding.
A general denial of the allegations in the petition shall not be allowed. (Sec. 10)
The writ of habeas data was conceptualized as a judicial remedy enforcing the right to privacy, most especially the right to informational privacy of individuals. The writ operates to protect a person’s right to control information
When is a petition for habeas data dismissible?
regarding himself, particularly the instances such information is being collected in through unlawfulwhere means in order to achieve unlawful ends (Roxas v. Macapagal Arroyo, G.R. No. 189155, September 7, 2010).
A Habeas dismissible if itthe fails to adequately show that Data therePetition exists aisnexus between right to privacy on the one hand, and the right to life, liberty or security on the other. Moreover, it is equally dismissible if it is not supported by substantial evidence showing an actual or threatened violation of the right to privacy in life, liberty or security of the victim. (Joy Margate Lee vs. P/Supt. Neri A. Ilaga G.R. No. 203254, October 08, 2014)
Who may file the petition? Any aggrieved party may file a petition for the writ of habeas data.
What are the instances when the petition may be heard in chambers?
However, in cases of extralegal killings and enforced disappearances, the petition may be filed by: a. Any member of the immediate family of the aggrieved party, namely: the spouse, children and parents; or b. Any ascendant, descendant or collateral relative of the aggrieved party within the fourth civil degree of consanguinity or affinity, in default of those mentioned in the preceding paragraph (Sec. 2)
A hearing in chambers may be conducted: 1. Where the respondent invokes the defense that the release of the data or information in question shall compromise national security or state secrets, or 2. When the data or information cannot be divulged to the public due to its nature or privileged character. (Sec. 12)
Where should the petition be filed?
Explain the Rule on Consolidation.
i. a.RTC Where petitioner resides; or b. Where respondent resides; or c. Which has jurisdiction over the place where the data or information is gathered, collected or stored, at the option of the petitioner. ii. SC, CA, SB (when action concerns public data files of government offices). (Sec. 4)
When a for criminal action filedshall subsequent to the filing a petition the writ, the is latter be consolidated withof the criminal action. When a criminal action and a separate civil action are filed subsequent to a petition for a writ of habeas data, the petition shall be consolidated with the criminal action. (Sec. 21)
Where is the writ enforceable? What is the effect of filing a criminal action? The writ shall be enforceable anywhere in the Philippines. (Sec. 4)
When a criminal action has been commenced, no separate petition for the writ shall be filed. The reliefs under the writ shall be available to an aggrieved party by motion in the criminal case.
Are indigent petitioners required to pay docket fees and other lawful fees?
46
UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2017 The procedure under this Rule shall govern the disposition of the reliefs available under the writ of habeas data. (Sec. 22)
When is a complaint or information deemed sufficient?
Institution of Separate Action
It is sufficient if it states the: (NANPAD)
The filing of a petition for the writ of habeas data shall not preclude the filing of separate criminal, civil or administrative actions. (Sec. 20)
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE What are the requisites for the exercise of criminal jurisdiction? 1. 2. 3.
---
Jurisdiction over the subject matter; Jurisdiction over the territory; and Jurisdiction over the person of the accused.
INJUNCTION TO RESTRAIN CRIMINAL PROSECUTION GR: The long-standing doctrine that writs of injunction or prohibition will not lie to restrain a criminal prosecution for the reason that public interest requires that criminal acts be immediately investigated and prosecuted for the protection of society. (Domingo v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 109376, January 20, 2000) XPNs: 1. To prevent the use of the strong arm of the law in an oppressive and vindictive manner (Ibid.); 2. To afford adequate protection to constitutional rights (Ibid.); 3. For the orderly administration of justice (Hernandez v. Albano, G.R. No. 19272, January 25, 1967) ; 4. To avoid multiplicity of actions (Ibid.); 5. In proper cases, because the statute relied upon is unconstitutional, or was held invalid (Ibid.); 6. When the acts of the officer are without or in excess of authority (Planas v. Gil, G.R. No. L-46440, January 18, 1939); 7. When the court has no jurisdiction over the offense (Lopez v. City Judge, G.R. No. L-25795, October 29, 1966) ; 8. When there is a prejudicial question which is sub judice (before a court or judge for consideration); 9. Where the prosecution is under an invalid law, ordinance or regulation; 10. When double jeopardy is clearly apparent; 11. Where it is a case of persecution rather than prosecution; 12. Where the charges are manifestly false and motivated by lust for vengeance; and 13. Where there is clearly no prima facie case against the accused and a motion to quash on that ground has been denied.
NO. It is axiomatic that a complaint or information must state every single fact necessary to constitute the offense charged; otherwise, a motion to dismiss or to quash on the ground that the complaint or information charges no offense may be properly sustained. The test does not require absolute certainty as to the presence of the elements of the offense; otherwise, there would no longer be any need for the Prosecution to proceed to trial. The information for corruption of public officials and violation of Section 4(a) of RA No. 3019 have sufficiently complied with the requirements of Section 6, Rule 110 of the Rules of Court. (Disini v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 169823-24, September 11, 2013,Bersamin, J.) --N CONTROL OF PROSECUTIO Who controls the prosecution of criminal actions?
GR: The public prosecutor shall prosecute, direct and control all criminal actions commenced by a complaint or information. XPN: The private prosecutor (private counsel) may prosecute the case provided that: 1. 2. 3.
The public prosecutor has heavy work schedule; or There is lack of public prosecutors; The private prosecutor must be authorized in writing by the Chief Prosecution Office or Regional State Prosecution; and, Such will be subject to the court’s approval. (Sec. 5, Rule 110)
What are the matters within the control and supervision of the prosecutor?
How are criminal actions instituted?
2.
The Office of the Ombudsman filed two (2) informations charging Disini in the Sandiganbayan with corruption of public officials penalized under the Revised Penal Code and with a violation of R.A. No. 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. Disini filed a motion to quash, alleging that the information did not conform to the prescribed form. Is Disini’s contention correct?
4.
PROSECUTION OF OFFENSES RULE 110
1.
Name of the accused; Designation of the offense given by the statute; Acts or omissions complained of as constituting the offense; Name of the offended party; Approximate date of the commission of the offense; and Place where the offense was committed. (Sec. 6, Rule 110)
Filing the complaint with the proper officer for the purpose of conducting the requisite preliminary investigation for offenses where a preliminary investigation is required; or For all other offenses, by filing the complaint or information directly with the MTC and MCTC, or the complaint with the office of the prosecutor. (Sec. 1, Rule 110)
1. 2. 3. 4.
What charge to file; Whom to prosecute; Manner of prosecution; and Right to withdraw information before arraignment even without notice and hearing.
NOTE: Once a complaint or information is filed in court, any disposition of the case as its dismissal or the conviction or acquittal of the accused rests in the sound discretion of the court. Although the fiscal retains the direction and control of the prosecution of criminal cases even while the case is already in court, he cannot impose his opinion on the trial court.
SUFFICIENCY OF COMPLAINT OR INFORMATION It is fundamental that every element of which the offense is comprised must be alleged in the information. (EstrelladoMainar vs. People; GR No. 184320; July 29, 2015)
47
REMEDIAL LAW Gerald’s mother filed a complaint for reckless imprudence resulting in serious physical injuries against the attending physicians. Upon finding of probable cause, the prosecutor’s office filed an information solely against Dr. Solidum. Both the RTC and CA found Dr. Solidum guilty of the crime charged and adjudged Ospital ng Maynila jointly and severally liable with Dr. Solidum for damages. Is the Ospital ng Maynila civilly liable?
AMENDMENT OR SUBSTITUTION OF COMPLAINT OR INFORMATION Amendment
Substitution
May involve either formal or substantial changes. Amendment before the plea is entered can be effected without leave of court. An amendment as to form will not require another preliminary investigation and retaking of plea of the accused.
Involves substantial change from the srcinal charge. It must be with leave of court as the srcinal information has to be dismissed. Substitution of the information entails another preliminary investigation and plea to the new information.
An amended information refers to the same offense charged in the srcinal information or to an offense which necessarily includes or is necessarily included in the srcinal charge, hence substantial amendments to the information after the plea has been taken cannot be made over the objection of the accused, for if the srcinal would be withdrawn, the accused could invoke double jeopardy.
Requires or presupposes that the new information involves a different offense which does not include or is not necessarily included in the srcinal charge; hence the accused cannot claim double jeopardy.
NO. In criminal prosecutions, the civil action for the recovery of civil liability that is deemed instituted with the criminal action refers only to that arising from the offense charged. It is puzzling, therefore, how the RTC and the CA could have adjudged Ospital ng Maynila jointly and severally liable with Dr. Solidum for the damages despite the obvious fact that Ospital ng Maynila, being an artificial entity,courts had not been charged along with Dr. Solidum. The lower thereby acted capriciously and whimsically, which rendered their judgment against Ospital ng Maynila void as the product of grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction. (Solidum v. People, G.R. No. 192123, March 10, 2014, Bersamin, J.)
--Hanz was brought to the hospital for an emergency appendectomy. Dr. Lumantas performed circumcision on Hanz after his appendectomy. He also urinated abnormally after Dr. Lumantas forcibly removed the catheter. Several days after, Hanz was discharged from the hospital and was again confined because of the abscess formation between the base and the shaft of his penis. Hanz was diagnosed to have a damaged urethra and underwent cystostomy, and thereafter was operated for three times to repair his damaged urethra. When his damaged urethra could not be fully repaired and reconstructed, Hanz’s parents brought a criminal charge against Dr. Lumantas for reckless imprudence resulting in serious phy sical injuries. The RTC acquitted Dr. Lumantas of the crime charged for insufficiency of evidence but held Dr. Lumantas liable for moral damages. The CA affirmed the decision of the RTC. Is Dr. Lumantas still civilly liable despite his acquittal?
What is the rule on amendment made before plea? If the amendment is made before the accused enters his plea, the complaint or information may be amended in form or substance, without the need for leave of court. (Riano, 2011) However, leave of court is still necessary even if the amendment is made before the accused enters his plea when: a. The amendment downgrades the nature of the offense charged; or b. The amendment excludes any accused from the complaint or information. Is amendment after plea AND during trial allowed? This is allowed provided that amendment is made with: a. leave of court; and b. It does not cause prejudice to the rights of the accused. Therefore, after plea, only formal amendment is allowed and substantial amendment is proscribed except if the same is beneficial to the accused. (Riano, 2011)
NOTE: Substantial amendment after the plea has been taken cannot be made over the objection of the accused, for if the srcinal would be withdrawn, the accused could invoke double jeopardy. (Pacoy v. Cajical, G.R. No. 1574772, September 28, 2007)
PROSECUTION OF CIVIL ACTIONS RULE 111 RULE ON IMPLIED INSTITUTION OF CIVIL ACTION WITH CRIMINAL ACTION
YES. It is axiomatic that every person criminally liable for a felony is also civilly liable. Nevertheless, the acquittal of an accused of the crime charged does not necessarily extinguish his civil liability. In Manantan v. Court of Appeals , the Court elucidates on the two kinds of acquittal recognized by our law as well as on the different effects of acquittal on the civil liability of the accused. First is an acquittal on the ground that the accused is not the author of the act or omission complained of. This instance closes the door to civil liability, for a person who has been found to be not the perpetrator of any act or omission cannot and can never be held liable for such act or omission. There being no delict, civil liability ex delicto is out of the question, and the civil action, if any, which may be instituted must be based on grounds other than the delict complained of. This is the situation contemplated in Rule 111 of the Rules of Court. The second instance is an acquittal based on reasonable doubt on the guilt of the accused. In this case, even if the guilt of the accused has not been satisfactorily established, he is not exempt from civil liability which may be proved by preponderance of evidence only. (Lumantas v. Calapiz, G.R. No. 163753, January 15, 2014, Bersamin, J.) ---
Gerald was born with an imperforate anus. Two days after his birth, Gerald underwent colostomy. Gerald, then three years old, was admitted at the Ospital ng Maynila for a pull-through operation. The anaesthesiologists included Dr. Solidum. During the operation, Gerald experienced bradycardia, and went into a coma. His coma lasted for two weeks, but he regained consciousness only after a month. He could no longer see, hear or move. Thus,
WHEN A CIVIL ACTION MAY PROCEED INDEPENDENTLY What are the instances when civil actions may proceed independently? (2005, 2010 Bar) 1.
48
Arising from breach of contract; and,
UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2017 2.
and that there existed a prejudicial question necessitating the suspension of the criminal action until after the issue on the liability of the BF Homes was first determined by the SEC en banc or by the HLURB. Does the administrative case for specific performance in the HLURB raise a prejudicial question?
Independent civil actions or those based on Arts. 32, 33, 34 and Art. 2176 of the NCC or quasi-delict. (Herrera, 2007)
NOTE: The failure to reserve the right to file the enumerated actions does not amount to a waiver to institute a separate civil action. (Herrera, 2007)
YES. The determination of whether the proceedings ought to be suspended because of a prejudicial question rested on whether the facts and issues raised in the pleadings in the specific performance case were so related with the issues raised in the criminal complaint for the violation of P.D. No. 957, such that the resolution of the issues in the former would be determinative of the question of guilt in the criminal case. The action for specific performance in the
SUSPENSION OF THE SEPARATE CIVIL ACTION When is a separate civil action suspended?
GR: If the civil action is instituted before the institution of the criminal action, the pending civil action, in whatever stage it may be found, shall be suspended until final judgment of the criminal action has been rendered. (Sec. 2, Rule 111)
HLURB would determine whether or the notdelivery San Miguel Properties was legally entitled to demand of the remaining TCTs, while the criminal action would decide whether or not BF Homes’ directors and officers were criminally liable for withholding the TCTs. The resolution of the former must obviously precede that of the latter, should the HLURB hold San Miguel Properties to be not entitled to the delivery of the TCTs because Atty. Orendain did not have the authority to represent BF Homes in the sale due to his receivership having been terminated by the SEC, the basis for the criminal liability for the violation of P.D. No. 957 would evaporate, thereby negating the need to proceed with the criminal case. (San Miguel Properties, Inc. v. Perez, G.R. No. 166836, September 4, 2013, Bersamin, J.)
XPNs: 1. In cases of independent civil actions based on Arts. 32, 33, 34 and 2176 of the Civil Code; 2. In cases where the civil action presents a prejudicial question; and, 3. Where the civil action is not one intended to enforce the civil liability arising from the offense. PREJUDICIAL QUESTION What is a prejudicial question? It is an issue involved in a civil action which is similar or intimately related to the issue raised in a criminal action, the resolution of which determines whether or not the criminal action may proceed.
---
RULES ON FILING FEES 1.
NOTE: The prejudicial question may be raised during the preliminary investigation of the offense or in court before the
Actual damages GR: No filing fee is required.
prosecution rests its case.
XPN: B.P. 22 cases, wherein the amount of the filing fees shall be equivalent to the amount of the check involved.
The petition for suspension by reason of prejudicial question is filed with the Office of the Prosecutor or court where the criminal action has been filed for trial at any time before the prosecution rests. (Sec. 6, Rule 111)
2.
What are the elements of a prejudicial question? 1. 2.
3.
The civil action must be instituted prior to the criminal action; The civil action involves an issue similar or intimately related to the issue raised in the subsequent criminal action; and, The resolution of such issue determines whether or not the criminal action may proceed. (Sec. 7, Rule 111)
Liquidated, moral, nominal, temperate or exemplary damages – The filing fee shall be based on the amount alleged in the complaint or information. [Sec. 1(4), Rule 111]
PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION RULE 112 When is preliminary investigation required? (2004 Bar)
Preliminary Investigation is required to be conducted before filing of complaint or information for an offense where the penalty prescribed by law is at least 4 years, 2 months and 1 day without regard to fine.
NOTE: For the principle of prejudicial question to apply, it is essential that there be two cases involved, invariably a civil case and a criminal case. If the two cases are both civil or if they are both criminal, the principle does not apply. The law
When is preliminary investigation not required? limits a prejudicial question action not to a subsequent one.to a previously instituted civil A preliminary investigation shall not be required under the following: 1. When the penalty prescribed by law for the offense involves an imprisonment of less than 4 years, 2 months and 1 day; and, 2. If a person is arrested lawfully without a warrant involving an offense which requires preliminary investigation, an information or complaint may be filed against him without need for a preliminary investigation provided an inquest has been conducted in accordance with existing rules. (Sec. 6 Rule 112 as amended by A.M. No. 05-08-26-SC, August 30, 2005 )
--San Miguel Properties (SMP) purchased from BF Homes 130 residential lots situated in its subdivision BF Homes Parañaque. BF Homes, however, refused to deliver the 20 TCTs despite demands. Thus, SMP filed a complaintaffidavit with the Office of the City Prosecutor charging the directors and officers of BF Homes with non-delivery of titles in violation of Section 25, in relation to Section 39, both of P.D. No. 957. At the same time, SMP sued BF Homes for specific performance in the HLURB praying to compel BF Homes to release the 20 TCTs in its favor. The OCP dismissed the criminal complaint on the ground that the implementation of the provisions of P.D. No. 957 exclusively pertained under the jurisdiction of the HLURB
49
REMEDIAL LAW When is the right to preliminary investigation waived?
information. It is not yet a trial on the merits, for its only purpose is to determine whether a crime has been committed and whether there is probable cause to believe that the accused is guilty thereof. The scope of the investigation does not approximate that of a trial before the court; hence, what is required is only that the evidence be sufficient to establish probable cause that the accused committed the crime charged, not that all reasonable doubt of the guilt of the accused be removed. (Enrile v. Manalastas, G.R. No. 166414, October 22, 2014, Bersamin, J.)
While the right to preliminary investigation is a substantive right and not a mere formal or technical right of the accused, nevertheless, the right to preliminary investigation is deemed waived when the accused fails to invoke it before or at the time of entering a plea at arraignment. (People v. Buluran, G.R. No. 113940, February 15, 2000)
NOTE: The waiver, whether express or implied, must be in a clear and unequivocal manner. (Herrera, 2007)
--What are the remedies available to the accused if there was no preliminary investigation conducted pursuant to a lawful warrantless arrest? 1.
Summary of the remedies available to the aggrieved party
Before the complaint or information is filed, the person arrested may ask for a preliminary investigation but he must sign a waiver of the provisions of Art. 125 of the RPC, as amended, in the presence of his counsel;
Resolution of the Office of the Prosecutor
NOTE: Art. 125 of the RPC deals with the period of delay in the delivery of detained persons to the proper judicial authorities. (Art. 125, RPC ) Accused may file a investigation is refused;
certiorari if
MOTION FOR
APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION
- Before the Secretary of Justice within 15 days from receipt of assailed resolution or 15 days from receipt of denial of MR.
- Before the Office of the Prosecutor within 15 days from receipt of assailed resolution
preliminary
The waiver by the person lawfully arrested of the provisions of Art. 125 of the RPC does not preclude him from applying for bail; 2.
3. 4.
5.
After the filing of the complaint or information in court without a preliminary investigation, the accused may, within 5 days from the time he learns of its filing, ask
PETITION FOR
APPEAL
CERTIORARI
-
-
for a preliminary investigation with same right to adduce evidence in his evidence as the provided in this Rule. (Sec. 6, Rule 112 ) Refuse to enter a plea upon arraignment and object to further proceedings upon such ground; Raise lack of preliminary investigation as error on appeal (US v. Banzuela, G.R. No. 10172, October 1, 1915); and, File for prohibition (Conde v. CFI, G.R. No. 21236, October 1, 1923).
before the CA under Rule 65 and only where the decision of the Secretary is tainted with grave abuse of discretion
Before the Office of the President
APPEAL -
Before the under Rule 43
CA
APPEAL BY CERTIORARI
- Before the under Rule 45
SC
NOTE:
Appeals before the Office of the President may only be taken under the following conditions: 1. The offense involved is punishable by reclusion perpetua to death; 2. New and material issues are raised which were not presented before the DOJ; 3. The prescription of the offense is not due to lapse within 6 months from notice of the questioned resolution; and 4. The appeal or petition for review is filed within 30 days from notice.
--Josefina, Rommel and Perla charged the respondents in the MTC with frustrated homicide (victim being Rommel); with less serious physical injuries (victim being Josefina); and with less serious physical injuries (victim being Perla). The MTC found probable cause for less serious physical injuries. The respondents filed a motion to quash which was denied by the MTC. Both the MTC and RTC ruled that the issues raised in the motion to quash are matters of defense that could onlyproof be threshed out in healing a full blown trial on the merits. Indeed, of the actual period of the alleged injuries of the complainants could only be established in the trial of the cases filed against them by means of competent evidence. Is the ruling of the MTC and RTC correct?
INQUEST An informal and summary investigation conducted by a public prosecutor in criminal cases involving persons arrested and detained without the benefit of a warrant of arrest issued by the court for the purpose of determining whether or not said persons should remain under custody and correspondingly be charged in court. (Sec. 1, DOJ Circular No. 61)
YES as the MTC and RTC rightly held that the presentation of the medical certificates to prove the duration of the victims’ need for medical attendance or of their incapacity should take place only at the trial, not before or during the preliminary investigation. According to Cinco v. Sandiganbayan , the preliminary investigation, which is the occasion for the submission of the parties’ respective affidavits, counter affidavits and evidence to buttress their separate allegations, is merely inquisitorial, and is often the only means of discovering whether a person may be reasonably charged with a crime, to enable the prosecutor to prepare the
Instances when production of a detained person before the inquest officer is dispensed with: 1. 2.
50
If he is confined in a hospital; If he is detained in a place under maximum security;
UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2017 3. 4.
When is a warrant of arrest NOT necessary?
If production of the detained person will involve security risks; or, If the presence of the detained person is not feasible by reason of age, health, sex and other similar factors. (Sec. 6, Part II, Manual for Prosecutors)
1. 2. 3.
ARREST RULE 113
Accused is already under detention; Complaint or information was filed pursuant to a valid warrantless arrest; and, Complaint or information is for an offense penalized by fine only. (Sec. 5(c), Rule 112)
What are the instances of a valid warrantless arrest? The issuance by the trial court of the warrant of arrest upon filing of the information and supporting papers implies the determination of probable cause for the offense charged. (Balindong vs. CA; G.R. No. 177600, October 19, 2015)
1.
When in the presence of the arresting person, the person to be arrested has committed, is actually committing or is attempting to commit an offense (in flagrante delicto arrest);
2.
When an person offensehas hasprobable in fact been and the arresting cause committed to believe based on personal knowledge of facts and circumstances that the person to be arrested has committed it (doctrine of hot pursuit);
How is arrest effected?
Method of arrest
Exception to the rule on giving information Arrest by officer by virtue of a warrant (Sec. 7, Rule 113) The officer shall inform 1. When the person to the person to be arrested be arrested flees; of the cause of the arrest 2. When he forcibly and the fact that the resists before the warrant has been issued officer has an for his arrest. opportunity to inform him; and NOTE: The officer need 3. When the giving of such information will not have the warrant in imperil the arrest. his possession at the time of the arrest but must show the same after the arrest, if the person arrested so requires.
NOTE: There must be compliance with the element of immediacy between the time of the commission of the crime and the time of arrest. (People v Salvatiera, G.R. No. 104663, July 24, 1997) 3.
When the person to be arrested is a prisoner who has escaped from a penal establishment or place where he is serving final judgment or temporarily confined while his case is pending or has escaped while being transferred from one confinement to another (escapee exception) (Sec. 5, Rule 113)
When is illegality of the arrest waived? Any objection to the legality of the arrest is waived when the
It must also be noted that warrant is not jurisdictional.
person submits to arraignment withoutor any objection.arrested Therefore, any objection involving arrest the procedure in the court’s acquisition of jurisdiction over the person of an accused must be made before he enters his plea. (People v. Aminola, G.R. No. 178062, September 8, 2010)
Arrest by officer without a warrant (Sec. 8, Rule 113) The officer shall inform 1. When the person to the person to be arrested be arrested is engaged of his authority and the in the commission of cause of the arrest an offense or is without a warrant. pursued immediately after its commission; 2. When he has escaped, flees, or forcibly resists before the officer has an opportunity to do so inform him; and 3. When the giving of such information will imperil the arrest.
Probable Cause Such facts sufficient to engender a well-founded belief that a crime has been committed and that respondent is probably guilty thereof. The determination of the existence of probable cause lies within the discretion of the prosecuting officers after a preliminary investigation. (Cam vs. Casimiro; G.R. No. 184130, June 29, 2015) Distinguish probable cause of a prosecutor from that of a judge
Probable Cause as Probable Cause as determined by the determined by the Prosecutor Judge
Arrest by a private person (Sec. 9, Rule 113) The private person shall 1. When the person to inform the person to be be arrested is engaged arrested of the intention in the commission of to arrest him and the an offense or is cause of the arrest. pursued immediately after its commission; The private 2. When he has escaped, NOTE: person must deliver the flees, or forcibly arrested person to the resists before the nearest police station or officer has an jail, otherwise, he may be opportunity to do so held criminally liable for inform him; and 3. When the giving of illegal detention. such information will imperil the arrest.
51
Purpose
For the filing an information in of court by determining whether there is reasonable ground to believe that the accused is guilty of the offense charged and should be held for trial.
Function Basis
Executive function Reasonable ground to believe that a crime has been committed.
For the to issuance of warrant determine whether there is a necessity for placing the accused under immediate custody in order not to frustrate the ends of justice. (P/Supt. Cruz v. Judge Areola, A.M. No. RTJ01-1642, March 6, 2002) Judicial function The report and the supporting documents submitted by the prosecutor during
REMEDIAL LAW the preliminary investigation and the supporting affidavits that may be required to be submitted.
2.
BAIL RULE 114
3.
The decision whether to detain or release an accused before and during trial is ultimately an incident of the judicial power to hear and determine his criminal case. The strength of the prosecution's case, albeit a good measure of the accused's propensity for flight or for causing harm to the public, is subsidiary to the primary objective of bail, which is to ensure
4.
5.
that No. the 213847, accused appears at trial. G.R. August 18, 2015)(Enrile vs. Sandiganbayan;
offenses falling the Revised Rule on Summary Procedure shall under be released on recognizance to the custody of their parents or other suitable person who shall be responsible for the juveniles’ appearance in court whenever required. (Sec. 15, A.M. No. 02-1-18-SC)
Basis of the right to bail The right to bail flows from the right to be presumed innocent. It is accorded to a person in the custody of the law who may be allowed provisional liberty upon filing of a security to guarantee his appearance before any court, as required under specified conditions. (Tanog vs. Balindong; G.R. No. 187464, November 25, 2015)
--Enrile and several others were charged with plunder in the Sandiganbayan on the basis of their purported involvement in the diversion and misuse of appropriations under the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF). On the same day that the warrant for his arrest was issued, Enrile voluntarily surrendered. Consequently, Enrile filed a Motion to Fix Bail which was likewise denied by the Sandiganbayan. Is Enrile entitled to bail?
When can the court increase or decrease the amount of bail? After the accused is admitted to bail, the court may, upon good cause, either increase or reduce its amount. When increased, the accused may be committed to custody if he does not give bail in the increased amount within a reasonable period. (Sec. 20, Rule 114)
YES. The Sandiganbayan arbitrarily ignored the objective of bail to ensure the appearance of the accused during the trial; and unwarrantedly disregarded the clear showing of the fragile health and advanced age of Enrile. As such, the
When is bail not allowed? 1.
2. 3.
Sandiganbayan its isdiscretion in denying Enrile’s Motion togravely Fi x Bail.abused The Court further mindful of the Philippines’ responsibility in the international community arising from the national commitment under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to uphold the fundamental human rights as well as value the worth and dignity of every person. In the Court’s view, his social and political standing and his immediate surrender to the authorities upon his being charged in court indicate that the risk of his flight or escape from this jurisdiction is highly unlikely. (Enrile v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No.21384, August 18, 2015, Bersamin, J.)
A person charged with a capital offense, or an offense punishable by reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, shall not be admitted to bail when evidence of guilt is strong; After judgment of conviction has become final; or, After the accused as commenced to serve his sentence.
When is bail a matter of right? (1999, 2006 Bar)
Before or afterconviction by the MeTC and MTC; Before conviction by the RTC of an offense not punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment; Before final conviction by all children in conflict with the law for an offense not punishable by reclusion perpetuaor life imprisonment.
1. 2.
3.
penalty of which does not exceed 6 months imprisonment and/or Php2,000 fine; Where a person has been in custody for a period equal to or more than the minimum of the imposable principal penalty, without application of the Indeterminate Sentence Law or any modifying circumstance (Sec. 16, Rule 114); Where the accused has applied for probation, pending the resolution of the case but no bail was filed or the accused is incapable of filing one (Sec. 24, Rule 114); In case of a youthful offender held for a physical and mental examination, trial, or appeal, if he is unable to furnish bail and under circumstances envisaged in PD 603 (Child and Youth Welfare Code) as amended; and, Before final conviction, all juveniles charged with
---
NOTE: The prosecution cannot adduce evidence for the denial of bail where it is a matter of right. However, where the grant of bail is discretionary, the prosecution may show proof to deny the bail.
When is bail a matter of discretion?
Whether bail is a matter of right or of discretion, reasonable notice of hearing is required to be given to the prosecutor or
1.
fiscal, or at least he must be asked for his recommendation.
Upon conviction by thereclusion RTC of perpetua an offense punishable by death, or not life imprisonment; Regardless of the stage of the criminal prosecution, a person charged with a capital offense, or an offense punishable by reclusion perpetuaor life imprisonment, when evidence of guilt is not strong (Sec. 7, Rule 114); and, A child in conflict with the law charged with an offense punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment when evidence of guilt is not strong. (Sec. 28, A.M. No. 02-1-18-SC)
2.
3.
Recommendation is necessary because in fixing the amount of bail, the judge is required to take into account a number of factors, such as the applicant’s character and reputation, forfeiture of other bonds or whether he is a fugitive from justice.
HEARING OF APPLICATION FOR BAIL IN CAPITAL OFFENSES
May a person charged with a capital offense be admitted to bail?
When is bail NOT necessary or when recognizance is sufficient? 1.
It depends. No person charged with a capital offense, or an offense punishable by reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, shall be admitted to bail when evidence of
When the offense charged is for violation of an ordinance, a light, or a criminal offense, the imposable
52
UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2017 guilt is strong, regardless of the stage of the criminal prosecution.
3.
Latest clearance from the National Bureau of Investigation; and, Clearance from the court or appropriate government agency when applicable.
4. What are the duties of the trial judge in an application for bail in offenses punishable by reclusion perpetua, life imprisonment or death? 1.
2.
3.
4.
ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA RULE 116
Reasonably notify the prosecutor of the hearing of the application for bail or require him to submit his recommendation (Sec. 18, Rule 114); Conduct a hearing of the application for bail regardless of whether or not the prosecution refuses to present evidence to show that the guilt of the accused is strong for the purpose of enabling the court to exercise its sound discretion (Secs. 7 and 8, Rule 114);
Grounds for suspension of arraignment Upon motion by the proper party, the arraignment shall be suspended in the following cases: 1. The accused appears to be suffering from an unsound mental condition which effectively renders him unable to fully understand the charge against him and
Decide evidence of guilt of the accused is strong whether based onthethe summary of evidence of the prosecution (Baylon v. Sison, A.M. No. 92-7-360-0, April 6, 1995);and, If the guilt of the accused is not strong, discharge the accused upon the approval of the bail bond. Otherwise, petition should be denied (Sec. 19, Rule 114).
2. 3.
4.
FORFEITURE AND CANCELLATION OF BAIL Effects of failure of the accused to appear in court when so required 1. 2.
2.
A petition for reviewof the resolution of the prosecutor is pending at the Department of Justice or the Office of the President (Sec. 11, Rule 116); Provided that the period of suspension shall not exceed 60 days counted from the filing of the petition; and, There are pending incidents such as: a. Motion to Quash b. Motion for Inhibition c. Motion for Bill of Particulars
NOTE: The period of suspension shall not exceed sixty (60) days counted from the filing of the petition with the reviewing office. (Sec. 11, Rule 116)
The bail shall be declared forfeited; and, The bondsmen are given 30 days within which to: a. Produce the body of their principal or give the reason for his non-production; and, b. Explain why the accused did not appear before the court when first required to do so. (Sec. 21, Rule 114)
When should a plea of not guilty be entered?
When is bail deemed cancelled? 1.
to plead intelligently thereto; There exists a valid prejudicial question;
Upon the application of the bondsmen, with due notice to the prosecutor, the bail may be cancelled upon: a. Surrender of the accused; or, b. Proof of his death. The bail shall be deemed automatically cancelled upon: a. Acquittal of the accused; b. Dismissal of the case; or, c. Execution of the judgment of conviction. (Sec. 22, Rule 114)
1. 2. 3.
When the accused so pleaded; When he refuses to plead (Sec. 1(c)) ; When he enters a conditional plea of guilty (Sec. 1(c)) ;
4.
Where after a his pleaplea of guilty but presents exculpatory circumstances, shall be deemed withdrawn and a plea of not guilty shall be entered for him (Sec. 1(d)) ; When the plea is indefinite or ambiguous.
5.
When may the accused enter a plea of guilty to a lower offense?
Does an application for bail bar objections on illegal arrest, lack of or irregular preliminary investigation?
1.
During arraignment a. If the offended party is present, the latter must consent with the prosecutor to the plea; and b. That the lesser offense is necessarily included in the offense charged.
2.
After arraignment but before trial provided the following requisites are present:
No. An application for bail is not a bar to objections in illegal arrest or irregularity or lack of preliminary investigation, provided that he raises them before entering his plea. The court shall resolve the matter as early as possible, not later than the start of the trial on the case. (Sec. 26, Rule 114)
a. b. c. d.
HOLD DEPARTURE ORDER AND BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION WATCHLIST Remedy of a person who is not the same person whose name appears in the Hold Departure Order/Watch List Order
The plea of guilty is withdrawn; The plea of not guilty and the withdrawal of the previous guilty plea shall be made before trial; The lesser offense is necessarily included in the offense and,the consent of the prosecutor The pleacharged; must have and the offended party (Sec. 2, Rule 116).
NOTE: No amendment of complaint or information is necessary (Sec. 2).A conviction under this plea shall be equivalent to a conviction of the offense charged for purposes of double jeopardy. (People v. Magat, G.R. No. 130026, May 31, 2000)
Any person who is prevented from leaving the country because his/her name appears to be the same as the one that appears in the HDO/WLO may upon application under oath obtain a Certification to the effect that said person is not the same person whose name appears in the issued HDO/WLO upon submission of the following requirements: 1. Affidavit of Denial; 2. Photocopy of the page of the passport bearing the personal details;
3.
After prosecution rests– Allowed only when the prosecution does not have sufficient evidence to establish guilt for the crime charged.
When is a plea considered an improvident plea? 1.
53
Plea of guilty intimidation;
was
compelled
by
violence
or
REMEDIAL LAW 2. 3. 4. 5.
XPNs: 1. Double jeopardy; or, 2. Criminal liability is extinguished.(Sec. 6, Rule 117)
The accused did not fully understand the meaning and consequences of his plea; Insufficient information to sustain conviction of the offense charged; Information does not charge an offense; or, Court has no jurisdiction.
Preliminary Investigation, Arraignment
Preliminary investigation Conducted to determine probable cause.
Inquest
Inquest proceeding To determine whether the accused should remain under custody and be charged in court.
proceeding
NOTE: The prohibition against double jeopardy refers to the same offense and not to the same act. The offense charged in the two prosecutions must be the same in law and in fact, because the same acts may be violative of two or more provisions of the criminal law.
and
Effect of double jeopardy on the civil aspect of the case
Arraignment To inform accused of nature of
The offended party and the accused may appeal the civil aspect of the case because the concept of double jeopardy evidently has reference only to the criminal case and has no
the the the
effect on the civil liability of the accused. (Riano, 2011)
accusation against him.
Does double jeopardy apply to administrative cases? The rule on double jeopardy does not apply to a controversy where one is an administrative case and the other is criminal in nature. (Riano, 2011, citing Icasiano v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 95642, May 28, 1992)
SEARCHING INQUIRY The court must conduct a searching inquiry. The inquiry is not a simple question and answer exercise; it must be searching. To search means to look into or over carefully or thoroughly in an effort to find something. This looking into carefully and thoroughly, in the matter under consideration, must be focused on: (1) the voluntariness of the plea; and (2) the full comprehension of the consequences of said plea (People v. Chua, G.R. No. 137841, October 1, 2001) .
Motion to quash vs. Demurrer to evidence
Motion to quash Filed before the defendant enters his plea.
Demurrer to evidence Filed after the prosecution has rested its case.
Does not go into the merits of the case but is anchored on matters not directly related to the question of guilt or innocence of the accused.
Based on the ground of insufficiency of evidence adduced by the prosecution in support of the accusation.
MOTION TO QUASH RULE 117
Governed by Rule 117 of the Rules of Court.
Governed by Rule 119 of the Rules of Court.
It is a special pleading filed by the defendant before entering his plea, which hypothetically admits the truth of the facts spelled out in the complaint or information and, if duly proved, would preclude further proceedings. (Look for case definition)
Does not require a prior leave of court.
May be filed by the accused either with leave or without leave of court.
Purpose of searching inquiry To determine whether the plea of guilty was made voluntarily and whether the accused understood fully the consequence of his plea.
PRE-TRIAL RULE 118
Grounds to quash the complaint or information (18 times asked in the Bar)
Matters to be considered during pre-trial
1. 2.
That the facts charged do not constitute an offense; That the court trying the case has no jurisdiction over the offense charged; That the court has no jurisdiction over the person of the accused (2000 Bar) ; That the officer who filed the information had no authority to do so; That the information does not conform substantially to
1. 2.
3. 4.
Marking for identification of evidence of parties; Waiver of objections to admissibility of evidence;
the prescribed form; That more than one offense is charged except when a single punishment for various offense is prescribed by law (2005 Bar) ; That the criminal action or liability has been extinguished; That it contains various averments which if true would constitute legal excuse or justification; That the accused has been previously convicted or acquitted of the offense charged, or the case against him was dismissed or otherwise terminated without his express consent (double jeopardy) (Sec. 3, Rule 117).
5.
Modification of the order of the trial if one of the accused admits the charge but interposes a lawful defense (reverse trial); and, Such other matters as will promote a fair and expeditious trial of the civil and criminal aspects of the case (Sec. 1, Rule 118).
3. 4. 5. 6.
7. 8. 9.
Plea bargaining; Stipulation of facts;
NOTE: In order for the accused to be bound, it must be signed by him.
6.
NOTE: If the accused has pleaded not guilty to the crime charged, he may state whether he interposes a negative or affirmative defense. A negative defense shall require the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, while an affirmative defense may modify the order of trial and require the accused to prove such defense by clear and convincing evidence. (Sec. 3, Speedy Trial Act)
NOTE:The enumeration is exclusive. GR: An order sustaining the motion to quash is not a bar to another prosecution for the same offense.
54
UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2017 10. All habeas corpuscases decided by the first level courts in the absence of the RTC judge that are brought up on appeal from the special jurisdiction granted to the first level courts.
What is the effect of non-appearance of counsel for the accused or the prosecutor during the pre-trial without valid justification? The court may impose proper sanctions or penalties in the form of reprimand, fines or imprisonment the counsel does not offer an acceptable excuse for his lack of cooperation. (Sec. 3, Rule 118; Sec. 5, Speedy Trial Act)
TRIAL RULE 119 When does trial commence?
NOTE: Unless otherwise required by the court, personal appearance of the accused at the conference is not indispensable.
1.
What is the rule on pre-trial agreement? 2. All or admissions or entered into during the agreements pre-trial conference shall made be reduced in writing and signed by the accused and counsel, otherwise the same cannot be used against the accused. (Sec. 2, Rule 118)
After a plea of not guilty is entered, the accused shall have at least 15 days to prepare for trial. The trial shall commence within 30 days from receipt of pre-trial order. (Sec. 1, Rule 119) If the accused is to be tried again pursuant to an order of a new trial, trialgranting shall commence within days from notice of thethe order a new trial (Sec. 30 5, Rule 119).
NOTE:Under Sec. 7 of the Rule 114, accused is entitled as for right to at least two days to prepare for trial. Denial of this right to prepare is reversible error; the proper remedy from a judgment of conviction under such case is appeal and not certiorari nor habeas corpus. (Montilla v. Arellano, G.R. No. 123872, January 30, 1998)
When is plea-bargaining not applicable? Plea bargaining is inapplicable in violations of the Dangerous Drugs Act regardless of the imposable penalty (Sec. 23, RA 9165).
What is reverse trial and when may it be resorted to? (2007 Bar)
Pending deliberation on whether or not to adopt the statutory provision in toto or a qualified version thereof, we deem it proper to declare as invalid the prohibition against plea bargaining on drug cases until and unless it is made part of the rules of procedure through an administrative circular duly issued for the purpose. (Estipona, Jr. v. Hon. Frank E. Lobrigo, G.R. No. 226679, August 15, 2017)
When the accused admits the act or omission charged in the complaint or information but interposes a lawful defense, the trial court may allow the accused to present his defense first and thereafter give the prosecution an opportunity to present its rebuttal evidence. A departure from the order of the trial is not reversible error as where it was agreed upon or not seasonably objected to, but not where the change in order of the trial was timely objected by the defense.
What should the court do when prosecution and offended party agree to the plea offered by the accused? The court shall: 1. Issue an order which contains the plea bargaining arrived at; 2. Proceed to receive evidence on the civil aspect of the case; and 3. Render and promulgate judgment of conviction, including the civil liability or damages duly established by the evidence. (A.M. No. 03-1-09-SC)
Trial in Absentia Sec. 14 (2), Art. III of the Constitution provides that trial may proceed notwithstanding the absence of the accused provided that he has been duly notified and his failure to appear is unjustifiable. (Parada v. Veneracion, A.M. No.RTJ-96-1353, March 11, 1997) Requisites of trial in absentia
REFERRAL OF SOME CASES TO COURT ANNEXED MEDIATION AND JUDICIAL DISPUTE RESOLUTION
1. 2. 3.
Cases covered by CAM and JDR 1.
2. 3.
4. 5.
6. 7.
8.
9.
All civil cases and the civil liability of criminal cases covered by the Rule on Summary Procedure, except those which by law may not be compromised; Special proceedings for the settlement of estates; All civil and criminal cases filed with a certificate to file action issued by the Punong Barangayor the Pangkat ng
The accused has been arraigned; He has been notified of the trial; and, His failure to appear is unjustified. (Sec. 14(2), Art. III, 1987 Constitution of the Phiippines; Bernardo v. People, G.R. No. 166980, April 4, 2007)
Remedy when accused is not brought to trial within the prescribed period If the accused is not brought to trial within the time limit
Tagapagkasundo Pambarangay Law ; under the Revised Katarungang The civil aspect of quasi-offenses; The civil aspect of less grave felonies punishable by correctional penalties not exceeding 6 years imprisonment where the offended party is a private person; The civil aspect of estafa, theft and libel; All civil cases and probate proceedings, testate and intestate, brought on appeal from the exclusive and srcinal jurisdiction granted to the first level courts; All cases of forcible entry and unlawful detainer brought on appeal from the exclusive and srcinal jurisdiction granted to the first level courts; All civil cases involving title to or possession of real property or an interest therein brought on appeal from the exclusive and srcinal jurisdiction granted to the first level courts; and,
required Sec. 1(g), Rule 116, on thethe information may be dismissedby on motion of the accused ground of denial of his right to speedy trial. (Sec. 9, Rule 117) Requisites before trial can be suspended on account of absence of witness The following must be present: 1. Witness is essential and appears to the court to be so; 2. His absence is brought by either of the following: a. His whereabouts are unknown; or, b. His whereabouts cannot be determined by due diligence. Requisites before an accused may become a State witness The trial court must be satisfied that:
55
REMEDIAL LAW 1.
2.
3.
4. 5.
There is absolute necessity for the testimony of the accused whose discharge is requested; There is no other direct evidence available for the proper prosecution of the offense committed, except the testimony of the said accused; The testimony of said accused can be substantially corroborated in its material points; Said accused does not appear to be the most guilty; and, Said accused has not at any time been convicted of any offense involving moral turpitude. (Sec. 17, Rule 119)
The motion for leave of court to file a demurrer to evidence shall specifically state its grounds and shall be filed within a non-extendible period of 5 days after the prosecution rests its case. The prosecution may oppose the motion within a nonextendible period of 5 days from its receipt.
Effects of the discharge of an accused as state witness 1.
Discharge of accused operates as an acquittal and bar to further prosecution for the same offense (Sec. 18,
If leave of court is granted, the accused may file the demurrer to evidence within
2.
Rule 119);adduced in support of the discharge shall Evidence automatically form part of the trial (Sec. 17, Rule 119) ; and, If the court denies the motion to discharge the accused as State witness, his sworn statement shall be inadmissible in evidence. (Sec. 17, Rule 119)
10 days. The prosecution may however, oppose the demurrer to evidence within a non-extendible period of 10 days from the receipt of the demurrer. (Sec. 23, Rule 119)
3.
DEMURRER TO EVIDENCE RULE 119
JUDGMENT RULE 120
A demurrer to evidence is actually a motion to dismiss that is filed by the accused after the prosecution has rested its case.
What are the requisites of a valid judgment? It must be: 1. Written in official language; 2. Personally and directly prepared by the judge; 3. Signed by the judge; and, 4. Contain clearly and distinctly a statement of the facts and the law upon which it is based. (Sec. 1, Rule 120)
The demurrer to evidence in criminal cases is “filed after the prosecution had rested its case” and when the same is granted, it calls for an appreciation of the evidence adduced by the prosecution and its sufficiency to warrant conviction beyond reasonable doubt, resulting in a dismissal of the case on the merits, tantamount to an acquittal of the accused. Such dismissal of a criminal case by the grant of demurrer to
NOTE: The jurisdictional requirements before a judgment
evidence mayinnot be appealed, for The to doverdict so would be toone place the accused double jeopardy. being of acquittal, the case ends there. (Asistio Y Consino vs. People; G.R. No. 200465; 20 April 2015)
may be validly rendered are jurisdiction over the subject matter, territory and the person of the accused. (Antiporda, Jr. v. Garchitorena, G.R. No. 133289, December 23, 1999) What are the instances when judgment promulgated even if the accused is not present? 1. 2.
Effect of filing a demurrer with leave of court v. Filing a demurrer without leave
Demurrer With Leave of Court If leave of court is denied, the accused may proceed with the presentation of his evidence.
If demurrer is granted, the case is dismissed and the effect is an acquittal.
Demurrer Without Leave of Court If demurrer to evidence is denied, it is tantamount to a waiver of the accused’ s right to present evidence and as a consequence the case will be submitted for judgment on the basis of the evidence for the prosecution.
3.
may
be
A judgment of acquittal. Judgment is for a light offense, in which case judgment may be promulgated in the presence of the counsel for the accused or a representative. Accused fails to attend the promulgation despite due notice or if he jumped bail or escaped from prison. Notice must be given to the bondsmen, warden, accused’s bailor and counsel (Sec. 6, Rule 120)
FINALITY OF JUDGMENT When does judgment become final?
If demurrer is granted, the case is dismissed and the effect is an acquittal.
1.
After the lapse of time for perfecting an appeal;
2. 3.
NOTE: In case of death penalty is imposed, the CA shall automatically review the judgment before it becomes final. When the sentence has been partially or totally satisfied; When the accused has expressly waived in writing his right to appeal; When the accused has applied for probation (Sec. 7, Rule 120)
4.
NEW TRIAL OR RECONSIDERATION RULE 121 New trial Rehearing of a case already decided but before the judgment of conviction therein rendered has become final, whereby errors of law or irregularities are expunged from the record or new evidence is introduced, or both steps are taken.
56
Reconsideration May be filed in order to correct errors of law or fact in the judgment. It does not require any further proceeding.
UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2017
Grounds:
Grounds: Errors of law or irregularities prejudicial to the 1. Errors of law; or, substantial rights of the accused have been 2. Errors of fact. (Sec. 3, Rule 121) committed during the trial. 2. New and material evidence has been discovered NOTE: The principle underlying this rule is to afford the which the accused could not, with reasonable trial court the opportunity to correct its own mistakes diligence, have discovered and produced at the and to avoid unnecessary appeals from being taken. The trial and which if introduced and admitted would grant by the court of reconsideration should require no probably change the judgment. (Sec. 2, Rule 121) further proceedings, such as taking of additional proof. 3. Other grounds which the court may consider in the exercise of its jurisdiction: a. Negligence or incompetency of counsel or mistake which is so gross amounting to deprivation of the substantial rights of the accused and due process (Aguilar v. CA GR No. 114282, 1.
b. November Recantation28,of1995); a witness where there is no evidence sustaining the judgment of conviction other than the testimony of such witness (Tan Ang Bun v. CA G.R. No. L47747, February 15, 1990) ; c. Improvident plea of guilty which may be withdrawn; d. Disqualification of attorney de officioto represent accused in trial; and, e. Interest of justice (Sec. 6, Rule 121 ) the RTC ordered Sanico to file his memorandum on appeal. For failure to comply with the said order, the RTC dismissed the appeal. The RTC also denied Sanico’s motion for reconsideration. Sanico filed a petition for review in the CA, contesting his conviction, and assailing the dismissal of his appeal for failure to file the memorandum on appeal. However, the CA denied the petition. The motion for reconsideration was likewise denied. Was the dismissal of the appeal for failure to file a memorandum of appeal correct?
What are the requisites before a new trial may be granted on the ground of newly discovered evidence? (Berry Rule) 1. 2.
3. 4.
The evidence was discovered after trial; Such evidence could not have been discovered and produced at the trial even with the exercise of reasonable diligence; It is a new and material evidence; If introduced and admitted, it would probably change the judgment if admitted. (Riano, 2011)
TheRTC failure to file the appeal is The a ground NO for .the to dismiss thememorandum appeal only inon civil cases. same rule does not apply in criminal cases, because Section 9(c), Rule 122 of the Rules of Court imposes on the RTC the duty to decide the appeal "on the basis of the entire record of the case and of such memoranda or briefs as may have been filed" upon the submission of the appellate memoranda or briefs, or upon the expiration of the period to file the same. Hence, the dismissal of the Sanico’s appeal cannot be properly premised on the failure to file the memorandum on appeal. (Sanico v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 198753, March 25, 2015, Bersamin, J.)
NOTE: A new trial may be granted at any time before the judgment of conviction becomes final: 1. On motion of the accused. 2. On motion of the court but with consent of the accused. What is meant by the Fresh Period Rule? A fresh period of 15 days to appeal is counted from the denial of the motion for reconsideration or new trial. (Neypes v. CA, G.R. No. 141524, September 14, 2005)
NOTE:The reason for the "fresh period rule" is to standardize the appeal period provided in the Rules and do away with the confusion as to when the 15-day appeal period should be counted.
--Pedro Buado y Cipriano Jr. was found guilty by the RTC of Valenzuela of two counts of rape committed against his two minor daughters, 10 years old and 8 years old. He was sentenced to suffer in each case the death penalty. He elevated the case to the Court of Appeals (April 27, 2005). The CA affirmed the conviction, but reduced the death
Instances where fresh period rule is inapplicable: 1. It is settled that the “fresh period rule” applies only to judicial appeals and not to administrative appeals (San
Lorenzo Ruiz Builders and Developers Group, Inc. and Oscar Violago v. Ma. Cristina F. Bayang, G.R. No. 194702, April 20, 2015). 2. Appeal is filed out of time. Neypes is inapplicable to the present case, although procedural laws may be given retroactive effect to actions pending and undetermined at the time of their passage; there being no vested rights in the rules of procedure, said retroactive application of procedural rule does not extend to actions that have already become final and executory, like the Order of the trial court in the instant case. (National Power Corporation vs. Laohoo, 593 SCRA 564, July 23, 2009 ) --Sanico and Batiquin were convicted by the MCTC of the crimes of trespassing and theft of minerals. Sanico’s counsel filed a notice of appeal in the MCTC. Consequently,
57
penalty reclusion perpetua. Hence, the the accused-appelant appeal. (1) Did to the court erred in convicting of the crime charged despite the fact that his guilt was not proven beyond reasonable doubt? (2) Did the trial court gravely erred in imposing the death penalty upon the accused-appellant despite the prosecution’s failure to prove the special qualifying circumstances of relationship and minority? (1) NO. The trial records entirely supported the lower court’s findings in favor of the credibility of the two daughters’ recollections. On the other hand, the accused did not bring to the Court’s attention any facts and circumstances of weight that, if properly considered, would change the result into one favorable to him. Moreover, long silence and delay in reporting the crime of rape to the proper authorities have not always been considered as an indication of a false accusation. The
REMEDIAL LAW Court discussed that, the essence of rape is the carnal knowledge of a female either against her will (through force or intimidation) or without her consent (where the female is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious, or is under 12 years of age, or is demented). The accused may then be convicted solely on the basis of the victim’s credible, natural and convincing testimony.
Warrant of Arrest vs. Search Warrant
Warrant of Arrest Order directed to the peace officer to execute the warrant by taking the person stated therein into custody so that he may be bound to answer for the commission of the offense.
Search Warrant Order in writing in the name of the People of the Philippines signed by the judge and directed to the peace officer to search personal property described therein and to bring it to court. Does not become stale. Validity is for 10 days only. May be served on any day To be served only in daytime and at any time of day or unless the affidavit alleges night. that the property is on the
(2) During the trial, the Prosecution adduced no evidence to establish the minority of one of the raped daughters in Crim. Case No. 912-V-99. Hence, the court concurs with the CA’s conclusion that the accused could not be properly found guilty of qualified rape. Accordingly, the CA correctly prescribed Reclusion Perpetua as the penalty. On the other hand, in Crim. Case No. 974-V-99, it sufficiently stated the minority of the other daughter and her being a legitimate daughter of the accused. Accordingly, the CA correctly affirmed the penalty of death. But, with the intervening passage on June 24, 2006 of R.A. No. 9346, the imposition of the death penalty has become prohibited. Thus, the retroactive application of the prohibition against the death penalty must be made here because it is favorable to the accused. (People v. Buado, Jr. y Cipriano, G.R. No. 17063, January 8, 2013, Bersamin, J.) ---
SEARCH AND SEIZURE RULE 126 What is a general warrant?
person or in the place to be searched. Searching examination of The judge must personally witnesses is not necessary. conduct an examination of the complainant and the witnesses. Judge is merely called upon to Examination must be examine and evaluate the probing. Not enough to report of the prosecutor and merely adopt the questions the evidence. and answers asked by a previous investigator.
NOTE: In general, the requirements for the issuance of a search warrant are more stringent than the requirements for the issuance of a warrant of arrest. The violation of the right to privacy produces a humiliating effect which cannot be rectified anymore. This is why there is no other justification for a search, except a warrant. On the other hand, in a warrant of arrest, the person to be arrested can always post bail to prevent the deprivation of liberty (See also: Dr. Nemesio E. Prudente v. The Hon. Executive Judge Abelardo M.
Dayrit, RTC Manila, Branch 33 And People Of The Philippines, G.R. No. 82870, December 14, 1989 ).
A warrant one which vaguely to describes does notgeneral particularize theispersonal properties be seizedand without definite guidelines to the searching team as to what items might be lawfully seized, thus giving the officers of the law discretion regarding what articles they should seize.
What is the extent of a search incident to lawful arrest? This includes searching the person who is arrested, in order to find and seize the things connected with the crime as fruits or as the means by which it was committed.
Is a general warrant valid? No. A general warrant is not valid as it infringes on the constitutional mandate requiring particular description of the things to be seized.
What are the personal properties that can be a subject of a search warrant?
What is a scatter-shot search warrant?
1. 2.
A scatter-shot warrant is a warrant issued for more than one offense. It is invalid because it violates what the law requires in a warrant of arrest.
3.
What are the requisites before a warrant may be issued? 1.
It must be issued upon probable cause;
2.
Probable cause must be determined by the issuing judge personally; The judge must have personally examined, in the form of searching questions and answers, the applicant and his witnesses; The warrant issued must particularly describe the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized; and It must be in connection with one specific offense; and, The sworn statements together with the affidavits submitted by witnesses must be attached to the record. (Prudente v. Dayrit, G.R. No. 82870, December 14, 1989)
3.
4.
5. 6.
Personal property subject of the offense; Personal property stolen or embezzled and other proceeds, or fruits of the offense; or, Personal property used or intended to be used as a means of committing an offense.
What are objects subject to seizure during a search incidental to an arrest of a person even without a search warrant? (2003 Bar) 1. 2.
Dangerous weapons; and, Anything which may be used as proof of the commission of an offense.
NOTE: In searches incident to lawful arrest, the arrest must precede the search and the process cannot be reversed, unless the police officers have probable cause to make the arrest at the outset of the search. What are the requirement?
NOTE:The warrant must not have been issued more than 10 days prior to the search made pursuant thereto.
1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
58
exceptions
to
the
Search incident to lawful arrest; Plain view doctrine; Immediate control test; Consented search (waiver of right); Search of moving vehicle;
search
warrant
UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2017 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.
Checkpoints; body checks in airports; Stop and frisk situations (Terry doctrine); Enforcement of custom laws; Exigent and emergency circumstances; and, Inspection of buildings and other premises for the enforcement of fire, sanitary, and building regulations.
A valid “stop” by an officer requires that he has a reasonable belief that a criminal activity has happened or is about to happen. The “frisk” made after the “stop” must be done because of a reasonable belief that the person stopped is in possession of a weapon that will pose danger to the officer and other. (Riano, 2011)
What is the Plain View Doctrine?
NOTE: The officer may search the outer clothing of the person in an attempt to discover weapons which might be used to assault him. (Manalili v. CA, G.R. No. 113447, October 9, 1997)
Objects falling in the plain view of an officer has a right to be in the position to have that view are subject to seizure and may be presented as evidence.
Police officers must not rely on a single suspicious circumstance. There should be presence of more than one seemingly innocent activity, which, taken together, warranted
For the doctrine to apply, the following requisites must be met: a.
a reasonable inference criminal activity. (Comerciante y Gonzales vs. People; G.R.ofNo. 205926, July 22, 2015)
s
What does the ‘inadvertence’ requirement under the plain view doctrine mean?
What is the effect of an illegal search and seizure?
It means that the officer must not have known in advance of the location of the evidence and intend to seize it. Discovery should not be anticipated. (United Laboratories v. Isip, G.R. No. 163858. June 28, 2005)
Fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine – The effect of an illegal search and seizure is the exclusion of the evidence obtained from being used against the person whose rights were violated by the search.
The plain view doctrine does not apply where officers did not just accidentally discover the evidence but actually searched for it. The plain view doctrine may not be used to launch unbridled searches and indiscriminate seizures or to extend a general exploratory search made solely to find evidence of defendant’s guilt. (Valeroso v. CA, G.R. No. 164815, September 3, 2009)
What are the remedies against an unlawful search and/or seizure? 1. 2.
3. 4.
---
Motion to quash the search warrant; Motion to suppress as evidence the objects illegally taken (exclusionary rule – any evidence obtained through unreasonable searches and seizures shall be inadmissible for any purpose in any proceeding); Replevin, if the objects are legally possessed; and Certiorari, where the search warrant is a patent nullity.
Acting on a tip by an informant, a buy bust operation was planned against Gonzales. PO1 as the poseur-buyer and marked theEduardo buy bustDimla moneyacted with his initials “ED”. Gonzales handed PO1 Dimla a small plastic sheet containing a white substance and PO1 Dimla gave Gonzales the marked money. PO1 Dimla gave the signal and Gonzales was arrested. PO1 Dimla marked the sachet with his initials, “ED”. The Bulacan Provincial Crime Laboratory Office certified that the contents were 0.194 gram of shabu. With only PO1 Dimla as the sole prosecution witness, the RTC convicted Gonzales which the CA affirmed. Was the conviction proper?
NOTE:The remedies are alternative.
NO. PO1 Dimla failed to allege that the marking was done in the presence of Gonzales or upon his arrest and who took custody of the confiscated item after he marked it. Marking, which is the affixing on the dangerous drugs or related items by the apprehending officer or the poseur-buyer of his initials or signature or other identifying signs, should be made in the presence of the apprehended violator immediately upon arrest. The indeterminateness of the identities of the individuals who could have handled the sachet of shabu after
The provisional remedies in civil actions, insofar as they are applicable, may be availed of in connection with the civil action deemed instituted with the criminal action. (Sec. 1, Rule 127)
PROVISIONAL REMEDIES IN CRIMINAL CASES RULE 127 What are the Provisional Remedies available in criminal cases? 1. Attachment (Rule 57); 2. Preliminary injunction (Sec. 58); 3. Receivership (Rule 59); and, 4. Replevin (Rule 60);
NOTE: If the civil action has been waived, reserved, or instituted separately, the provisional remedy may not be availed of in the criminal action. Instead, it should be applied for in the separate civil action instituted.
PO1 Dimla’s marking broke the chainpresented of custody, tainted the integrity of the shabu ultimately asand evidence to the trial court. By way of exception, Republic Act No. 9165 and its IRR both state that the non-compliance with the procedures thereby delineated and set would not necessarily invalidate the seizure and custody of the dangerous drugs provided there were justifiable grounds for the noncompliance, and provided that the integrity of the evidence of the corpus delicti was preserved. (People v. Gonzales, G.R. No. 182417, April 3, 2013, Bersamin, ) J.
EVIDENCE Evidence is the means, sanctioned by the Rules of Court, of ascertaining in a judicial proceeding the truth respecting a matter of fact (Sec. 1, Rule 128). To what proceedings does the rules on evidence apply? The rules of evidence, being part of the Rules of Court, apply only to judicial proceedings (Sec. 1, Rule 128).
---
It does not apply to administrative or quasi-judicial proceedings as administrative bodies are not bound by the technical niceties of the rules obtaining in the court of law. (El Greco Ship Maning and Management Corporation vs. Commissioner of Customs, G.R. No. 177188, December 4, )2008
STOP AND FRISK SITUATIONS What is Terry Search Doctrine?
59
REMEDIAL LAW GR: The Rules of Court shall not apply to: (NICOLE) 1. Naturalization Proceedings; 2. Insolvency Proceedings; 3. Cadastral Proceedings; 4. Other cases as may be provided by law; 5. Land registration cases; and 6. Election cases XPNs: 1. 2. 3.
are matters other than the facts in issue Collateral matters and which are offered as a basis for inference as to the existence or non-existence of the facts in issue (Regalado, Remedial Law Compendium). It may be admitted if it tends in any reasonable degree to establish the probability or improbability of the fact in issue. (Sec. 4, Rule 128) Is there such a thing as multiple admissibility? What are the instances illustrating the same?
by analogy; in a suppletory character; and whenever practicable and convenient(Sec. 4, Rule 1).
Yes. When a proffered evidence is admissible for 2 or more purposes. For instance, a declaration of a dying person may be offered as:
Distinguish Evidence in civil cases from Evidence in criminal cases
Evidence in Civil Case The party having the burden of proof must prove his claim by a preponderance of evidence (Sec. 1, Rule 133) . An offer of compromise is not an admission of any liability, and not admissible in evidence against the offeror (Sec. 27, Rule 130).
The concept of presumption of innocence does not apply and generally there is no presumption for or against a party exept in certain cases provided by law.
Evidence in Criminal Case The guilt of the accused has to be proven beyond reasonable doubt (Sec. 1, Rule 133). The same may be received in evidence as an admission of guilt except those involving quasi-offenses (criminal negligence) or those allowed by law to be compromised (Sec. 27, Rule 130). The accused enjoys the constitutional presumption of innocence (Sec. 14, Art. III, 1987 Constitution).
a. a dying declaration; b. part of the res gestae; or, c. declaration against interest. It applies also when evidence may be inadmissible for one purpose but admissible for another. An example is a person's bad reputation for truth, honesty or integrity is objectionable if offered to prove that he committed the crime charged but admissible to impeach his credibility as a witness. Can evidence be conditionally admitted?
YES. When the relevance of the evidence is not apparent at the time it is offered but may be readily seen when connected to other pieces of evidence not yet offered, the proponent of the evidence may ask the court that said evidence be conditionally admitted in the meantime, subject to the condition that he is going to establish its relevancy and competency at a later time.
Differentiate Proof from Evidence.
Curative Admissibility
Proof is mere probative effect or result of an evidence; there can be proof only because there is evidence. On the other hand, Evidence is a medium of proof, the means of having a fact proved or disproved.
It allows a party to introduce an otherwise inadmissible evidence to answer the opposing party's previous introduction of inadmissible evidence if it would remove any unfair prejudice caused by the admission of the earlier inadmissible evidence.
What is the difference between Factum Probans and Factum Probandum?
Evidence considered as positive and as negative evidence
: (the evidence) refers to the material/facts Factum Probans evidencing the fact to be established; refers to the probative or evidentiary fact tending to prove the fact in issue. While : (what you are supposed to prove, i.e., Factum Probandum the elements of the cause of action); refers to the fact to be proven, or the fact/proposition to be established.
An evidence is POSITIVE when a witness affirms that a certain state of facts exists or that a certain event happened.
What are the Requisites for Admissibility of Evidence?
Admissible Evidence and Credible Evidence
1. 2.
An evidence is NEGATIVE when a witness states that a certain event did not occur or that the state of facts alleged to exist does not actually exist.
Evidence is admissible when it is relevant to the issue and is not excluded by the law or rules. (Sec. 3, Rule 128)
The evidence is relevantto the issue; and The evidence is not excluded by the rules (competent).
How is relevancy and competency determined?
evidence not necessarily NOTE: evidence.Admissible Admissibility does notisguarantee credibility.credible (Riano, 2016)
It is relevant if “it has such a relation to the fact in issue as to induce belief in its existence or non-existence” (Sec. 4, Rule 128).
Credibilityrefers to worthiness of belief, that quality which renders a witness worthy of belief. (Black’s Law Dictionary, 5th Ed., p.330)
Competency is determined by the prevailing exclusionary rules of evidence.
Burden of Proof vs Burden of Evidence What are collateral matters? When are they allowed?
Burden of proof Burden of evidence Duty of a party to present Duty of the party to go evidence to establish his forward with the evidence to claim or evidence by the overthrow the prima facie amount of evidence required evidence against him by law (Supreme Transliner, (Bautista v. Sarmiento, G.R. Inc. v. CA, G.R. No. 125356,No. L-45137, September 23, November 21, 2001). 1985).
A matter is collateral when it is on a “parallel or diverging line,” merely “additional” or “auxiliary” (Black Law’s th Ed., p. 237). Dictionary, 5 This term connotes an absence of a direct connection between the evidence and the matter in dispute.
60
UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2017 fDoes not shift and remains throughout the entire case exactly where the pleadings srcinally placed it.
Generally determined by the pleadings filed by the party.
The burden of going forward with the evidence may shift from party to party as the exigencies of the trial require (Chamberlayne, Sec. 203, 108, 169). Generally determined by the developments of the trial, or by the provisions of substantive law or procedural rules which may relieve the party from presenting evidence on the facts alleged.
Weight of Evidence It is the probative value given by the court to particular evidence admitted to prove a fact in issue.
PROOF BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT Proof beyond reasonable doubt does not mean such a degree of proof as, excluding possibility of error, produces absolute certainty. Moral certainty only is required, or that degree of proof which produces conviction in an unprejudiced mind (Sec. 2, Rule 133) . Should the identity of the accused be proven beyond
The burden of proof lies with the party who asserts his/her right. In a counterclaim, the burden of proving the existence of the claim lies with the defendant. (Ogawa v. Menigishi, 676 SCRA 14, 21, July 9, 2012 )
reasonable doubt for a judgment of conviction?
YES. When the identity of the accused is not established beyond reasonable doubt, acquittal necessarily follows. Conviction for a crime rests on the strength of the prosecution’s evidence, never on the weakness of that of the defense (People vs. Jalon, G.R. No. 93729, November 13, 1992) .
Presumptions These are inferences of the existence or non-existence of a fact which courts are permitted to draw from the proof of other facts (In the matter of the Intestate Estates of Delgado and Rustia, G.R. No. 175733, January 27, 2006).
NOTE: A presumption shifts the burden of going forward with the evidence. It imposes on the party against whom it is directed the burden of going forward with evidence to meet or rebut the presumption (Bautista, 2004, citing Mueller and Kirkpatrick, §3.4.).
A party in whose favor the legal presumption exists may rely on and invoke such legal presumption to establish a fact in issue. One need not introduce evidence to prove the fact for a presumption is prima facieproof of the fact presumed (Diesel Construction, Inc v. UPSI Property Holdings, Inc., G.R. No. 154937, March 24, 2008). Explain each kind of presumptions of law.
(presumptions juris et de jure) are Conclusive presumptions those which are irrebuttable, and any evidence tending to rebut the presumption is not admissible. This presumption is in reality a rule of substantive law (Riano, 2009).
should the knifebrothers he held during a fight againsthad his longtime enemies, Chris and Michael, been presented, it would show the difference that Chris’ knife, although smaller than Johnny’s, had more blood stains but which size fits best on the mortal wound inflicted on himself. It would thereby be ascertained that Chris accidentally stabbed himself upon losing his balance during such aggressive fight. Is Johnny’s contention meritorious?
NO. The non-identification and non-presentation of the weapon actually used in the killing did not diminish the merit of the conviction on the ground that other competent evidence and the testimonies of witnesses had directly and positively identified and incriminated Johnny as the assailant of Chris. The presentation of the weapon is not a prerequisite for conviction. Positive identification of the accused is sufficient for the judgment of conviction despite the nonpresentation of the weapon used in the commission of the offense. Thus, the establishment beyond reasonable doubt of Johnny’s guilt for the homicide did not require the production
(presumptions juris tantum) are Disputable presumptions those which are satisfactory if uncontradicted, but may be contradicted and overcome by other evidence (Sec. 3, Rule 131; Regalado, 2008). Classes of conclusive presumptions
Estoppel in pais(Equitable Estoppel) – Whenever a party has, by his own declaration, act or omission, intentionally and deliberately led another to believe a particular thing to be true, and to act upon such belief, he cannot, in any litigation arising out of such declaration, act or omission, be permitted to falsify it (Sec. 2, (par. a), Rule 131);
2.
1. The commission of the crime; and, 2. The identification of the accused as the perpetrator of the crime. What is needed is positive identification made with moral certainty as to the person of the offender (People v. Maguing, G.R. No. 144090, June 26, 2003). Prosecution witnesses positively identified Johnny as the assailant of Chris. Hence, he was convicted of homicide. However, he contends that the State failed to present sufficient evidence against him in court. He sufficed that
Effect of a Presumption
1.
NOTE: In every criminal prosecution, the prosecution must prove two things:
of the weapon usedG.R. in No. the 161308, killing as evidence in court. (Medina vs. People, January 15, 2014)
PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE It is the weight, credit, and value of the aggregate evidence on either side and is usually considered to be synonymous with the term “greater weight of the evidence” or “greater weight of the credible evidence”. It is a phrase which, in the last analysis, means probability of the truth, evidence which is more convincing to the court as worthy of belief than that which is offered in opposition thereto (Philippine Commercial International Bank v. Balmaceda, G.R. No. 158143, September 21, 2011).
Estoppel by deed– A party to a property deed is precluded from asserting, as against another party to the deed, any right or title in derogation of the deed, or from denying the truth of any material fact asserted in the deed e.g. The tenant is not permitted to deny the title of his landlord at the time of the commencement of the relation of landlord and tenant between them (Sec. 2 (par. b), Rule 131).
NOTE:A judgment cannot be entered in the plaintiff’s favor if his evidence still does not suffice to sustain his cause of action. (Ibid.)
QUANTUM OF EVIDENCE
61
REMEDIAL LAW required beyond reasonable doubt as in criminal cases. (Black’s Law Dictionary)
Did the Republic preponderantly show that the Bakunawas had acquired ill-gotten wealth during Luz g the Marcos Bakunawa’s employment durin administration?
NO. The Sandiganbayan correctly ruled that the evidence of the Republic was able to establish, at best, that Luz Bakunawa had been an employee in Malacañang Palace during the Marcos administration, and did not establish her having a close relationship with the Marcoses, or her having abused her position or employment in order to amass the assets subject of this case. (Republic Of The Philippines, Represented By The Presidential Commission (Republic Of The Philippines, Represented By The Presidential
This standard should be lower than proof beyond reasonable doubt but higher than preponderance of evidence. The potential extraditee must prove by "clear and convincing evidence" that he is not a flight risk and will abide with all the orders and processes of the extradition court. (Government of Hongkong Special Administrative Region v. Olalia Jr., G.R. No. 153675, April 19, 2007)
XPN: Under Art. 1387, NCC, certain alienations of property are presumed fraudulent. CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE
Commission On GoodAugust Government vs. Luz Reyes J.) Bakunawa, Et Al., G.R. No. 180418, 28, 2013, Bersamin,
Circumstantial evidence is sufficient if:
FEBTC filed a case against Chan to recover the unpaid balance of the amount fraudulently withdrawn from Chan’s Current Account with the use of his ATM card. It was alleged that at the time of the ATM withdrawal transactions, there was a "system bug" whose nature had allowed Chan to successfully withdraw funds in excess of his current credit balance of P198,511.70; and that Chan had taken advantage of the system bug to do the withdrawal transactions. On his part, Chan denied liability. Although admitting his physical possession of Far East Card, he denied making the ATM withdrawals and instead insisted that he had been actually home at the time of the withdrawals. He alluded to a possible "inside job" as the cause of the supposed withdrawals. The RTC rendered judgment in favor of FEBTC. Did FEBTC preponderantly prove Chan’s liability for the supposedly fraudulent withdrawals?
(a) there is more than one circumstance; (b) the facts from which the inferences are derived have been proven; and, (c) the combination of all the circumstances is such as to produce a conviction beyond reasonable doubt. (Rule 133, Sec. 4; Marie Callo-Claridad v. Philip Ronald P. Esteban And Teodora Alyn Esteban, G.R. No. 191567, March 20, 2013)
Although there was no question NO. physical possession of ATM card atthat the Chan time had of the the withdrawals, the exclusive possession of the card alone did not suffice to preponderantly establish that he had himself made the withdrawals, or that he had caused the withdrawals to be made. In his answer, he denied using the card to withdraw funds from his account on the dates in question, and averred that the withdrawals had been an "inside job." His denial effectively traversed FEBTC’s claim of his direct and personal liability for the withdrawals, that it would lose the case unless it competently and sufficiently established that he had personally made the withdrawals himself, or that he had caused the withdrawals. In other words, it carried the burden of proof. ( Far East Bank Trust Company, vs. Roberto Mar Chante, A.K.A. Robert Mar G. Chan , G.R. NO. 170598, October 9, 2013, Bersamin, J. )
7:00 of February 27, 2007, and nothing about Philip beingthat, the driverp.m. of the said car. But there was else after because the circumstances revealed by the other witnesses could not even be regarded as circumstantial evidence against Philip. Some of the affidavits were unsworn. The statements subscribed and sworn to before the officers of the Philippine National Police (PNP) x x x undeniably lacked the requisite certifications to the effect that such administering officers had personally examined the affiants, and that such administering officers were satisfied that the affiants had voluntarily executed and understood their affidavits. (Marie Callo-Claridad v. Philip Ronald P. Esteban And Teodora Alyn Esteban, G.R. No. 191567, March 20, 2013, Bersamin, J.)
The pieces of evidence must be consistent with the hypothesis that the respondents were probably guilty of the crime and at the same time inconsistent with the hypothesis that they were innocent, and with every rational hypothesis except that of guilt. The records show that the circumstantial evidence linking Philip to the killing of Chase derived from the bare recollections of Ariane and of Guray and Corpus respectively, about seeing Chase board the white Honda Civic at around
JUDICIAL NOTICE AND JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS What are the facts that need not be proved?
SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE 1. Is an evidence that should constitute that amount of relevant evidence which a reasonable mind might accept as adequate
2.
to justify a conclusion. (Sec. 5, Rule 133)
3. 4.
To what cases does substantial evidence apply? 5. 6.
It applies to cases filed before the administrative or quasijudicial bodies and which requires that in order to establish a fact.
7.
NOTE: In a petition for a writ of amparo, the parties shall establish their claims by substantial evidence. (Sec 17, The Rule on the Writ of Amparo, effective October 24, 2007)
Those of which the courts may take judicial notice (Rule 129); Those that are judicially admitted (Rule 129); Those presumedbut (Rule 131); Those that that are are conclusively disputably presumed uncontradicted (Rule 131); Immaterial allegations; and, Facts admitted or not denied provided they have been sufficiently alleged (Sec. 1, Rule 8). Res ipsa loquitur
Judicial notice It is the cognizance of certain facts which judges may properly take and act upon without proof because they are supposed to be known to them. It is based on considerations of expediency and convenience. It displaces evidence, being equivalent to proof (Regalado, 2008).
CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE It is that degree of evidence that produces in the mind of the trier of fact a firm belief or conviction as to allegations sought to be established. It is intermediate, being more than preponderance, but not to the extent of such certainty as is
Judicial Notice is mandatory
62
UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2017 Ikdal and Ministry of Public Health – Kuwait vs. Ma. Josefina Echin, G.R. No. 178551, October 11, 2010). While the foreign law was properly pleaded in the case at bar, it was, however, proven not in the manner provided by Section 24, Rule 132 of the Revised Rules of Court. While a photocopy of the foreign statute relied upon by the court a quo to relieve the common carrier from liability, was presented as evidence during the trial, the same however was not accompanied by the required attestation and certification. (Nedlloyd Lijnen B.V. Rotterdam And The East Asiatic Co., Ltd. Vs. Glow Laks Enterprises, LTD. G.R. No. 156330, November 19, 2014 )
When the matter is subject to a mandatory judicial notice, no motion or hearing is necessary for the court may take judicial notice of a fact. Matters subject to mandatory judicial notice (EPOL-APOLMG) 1. 2.
5. 6.
Existence and territorial extent of states; Political history, forms of government and symbols of nationality; Law of nations; Admiralty and maritime courts of the world and their seals; Political constitution and history of the Philippines; Official acts of legislative, executive and judicial
7. 8. 9.
departments of the Philippines; Laws of nature; Measure of time; and Geographical divisions (Sec. 1, Rule 129)
3. 4.
Judicial admissions These are admissions, verbal or written, made by a party in the course of the (Sec. proceedings the same case, which does not require proof 4, Rule in 129) . Judicial Admissions vs. Extrajudicial Admissions
When may judicial notice of a fact be taken? 1. 2. 3.
Judicial Admissions Those made in the course of the proceeding in the same case
During trial; After trial and before judgment; or, Appeal.
Do not require proof and may be contradicted only by showing that it was made through palpable mistake or that no such admission was made (Sec. 4, Rule 129). Judicial admissions need not be offered in evidence since it is not evidence. It is superior to evidence and shall be considered by the court as
In all instances, the court may act on its own initiative or on request of a party (Sec. 3, Rule 129). Generally speaking, matters of judicial notice have three material requisites: 1. the matter must be one of common and general knowledge; 2. it must be well and authoritatively settled and not doubtful or uncertain; and, 3. it must be known to be within the limits of the jurisdiction of the The principal in determining what factscourt. may be assumed to be guide judicially known is that of notoriety. (Latip v. Chua, G.R. No. 177809, October 16, 2009 )
established. Conclusive upon the admitter Admissible even if selfserving Subject to cross-examinat ion
Mandatory Judicial Notice vs. Discretionary Judicial Notice
Mandatory Judicial Notice Court is compelled to take judicial notice Takes place at court’s initiative No hearing
Requires formal offer for it to be considered.
Rebuttable Not admissible if self-serving Not subject examination
to
cross-
Requisites of judicial admission
Discretionary Judicial Notice Court is not compelled to take judicial notice May be at court’s own initiative or on request of a party Needs hearing and presentation of evidence
1. 2. 3.
It must be made by a party to the case or his counsel; It must be made in the course of the proceedings in the same case; and, It can be verbal or written admission. There is no particular form required (Regalado, 2008).
It is an established principle that judicial admissions cannot be contradicted by the admitter who is the party himself and binds the person who makes the same, absent any showing that this was made through palpable mistake, no amount of rationalization can offset it. (Philippine Charter Insurance Corporation v. Central Colleges of the Philippines, 666 SCRA
Do Philippine courts take judicial notice of foreign laws?
540)
GR: Courts cannot take judicial notice of foreign laws. They must be alleged and proved.
OBJECT (REAL) EVIDENCE
XPN: When said laws are within the actual knowledge of the court and such laws are: 1. 2.
Extrajudicial Admissions Those made out of court or in a judicial proceeding other than the one under consideration. Regarded as evidence and must be offered as such, otherwise, the court will not consider it in deciding the case.
Object evidence, also known as real evidence, demonstrative evidence, autoptic preference and physical evidence, is that evidence which is addressed to the senses of the court (Sec. 1, Rule 130). It is not limited to the view of an object. It covers the entire range of human senses: hearing, taste, smell, and touch (Riano, 2013) .
Well and generally known; Actually ruled upon in other cases before it; and none of the parties claim otherwise (PCIB v. Escolin, G.R. Nos. L27860, L-278896, March 29, 1974).
What is the Doctrine of Processual Presumption?
Requisites for the admissibility of Object Evidence
In international law, the party who wants to have a foreign law applied to a dispute or case has the burden of proving the foreign law. Where a foreign law is not pleaded or even if pleaded, is not proved, the presumption is that the foreign law is same as ours (ATCI Overseas Corporation, Amalia G.
1. 2. 3.
63
It must be relevant and competent; Authenticated; The authentication must be made by a competent witness who should identify the object to be the actual thing involved;
REMEDIAL LAW 4.
The object must be formally offered in evidence (Riano, 2013).
The chain of custody is essential to ensure that doubts regarding the identity of the evidence are removed through the monitoring and tracking of the movements of the seized drugs from the accused, to the police, to the forensic chemist, and finally to the court (People v. Sitco, G.R. No. 178202, May 14, 2010). Ergo, the existence of the dangerous drug is a condition sine qua nonfor conviction. What is essential is “the preservation of the integrity and the evidentiary value of the seized items, as the same would be utilized in the determination of the guilt or innocence of the accused (People vs. Cardenas, G.R. No. 190342. March 21, 2012). The failure to establish, through convincing proof, that the integrity of the seized items has been adequately preserved through an unbroken chain of custody is enough to engender reasonable doubt on the guilt of an accused (People v. De Guzman y
An object evidence, when offered in accordance with the requisites for its admissibility, becomes evidence of the highest order and speaks more eloquently than witnesses put together. The presence of the victim’s ravished body in a deep ravine with handcuffs on her wrist is a physical evidence that bolsters the testimony of the witness. (People v. Larrahaga, G.R. Nos. 138874-75, July 21, 2005 )
Real Evidence vs. Demonstrative Evidence
Real evidence Tangible objectrole that in played some actual the matter that gave rise to the litigation Intends to prove that the object is used in the underlying event
Demonstrative Evidence
Danzil, G.R. No. 186498, March 26, 2010).
Tangible evidence that merely illustrates a matter of importance in the litigation Intends to show that the demonstrative object fairly represents or illustrates a real evidence Illustration: Where a drawing is presented to illustrate the relative positions of the protagonists and witnesses to the killing, the foundation for demonstrative evidence will normally consist of the testimony of an eyewitness or investigator stating that the drawing was indeed fairly represents the
NOTE: In case there is a failure to comply with the requirements of the law in the handling of confiscated drugs, the implementing rules require the following: 1. 2.
If sufficient explanation is given by the prosecution for the non-compliance with the required procedure in the handling of the seized items, such non-compliance shall not render the seizure and custody of the seized items void and invalid. Nonetheless, it must be accompanied by proof (People v. Dela Cruz, G.R. No. 177222, October 29, 2008) . After a buy-bust operation involving the accused Recto Angngao and Robert Carlin and the apprehender SPO4
position of those present in the event. (Francisco, 1996)
Marquez Madlon, the confiscated substances Office brought to the Benguet Provincial Crime Laboratory were identified and testified positive for marijuana resin and hashish oil. The Office of the City Prosecutor filed in the RTC two (2) information against the accused, charging them with illegal sale and possession of said dangerous drugs. The RTC convicted Angngao but acquitted Carlin. The CA affirmed the RTC’s ruling. Was the chain of custody substantially complied with?
What is the meaning of View of an Object or Scene? When an object is relevant to the fact in issue, it may be exhibited to, examined or viewed by the court. (Sec 1, Rule 130) Where the object in question cannot be produced in court because it is immovable or inconvenient to remove, it is proper for the tribunal to go to the object in its place and there observe it (Francisco, 1996).An ocular inspection conducted by the judge without the presence of the parties or due notice is not valid, as an ocular inspection is part of the trial. (Regalado, 2008, citing Adan vs. Abucejo-Luzano, et al., A.M. No. MTJ-00-1298, August 3, 2000) Explain the chain of custody in relation to Section 21 of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002 (as amended by R.A. 10640)
NO. It is beyond dispute, for one, that no photograph was taken of the recovered items for documentation purposes. It was also not shown why, despite the requirement of the law itself, no representative from the media, from the Department of Justice, or any elective official was present to serve as a witness during the arrest. The Prosecution’s testimonial evidence is actually bereft of the showing of the efforts undertaken by the law enforcers to see to the presence of any of such representatives during the operation against the appellant from his apprehension until the seizure of the drugs. (People Of The Philippines vs. Recto Angngao And
Robert Carlin, G.R. No. 189296, March 11, 2015, Bersamin, J.)
It is the duly recorded authorized movements and custody of seized drugs or controlled chemicals or plant sources of dangerous drugs or laboratory equipment of each stage: 1. 2. 3. 4.
Non-compliance must be because of justifiable grounds; and The apprehending officer/team must have properly preserved the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized items.
Acting on a tip by an informant, a buy bust operation w as planned. PO1 Eduardo Dimla acted as the poseur-buyer and marked the buy bust money, two Php 100.00 bills with his initials “ED”. PO1 Dimla, along with the rest of the team, proceeded to respondent Alberto Gonzales’ house. Gonzales handed PO1 Dimla a small plastic sheet containing a white substance and PO1 Dimla gave Gonzales the marked money. PO1 Dimla gave the signal and Gonzales was arrested. PO1 Dimla marked the sachet with his initials, “ED”. The Bulacan Provincial Crime Laboratory Office certified that the contents was 0.194 gram of shabu. With only PO1 Dimla as the sole prosecution witness, the RTC convicted Gonzales which the CA affirmed. Was the sachet of shabu properly marked?
From the time of seizure/confiscation to; Receipt in the forensic laboratory to; Safekeeping to; Presentation in court for destruction.
Such record of movements and custody of seized item shall include the identity and signature of the person who held temporary custody of the seized item, the date and time when such transfer of custody were made in the course of safekeeping and used in court as evidence and the final disposition (Sec. 1, DDB Reg. No. 1, Series of 2002).
64
UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2017 NO. Although PO1 Dimla, the State’s lone witness, testified that he had marked the sachet of shabu with his own initials of "ED" following Gonzales’ arrest, he did not explain, either in his court testimony or in the joint affidavit of arrest, whether his marking had been done in the presence of Gonzales, or done immediately upon the arrest of Gonzales. Nor did he show by testimony or otherwise who had taken custody of the sachet of shabu after he had done his marking, and who had subsequently brought the sachet of shabu to the police station, and, still later on, to the laboratory. The indeterminateness of the identities of the individuals who could have handled the sachet of shabu after PO1 Dimla’s marking broke the chain of custody, and tainted the integrity of the shabu ultimately presented as evidence to the trial court. (People Of The Philippines v. Alberto Gonzales Y Santos
NOTE: Even if a person has already been convicted under a final and executory judgment, he may still avail of DNA testing provided that (a) a biological sample exists; (b) such sample is relevant to the case; and (c) the testing would probably result in the reversal or modification of the judgment of conviction. (2012 Bar)
aka TAKYO G.R. No. 182417, April 3, 2013, Bersamin, J.)
evidence and/or object evidence.
Martin denied the allegations against him and clarified that it was impossible for two blocks of marijuana to fit inside his bag. He added that it would only be possible if said blocks were pressed but that would cause the plastic bags and its contents to explode inside. However, one of the policemen testified that the bag seized from Martin was a sling bag and that there was nothing else inside it but the two blocks of marijuana well-covered with plastic bags. Upon examination by the forensic chemist, the two blocks of marijuana were indeed covered with plastic and intact with no holes nor wrinkles which could identify that they were tightened or pressed. The same were presented as evidence in court. Nonetheless, the trial court ruled that Martin is guilty of illegal possession of marijuana under Republic Act No. 6425. Is the trial court correct?
It is object evidence, when it is addressed to the senses of the court or when it is presented in order to establish certain physical evidence or characteristics that are visible on the paper and the writings that comprise the document. On the other hand, it is considered as documentary evidence when it is offered as proof of its contents.
DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE Documents as evidence consist of writings or any material containing letters, words, numbers, figures, symbols, or other modes of written expressions, offered as proof of their contents (Sec. 2, Rule 130). Distinguish the admissibility of document as documentary
BEST EVIDENCE RULE GR: When the subject of the inquiry is the contents of the document, no evidence shall be admissible other than the srcinal document itself. XPNs: (LCNP) 1. When the srcinal has been lost or destroyed, or cannot be produced in court, without bad faith on the part of the offeror; 2. When the srcinal is in the custody or under the control of the party against whom the evidence is offered, and
NO. Under the Rules of Court, evidence, to be relevant, must throw light upon, or have a logical relation to, the facts in issue to be established by one party or disproved by the other. The test of relevancy is satisfied if there is somethe logical connection either directly or by inference between fact offered and the fact to be proved. In here, the Prosecution failed to establish the linkage between the blocks of marijuana supposedly seized by the policemen from Martin’s bag and the blocks of marijuana that the Prosecution later presented. That linkage was indispensable because the failure to prove that the specimens of marijuana submitted to the forensic chemist for examination were the same marijuana allegedly seized from Martin irreparably broke the chain of custody that linked the confiscated marijuana to the marijuana ultimately presented as evidence during the trial. Thus, the credibility of the evidence of the corpus delicti in a prosecution for illegal possession of marijuana depends on the integrity of the chain of custody of the marijuana from the time of its seizure until the time of its presentation as evidence in court. (People vs. Belocura, G.R. No. 173474, August 29, 2012, Bersamin, J.)
3.
4.
the latter to produce it after reasonable notice; or When thefails srcinal consists of n umerous accounts other documents which cannot be examined in court without great loss of time and the fact sought to be established from them is only the general result of the whole; When the srcinal is a public record in the custody of a public officer or is recorded in a public office (Sec. 3, Rule 130).
Only a photocopy of the Employee Clearance was presented in evidence. The Court held that the photocopy is admissible as evidence since an exception to the best evidence rule is when the document sought to be presented is in the possession of the person against whom it is to be offered and such party fails to present it even after reasonable notice. (Pacasum vs. People, G.R. No. 180314, April 16, 2009)
What are the guidelines to be used by courts in assessing the probative value of DNA evidence? What is the so-called
NOTE: Where the issue is only as to whether such a document was actually executed, or exists, or on the circumstances relevant to or surrounding its execution or
Vallejo Standard? (2010, 2009 Bar)
delivery, the best evidence rule does not apply (Moran, 1980).
1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
During trial for the complaint filed by the of Heirs of Maximo Alvarez and Valentina Clave for quieting of title and damages against Margarita Prodon, the custodian of the records of the property attested that the copy of the deed of sale with right to repurchase could not be found in the files of the Register of Deeds of Manila. The RTC rendered judgment in favor of the Heirs of Prodon. It opined that although the deed itself could not be presented as evidence in court, its contents could nevertheless be proved by secondary upon proof of its execution or existence and of the cause of its unavailability being without bad faith. It found that the defendant had established the execution and existence of the deed. The RTC concluded that the srcinal copy of the deed of sale with right to repurchase had been lost, and that earnest
6.
How the samples were collected; How they were handled; The possibility of contamination of the samples; The procedure followed in analyzing the samples; Whether the proper standards and procedures were followed in conducting the tests; and, The qualification of the analyst who conducted the tests (People v. Vallejo, G.R. No. 144656, May 9, 2002).
A rape-slay case of a 9-year old girl, admitted in evidence the DNA samples of the victim which were found in the bloodstained garments of the accused. Vaginal swabs taken from the victim were also admitted and were found to show the DNA profile of the accused who was subsequently convicted. (People v. Vallejo, 382 SCRA 192)
65
REMEDIAL LAW efforts had been exerted to produce it before the court. Does the Best Evidence Rule apply to the case?
An electronic document shall be regarded as the equivalent of an srcinal document under the Best Evidence Rule if it is a printout or output readable by sight or other means, shown to reflect the data accurately (Sec. 1, Rule 4) .
NO. The Best Evidence Rule applies only when the terms of writing are in issue. When the evidence sought to be introduced concerns external facts, such as the existence, execution or delivery of the writing, without reference to its terms, the Best Evidence Rule cannot be invoked. In such a case, secondary evidence may be admitted even without accounting for the srcinal.
The copies of the printout or output readably by sight are also deemed srcinals where the copies were executed at or about the same time with identical contents, or is a counterpart produced by the same impression as the srcinal or from the same matrix or by other means and which accurately reproduces the srcinal (Sec.2, Rule 4) .
The action for quieting of title may be based on the fact that a deed is invalid, ineffective, voidable, or unenforceable. The terms of the writing may or may not be material to an action for quieting of title, depending on the ground alleged by the
NOTE: The authenticity of any private electronic document must be proved by evidence that it had been digitally signed and other appropriate security measures have been applied
plaintiff. instance, when an for quieting of title is based on For the unenforceability of action a contract for not complying with the Statute of Frauds, Article 1403 of the Civil Code specifically provides that evidence of the agreement cannot be received without the writing, or a secondary evidence of its contents. There is then no doubt that the Best Evidence Rule will come into play. (Heirs Of Margarita Prodon vs. Heirs Of Maximo S. Alvarez And Valentina Clave, G.R. NO. 170604, September 2, 2013, Bersamin, J.)
ORIGINAL DOCUMENT Original document
1. 2.
(Sec. 2, Rule 5). The evidence offered by NAPOCOR were photocopies. The Court held that the photocopies were not equivalent to the srcinal documents based on the Rules on Electronic Evidence. The information contained in the photocopies submitted by NAPOCOR will reveal that not all of the contents therein, such as the signatures of the persons who purportedly signed the documents, may be recorded or produced electronically. (National Power Corporation vs. Codilla, G.R. No. 170491. April 3, 2007) The Court held that the print-out and/or photocopies of facsimile transmissions are not electronic evidence. Thus, it is consequential that the same may not be considered as the functional equivalent of their srcinal as decreed in the law. (MCC Industrial Sales Corporation vs. Ssangyong Corporation, G.R. No. 170633. October 17, 2007)
The srcinal of a document is one the contents of which are the subject of inquiry; When a document is in two or more copies executed at or about the same time, with identical contents, including signed carbon copies, all such copies are equally regarded as srcinals; or,
PAROL EVIDENCE RULE
NOTE:When carbon sheets are inserted between two or more sheets of paper with the writing and the signature on the first sheet being reproduced in the sheets beneath by the same stroke of pen or writing medium, all the sheets are considered srcinal (Trans-pacific Industrial Supplies v. CA, G.R. No. 109172, August 19, 1 994).
When terms of an as agreement have beenterms reduced to writing,the it is considered containing all the agreed upon and there can be, between the parties and their successors-in-interest, no evidence of such terms other than the contents of the written agreement (Sec. 9, Rule 130) . Exceptions to Parol Evidence Rule
3.
When an entry is repeated in the regular course of business, one being copied from another at or near the time of the transaction, including entries in journals and ledgers, all the entries are likewise equally regarded as srcinals (Sec. 4, Rule 130).
A party may present evidence to modify, explain or add to the terms of the written agreement if he puts in issue in his pleadingsthe following: (IF-VE) 1.
SECONDARY EVIDENCE
2.
What is the so called “Laying the basis ” or “Laying the predicate ”?
3. 4.
It means that the contents of an srcinal document may be proved by secondary evidence. Provided, that the offeror is able to prove the following:
An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or imperfection in the written agreement; Failure of the written agreement to express the true intent of the parties thereto; Validity of the written agreement; or Existence of other terms agreed to by the parties or their successors in interest after the execution of the written agreement (Sec. 9, Rule 130).
The parol embodying evidence rule predicated on the existence of is a document theisterms of an agreement. A receipt not such a document as it merely attests to the receipt of money and it is not and could have not been intended by the parties to be the sole memorial of their agreement. (Cruz vs. CA, 192 SCRA 209)
1. Execution or existence of the srcinal document; 2. The cause of its unavailability; and 3. The unavailability of the srcinal is not due to bad faith on his part. (Sec. 5, Rule 130)
NOTE: Accordingly, the correct order of proof is as follows : existence, execution, loss, and contents. This order may be changed if necessary at the sound discretion of the court. (Citibank, N.A. MasterCard v. Teodoro, G.R. No. 150905, September 23, 2003) ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE Explain the Rules on Electronic Evidence (A.M. No. 01-7-01SC)
66
Serrano introduced parol evidence to prove that he was merely acting as an agent without any consideration. The Court held that Serrano can introduce such parole evidence because the case at bar is not one where the evidence offered varies, alters, modifies, or contradicts the terms of indorsement admittedly existing. (Maulini vs. Serrano, 28 Phil 640)
UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2017 Parol Evidence Rule vs. Best Evidence Rule
Parol Evidence Rule Presupposes that the srcinal document is available in court
Best Evidence Rule The srcinal document is not available or there is a dispute as to whether said writing is srcinal
Prohibits the varying of the terms of a written agreement
Prohibits the introduction of secondary evidence in lieu of the srcinal document regardless of whether it varies the contents of the srcinal
Applies only to documents which are contractual in nature including wills
Applies to writings
Can be invoked only when the controversy is between the parties to the written agreement, their privies, or any party affected thereby like a cestui que trust
Can be invoked by any party to an action whether he has participated in the writing involved
wills and testaments; and 3. Public records, kept in the Philippines, of private documents required by law to be entered therein (Sec. 19, Rule 132). As to authenticity and admissibility as evidence Admissible as evidence Before any private without need of further document offered as proof of its genuineness authentic is received in and due execution evidence, its due execution and authenticity must first be proved. As to persons bound
all
kinds
of
Evidence even against third persons, of the fact which gave rise to its due execution and to the date of the latter
Binds only the parties who executed them or their privies, insofar as due execution and date of the document are concerned
As to validity of certain transactions Certain transactions must be contained in a public document; otherwise they will not be given any validity.
AUTHENTICATION AND PROOF OF DOCUMENTS When is the authentication of documents NOT required? 1.
Who may prove the due execution and authenticity of private documents?
When the writing is an ancient document (Sec. 21, Rule 132);
1. By anyone who saw the document executed or written; or 2. By evidence of the genuineness of the signature or handwriting of the maker.
NOTE: A document is ancient when it is more than thirty years old, is produced from a custody in which it would naturally be found if genuine, and is unblemished by any alterations or circumstances of suspicion, no other evidence of its authenticity need be given. 2.
3. 4.
Any other private document need only be identified as that which it is claimed to be, i.e. ancient documents. When is evidence of authenticity not required of a private writing?
When the genuineness and authenticity of an actionable have not been specifically denied under oath by the adverse party; When the genuineness and authenticity of the document have been admitted; and When the document is not being offered as authentic (Riano, 2013).
1. The writing is an ancient document (Sec. 21, Rule 132); 2. The authenticity and due execution of the document has been expressly admitted or impliedly admitted by failure to deny the same under oath; 3. When such genuineness and due execution are immaterial to the issue.
Respondent Rances failed to submit any attestation issued by the proper Dubai official having legal custody of the srcinal of the decision of the Dubai Court that the copy presented by said respondent is a faithful copy of the srcinal decision, which attestation must furthermore be authenticated by a Philippine Consular Officer having jurisdiction in Dubai. The transmittal letter, signed by Mohd Bin Saleh, Honorary Consul for Philippines’ does not comply with the requir ements of either the attestation under Section 26 or the authentication
Requisites of ancient document/authentic document rule 1. That the private document be more than 30 years old; 2. That it be produced from a custody in which it would naturally be found if genuine; and 3. That it is unblemished by any alteration or circumstances of suspicion (Sec. 21, Rule 132; Heirs of Lacsa vs. Court of Appeals, 197 SCRA 234, 1991).
envisaged by Section 25. (Pacific Asia Overseas Shipping Corp. vs. NLRC, 161 SCRA 122, 1988) Public Document vs. Private Document
NOTE: This rule applies only if there are no other witnesses to determine authenticity. How is the genuineness of a handwriting proven?
Public Document Private Document What comprises it 1. The written official acts, All other writings are or records of the official private (Sec. 19, Rule 132). acts of the sovereign authority, official bodies and tribunals, and public officers, whether of the Philippines, or of a foreign country; 2. Documents acknowledged before a notary public except last
1. 2.
3. 4.
67
It may be proved by any witness who actually saw the person writing the instrument; By any person who is familiar or has acquired knowledge of the handwriting of such person, his opinion as to the handwriting being an exception to the opinion rule under Secs. 48 & 50 of Rule 130; By a comparison of the questioned handwriting from the admitted genuine specimens thereof; or By expert witness (Secs. 20 & 22, Rule 132; Sec. 49, Rule 130).
REMEDIAL LAW Opinion of Handwriting Experts The opinion of handwriting experts are not necessarily binding upon the court, the expert’s function being to place before the court data upon which the court can form its own opinion. This principle holds true especially when the question involved is mere handwriting similarity or dissimilarity, which can be determined by a visual comparison of specimens of the questioned signatures with those of the currently existing ones. A finding of forgery does not depend entirely on the testimonies of handwriting experts, because the judge must conduct an independent examination of the questioned signature in order to arrive at a reasonable conclusion as to its authenticity (Betty GepulleGarbo v. Spouses Victorey Antonio Garabato And Josephine S.
Garabato, G.R. No. 200013, January 14,
Affairs of Norway and the attachment of the official seal of that office on each authentication indicated that the documents were of a public nature in Norway, not merely private documents. That rules of procedure may be mandatory in form and application does not forbid a showing of substantial compliance under justifiable circumstances, because substantial compliance does not equate to a disregard of basic rules. For sure, substantial compliance and strict adherence are not always incompatible and do not always clash in discord. (Makati Shangri-La Hotel and Resort, Inc. Vs. Ellen Johanne Harper, Jonathan Christopher Harper, And Rigoberto Gillera, G.R. No. 189998, August 29, 2012, Bersamin, J.) What must be stated whenever a copy of a document or record is attested for the purpose of evidence?
What are Proof of public records? (2009 Bar) Written official acts, or records of the official acts of the sovereign authority, official bodies and tribunals, and public officers, e.g. a written foreign law, may be evidenced by:
1. That the copy is a correct copy of the srcinal, or a specific part thereof, as the case may be; 2. It must be under the official seal of the attesting officer, if there be any, or if he be the clerk of a court having a seal, under the seal of such court (Sec. 25, Rule 132).
1. If it is within the Philippines :
What must a Proof of Lack of Record contain?
a. An official publication thereof; or b. By a copy attested by the officer having the legal custody of the record, or by his deputy.
The Proof of lack of record of a document consists of written statement signed by an officer having custody of an official record or by his deputy. The written statement must contain the following matters: 1. There has been a diligent search of the record; 2. That despite the diligent search, no record of entry of a specified tenor is found to exist in the records of his office.
2. If it is kept in a foreign country : a. An official publication thereof; or b. By a copy attested by the officer having the legal custody of the record or by his deputy and accompanied with a certificate that such officer has the custody. The certificate may be made by a secretary of the embassy or legation,
NOTE: The written statement must be accompanied by a
consul general, consul, vice consul, or consular agent or by any officer in the foreign service of the Philippines stationed in the foreign country in which the record is kept, and authenticated by the seal of his office (Sec. 24, Rule 132).
certificate that 132). such officerBar) has the custody of official records (Sec. 28, Rule (2003 What are the grounds for the Impeachment of a judicial record? (WCF) (2009 Bar)
NOTE: Upon failure to comply with the above-mentioned requirements, courts will apply the doctrine of processual presumption.
1. Want of jurisdiction in the court or judicial officer; 2. Collusion between the parties (e.g. legal separation, annulment cases); or 3. Fraud in the party offering the record, in respect to the proceedings (Sec. 29, Rule 132).
Ellen Harper and her son, Jonathan Harper, filed a case for damages against Shangri-La Hotel and Resort, Inc. for the death of Christian Harper. To prove their heirship, they presented several documents (B irth Certificates, Marriage Certificate, and Certificate from the Oslo Probate Court) which were all kept in Norway. The documents had been authenticated by the Royal Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and also bore the official seal of the Ministry and signature of one, Tanja Sorlie. The documents were also accompanied by an Authentication by the Consul, Embassy of the Republic of the Philippines in Stockholm, Sweden to the effect that, Tanja Sorlie was duly authorized to legalize
NOTE: Fraud refers to extrinsic fraud, which is a ground for annulment of judgment. How are alterations in a document explained? A party producing a document as genuine which has been altered and appears to have been altered after its execution must account for the alteration. He may show that the alteration:
official thefiliation Ministry. Hotel, however,documents questionedfor their withShangri-La the deceased. It argued that the documents presented were incompetent for being unauthenticated. Is Shangri- La Hotel’s contention correct?
1. Was made by another, without his concurrence; 2. Was made with the consent of the parties affected by it; 3. Was otherwise properly or innocently made; or 4. That the alteration did not change the meaning or language of the instrument.
NO. Although the documents were not attested by the officer having the legal custody of the record or by his deputy in the manner required in Section 25 of Rule 132, and said documents did not comply with the requirement under Section 24 of Rule 132 to the effect that if the record was not kept in the Philippines a certificate of the person having custody must accompany the copy of the document that was duly attested stating that such person had custody of the documents, the deviation was not enough reason to reject the utility of the documents for the purposes they were intended to serve. The official participation in the authentication process of Tanja Sorlie of the Royal Ministry of Foreign
NOTE: Failure to do at least one of the above will make the document inadmissible in evidence (Sec. 31, Rule 132). Are documentary evidence in an unofficial language admissible? Documents written in an unofficial language shall not be admitted as evidence unless accompanied with a translation into English or Filipino (Sec. 33, Rule 132) .
TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE
68
UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2017 When an offense directly attacks or directly and vitally impairs, the conjugal relation, it comes within the exception to the statute that one shall not be a witness against the other except in a criminal prosecution for a crime committed by one against the other. Using the criterion, it can be concluded that in the law of evidence the rape perpetrated by the father against his daughter is a crime committed by him against his wife (the victim’s mother). (Ordono vs. Saquigan, 62 SCRA 270)
It is sometimes called viva voce evidence which literally means “living voice” or by word of mouth. In this kind of evidence, a human being (witness) is called to the stand, is asked questions, and answers the question asked of him (Riano, 2013). When must the witness possess the qualifications of a witness?
How does the disqualification by reason of death or insanity of the adverse party or the Dead Man’s Statute/Surviving Party Rule apply?
The qualifications and disqualifications of witnesses are determined as of the time said witnesses are produced for examination in court or at the taking of their depositions (Regalado, 2008).
1. The acceptance of amanner witnesshedepends onthem the quality of the his perceptions and the can make known to court. The testimony of Soria was positive, clear, plain, coherent and credible despite her slurred speech and the use of leading questions. (People vs. Solomon, 229 SCRA 402)
2.
Competency of Witness vs. Credibility of Witness
4.
Competency of Witness Refers to a witness who can perceive, and in perceiving, can make known his perception to others Is a matter of law or a matter of rule
3.
Credibility of Witness Refers to a witness whose testimony is believable
Refers to the weight and trustworthiness or reliability of the testimony
1. Those whose mental condition, at the time of their production for examination, is such that they are incapable of intelligently making known their perception to others (Sec. 21 (a), Rule 130); 2. Children whose mental maturity is such as to render them incapable of perceiving the facts respecting which they are examined and of relating them truthfully (Sec. 21 (b), Rule 130).
case
is
the
executor
or
Purpose of Dead Man’s Statute? It is designed to close the lips of the party plaintiff when death has closed the lips of the party defendant, in order to remove from the surviving party the temptation to do falsehood and the possibility of fictitious claims against the deceased (Goñi v. CA, G.R. No. L-27434, September 23, 1986).
Requisites for the disqualification by reason of marriage to apply (Marital Disqualification)
4.
the
The Dead Man’s Statute disqualifies only parties or assignors of parties; officers and/or stockholders of a corporation, therefore, are not disqualified from testifying for or against the corporation which is a party to an action upon a claim or demand against the estate of a deceased person, as to any matter of fact occurring before the death of such person. (Lichauco vs. Atlantic Gulf, 84 Phil. 330)
The following persons cannot be witnesses:
3.
in
Modesta Garcia, and Cristina Salamat V. Dominga Robles Vda. De Caparas, G.R. No. 180843, April 17, 2013)
Witnesses disqualified by reason of mental incapacity or immaturity
2.
defendant
administrator or a mind; representative of the deceased or the person of unsound The suit is upon a claim by the plaintiff against the estate of said deceased or person of unsound mind; The witness is the plaintiff, or an assignor of that party, or a person in whose behalf the case is prosecuted; and The subject of the testimony is as to any matter of fact occurring before the death of such deceased person or before such person became of unsound mind (Sec. 23, Rule 130).
Under the Dead Man’s Statute Rule, if one party to the alleged transaction is precluded from testifying by death, insanity, or other mental disabilities, the other party is not entitled to the undue advantage of giving his own uncontradicted and unexplained account of the transaction. Thus, the alleged admission of the deceased Pedro Caparas that he entered into a sharing of leasehold rights with Modesta Garcia and Cristina Salamat cannot be used as evidence against Dominga Caparas as the latter would be unable to contradict or disprove the same. (Apolonio Garcia, In Substitution of his Deceased Mother,
It also includes the absence of any of the disqualifications imposed upon a witness. (Riano, 2013)
1.
The
That the spouse for or against whom the testimony of the other is offered is a party to the case; That the spouses are legally married (valid until annulled); That the testimony is offered or made during the existence of a valid marriage; and, That the case is not one against the other (Herrera, 1999; (Sec. 22, Rule 130)).
To what cases do the disqualification by reason of privileged communication apply? The disqualification by reason of privileged communication applies to both civil and criminal cases except as to the doctor-patient privilege, which is applicable only in civil cases. Unless waived, the disqualification under Sec. 24 remains even after the various relationships therein have ceased to exist.
Enumerate the exceptions to Spousal Immunity.
Requisites for the Marital Privilege to apply
1. Consent is given by the party-spouse; 2. In a civil case filed by one against the other; 3. In a criminal case for a crime committed by one against the other or the latter’s direct descendants or ascendants (Sec. 22, Rule 130); or 4. Where the testimony was made after the dissolution of the marriage (Riano, 2013).
1. 2. 3.
69
There must be a valid marriage between the husband and wife; There is a communication received in confidence by one from the other; The confidential communication was received during the marriage (Riano, 2013) ; and,
REMEDIAL LAW 4.
The spouse against whom such evidence is being offered has not given his or her consent to such testimony (Regalado, 2008).
3.
NOTE: Where a privileged communication from one spouse to another comes into the hands of a third party, whether legally or not, without collusion and voluntary disclosure on the part of either of the spouses, the privilege is thereby extinguished and the communication, if otherwise competent, becomes admissible. (People vs. Carlos 47 Phil. 626, 1925)
5.
Marital Disqualification Communication Rule
Rule
vs.
Marital
Marital Privileged
Rule (Sec. 22, Rule 130)
Communication (Sec. 24 (a), RuleRule 130) Can be claimed whether or not the other spouse is a party to the action Can be claimed even after the marriage is dissolved
The objection would be raised on the ground of marriage. The married witness would not be allowed to take the stand at all because of the disqualification. Even if the testimony is for or against the objecting spouse, the spouse witness cannot testify.
Such person acquired the information while he was attending to the patient in his professional capacity; The information was necessary to enable him to act in that capacity; and The information was confidential and, if disclosed, would blacken the reputation of the patient (Krohn v. CA, G.R. No. 108854, June 14, 1994, citing Lim v. CA, G.R. No. 91114, September 25, 1992) .
NOTE: Where the person against whom the privilege is claimed is the patient’s husband who testifies on a document executed by medical practitioners, his testimony does not have the force and effect of the testimony of the physician who examined the patient and executed the report. Plainly, this does not fall within the prohibition. (Krohn vs. Court of
Privileged
Marital Disqualification
Can be invoked only if one of the spouses is a party to the action Applies only if the marriage is existing at the time the testimony is offered. Constitutes a total prohibition for or against the spouse of the witness
4.
Appeals, 233 SCRA 146, 1994) Is a confession by a penitent to a priest privileged information? If so, how does it apply? (Sec. 24(d), Rule 130)
YES. It is called Priest-Penitent Privilege. 1. The confession must have been made to the priest in his professional character according to the discipline of the church to which the priest or minister belongs (Sec. 24(d), Rule 130); and 2. Communications made must be confidential and must be penitentialin character(Regalado, 2008).
Applies only to confidential communications between the spouses The married person is on the stand but the objection of privilege is raised when the confidential marital communication is inquired into.
Are communications made in official confidence privileged information? (Sec. 24(e), Rule 130)
YES, provided that the following must be complied with: 1. The holder of the privilege is the government, acting through a public officer; 2. The communication was given to the public officer in 3.
When is communication covered under the Attorney-Client Privilege?
4.
The period to be considered is the date when the privileged communication was made by the client to the attorney in relation to either a crime committed in the past or with respect to a crime intended to be committed in the future. in other words, If the client seeks his lawyer’s advice with respect to a crime that the former has theretofore committed, he is given the protection of a virtual confessional seal which the attorney-client privilege declares cannot be broken by the attorney without the client’s consent. (People vs. Sandiganbayan, 275 SCRA 505, 1997)
official confidence; was given during the term of office The communication of the public officer or afterwards; The public interest would suffer by the disclosure of the communication (Herrera, 1999).
NOTE: The privilege under Section 21, Rule 130 is intended not for the protection of public officers but for the protection of public interest. Where there is no public interest that would be prejudiced, this rule will not be applicable. The rule that a public officer cannot be examined as to communications made to him in official confidence does not apply when there is nothing to show that the public interest would suffer by the disclosure question. (Banco Filipino vs. Monetary Board, 142 SCRA 523, 1986)
Is an information made by the client to his attorney that is intended to be communicated to a third person?
What does the Parental and Filial Privilege state?
NO. It will be noted that the evidence in question concerned the dealings of the plaintiff’s attorney with a third person. A communication made by a client to his attorney for the
No person may be compelled to testify against his parents, other direct ascendants, children or other direct descendants. (Sec. 25, Rule 130).
express purpose of its being communicated to a third person is essentially inconsistent with the confidential relation. Such communication is between the third person and the client, the attorney being merely an agent. (Uy Chico vs. Union Life, 29 Phil. 163, 1915)
The Family Code provides that no descendant shall be compelled, in a criminal case, to testify against his parents and grandparents. As an exception, the descendant may be compelled to give his testimony in the following instances:
Physician and Patient Privilege (Sec. 24(c), Rule 130)
1.
1.
2.
The privilege is claimed in a civil case;
NOTE: This privilege cannot be claimed in a criminal case presumably because the interest of the public in criminal prosecution should be deemed more important than the secrecy of the communication (Riano, 2013). 2.
When such testimony is indispensable in a crime committed against said descendant; or In a crime committed by one parent against the other (Riano, 2013, citing Art. 215, Family Code).
Explain the rules on the examination of a witness.
GR: The examination of witnesses presented in a trial or hearing shall be done in open court, and under oath or affirmation. Unless the witness is incapacitated to speak, or the question calls for a different mode of answer, the answers of the witness shall be given orally (Sec. 1, Rule 132).
The person against whom the privilege is claimed is one duly authorized to practice medicine, surgery or obstetrics;
70
UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2017 unjustifiably declines to execute a judicial affidavit or (b) refuses without just cause to make the relevant documents available to the other party and its presentation to court, Section 5 allows the requesting party to avail of issuance of subpoena ad testificandum or duces tecum under Rule 21 of the Rules of Court. Thus, adverse party witnesses and hostile witnesses being excluded they are not covered by Section 5. Expressio unius est exclusion alterius: the express mention of one person, thing, or consequence implies the exclusion of all others. (Nang Meng Teng vs China Banking Corporation, G.R No. 214054, , August 5, 2015 )
XPNs: The testimony of the witness may not be given in open court in the following cases: 1. 2.
3.
4.
5.
In civil cases, by depositions pursuant to and under the limitations of Rules 23 and 24 (Regalado, 2008) ; In criminal cases, by depositions or conditional examinations, pursuant to Secs. 12-15, Rule 119, and Sec. 1, Rule 123, or by the records of the preliminary investigation, under the circumstances of Sec. 1(f) of Rule 115 (Regalado, 2008) ; In criminal cases covered by the Rule on Summary Procedure, the affidavits of the parties shall constitute the direct testimonies of the witnesses who executed the
Contents of a Judicial Affidavit A judicial affidavit shall be prepared in a language known to
same (Riano, 2013, citing Sec. 15, Rule on Summary Procedure) ; In civil cases covered by the Rule on Summary Procedure, the parties are merely required to submit the affidavits of their witnesses and other pieces of evidence on the factual issues, together with their position papers, setting forth the law and the facts relied upon (Riano, 2013, citing Sec. 9, Rule on Summary Procedure) ; and Under the Judicial Affidavit Rule, the judicial affidavit shall take the place of direct testimonies of witnesses (Sec. 2, Judicial Affidavit Rule) .
JUDICIAL AFFIDAVIT RULE To what actions do the Judicial Affidavit Rule (A.M. No. 128-8-SC) apply?
the witness and, not in English or Filipino, accompanied by a translation in ifEnglish or Filipino, and shall contain the following: 1. The name, age, residence or business address, and occupation of the witness; 2. The name and address of the lawyer who conducts or supervises the examination of the witness and the place where the examination is being held; 3. A statement that the witness is answering the questions asked of him, fully conscious that he does so under oath, and that he may face criminal liability for false testimony or perjury; 4. Questions asked of the witness and his corresponding answers, consecutively numbered, that:
This shall apply to all actions (criminal or civil), proceedings, or incidents requiring the reception of evidence. It applies to all courts other than the Supreme Court, and applicable also to certain non-judicial bodies like the IBP. It is however not
a. Show the circumstances under which the witness acquired the facts upon which he testifies; b. Elicit from him those facts which are relevant to the issues that the case presents; and c. Identify the attached documentary and object
applicable to small claims cases.
evidence establish their authenticity in accordance with the Rules and of Court;
NOTE: In criminal cases, the Rule is applicable if the maximum imposable penalty does not exceed six years. However, even if penalty exceeds six years, the Rule will still apply if the accused agrees to the use of judicial affidavit.
5. The signature of the witness over his printed name; and 6. A jurat with the signature of the notary public who administers the oath or an officer who is authorized by law to administer the same (Sec. 3, JAR).
The judicial affidavit must conform to the content requirements of Sec. 3 of the Rule, otherwise, it shall not be admitted by the court in evidence. However, non-conformity thereto shall not absolutely bar the submission of a compliant replacement judicial affidavit as long as the replacement shall be submitted before the hearing.
Effect of non-compliance with the JAR 1. A party who fails to submit the required judicial affidavits and exhibits on time shall be deemed to have waived their submission. The court may, however, allow only once the late submission of the same provided, the delay is for a valid reason, would not unduly prejudice the opposing party, and the defaulting party pays a fine of not less than Php1,000.00 nor more than Php5,000.00, at the discretion of the court; 2. The court shall not consider the affidavit of any witness who fails to appear at the scheduled hearing of the case as required. Counsel who fails to appear without valid cause
Rules on number of days before a JA can be filed The parties shall file with the court and serve on the adverse party, personally or by licensed courier service, not later than 5 days before pre-trial or preliminary conference or the scheduled hearing with respect to motions and incidents, the following:
despite shall deemed to havethe waived his client's right to notice confront by be cross-examination witnesses there present; 3. The court shall not admit as evidence judicial affidavits that do not conform to the content requirements of Sec. 3 and the attestation requirement of Sec. 4 above. The court may, however, allow only once the subsequent submission of the complaint replacement affidavits before the hearing or trial provided the delay is for a valid reason and would not unduly prejudice the opposing party and provided further, that public or private counsel responsible for their preparation and submission pays a fine of not less than Php1,000.00 nor more than Php5,000.00, at the discretion of the court (Sec. 10, JAR)
1. The judicial affidavits of their witnesses, which shall take the place of such witnesses' direct testimonies; and 2. The parties' documentary or object evidence, if any, which shall be attached to the judicial affidavits and marked as Exhibits A, B, C, and so on in the case of the complainant or the plaintiff, and as Exhibits 1, 2, 3, and so on in the case of the respondent or the defendant ( Sec. 2, JAR).
NOTE:Under Section 10, parties are to be penalized if they do not conform to the provisions of the JAR. Parties are however allowed to resort to the application of a subpoena pursuant to Rule 21 of the Rules of Court in Section 5 of the JAR in certain situations. Section 5 of the JAR contemplates a situation where there is a (a) government employee or official or (b) requested witness who is not the (1) adverse party’s witness nor (2) a hostile witness. If this person either (a)
Effects of JAR on Other Rules
71
REMEDIAL LAW As to Rules of Court and Rules of Procedure governing investigating officers and bodies authorized by the - They are repealed or Supreme Court to receive evidence modified insofar as they are inconsistent with the provisions of the Judicial Affidavit Rule (Sec. 11, JAR) . As to Rules of procedure governing quasi-judicial bodies which are inconsistent with -it They are thereby disapproved (Ibid.). RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF A WITNESS
How shall Laying the predicate apply in impeaching a witness by evidence of prior inconsistent statements? 1. The prior inconsistent statements must be related to him, with the circumstances of the times and places and the persons present; 2. The witness must be asked whether he made such statements, and if so, allowed to explain them; and, 3. If the statements be in writing it must be shown to the witness before any question is put to him concerning them (Sec. 13, Rule 132). (1996 Bar)
Rights of a witness
Is evidence on the good character of a witness admissible?
1. To be protected from irrelevant, improper, or insulting
Evidence of the good character of a witness is not admissible
questions, and from harsh or insulting demeanor; 2. Not to be detained longer than the interests of justice require; 3. Not to be examined except only as to matters pertinent to the issue; 4. Not to give an answer which will tend to subject him to a penalty for an offense unless otherwise provided by law (right against self-incrimination);
until such character has been impeached (Sec. 14, Rule 132).
NOTE: This refers to immunity statutes wherein the witness is granted immunity from criminal prosecution for offenses admitted in his testimony, e.g. under Sec. 8, R.A. 1379, the law providing for the forfeiture of unlawfully acquired property; and under P.D. 749, in prosecutions for bribery and graft (Regalado, 2008) .
XPNs: 1. The examination has not been concluded; or, 2. If the recall of the witness was expressly reserved by a party with the approval of the court. In these two cases the recall of a witness is a matter of right (Regalado, 2008).
5. Not to give an answer, which will tend to degrade his
Section 14, Rule 132 of the Rules of Court explicitly provides that the court may grant or withhold leave to recall a witness, in its discretion, as the interests of justice may require; and We believe that it was the better part of discretion and caution on the part of the trial court to have denied as it did,
RECALLING A WITNESS GR: After the examination of a witness by both sides has been concluded, the witness cannot be recalled without leave of court. The court will grant or withhold leave in its discretion, as the interests of justice may require (Sec. 9, Rule 132).
reputation, unless it be to the very fact at issue or to a fact from which the fact in issue would be presumed. But a witness must answer to the fact of his previous final conviction for an offense (Sec. 3, Rule 132).
the request the defense to tending recall Ceribo. The record is loaded withof circumstances to show insidious attempts, too obvious to be overlooked, to tamper with the witnesses for the prosecution.
LEADING AND MISLEADING QUESTIONS When is a leading question allowed? 1. On cross-examination; 2. On preliminary matters; 3. When there is difficulty in getting direct and intelligible answers from a witness who is ignorant, or a child of tender years, or is of feeble mind, or a deaf-mute; 4. Of an unwilling witness or hostile witness;
Under the circumstances, to allow such a procedure would only encourage the perversion of truth and make a mockery of court proceedings. (People vs. Del Castillo, 25 SCRA)
NOTE: A witness may be considered as unwilling or hostile only if so declared by the court upon adequate showing of his adverse interest, unjustified reluctance to testify or his having misled the party into calling him to the witness stand. (Sec. 12, Rule 132)
Civil Case vs. Criminal Case
Differentiate offer of compromise as admission of liability in civil cases and in criminal cases
Civil Case It is NOT an admission of any liability and is NOT admissible against the offeror (Sec. 27, Rule 130).
5. Of a witness who is an adverse party or an officer, director, or managing agent of a public or private corporation or of a partnership or association which is an adverse party (Sec. 10,
Rule 132);or 6. In all stages of examination of a child if the same will further the interests of justice (Sec. 20, Rule on Examination of a Child Witness, A.M. No.004-07-SC).
Criminal Case GR: It may be received in evidence as an implied admission of guilt (Ibid.). XPNs: 1. In
2.
IMPEACHING A WITNESS What does Laying the predicate mean in impeaching a witness? It means that it is the duty of a party trying to impugn the testimony of a witness by means of prior or subsequent inconsistent statements, whether oral or in writing, to give the witness a chance to reconcile his conflicting declarations, such that it is only when no reasonable explanation is given by him that he should be deemed impeached. (People v. Sambahon, G.R. No. 182789, August 3, 2010)
72
quasi-offenses
where
there is no criminal intent (negligence), such as reckless imprudence; In criminal cases allowed by law to be compromised such as: a. NIRC (Sec. 7c)– The CIR has the power to compromise minor criminal violations as may be determined by the Secretary of Finance; b. LGC (Sec. 408) – Allowed in minor offenses whose penalties do not exceed one year;
UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2017 c.
RPC (Art. 266-C)– In cases of marital rape, where subsequent forgiveness by the wife extinguishes the criminal action or penalty (Suarez and De la Banda, 2006).
b. The declaration or act must relate to the conspiracy; and c. The conspiracy must be shown by evidence other than such declaration or act. The rule regarding statements made by a co-conspirator refers to statements made by one conspirator during the pendency of the unlawful enterprises and in furtherance of its object and not to a confession made long after the conspiracy had been brought to an end. Under the rule on multiple admissibility of evidence, the confession of a co-accused may be inadmissible against his co-accused for being hearsay but may nevertheless be admissible against the declarant’s own guilt. (People vs. Yatco, 97 Phil. 941, 1955)
NOTE:No compromise is valid in the following cases: 1. 2. 3. 4.
Civil status of persons; Validity of a marriage or legal separation; Any ground for legal separation; Future support;
5. 6. 7. 8.
Jurisdiction of courts; Future legitime; Habeas corpus ; and Election cases (Herrera, 1999) .
3.
Explain the admissibility of plea or offer. Offer or Plea vs. Admisibility
Offer or Plea Plea of guilty later withdrawn by the accused Offer by the accused to plead guilty to a lesser offense but unaccepted by prosecution Offer to pay or payment of medical, hospital or other expenses occasioned by injury (Good Samaritan Rule)
Admissibility Not admissible in evidence against the accused who made the plea Not admissible in evidence against the accused who made the offer
ADMISSION BY A PARTY Requisites for the admissibility of an admission 1. The act, declaration or omission must have been made by a party or by one by whom he is legally bound; 2. The admission must be as to a relevant fact; and, 3. The admission may only be given in evidence against him (Ibid.; Herrera, 1999) .
Not admissible in evidence as proof of civil or criminal liability for the injury (Suarez and De la Banda,
Admission by Silence
Evidence: A Lawyer’s Companion, 2006 ed.)
There is admission by silence when a party does or says nothing when he hears or observes an act or declaration made in his presence when such act or declaration is such as naturally to call for action or comment if not true, and when proper and possible for him to do so. Such may be given in evidence against him (Sec. 32, Rule 130).
RES INTER ALIOS ACTA RULE This principle literally means “things done between strangers ought not to injure those who are not parties to them” (Black’s Law Dictionary, 5 th Ed.; Dynamic Signmaker Outdoor Advertising Services, Inc. v. Potongan, 461 SCRA 328).
Requisites of an admission by silence 1. He must have heard or observed the act or declaration of the other person; 2. He must have had the opportunity to deny it (People v. Ranario, 49 Phil. 220) ; 3. He must have understood the statement; 4. He must have an interest to object, such that he would naturally have done so, if the statement was not true; 5. The facts were within his knowledge; and 6. The fact admitted or the inference to be drawn from his silence is material to the issue (People v. Paragsa, G.R. No. L44060, July 20, 1978; Sec. 32, Rule 130; Regalado, 2008).
What are the two (2) branches of res inter alios acta rule? 1. 2.
The rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by an act, declaration, or omission of another (Sec. 28, Rule 130) ; Evidence that one did or did not do a certain thing at one time is not admissible to prove that he did or did not do the same or similar thing at another time (Sec. 34, Rule 130).
What are the exceptions to the res inter alios acta rule (first branch): 1.
CONFESSIONS
Admission by a co-partner or agent (Sec. 29, Rule 130)
What are the requisites for the admissibility of a confession?
a. The declaration or act of the partner or agent must have been made or done within the scope of his authority; b. The declaration or act of the partner or agent must have been made or done during the existence of the partnership or agency (while the person making the declaration was still a partner or an agent); and, c. The existence of the partnership or agency is proven by evidence other than the declaration or act of the partner or agent. 2.
Admission by privies (Sec. 31, Rule 130). a. There must be an act, declaration or omission by a predecessor-in-interest; b. The act, declaration or omission of the predecessor must have occurred while he was holding (not after) the title to the property; and, c. The act, declaration or omission must be in relation to the property.
1. 2. 3. 4.
Admission by a co-conspirator (Sec. 30, Rule 130) 5.
a. The declaration or act be made or done during the existence of the conspiracy;
73
It must involve an express and categorical acknowledgement of guilt (U.S. v. Corrales, 28 Phil. 362) ; Facts admitted must be constitutive of a criminal offense (U.S. v. Flores, 26 Phil. 262) ; It must have been given voluntarily (People v. Nishishima, 57 Phil. 26); It must have been intelligently made (Bilaan v. Cusi, G.R. No. L-18179, June 29, 1962) , the accused realizing the importance or legal significance of his act (U.S. v. Agatea, 40 Phil. 596) ; and There must have been no violation of Sec. 12, Art. III, 1987 Constitution (Regalado, 2008) .
REMEDIAL LAW 6.
Testimony or deposition at a former proceeding ( Sec. 47); Family reputation or tradition regarding pedigree (Sec. 40); 7. Common reputation (Sec. 41); 8. Parts of Res gestae(Sec. 42); 9. Entries in official records (Sec. 44); 10. Commercial lists and the like (Sec. 45); 11. Learned treatises (Sec. 46); 12. Independently Relevant Statement 5.
It must be in writing and signed by such person in the presence of his counsel or in the latter’s absence, upon a valid waiver, and in the presence of any of the parents, elder brothers and sisters, his spouse, the municipal mayor, the municipal judge, district school supervisor or priest or minister of the gospel as chosen by him (Sec. 2(d), R.A. 7438).
6.
What are the requirements for an admission of guilt of an accused during a custodial investigation to be admitted as evidence? 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
As a general rule, the extrajudicial declaration of an accused, although deliberately made, is not admissible and does not have probative value against his co- accused. It is merely hearsay evidence as far as the other accused are concerned.
The admission must be voluntary (Sec. 12(1), 1987 Constitution) ; The admission must be in writing (R.A. 7438);
(People vs. Alegre, 94 Phil. 109, 1979)
The admission must be made with the of competent, independent counsel (Sec.assistance 12, 1987 Constitution) ; The admission must be express (People vs. Prinsipe, G.R. No. 135862, May 2, 2002); In case the accused waives his rights to silence and to counsel, such waiver must be in writing, executed with the assistance of competent, independent counsel (R.A. 7438).
NOTE: Items 1 to 5 require death or unavailability of declarant. Independently Relevant Statement
Doctrine of Interlocking Confessions It states that extrajudicial confessions independently made without collusion which are identical with each other in their essential details and corroborated by other evidence against the persons implicated, are admissible to show the probability of the latter’s actual participation in the commission of the crime (People v. Mulit, G.R. No. 181043, October 8, 2008) . Admission vs. Confession
Admission A statement of fact which does not involve an acknowledgment of guilt or liability. May be made by third persons and in certain cases, are admissible against a party Applies to both criminal and civil cases May be express or tacit
Confession A statement of fact which involves an acknowledgment of guilt or liability.
Under the doctrine of independently relevant statements, regardless of their truth or falsity, the fact that such statements have been made is relevant. The hearsay rule does not apply, and the statements are admissible as evidence. Evidence as to the making of such statement is not secondary but primary, for the statement itself may constitute a fact in issue or be circumstantially relevant as to the existence of such a fact. (People vs. Estibal, GR No. 208749, Nov. 26, 2014 citing People vs. Velasquez) Evidence regarding the making of NOTE: independently relevant statement is not secondary but primary, because the statement itself may (1) constitute a fact in issue or (2) be circumstantially relevant as to the existence of that fact. (Bayani vs. People, GR No. 155619, Aug. 14, 2007 of IRS)
The ban on hearsay does not cover independently relevant statements, which consist of statements that are independently relevant of the truth asserted therein. They belong to two classes: The first class are 1) those statements which are the very facts in issue; 2) those statements which are circumstantial evidence of the facts in issue. The second class includes the following: Statement of a person showing his state of mind; Statement of a person showing his physical condition; Statement of a person to infer a state of mind of another person; Statements which may identify the date, place and person in question; Statements to show a lack of credibility of a witness. (U.S. vs. Zenni, 492 F. Supp. 464, 1980)
Can be made only by the party himself and, in some instances, are admissible against his co-accused Applies only to criminal cases Must be express
HEARSAY RULE It states that a witness can testify only to those facts which he knows of based on his personal knowledge or those which are derived from his own perception (Sec. 36, Rule 130).
How does the Dying declaration apply?
What is the reason for the exclusion of Hearsay Evidence?
1. 2.
There is no opportunity to cross-examine the outside declarant.
3.
In criminal cases, its admission would be a violation of the constitutional provision that the accused shall enjoy the right of being confronted with the witnesses testifying against him and to cross-examine them. Moreover, the court is without opportunity to test the credibility of hearsay statements by observing the demeanor of the person who made them (People v. Pruna, G.R. No. 138471, October 10, 2002)
4. 5. 6.
7.
Exceptions to the hearsay rule 1. 2. 3. 4.
Dying declaration (Sec. 37); Declaration against interest (Sec. 38); Act or declaration about pedigree (Sec. 39); Entries in the course of business (Sec. 43);
The declaration is one made by a dying person; The declaration was made by said dying person under a consciousness of his impending death; The declaration refers to the cause and circumstances surrounding the death of the declarant and not of anyone else; The declaration is offered in a case wherein the declarant’s death is the subject of the inquiry; The declarant is competent as a witness had he survived (Geraldo v. People, G.R. No. 173608, November 20, 2008); That the statement is complete in itself – “Doctrine of Completeness” ( People v. De Joya, G.R. No. 75028, November 8, 1991) ; and The declarant should have died. If he survives, his declaration may be admissible as part of the res gestae (Riano, 2013) .
Is interval of time from the making of a dying declaration always material?
74
UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2017 2.
GR: The intervening time from the making of a dying declaration up to the time of death is immaterial in its admissibility, as long as it was made under the consciousness of impending death.
3.
XPN: The interval of time between the declaration and the death of the declarant may be taken into account where the declaration is ambiguous as to whether the declarant believed that his death was imminent when he made such declaration (Regalado, 2008) .
4.
Requisites of Part of the Res Gestae 1. That the principal act, the res gestae, be a startling occurrence; 2. That the statements were made before the declarant had time to contrive or devise falsehood; and
Declaration Against Interest 1.
The declarant is dead or unable to testify;
2.
Declaration declarant; relates to a fact against the interest of the At the time he made said declaration, he was aware that the same was contrary to his interest; and Declarant had no motive to falsify and believed such declaration to be true.
3. 4.
The common reputation must have been ancient, i.e. 30 years old; The reputation must have been one formed among a class of persons who were in a position to have some sources of information and to contribute intelligently to the formation of the opinion; and The common reputation must have been existing previous to the controversy.
3. That the mustattending concern circumstances the occurrence in question and statements its immediately (Sec. 42, Rule 130; People v. Balbas, 122 SCRA 859; People Of The Philippines vs. Anecito Estibal Y Calungsag G.R. No. 208749, November 26, 2014). The declaration of the deceased is not admissible as an antemortem declaration since the deceased was in doubt as to whether he would die or not. x x x It may be admitted, however, as part of the res gestae since the statement was made immediately after the incident and the deceased had no sufficient time to concoct a charge against the accused. (People vs. Laquinon, 135 SCRA 91, 1985)
To admit declarations against interest as exceptions to the hearsay rule: (a) the declarant must not be able to testify due to death, mental incapacity or physical incompetence rather than mere absence from the courts; (b) the declaration must concern a matter of fact cognizable by the declarant; (c) the circumstances render it improbable that a motive to falsify exists. (Fuentes vs. CA, 253 SCRA 430, 1996)
Part of Res Gestae vs. Dying Declaration Requisites of act or declaration about pedigree 1. 2. 3.
The declarant is dead or unable to testify; The pedigree should be in issue; The declarant must be a relative of the person whose pedigree is in question, either by birth or marriage;
4.
The declaration must occurred; be madeand ante litem motam or before the controversy The relationship between the declarant and the person whose pedigree is in question must be shown by evidence other than such act or declaration (Tecson v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 161434, March 3, 2004).
5.
2. 3.
4.
There is controversy in respect to the pedigree of any member of the family; The reputation or tradition of the pedigree of the person concerned existed previous to the controversy; The statement is about the reputation or tradition of the family in respect to the pedigree of any member of the family; and The witness testifying to the reputation or tradition regarding pedigree of the person concerned must be a member of the family of said person either by consanguinity or affinity (Sec. 40, Rule 130).
May be made by the killer after or during the killing or that of a third person May precede, or accompany or follow the principal act
Can be made by the victim only Confined to matters occurring after the homicidal act Justification is the trustworthiness, being given by the person who was aware of his impending death
Verbal Acts vs. Spontaneous Statements
How to establish family reputation or tradition with respect to one’s pedigree? 1. Through testimony in open court of a witness who must be a member of the family either by consanguinity or affinity; 2. Through entries in: a. Family bible; b. Family books or charts; c. Engravings on rings; or d. Family portraits and the like. Requisites of Common Reputation 1.
Dying Declaration A sense of impending death takes the place of an oath and the law regards the declarant as testifying
Justification is the spontaneity of the statement
Requisites of family reputation or tradition regarding pedigree 1.
Part ofRes Gestae It is the event itself which speaks
The facts must be of public or general interest and more than 30 years old;
75
Verbal Acts Utterances which accompany some act or conduct to which it is desired to give legal effect; When such act has intrinsically no definite legal significance, or only an
Spontaneous Statements Statements or exclamations made immediately after some exciting occasion by a participant or spectator and asserting the circumstances of that occasion as it is
ambiguous one, its legal purport or tenor may be ascertained by considering the words accompanying it, and these utterances thus enter merely as verbal part of the act. The res gestae is the equivocal act. Verbal act must be contemporaneous with or must accompany the equivocal act to be admissible. Requisites: 1. There must be a startling occurrence; The statement must
observed by him.
The res gestaeis the startling occurrence. May be prior to, simultaneous with, or subsequent to the startling occurrence.
Requisites: 1. The principal act to be characterized must be equivocal;
REMEDIAL LAW relate to the circumstances of the startling occurrence or that the statement must concern the occurrence in question and its immediate attending circumstances; and
2.
The statement must be spontaneous and were made before the declarant had the time to contrive or devise a falsehood (Talidano v.
Falcom Maritime & Allied Services, Inc., G.R. No. 172031, July 14, 2008). NOTE: The reason for the admissibility of verbal acts is that the motive, character and object of an act are frequently indicated by what was said by the person engaged in the act.
1.
2. The equivocal act must be material to the issue; 3. The statement must accompany the equivocal act; and The statement gives a legal significance to the equivocal act (Talidano v. Falcom Maritime & Allied Services, Inc., G.R. No. 172031, July 14, 2008).
2.
3. 4. 5.
NOTE:The reason for the admissibility of spontaneous statements
Witness whose testimony is offered in evidence is dead or unable to testify; The testimony or deposition was given in a former case or proceeding, judicial or administrative, between the same parties or those representing the same interests; Former case involved the same subject as that in the present case, although on different causes of action; Issue testified to by the witness in the former trial is the same issue involved in the present case; and Adverse party had an opportunity to cross-examine the witness in the former case (Regalado, 2008).
Explain the Opinion Rule.
is trustworthiness and necessity, because statements are made instinctively, and because said natural and spontaneous utterances are more convincing than the testimony of the same person on the stand.
opinion of within a witness is knowledge not admissible. Thenot witness GR: mustThe testify to facts their and may state their opinion, even on their cross-examination.
XPNs: 1. Opinion of expert witness; 2. The opinion of an ordinary witness for which proper basis is given, may be received in evidence regarding: a. Identity of person about whom he has adequate knowledge; b. A handwriting with which he has sufficient familiarity; c. The mental sanity of a person with whom he is sufficiently acquainted; and d. The witness’ impressions of the emotion, behavior, condition or appearance (EBCA) of a person.
Requisites of Entries in the course of business or the ShopBook Rule 1. The person who made the entry must be dead or unable to testify; 2. The entries were made at or near the time of the transactions to which they refer; 3. The entrant was in a position to know the facts stated in
Explain the admissibility of Character evidence.
GR: Character evidence is NOT admissible in evidence.
4. the The entries; entries were made in his professional capacity or in the performance of a duty, whether legal, contractual, moral or religious; and 5. The entries were made in the ordinary or regular course of business or duty (Regalado, 2008).
XPNs: 1. Subject to certain exceptions in criminal cases; 2. In civil cases; 3. In case the character of a witness has been previously impeached. Explain Character evidence in criminal cases.
Requisites of Entries in official records
As to the Accused 1. Entries were made by a public officer in the performance of his duties or by a person in the performance of a duty especially enjoined by law; 2. Entrant had personal knowledge of the facts stated by him or such facts were acquired by him from reports made by persons under a legal duty to submit the same; and 3. Such entries were duly entered in a regular manner in the official records (Ibid.).
He may prove his good moral character which is pertinent to the moral trait involved in the offense charged.
Requisite of Commercial lists and the like 1. Statements of matters of interest to persons engaged in an occupation; 2. Statements must be contained in a list, register, periodical, or other published compilation; 3. Compilation is published for use by persons engaged in that occupation; and 4. Such is generally relied upon by them.
As to the Prosecution They may not prove the bad moral character of the accused which is pertinent to the moral trait involved in the offense charged, unless in rebuttal, when the accused opens the issue by
As to the Offended Party His good or bad moral character may be proved as long as it tends to establish in any reasonable degree the probability or improbability of the offense charged
introducing evidence of his good moral character. Explain Character evidence in civil cases.
GR: The moral character of either party thereto cannot be proved
Are Learned treatises admissible in evidence? Yes, provided that: 1. the court can take judicial notice of them; or 2. an expert witness testifies that the author of such is recognized as expert in that profession (Sec. 46, Rule 130).
XPN: 1. Unless it is pertinent to the issue of character involved in the case (Sec. 51, Rule 130) . 2. Unless the good moral character of a witness is impeached.
Requisites of a testimony or deposition at a former trial
RULE ON EXAMINATION OF A CHILD WITNESS (A.M. No. 004-07-SC)
76
UST LAW PRE-WEEK NOTES 2017 3. Who is a child witness? 4. A child witness is any person who at the time of giving testimony is below the age of 18 years. It includes those who are over 18 years but is found by the court as unable to fully take care of himself or protect himself from abuse, neglect, cruelty, exploitation, or discrimination, because of a physical or mental disability or condition (Sec. 4(a)).
Documents or affidavits used in deciding quasi-judicial or administrative cases; Lost objects previously marked, identified, described in the record, and testified to by witnesses who had been subjects of cross-examination in respect to said objects. (2012 Bar)
When should a party make an offer?
Testimonial Evidence Paul, a five-year-old boy, testified that Rolando boxed his wife then burned her. The testimony of Paul shows that he is of above average intelligence, that he is capable of giving responsive answers, of recalling events, and of relating his recollections. For a child witness to be competent, it must be
Offer must be made at the time the witness is called to testify.
shown that he capacity of (1)(People observation, (2) of recollection, andhas (3) the of communication. vs. Mendoza, 254 SCRA 18)
Every time a new witness is called to testify, there must be an offer of evidence.
What is the presumption regarding the rule? The Rule on Examination of a Child Witness specifies that every child is presumed qualified to be a witness. To rebut this presumption, the burden of proof lies on the party challenging the child’s competence. Petitioners’ flimsy objections on Rachel’s lack of education and inability to read and tell time carry no weight and cannot overcome the clear and convincing testimony of Rachel as to who killed her father. (People Of The Philippines v. Edwin Ibanez Y Albante, Et Al. G.R. No. 197813, September 25, 2013)
Documentary and Object Evidence Must be made after the presentation of party’s testimonial evidence, and before resting his case (Sec.
35, Rule 132) . The evidence is only offered once, after all the testimonial evidence are offered and prior to the resting of the case for a party. NOTE: The presentation of a documentary or object evidence for marking and identification during the course of trial is not the offer contemplated in the rules (Riano, 2013).
The RTC could not take the declaration of Villas into consideration because Villas’ extra -judicial sworn statement containing the declaration had not been offered and admitted as evidence by either side. The CA stressed that only evidence that was formally offered and made part of the records could be considered; and that in any event, the supposed
What is Live-link TV testimony of a child witness? The court may order that the testimony of the child be taken by live-link television if there is a substantial likelihood that the child would suffer trauma from testifying in the presence of accused, counsel prosecutor as theimpair case may be.the The traumahis must be ofora the kind which would the completeness or truthfulness of the testimony of the child (Sec. 25).
contradiction between the extra-judicial sworn statement and the court testimony should be resolved in favor of the latter. The CA’s negative treatment of the declaration contained in Villas’ extra -judicial sworn statement was in accord with prevailing rules and jurisprudence. Pursuant to Section 34, Rule 132 of the Rules of Court. (Emeritu C. Barut vs. People Of The Philippines, G.R. No. 167454, September 24, 2014, Bersamin, J.)
Explain the Sexual Abuse Shield Rule.
GR: It states that the following evidence is not admissible in any criminal proceeding involving alleged child sexual abuse:
When should objection be made? 1. 2.
Evidence offered to prove that the alleged victim engaged in other sexual behavior; and, Evidence offered to prove the sexual predisposition of the alleged victim (Sec. 30(a)).
Testimonial Evidence 1st:
When the offer was made; 2nd: When an objectionable question is asked of the witness.
XPN: Evidence of specific instances of sexual behavior by the alleged victim to prove that a person other than the accused was the source of semen, injury, or other physical evidence shall be admissible (Sec. 30(b)).
Documentary and Object Evidence When the document is offered in evidence.
By his testimony imputing the commission of the crime against his wife, the husband is considered to have waived all
OFFER AND OBJECTION Is formal offer required before the court may consider an evidence?
his objections to the testimony of his wife. It is to be expected that after giving such a testimony, it is but normal for his wife to rebut the allegation. (People vs. Francisco, 78 Phil. 694)
YES. Under the Rules, the court shall consider only the evidence which has been formally offered . The purpose for which the evidence is offered must be specified (Sec. 34, Rule 132).
Tender of excluded evidence When an attorney is not allowed by the court to present testimony which he thinks is competent, material, and necessary to prove his case, he must make an offer of proof. This is the method of properly preserving the record to the end that the question may be saved for purposes of review (Caraig, 2004).
NOTE: The failure to formally offer evidence must be objected to, otherwise, this constitutes as waiver. When is formal offer of evidence NOT required? 1. 2.
How is tender of excluded evidence made?
In a summary proceeding, since it is a proceeding where there is no full-blown trial; Documents judicially admitted or taken judicial notice of;
1.
77
As to documentary or object evidence: It may have the same attached to or made part of the record (Sec. 40, Rule 132).
REMEDIAL LAW 2.
As to oral evidence: It may state for the record the name and other personal circumstances of the witness and the substance of the proposed testimony (Sec. 40, Rule 132) .
Offer of Proof vs. Offer of Evidence
Offer of Proof / Tender of Excluded Evidence Only resorted to if admission is refused by the court for purposes of review on appeal
Offer of Evidence Refers to testimonial, documentary or object evidence that are presented or offered in court by a party so that the court can consider his evidence when it comes to the preparation of the decision
NOTE: The Rules allows the presentation of additional evidence even after the case has rested (Republic v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 152375, December 13, 2011).
78
