Part 1: Remedial Law

I. General Principles
 Concepts in Remedial Law
 Procedural Laws – are adjective laws which:
o Prescribes rules and forms of procedure of enforcing rights or obtaining redress for their invasion.
o Rules of procedure by which courts applying laws of all kinds can properly administer
o Includes rules of pleadings, practice and evidence.
 Remedial Law
o Plays a vital role in the administration of justice, lies at the very core of procedural due process, a law
which hear before it condemns, proceeds upon inquiry and renders judgment only after trial and
contemplates an opportunity to be heard before judgment is rendered.
 Nature of Remedial Law
o Promulgated by authority of law which has the force and effect of law, prescribing the time within which
certain acts must be done, or certain proceedings taken, and considered absolutely indispensable to the
prevention of needless delays and to orderly and speedy discharged of judicial business.
o Strict compliance with the rules has been held and imperative – failure to pay docket fee in the SC,
within the period fixed, will cause the dismissal of the appeal.

A: Substantive Law vs. Remedial Law

 Substantive Law –
o Part of law which creates, defines, or regulates concerning life, liberty and property or the powers of
agencies and instrumentalities for the administration of public affairs, which when violated gives rise
to a cause of action.
o Creates vested rights
o Prospective in application
o Enacted by Congress
 Remedial Law –
o Prescribes methods enforcing those rights and obligations created by substantive law.
o Does not create vested right
 GR: May be applied retroactively – to actions undetermined (PENDING) at the time of their passage, there
being no vested rights in the rules of procedure. Amendments to procedural rules are PROCEDURAL or
REMEDIAL in character as they do not create or remove vested rights, BUT only operate in furtherance of the
remedy or confirmation of rights already existing.
 XPNs:
1. Statute expressly or by implied necessity provides that pending actions are exempted from its
operation;
2. If applied to pending, would impair vested rights;
3. Court may deny retroactive application if not feasible or would work injustice;
4. If it would involve intricate problems of due process or impair independence of the court
 Promulgated by the SC
 Implemented through the judicial system, including the prosecutorial courts and quasi-judicial agencies.
 Test in determining W/N Rule is Procedural or Substantive: Whether it regulates procedure, that is, judicial
process for enforcing rights and duties recognized by substantive law and for justly administering remedy
and redress for a disregard or infraction of them. If the Rule takes away vest rights, it is not procedural. If the
rule creates a right such as the right to appeal, may be classified as substantive matter; but if it operates as a
means of implementing an existing right then the rule deals merely with procedure.
 Principal Sources of Remedial Law (CoDProCACO)
1. Constitution;
2. Different laws creating the judiciary, defining and allocating jurisdiction of courts of different levels;
3. Procedural laws and rules promulgated by the SC;
4. Circulars;
5. Administrative orders;
6. Internal Rules; and
7. Court decisions (Jurisprudence)
 The object of Remedial law is to facilitate the adjudication of conflicting claims and to serve, rather than to
defeat, the ends of justice.
 GR: The Rules shall be liberally construed in order to promote their objective of securing a just, speedy and
inexpensive disposition of every action and proceeding.
 XPN: Strictly construed:
1. Reglementary period;
2. Rule on Forum Shopping; and
3. Service of summons.

Liberal construction can only be invoked in situations where there is an excusable formal deficiency or
error in a pleading, provided the same does not subvert the essence of the proceeding and it at least
connotes a reasonable attempt at compliance.
 Rule on Uniform Interpretation: Every statute must be so construed and harmonized with other statutes as
to form a uniform system of jurisprudence (Maxim : Interpretare et concordare legibus est optimus
interpretendi. Applies both to Civil Procedure and Summary Procedure regarding the finality of judgments.

B. Rule-Making Power of the Supreme Court

 SC has the Power to promulgate rules concerning: ( ProPAILA )
1. Protection and enforcement of constitutional rights;
2. Pleading, practice and procedure in all courts;
 Carries the power to overturn judicial precedents on points of remedial law through the
amendment of the Rules of Court.
3. Admission to the practice of law;
4. Integrated bar (IBP); and
5. Legal Assistance to the underprivileged.
 Plea Bargaining is a rule of procedure. Provisions contained in a statute prohibiting it is unconstitutional for
being contrary to the rule-making authority of the SC. Only the SC can promulgate rules on pleadings,
practice and procedure, not Congress through the passage of law.
 Limitations on the Rule Making Power of SC ( SIUDIM )
1. Provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure for the speedy disposition of cases;
2. Uniform for all the courts of the same grade;
3. Must not diminish, Increase or Modify substantive rights.
 Power of the SC to Amend and Suspend Procedural Rules
 GR: Courts have the power to relax or suspend technical or procedural rules or to except a case from
their operations when compelling reasons so warrant or when the purpose of justice requires it.
 Cannot be questioned
 ROC should be viewed as mere tools designed to facilitate the attainment of justice.
 Pervasive and compelling as to alter even that which the SC itself has already declared to be
final.
  XPN: Strict and rigid application, which would result in technicalities that tend to frustrate rather than
promote substantial justice.
 Strong considerations of substantive justice are manifest on the petition, strict application
may be relaxed, in the exercise of its equity jurisdiction.
 XPN to he XPN: The mere invocation of substantial justice is not a magical incantation that will
automatically compel the Court to suspend procedural rules.
 Reasons that would warrant Suspension Rules of Procedure ( EMeCLOT )
1. Existence of special and Compelling reasons;
2. Merits of the case;
3. Cause not entirely attributable to the fault or negligence of the party favored by the suspension;
4. Lack of any showing that the review sought is merely frivolous or dilatory;
5. Other party will not be unjustly prejudiced;
6. Transcendental matters of life, liberty or state security.
 Power to Stay Proceedings and Control its Processes
o Incidental to the power inherent in every court to control the disposition of the cases on its dockets,
considering its time and effort, and that of counsel and the litigants
o It must be done in order to avoid multiplicity of suits and prevent vexatious litigations, conflicting
judgments, and confusion between litigants and courts
 Special courts and quasi-judicial bodies subject to the SC’s Rule-Making Power – unless disapproved by the
SC.
 The SC has the sole prerogative to amend, repeal, or even establish new rules for a more simplified and
inexpensive process and the speedy disposition of cases.
 SC can suspend its own rules - for good and sufficient cause, which is discretionary upon the courts.

C. Principle of Judicial Hierarchy

 Lower courts shall initially decide a case before it is considered by a higher court, unless the redress
desired cannot be obtained in the appropriate courts.
 Constitutional Imperative: Strict observance of the Doctrine is not mere policy, rather, it is a constitutional
filtering mechanism designed to enable the Court to focus on the more fundamental and essential tasks
assigned to it by the highest law of the land.
 Given:
1. The structure of our judicial system
1. recognizes the various levels of courts in the country as they are established under the
Constitution and by law, their ranking and effect of their rulings in relation with one another, and
how these different levels of court interact with one another. It determines the venues of
appeals and the appropriate forum for the issuance of extraordinary writs
2. Accordingly, when litigants seek relief directly from the Court, they bypass the judicial structure
and open themselves to the risk of presenting incomplete or disputed facts. This consequently
hampers the resolution of controversies before the Court. Without the necessary facts, the
Court cannot authoritatively determine the rights and obligations of the parties. The case would
then become another addition to the Court's already congested dockets.
2. The requirements of due process
1. By directly filing a case before the Court, litigants necessarily deprive themselves of the
opportunity to completely pursue or defend their causes of actions. Their right to due process is
effectively undermined by their own doing.

 Ensure that every level of the judiciary performs its designated roles in an effective and efficient manner.
 Trial courts do not only determine the facts. They are likewise competent to determine issues of law which
may include the validity of an ordinance, statute, or even an executive issuance in relation to the
Constitution

 Filtering Mechanism - The doctrine of hierarchy of courts operates to: ( PODE )

1. Prevent Inordinate demands upon the Court's time and attention which are better devoted to
those matters within its exclusive jurisdiction
2. Prevent further Overcrowding of the Court’s Docket; and
3. Prevent the inevitable and resultant Delay.
 EXCEPTIONS TO THE DOCTRINE OF HEIRARCHY OF COURTS (2017)
1. Genuine issues of constitutionality that must be addressed at the most immediate time;
 Includes remedies of certiorari and prohibition to assail constitutionality of actions of
both legislative and executive branches
2. Issues involved are of transcendental importance;
 Threats to fundamental Constitutional rights outweigh necessity for prudence, prevents
courts from the paralysis of procedural niceties when clearly faced with the need for
substantial protection;
3. Cases of first impression;
4. Constitutional issues raised are better decided by the SC;
5. Exigency in certain situations, time is of the essence
6. No other plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law;
7. Reviews act of a Constitutional Organ;
8. Questions that are dictated by public welfare, advancement of public policy, demanded by
broader interest of justice;
9. Orders found to be patent nullities
10. Appeal was considered as clearly inappropriate remedy;
11. Analogous, exceptional and compelling circumstances called for and justified immediate and
direct handling the case.

COMMON DENOMINATOR OF ALL: PURELY LEGAL QUESTIONS

 Failure to comply – sufficient ground for the dismissal of the petition.

D. Doctrine of Non-Interference/Judicial Stability

 GR: Courts of equal and coordinate jurisdiction cannot interfere with each other’s orders.
 CANNOT Interfere by injunction with the judgments or orders of another court of concurrent
jurisdiction
 The court first acquiring jurisdiction excludes the other courts.
 Applies with equal force to administrative bodies.
 XPN: Does not apply where a third-party claimant is involved
 well-established principle that no man shall be affected by any proceeding to which he is a stranger
 RATIONALE: 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 coordinate courts,
for its execution and overall, its incidents, and to control the conduct of ministerial officers acting in
connection with this judgment
II. Jurisdiction
 Power and authority of a court to try, hear, decide a case and the power to enforce its determination.
 Substantive law – confers jurisdiction over subject matter
 Procedural law – confers jurisdiction over parties, issues and rest

A. Classification of Jurisdiction
1. Original vs. Appellate
 Original – power of the court to take judicial cognizance of a case instituted for judicial action for
the first time under conditions provided by law.
 Appellate – authority of a Court higher in rank to re-examine the final order or judgment of a
lower Court which tried the case now elevated for judicial review.
2. General vs. Special
 General - those with competence to decide on their own jurisdiction and take cognizance of all
cases, civil and criminal, of a particular nature
 Special - those which have jurisdiction only for a particular purpose or are clothed with special
powers for the performance of special duties beyond which they have no authority of any kind
3. Exclusive vs. Concurrent
 Exclusive – possessed by a court to the exclusion of others.
 Concurrent – power of different courts to take cognizance of the same subject matter.

B. Doctrines of Hierarchy of Courts and Adherence of Jurisdiction

 Doctrine of Hierarchy of Courts – recourse must first be made to the lower courts exercising concurrent
jurisdiction with a higher court.
o The hierarchy of courts is determinative of the venue of appeals, and also serves as a general
determinant of the appropriate forum for petitions for the extraordinary writs.
 Doctrine of Adherence of Jurisdiction
o GR: Once attached, cannot be ousted by subsequent happenings or events although of a
character which would have prevented jurisdiction from attaching in the first instance, and the
court retains jurisdiction until it finally disposes of the case.
o XPNs:
1. Subsequent statute expressly prohibits the continued exercise of jurisdiction;
2. Law penalizing an act which is punishable is repealed by a subsequent law;
3. Accused is deprived of his constitutional rights; court fails to provide counsel or unable to
obtain and does intelligently waive his constitutional rights; violation of due process
4. Statute expressly provides, or is construed to the effect that it is intended to operate as to
actions pending before its enactment;
5. Proceedings in the court acquiring jurisdiction is terminated, abandoned or declared void;
6. Appeal has been perfected
7. Curative Statutes – cure defects in a prior law or validate legal proceedings that was void.
 The rule of adherence of jurisdiction until a cause is finally resolved or
adjudicated does not apply when the change in jurisdiction is curative in
character
 Effect of Retroactive Laws on Jurisdiction
o GR: Statute in force at the time of the commencement of action determines jurisdiction.
  Jurisdiction is not affected by a new law placing a proceeding under the jurisdiction of
another tribunal
 XPNs: (1) Statute expressly provides; and (2) Statute clearly intended to apply to actions pending before
its enactment.

C. Jurisdiction of Various Philippine Courts and Tribunals

1. Boundary dispute between municipalities and/or independent component city – RTC being a court of
general jurisdiction
2. Expropriation – RTC; incapable of pecuniary estimation
3. Labor Dispute – GR: Labor Arbiter (LA); Illegal dismissal. XPNs: Quasi-delict and no EE-ER relationship
4. Forcible entry/Unlawful detainer – MTC; exclusive original jurisdiction
5. Administrative investigations and to impose preventive suspension over local elective officials –
Secretary of Local Government, concurrent with Ombudsman
6. Public school teachers – Division School Superintendent in investigation of administrative; unless, DSI is
complainant or an interested party – All members of committee shall be appointed by the Secretary of
Education
7. Enforcement of money claims against an LGU – COA

1. Supreme Court
 Supreme Court En Banc
1. Constitutionality of a treaty, international or executive agreement or law.
2. ROC required to be heard En Banc
3. Constitutionality, application or operation of presidential decrees, proclamations, orders,
instructions, ordinances and other regulations.
4. Required number of votes in a division is not obtained.
5. Modification or reversal of a doctrine/principle laid down previously rendered En Banc.
6. Discipline of judges of lower courts
7. Election, returns and qualifications of President/Vice-president.
 Exclusive Original Jurisdiction
 Civil Cases – Writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus:
1. CA;
2. CTA;
3. COE En Banc;
4. COA;
5. SB

Certiorari under Rule 65, admits cases based on the specific grounds therein. Applies if
there is no appeal or any other plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary
course of action. Independent action for certiorari will lie only if grave abuse of discretion
is alleged and proved.
 Criminal Cases - Writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus:
1. Court of Appeals;
2. Sandiganbayan.
 Appeal
 Civil Cases
1. Petitions for review on certiorari against:
a. CA;
b. CTA En Banc;
c. Sandiganbayan;
 d. RTC, in cases involving:
i. No question of fact is involved and case involves:
a) Constitutionality or validity of treaty, international or executive
agreement, law, presidential decree, proclamation, order, instruction,
ordinance or regulation;
b) Legality of tax, impost, assessments, or toll, or penalty in relation thereto;
c) Jurisdiction of lower court is in issue;
d) Only errors or questions of law are involved;
ii. Only errors or questions of law are involved.
2. Special Civil action for Certiorari – filed within 30 days against Comelec/COA
 Criminal Cases
1. CA imposes RP, LI or a lesser penalty by notice of appeal filed with the CA
2. Automatic review for cases of Death Penalty rendered by the CA
Note: Where judgment also imposes a lesser penalty for offenses committed on the
same occasion or which arose out of the same occurrence that gave rise to the more
severe offense for which the penalty of death is imposed, and the accused appeals,
the automatic review from the CA to the SC shall include such lesser offense.
3. Petition for review on certiorari (Rule 43) from SB if penalty is less than D,LI or RP in
criminal and civil cases.
4. Notice of appeal from the SB - imposes LI or RP or where a lesser penalty is imposed
involving offenses committed on the same occasion or which arose out of the same
occurrence that gave rise to the more serious offense for which the penalty of death,
RP of LI is imposed;
5. Cases from the Ombudsman
6. Automatic review of death penalty imposed by the Sandiganbayan in the exercise of
its original jurisdiction
7. Automatic review whenever the Sandiganbayan, exercise of its appellate jurisdiction,
finds that the penalty of death, RP or LI should be imposed;
8. Appeals from RTC in which only errors or questions of law are involved.
 Concurrent with CA
 Civil Cases
1. Writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus against:
a. NLRC, must first be filed with the CA
b. Civil Service Commission;
c. Quasi-judicial agencies, filed with CA first;
d. RTC and lower courts
2. Writ of Kalikasan
 Criminal Cases – Writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus against RTC and lower
Courts.
 Concurrent with CA and RTC
 Civil Cases
1. Habeas corpus and quo warranto
2. Writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus against lower courts or bodies.
 Criminal Cases - Writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus against lower courts or
bodies
 Concurrent with CA, SB and RTC
 Civil Cases
1. Writ of Amparo
2. Habeas Data, involving public data or government office
  Criminal Cases – Writ of Amparo and Writ of Habeas data.
 Concurrent with RTC – Civil Cases only – Actions affecting Ambassadors, ministers and consuls.
 Concurrent with SB – Criminal Cases only - mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, injunctions and
ancillary writs in aid of its appellate jurisdiction including quo warranto arising or that may arise
in cases filed under E.O. Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14-A
 SC is not a trier of facts but if questions of law.
 Exceptions when the SC admits and reviews question of facts:
1. Inference made is manifestly mistaken;
2. Grave abuse of discretion;
3. Judgement is based on misapprehension of facts; and
4. Findings of fact are premised on the absence of evidence
5. Conclusion grounded entirely on speculation, surmise, and conjectures.
 Questions of Law – doubt or difference arises as to what the law is on a certain set of facts.
 Question of Fact – doubt or difference arises as to the truth or falsehood of the alleged facts.
 CA has jurisdiction if it involves a mixed question of law and fact.

2. Court of Appeals
 Exclusive Original Jurisdiction
 Civil Cases – Annulment of judgments of RTC based upon fraud or lack of jurisdiction (Rule
47)
 Criminal Cases
1. Annulment of judgments of RTC (BP 129)
2. Crimes of Terrorism under Human Security Act
 Appellate
 Civil Cases
1. Final judgments, decisions, resolutions, orders, awards of:
a. RTC (Original or appellate)
b. Family Courts;
c. RTC on the questions of constitutionality, validity of tax, jurisdiction involving
questions of fact, which should be appealed first to the CA.
d. Appeals from RTC in cases appealed from MTC’s which are not a matter of right;
2. Appeal from MTC in the exercise of its delegated jurisdiction
3. Appeals from Civil Service Commission;
4. Appeals from quasi-judicial agencies under Rule 43;
5. Appeals from NCIP
6. Appeals from Office of the Ombudsman in administrative cases
 Criminal Cases – Judgments or decisions of RTC via notice of appeal (except those
appealable to the SC or SB):
1. Original and Appellate jurisdiction;
2. Imposable penalty is LI or RP or a lesser penalty for offenses committed on the same
occasion or which arose from the same occurrence that gave rise to the offense
punishable by RP or LI
 Concurrent with SC
 Civil Cases
1. Writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus against the following:
a. NLRC under the Labor Code;
b. Civil Service Commission;
c. Quasi-judicial agencies; and
d. RTC’s and other lower courts;
 2. Writ of Kalikasan
 Criminal Cases – Certiorari, prohibition and mandamus against the RTC’s and lower courts.
 Concurrent with SC and RTC
 Civil Cases – Habeas Corpus, Quo Warranto and Habeas Data (involves public data or
government office)
 Criminal Cases – Writ of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus against the lower courts or
bodies.
 Concurrent with SC, SB and RTC
 Civil Cases – Writ of Amparo and Writ of Habeas Data (involves public data or government
office)
 Criminal Cases – Writ of Amparo and Habeas Data.

 CA may act as a trial court in the following instances:

1. Annulment of judgments
2. Motion for new trial is granted by the CA
3. petition for habeas corpus
4. Writ of amparo
5. Writ of habeas data
6. Writ of kalikasan
7. Cases which fall within its original and appellate jurisdiction
8. Newly discovered evidence (New trial)
9. 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

3. Court of Tax Appeals

 Exclusive Original
 Tax Cases - tax collection cases involving final and executory assessments; principal
amount of taxes and fees, exclusive of charges and penalties claimed is not less than
P1,000,000.
 Criminal Cases - Violation of the NIRC; Tariff and Customs Code and other laws; where the
principal amount of taxes and fees, exclusive of charges and penalties claimed is less that
P1,000,000 or no specified amount claimed (the offenses or penalties shall be tried by the
regular courts and the jurisdiction of the CTA shall be appellate).
 Appellate
 Tax Cases - principal amount of taxes and fees, exclusive of charges and penalties claimed
is less than P1,000,000 tried by the proper MTC, MeTC and RTC
 Criminal Cases - Appeals from the judgment, resolutions or orders of the RTC in tax cases
originally decided by them and those in their appellate jurisdiction
 Exclusive Appellate Jurisdiction to Review by Appeal from Commissioner of Internal Revenue
1. (a) Decisions in cases involving disputed assessments, (b) refunds of internal revenue
taxes, fees or other charges, penalties in relation thereto, or (c) other matters arising
under the NIRC or other laws administered by BIR
2. Inaction by the CIR
 Exclusive Appellate Jurisdiction to Review by Appeal from RTC
 Local tax cases originally decided or resolved by them in the exercise of their original or
appellate jurisdiction via Petition for Review under Rule 43.
 Exclusive Appellate Jurisdiction to Review by Appeal from Commissioner of Customs
 1. Liability for customs duties, fees or other charges, seizure, detention or release of property
affected, fines, forfeitures or other penalties in relation thereto;
2. Other matters arising under the Customs Law or other laws, part of laws or special laws
administered by BOC

 Exclusive Appellate Jurisdiction to Review by Appeal from Central Board of Assessment

Appeals
 Cases involving the assessment and taxation of real property originally decided by the
provincial or city board of assessment appeals via Petition for Review under Rule 43.
 Exclusive Appellate Jurisdiction to Review by Appeal from Secretary of Finance
 Decisions of the Commissioner of Customs which are adverse to the government under
Rule 42
 Exclusive Appellate Jurisdiction to Review by Appeal from Secretary of Trade and Industry and
the Secretary of Agriculture
 Secretary of Trade and Industry in the case of non-agricultural product, commodity or
article and Secretary of Agriculture in the case of agricultural product, commodity or
article, involving dumping duties and countervailing duties either party may appeal the
decision to impose or not to impose said duties (via Petition for Review under Rule 42)

 A party adversely affected by a resolution of a division of the CTA on a MR or new trial, may file a
petition for review with the CTA en banc.
 A party adversely affected by a decision or ruling of the CTA en banc may file with the SC a verified
petition for review on certiorari pursuant to Rule 45
 The power of the CTA includes that of determining whether or not there has been grave abuse of
discretion amounting to or lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of the RTC issuing an interlocutory
order in local tax cases within the exclusive appellate jurisdiction of the tax court

4. Sandiganbayan
 Exclusive Original
 Criminal Cases –
A. Violation of RA 3019 (Graft) and RA 1379 (Bribery), where one or more of the accused
are officials occupying the following positions in the government, permanent, acting or
interim capacity, at the time of the commission of the offense
1. Officials of the executive branch occupying the positions of RD or Grade 27 and
higher, including:
a. Provincial and City elected officials, including treasures, assessors,
engineers and department heads
b. Consul and Higher
c. AFP Col., Naval Cpt, and higher rank
d. PNP PD holding Senior Superintendent and higher;
e. Ombudsman, City and provincial prosecutors, assistants and officials.
f. Presidents, directors or trustees, or managers (GOCCs, SU, Educational
Institutions)
2. Members of Congress and officials thereof classified as Grade ‘27’ and higher;
3. Members of the judiciary without prejudice to the provisions of the Constitution;
4. Chairmen and members of the Constitutional Commissions;
5. All other national and local officials classified as Grade ‘27’ and higher
 B. Offenses or felonies whether simple or complexed with other crimes committed by the
public officials and employees mentioned in subsection (a) of this section in relation to
their office
C. Civil and criminal cases filed pursuant to and in connection with Executive Order Nos. 1,
2, 14 and 14-A

Note: RTC shall have exclusive original jurisdiction where the information:
a. Does not allege any damage to the government or any bribery; or
b. Alleges damage to the government or bribery does not exceed P1M.

Exclusive original jurisdiction thereof shall be vested in the proper RTC, MeTC, MTC and
MCTC, as the case may be, in cases where none of the accused are occupying positions
corresponding to Salary Grade ‘27’ or higher, or military and PNP officers mentioned
above.

 Appellate – Original and appellate jurisdiction decisions of RTC

 Concurrent with SC – mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, injunctions and ancillary writs in aid of
its appellate jurisdiction, quo warranto arising or that may arise in cases under EO 1, 2, 14, 14-A.
 Concurrent with SC, CA and RTC – Writ of Amparo and Habeas Data

5. Regional Trial Courts

 Exclusive Original
 Civil Cases
1. Subject of the litigation is incapable of pecuniary estimation;
2. Involve the title to, or possession of, real property, or any interest therein (assessed
value exceeds P 400,000);
3. Admiralty, Maritime jurisdiction, Probate, Money Claims (Exclusive of interests)
(exceeds P2M);
4. Actions involving the contract of marriage and marital relations
5. Cases not within the exclusive jurisdiction of any court, tribunal, person or body
exercising jurisdiction of any court, tribunal, person or body exercising judicial or
quasi-judicial functions;
6. Civil actions and special proceedings falling within the exclusive original jurisdiction of
a Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court and of the Court of Agrarian Relations;
 Criminal Cases
1. Not within exclusive jurisdiction of any court, tribunal or body:
a. penalty provided by law exceeds 6 years imprisonment irrespective of the fine
b. not falling within the exclusive original jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan,
imposable penalty is imprisonment more than 6 years and none of the
accused is occupying positions classified as “Grade 27” and higher
2. Only penalty provided by law is a fine exceeding P 4,000;
3. Laws which specifically lodge jurisdiction in the RTC:
a. Written defamation or libel;
b. Intellectual Property
c. RA 9165, except when the offender is under 16 and there are Juvenile and
Domestic Relations Court in the province
4. Cases falling under the Family Courts in areas where there are no Family Courts
5. Election offenses, even if committed by an official with salary grade of 27 or higher
6. Cases cognizable by the Sandiganbayan, where the information
 a. Does not allege any damage to the government or any bribery
b. Allegation of damage does not exceed P1M
 Appellate –
GR: All cases decided by lower courts in their respective territorial jurisdictions;
XPN: Decisions of lower courts in the exercise of delegated jurisdiction.

 Concurrent with SC, SB and CA

 Civil Cases – Writ of Amparo and Habeas Data
 Criminal Cases - Writ of Amparo and Habeas Data
 Concurrent with SC – Civil Cases - Affecting ambassadors and other public ministers and consuls
 Concurrent with SC and CA – Civil Cases – Certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, Habeas Corpus
and Quo Warranto.
 Concurrent with MTC - Enforcement or violations of environmental and other related laws, rules
and regulations
 Special Jurisdiction - Supreme Court may designate certain branches of RTC to try exclusively:
1. Criminal cases;
2. Juvenile and domestic relations cases;
3. Agrarian cases;
4. Urban land reform cases not falling within the jurisdiction of any quasi-judicial body;
5. Other special cases
 Exclusive Concurrent with the Insurance Commissioner - Single claim not exceeding 5M.

 Test to determine whether an action is capable of pecuniary estimation - If it is primarily for the
recovery of a sum of money, the claim is considered capable of pecuniary estimation
 Incapable of pecuniary estimation - money claim is purely incidental to, or a consequence of, the
principal relief sought like specific performance suits and in actions for support, or for annulment
of a judgment or foreclosure of mortgage, rescission or reformation of contracts, Interpretation
of a contractual stipulation
 Intra-corporate Controversies that are within the jurisdiction of the Special Commercial Courts
1. Any act of, the board of directors, business associates, officers or partners, amounting to
fraud or misrepresentation which may be detrimental to the interest of the public and/or
of the stockholders, partners, or members of any corporation, partnership, or
association;
2. Controversies arising out of intra-corporate, partnership, or association relations,
between and among stockholders, members, or associates; and between, any or all of
them and the corporation, partnership, or association of which they are stockholders,
members, or associates, respectively;
3. Controversies in the election or appointment of directors, trustees, officers, or managers
of corporations, partnerships, or associations;
4. Derivative suits; and
5. Inspection of corporate books

6. Family Courts
 Exclusive Original
 Civil Cases
1. Guardianship, custody of children, habeas corpus in relation to minor;
2. Adoption of children and its revocation;
 3. Annulment and declaration of nullity of marriage and those relating to marital status
and property relations of spouses or those living together under different status and
agreements, dissolution of conjugal partnership of gains;
4. Support and/or acknowledgment;
5. Summary judicial proceedings under FC;
6. Declaration of status of children as abandoned, dependent or neglected children,
petitions for voluntary or involuntary commitment of children, the suspension,
termination, or restoration of parental authority and other cases cognizable under
P.D. No. 603, E.O. No. 56
7. Constitution of the family home.
 Criminal Cases
1. One or more of the accused is/are below 18 years of age but not less than 9 years of
age;
2. One or more of the victims is a minor at the time of the commission of the offense;
3. Cases against minors cognizable under the Dangerous Drugs Act;
4. Violations of R.A. No. 7610
5. Domestic violence against women and children
 Exclusive concurrent with the CA and SC - Guardianship, custody of children, habeas corpus in
relation to the latter.

 Handling of records of child and family cases - utmost confidentiality and shall not be divulged
unless necessary and with imprimatur of the judge.
 FC have authority and jurisdiction to resolve the constitutionality of a statute - RTC remains to
possess the authority as a court of general original jurisdiction to pass upon all kinds of cases
whether civil, criminal, special proceedings, land registration, guardianship, naturalization,
admiralty or insolvency.

7. Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts in cities, and Municipal
Circuit Trial Courts (Republic Act No. (RA) 11576, An Act Further Expanding the Jurisdiction of First-
Level Courts)
 Exclusive Original
 Civil Cases
1. Personal property, money claims, Probate, Admiralty, Maritime (Does not exceed
P2M)
2. Cases involving title to or possession of real property or any interest therein where
the value or amount does not exceed P 400,000
3. Inclusion and exclusion of voters;
4. Covered by Rules on Summary Procedure;
5. Forcible entry and unlawful detainer;
6. Small Claims does not exceed P1M
 Criminal Cases
1. Punishable with imprisonment not exceeding 6 years;
2. Damage to property through criminal negligence where the imposable fine does not
exceed P150K;
3. Only penalty provided by law is a fine not exceeding P4,000;
4. Rules on Summary Procedure: Traffic Laws, Rental Law, Municipal or City Ordinance,
BP 22, and Penalty is imprisonment not exceeding 6 months and/or fine of P1K
5. Offenses committed by public officers and employees in relation to their office,
including government-owned or – controlled corporations, and by private individuals
 charged as co-principals, accomplices or accessories, punishable with imprisonment
not more than 6 years or where none of the accused holds a position classified as
“Grade 27” and higher
 Delegated – Civil Cases only - Cadastral or land registration cases covering lots where:
1. No controversy or opposition;
2. Contested, but the value does not exceed P100,000 (ascertained by the affidavit or
agreement)
 Special
 Civil Cases – Petition for habeas corpus in the absence of all RTC judges in the province or
city.
 Criminal Cases - Application for bail in the absence of all RTC judges in the province or city
 Concurrent with RTC – Civil Cases - Enforcement or violations of environmental and other
related laws, rules and regulations

 Doctrines:
1. Jurisdiction is determined by the allegations contained in the complaint
2. Rules allow provisional determination of ownership in ejectment cases when the
defendant raises the defense of ownership in his pleadings and the question of possession
cannot be resolved without deciding the issue of ownership
3. Forcible entry and unlawful detainer cases are within the exclusive original jurisdiction of
the first level courts. Moreover, all cases decided by the first level courts are generally
appealable to the RTC irrespective of the amounts involved

D. Aspects of Jurisdiction (P-Su-I-P-R)

1. Parties;
2. Subject matter;
3. Issues;
4. Res or Property in litigation; and
5. Remedies

1. Jurisdiction over the Subject-Matter - Power to hear and determine cases of the general class to which
the proceedings in question belong
 GR: Cannot be waived, enlarged or diminished by stipulation of the parties.
 XPN: Estoppel by laches, failure to object to the jurisdiction of the court for a long period of time and
by invoking its jurisdiction in obtaining affirmative relief.
o Failed to invoke the ground of lack of jurisdiction despite having full knowledge of this
ground
o Sought affirmative relief
o Were also able to file an appeal and Motion for Reconsideration before the CA
o Yet, even before the CA, the ground for lack of jurisdiction was never invoked

2. Jurisdiction Over the Parties - The legal power of the court to render a personal judgment against a party
to an action or proceeding.
 Plaintiff – acquired when the action is commenced by the filing of complaint, payment of docket fees.
 Defendant – (1) Voluntary appearance in court and his submission to authority (UNLESS: APPEARANCE
IS MADE PRECISELY TO OBJECT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE COURT OVER THE PERSON,
CHALLENGES JURISDICTION OF THE COURT ON GROUND OF INVALID SERVICE OF SUMMONS) and (2)
 valid service of summons (Not essential in actions in rem or quasi in rem as long as court acquires has
jurisdiction over the res).
 Filing of Pleadings seeking Affirmative Reliefs constitutes Voluntary Appearance
GR: Seeking affirmative relief constitutes voluntary appearance, and the consequent submission of
one’s person to the jurisdiction of the court
XPNs: Pleadings whose prayer is precisely for the avoidance of the jurisdiction of the court, which only
leads to a special appearance
1. Civil cases, motions to dismiss on the ground of lack of jurisdiction over the person of the
defendant
2. Criminal cases, (1) Motions to quash an Information on the ground of lack of jurisdiction over
the person of the accused and (2) Motion to quash a warrant of arrest

3. Jurisdiction Over the Issues

 GR: Conferred and determined by the pleadings of the parties that present the issues to be tried and
determined whether or not the issues are of fact or of law
 XPNs:
1. Stipulation of the parties, Pre-trial - stipulations of facts and documents or enter into an
agreement simplifying the issues of the case
2. Express or implied consent of the parties, issues not raised by the pleadings are tried

It is proper for the court to render judgment on the pleadings if the answer fails to tender an
issue, except in actions for declaration of nullity of annulment of marriage or legal separation

 Jurisdiction is not affected by the pleas or the theories set up by the defendant in an answer to the
complaint or a motion to dismiss the same.

4. Jurisdiction Over the Res or the Property in Litigation

 Refers to the court’s jurisdiction over the thing or property which is the subject of the action.
 Acquired either by:
1. Actual or constructive seizure of the property under legal process (Custodia Legis)
2. Result of the institution of legal proceedings, power of the court is recognized and made
effective.
 Action in rem or quasi in rem - jurisdiction over the person of the defendant is not required, summons
only served to satisfy requirements of due process.
 Action in personam converted to quasi in rem - where jurisdiction over the person of a defendant
cannot be acquired, preliminary seizure is to be considered necessary in order to confer jurisdiction
upon the court. The lien on the property is acquired by the seizure; and the purpose of the proceedings
is to subject the property to that lien.

E. Jurisdiction vs. Exercise of Jurisdiction

 Jurisdiction - Authority to hear and decide cases, does not depend upon the regularity of the exercise of
that power or upon the rightfulness of the decision made.
 Exercise of Jurisdiction - Any act of the court pursuant to such authority, includes making decisions. If there
is jurisdiction over the person and subject matter, the resolution of all other questions arising in the case is
but an exercise of jurisdiction

F. Jurisdiction vs. Venue

 Venue
 GR: Not a ground for a motu proprio dismissal
 XPN: In cases subject to summary procedure.
  place or geographical area where an action is to be filed and tried
 Can only be objected to before the other party files a responsive pleading (answer).
 Waivable: Failure to object through a motion to dismiss or through an affirmative defense; or
Stipulation of the parties
 Matter of procedural law
 May be stipulated by the parties
 Establishes a relation between the plaintiff and defendant
 Jurisdiction
 Ground for a motu proprio dismissal in case of lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter
 Power of the court to hear and decide a case
 Can be brought up at any stage of the proceedings
 Cannot be waived.
 Matter of substantive law.
 Cannot be the subject of the agreement of the parties
 Establishes a relation between the court and the subject matter

G. Jurisdiction Over Cases Covered by Barangay Conciliation, and Cases Covered by the Rules on Expedited
Procedures in the First Level Courts (Administrative Matter (A.M.) No. 08-8-7-SC, as amended, approved on
March 1, 2022)
 KATARUNGANG PAMBARANGAY LAW
 Effect an amicable settlement of disputes among family and barangay members at the barangay level
 Where to file:
 Residents of the same barangay: the dispute must be brought for settlement in the said barangay
 Residents of different but adjoining barangays and the parties agree to submit their differences to
amicable settlement: within the same city or municipality where any of the respondents reside at
the election of the complainant
 Involving real property or any interest when the parties thereto agree to submit their differences to
amicable settlement by an appropriate lupon therein shall be brought in the barangay where the
real property or larger portion thereof is situated;
 Arising at the workplace where the contending parties are employed or at the institution where
such parties are enrolled for study shall be brought in the barangay where such workplace or
institution is located
 Civil Cases covered
 All disputes involving parties who actually reside in the same city or municipality may be the subject
of the proceedings for amicable settlement in the barangay
 Requirement of undergoing barangay conciliation proceedings applies only to cases involving natural
persons, and not where any of the parties is a juridical person such as a corporation, partnership,
corporation sole, testate or intestate estate
 If the only contending party is the government or its instrumentality or subdivision the case is
exempted from the requirement of barangay conciliation proceedings but when it (government or
its instrumentality or subdivision) is only one of the contending parties, a confrontation should still
be undertaken among the other parties.
 Note: Barangay conciliation process is not a jurisdictional requirement, so that non-compliance
therewith cannot affect the jurisdiction which the court has otherwise acquired over the subject
matter or over the person of the defendant. Such defense shall be raised in the answer, otherwise,
such objection will be deemed waived.
 Criminal Cases Covered - punishable by imprisonment of not more than 1 year or fine of not more than
P 5,000
 Cases not covered by Barangay Conciliation:
  Where one party is the government or any subdivision or instrumentality thereof;
 Where one party is a public officer or employee, and the dispute relates to the performance of his
official functions;
 Offenses punishable by imprisonment exceeding one (1) year or a fine exceeding P 5,000.00;
 Dispute involves real properties located in different cities or municipalities unless the parties thereto
agree to submit their differences to amicable settlement by an appropriate lupon;
 Parties who actually reside in barangays of different cities or municipalities, except where such
barangay units adjoin each other and the parties thereto agree to submit their differences to
amicable settlement by an appropriate lupon;
 Other classes of disputes which the President may determine in the interest of justice or upon the
recommendation of the Secretary of Justice
 Any complaint by or against corporations, partnerships, or juridical entities,
 Urgent legal action is necessary to prevent injustice from being committed or further continued:
a. Criminal case where the accused is under police custody or detention
b. Petition for habeas corpus by a person illegally detained or deprived of his liberty or one
acting on his behalf
c. Actions coupled with provisional remedies, such as preliminary injunction, attachment,
replevin, and support pendent lite
d. Where the action may be barred by the Statute of Limitations.
 Labor disputes or controversies arising from employer-employee relationship;
 Dispute arises from the CARL
 Actions to annul judgment upon a compromise
 RULE ON SMALL CLAIMS CASES
 Provide a simpler and more inexpensive and expeditious means of settling disputes involving purely
money claims than the regular civil process
 Where to file: MeTC, MTCC, MTC, and MCTC
 Civil Cases Covered - Purely civil in nature, reimbursement of sum of money does not exceed P1M
 For money owed under any of the following: Contract of Lease, Loan, Services, Mortgage
 Liquidated damages arising from contracts
 Enforcement of a barangay amicable settlement or an arbitration award involving a money claim
 Amendments:
 Recovery of personal property, subject of a compromise agreement between the parties,
enforcement of barangay amicable settlement and arbitration awards does not exceed P1M,
provided no execution has been made within 6 months from date of settlement or when obligation
becomes due and demandable.
 Joinder of two or more separate small claims against a defendant is allowed, provided that the total
amount claimed does not exceed P1M
 More than five (5) claims are filed by one party within the calendar year, additional filing fee of Five
Hundred Pesos (PHP500.00) shall be paid for every claim filed after the fifth (5th) claim, Six Hundred
Pesos (PHP600.00) for every claim filed after the tenth (10th) claim, Seven Hundred Pesos
(PHP700.00) for every claim filed after the fifteenth (15th) claim, progressively and cumulatively.
 Service of summons through the plaintiff is allowed if it is returned unserved by the sheriff or proper
court officer or served outside the judicial region of the court where the case is pending. If the
plaintiff misrepresents that the defendant was served, the case shall be dismissed with prejudice
and the plaintiff shall be declared in indirect contempt and/ or be meted a fine of Five Thousand
Pesos (PHP5,000.00).
 Hearing will still be held in one (1) day, with the judgment to be rendered strictly within twenty-four
(24) hours from its termination. Conduct of videoconferencing hearings using Microsoft Teams for
both summary proceedings and small claims cases is allowed at any stage of the proceedings. If
 warranted, the first level courts may also make use of alternative platforms or instant messaging
applications with video call features for their videoconferencing hearings.

 RULES ON SUMMARY PROCEDURE

 Achieve an expeditious and inexpensive determination of the cases
 Where to File: MeTC; MTCC; MTC; and MCTC
 Civil Cases covered
 Forcible entry and unlawful detainer cases, regardless of the amount to be recovered. Attorney’s
fees, if awarded, shall not exceed One Hundred Thousand Pesos (PHP100,000.00);
 All civil actions where the claim does not exceed P2M. EXCEPT: Probate, Maritime, Small Claims
 Complaints for damages where the claims do not exceed P2M;
 Enforcement of barangay amicable settlement agreements and arbitration award where the money
claim exceeds P1M, provided that no execution has been enforced within six (6) months from the
settlement date or receipt of award or the date when the obligation becomes due and demandable;
 Cases solely for the revival of judgment of any first level court;
 BP 22 cases, if no criminal action has been instituted
 Criminal Cases Covered
 Violations of traffic laws, rules and regulations;
 rental law;
 municipal or city ordinances;
 Violations of B.P. 22 or the Bouncing Checks Law
 Penalty is imprisonment not exceeding 1 year and/or a fine of P50,000 irrespective of other
penalties or civil liabilities arising therefrom; and
 Appeals: RTC under Rule 40; Rule 122 for Criminal Cases. Judgment of the RTC on appeal shall be
final, executory and unappealable.
 Doctrines:
1. Rules on Expedited Procedure shall not apply to civil cases where the plaintiff’s cause of action is
pleaded in the same complaint with another cause of action subject to the regular procedure; nor
to criminal cases where the offense charged is necessarily related to another criminal case subject
to the regular procedure.
2. Regular procedure prescribed in the ROC shall apply to the cases covered by the Rules on Expedited
Procedures where no specific provision is found therein. It shall also apply in a suppletory manner
even if there is a specific provision found but only insofar as not inconsistent. In case of
inconsistency, the Rules on Expedited Procedures shall prevail.
3. It is the duty of the parties and their counsel to appear at the preliminary conference, court-
annexed mediation and judicial dispute resolution. Non-appearance of a party may be excused only
for Acts of God, force majeure or duly substantial physical inability.
4. Failure of the plaintiff or counsel to appear at the preliminary conference shall be cause for the
dismissal of the complaint. Defendant who appears in the absence of the plaintiff shall be entitled
to judgment on the counterclaim.
5. Failure of the sole defendant and or his counsel to appear shall be cause for the plaintiff to be
entitled to judgment as warranted by the facts alleged in the complaint and its attachments. shall
not apply where one of two or more defendants sued under a common cause of action and had a
pleaded a common defense, shall appear at the preliminary conference.
  Defendant’s failure to answer within the reglementary period, court motu proprio or upon motion of the
plaintiff, shall render judgment as may be warranted by the facts alleged in the complaint and its
attachments, limited to what is prayed for therein
 Parties shall file with the court and serve on the adverse party in such a way to ensure receipt, at least (3)
calendar days before the scheduled preliminary conference, their preliminary conference briefs.
 Trial is not conducted in civil cases covered by the Rules on Expedited Procedure. Within (30) calendar
days from receipt by the court of the mediator’s report or the JDR Report on the parties’ failure to reach an
amicable settlement, the court shall render judgement. Within (30) calendar days from receipt by the court
of the mediator’s report or the JDR Report on the parties’ failure to reach an amicable settlement, the court
shall render judgement
 Trial is conducted in criminal cases covered by the Rules on Expedited Procedure. Both the prosecution
and defense have sixty (60) calendar days to complete their respective presentation. Court shall render and
promulgate judgment not later than (30) calendar days from the court’s action on the last presenting party’s
offer of evidence.
 The Trial Court shall not issue warrant for the arrest of the accused in criminal cases governed by the
Rules on Summary Procedure except for failure to appear despite notice whenever required by the court.
 Remedy of a party in case of an unfavorable decision or order rendered by the first level court in summary
procedure cases. Appeal to the appropriate RTC under Rule 40 of the Rules of Court for civil cases and Rule
122 of the Rule of Court for criminal cases. Taken within 15 days by filing a notice of appeal and payment of
docket fees.
 No attorney shall appear in behalf of or represent a party at the hearing, unless the attorney is the plaintiff
or defendant.

III. Civil Procedure (A.M. No. 19-10-20-SC)

A. General Provisions
 These Rules shall govern the procedure to be observed in actions, civil or criminal, and special proceedings.
1. A civil action - one by which a party sues another for the enforcement or protection of a right, or
the prevention or redress of a wrong.
2. A criminal action - one by which the State prosecutes a person for an act or omission punishable by
law.
3. A special proceeding - a remedy by which a party seeks to establish a status, a right, or a particular
fact.
 Shall not apply to election cases, land registration, cadastral, naturalization and insolvency proceedings, and
other cases not herein provided for, except by analogy or in a suppletory character and whenever
practicable and convenient.
 Action is commenced by the filing of the original complaint in court by personal service, by registered mail,
by accredited courier, by electronic mail or other electronic means as may be authorized by the Court (and
the payment of the prescribed docket fee that vests a trial court with jurisdiction.)
 Civil Action vs. Special Proceedings - Civil action, a party sues another for the enforcement or protection of
a right, which the party claims he/she is entitled to, such as when a party-litigant seeks to recover property
from another. Special proceeding, a party merely seeks to have a right established in his/her favor. Unlike a
civil action which has a definite adverse party, a special proceeding has no definite adverse party. Further,
requirements regarding jurisdiction in order for said proceedings and judgements to be wholly valid

B. Kinds of Action
 Real Action
 Scope: Title to or possession of real property, or interest therein.
 Basis: Founded upon the privity of real estate. Realty or interest therein is the subject matter of the action.
Matter in litigation must also involve any of the following issues: (a) Title; (b) Ownership; (c) Possession;
Condemnation, (d) Foreclosure of mortgage; and (e) Any interest in real property.
  Venue: A real action is “local”, venue depends upon the location of the property involved in the litigation.
Venue of action shall be commenced and tried in the proper court which has jurisdiction over the area
wherein the real property involved, or a portion thereof is situated.
 Personal Action
 Scope: Recovery of personal property, the enforcement of a contract or the recovery of damages.
 Basis: Founded on privity of contract such as damages, claims of money, etc.
 Venue: Transitory, place where the plaintiff or any of the principal plaintiffs resides, or where the
defendant or any of the principal defendants resides, or in the case of a non-resident defendant where he
may be found, at the election of the plaintiff.
 Importance of distinction between real and personal actions is to determine VENUE OF ACTIONS.
 An action to cancel mortgage is a personal action. “No transfer or disposition of real property rights occurs
when an action to cancel a mortgage is granted or denied.”,
 An action to foreclose a mortgage is a real action. “a foreclosure of a mortgage where property rights are
clearly transferred or affected depending on the ruling of the court.”
 Mortgage contract merely involves the right to foreclose upon such real property.

1. In Rem
 An action against the thing itself, which is binding against the whole world
 A proceeding to bar indifferently all who might be minded to make any objection against the
right sought to be enforced.
 Jurisdiction over the person of the defendant is not required.
 Jurisdiction over the res is acquired either (1) by the seizure of the property under legal process;
or (2) as a result of the institution of legal proceedings.
 Examples of actions in rem: petitions directed against the “thing” itself or the res which
concerns the status of a person, like a petition for adoption, correction of entries in the birth
certificate, or annulment of marriage; nullity of marriage; petition to establish illegitimate
filiation; registration of land under the Torrens system; and forfeiture proceedings.

2. In Personam
 A proceeding to enforce personal rights and obligations brought against the person and is based
on the jurisdiction of the person.
 Directed against particular persons
 Involve his right to, or the exercise of ownership of, specific property, or seek to compel him to
control or dispose of it in accordance with the mandate of the court.
 Impose, thru the judgement of a court, some responsibility or liability directly upon the person of
the defendant.
 To compel a defendant to specifically perform some act or actions to fasten a pecuniary liability
on him.
 Jurisdiction over the person of the defendant is required.
 Judgement is binding only upon the parties impleaded or their successors-in- interest, but not
upon strangers.
 Examples of actions in personam: action for collection of sum of money and damages; action for
unlawful detainer or forcible entry; action for specific performance; action to enforce a foreign
judgement in a complaint for breach of contract.

3. Quasi In Rem
 Deal with the status, ownership or liability of a particular property but are intended to operate
these questions only as between the particular parties to the proceedings and not to ascertain or
cut-off the rights or interests of all possible claimants.
  An individual is named as a defendant and the purpose of the proceeding is to subject his
interests therein to the obligation or loan burdening the property.
 Directed against particular persons with respect to the res
 Jurisdiction over the person of the defendant is not required as long as jurisdiction over the res is
acquired
 Summons must be served upon the defendant in order to satisfy due process requirements
 Judgement will be binding only upon the litigants, their privies, and their successors-ininterest,
but the judgement shall be executed against a particular property. The res involved will answer
for the judgement
 Examples of actions quasi in rem: suits to quiet title, actions for foreclosure, attachment
proceedings, petition and accounting,

 Kinds of actions with respect to their binding effect and why is this distinction necessary - actions
may be classified as actions in rem, quasi in rem, and in personam. This distinction is important to
determine whether or not jurisdiction over the person of the defendant is required, and to determine
the type of summons to be employed
 Importance of classification of actions: (a) law on jurisdiction; (b) rules on venue and prescription; (c)
Defenses against the action; (d) Payment of docket fee; and (e) Service of summons.

C. Cause of Action (Rule 2)

 Every ordinary civil action must be based on a cause of action
 A cause of action is the act or omission by which a party violates a right of another.
 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
 Elements: (a) A legal right in favor of the plaintiff; (b) correlative legal duty of the defendant to respect such
rights; (c) act or omission on the part of such defendant in violation of the right of the plaintiff
 Splitting of Causes of Action: A party may not institute more than one suit for a single cause of action.
 Effect of splitting a single cause of action: the filing of one or a judgment upon the merits in anyone is
available as a ground for the dismissal of the others.
 Cause of Action in Administrative case: whether the respondent has breached the norms and standards of
the office.
 Cause of action in different cases:
 Breach of contract: (a) existence of a contract and (b) breach thereof.
 Liability of employer based on the negligence of his employee: Employer’s liability is presumed.
Ceases if the employer successfully proves the diligence required of a good father of a family to
prevent damage.
 Collection of sum of money based on a promissory note: (a) Requires an allegation that a debt exists
and (b) such debt is due and demandable.
 Unlawful Detainer: (1) Initially, the possession of the property by contract with or by tolerance of the
plaintiff; (2) Eventually, such possession became illegal upon notice of the plaintiff; (3) Thereafter, the
defendant remained in possession of the property and deprived the plaintiff of the enjoyment
thereof; and (4) Within one (1) year from the last demand on defendant to vacate the property, the
plaintiff instituted the complaint for ejectment.
 Forcible Entry: (a) Prior physical possession of the property; (b) Deprivation of possession either by
force, intimidations, strategy, threat, or stealth; (c) action must be filed within one (1) year from the
time the owners or legal possessors learned of their deprivation of physical possession of the land or
building.
 Malicious Prosecution: (a) Prosecution did occur, and the defendant was himself the prosecutor or
that he instigated its commencement; (b) criminal action finally ended with an acquittal; (c) bringing
 the action, the prosecutor acted without probable cause; and (d) prosecution was impelled by legal
malice – that is, an improper or sinister move.

 Right of Action (RoA) vs. Cause of Action (CoA)

 Definition:
 Cause of action: The act or omission by which party violates the rights of another
 Right of Action: Right of a plaintiff to bring an action and to prosecute that action until final
judgement
 Requisites:
 Cause of Action: (1) existence of a legal right of the plaintiff; (2) correlative duty of the
defendant to respect one’ right; and (3) act or omission of the defendant in violation of the
plaintiff’s right.
 Right of Action: (1) good cause. (Existence of a cause of action); (2) compliance with all the
conditions precedent to the bringing of the action; and (3) Right to bring and maintain the
action must be in the person instituting it.
 Nature:
 CoA: predicated upon substantive law on quasidelicts under the NCC
 RoA: procedural in character and is the consequence of the violation of the right of the plaintiff.
 Basis:
 CoA: Based on the allegations of the plaintiff in the complaint.
 RoA: Basis is the plaintiff’s cause of action. There is no right of action where there is no cause of
action.
 Effect of Affirmative Defense:
 CoA: Not affected by affirmative defenses. (fraud, prescription, estoppel, etc)
 RoA: May be taken away by the running of the statute of limitation, estoppel or other
circumstances which do not at all affect the cause of action
 Difference:
 RoA: a remedial right belonging to some persons
o a matter of right and depends on the substantive law
 CoA: a formal statement of the operation facts that give rise to such remedial right
o a matter of statute and is governed by the law on procedure
 The right of action springs from the cause of action, but does not accrue until all the facts
which constitute the cause of action have occurred.
 In determining the sufficiency of a cause of action, the test is, whether or not, admitting hypothetically the
truth of the allegations of fact made in the complaint, the court may validly grant the relief prayed for in the
complaint. The inquiry is confined to the four corners of the complaint, and no other.
 Failure to State a Cause of Action vs. Lack of Cause of Action
 Definition:
 FSCA: Insufficiency of allegation in the pleading
 LCA: Where the evidence does not sustain the cause of action.
 How Interposed:
 FSCA: Raised as an affirmative defense in the defendant’s answer
 LCA: Raised in a demurrer to evidence under Rule 33 after the plaintiff has rested his case
 Determination:
 FSCA: Determined only from the allegations of the pleading and not from evidentiary matters.
 LCA: Resolved only on the basis of the evidence he presented in support of his claim.
  When made:
 FSCA: made at the earliest stages from an action
 LCA: after questions of fact have been resolved on the basis of stipulations, admissions, or
evidence presented.

 Whether dismissal amounts to res judicata:

 FSCA: No, dismissal due to the failure to state a cause of action does not constitute res judicata.
Does not bar re-filing of the complaint.
 LCA: Yes, because dismissal on the ground of lack of cause of action is a decision on the merits
 Lack of cause of action does not affect the imprimatur of a court to hear and decide a given case, if the court
has jurisdiction over its subject matter, over the parties therein, and, in an action in rem, over the res.
 Failure to state a cause of action is not among the grounds that may be raised in a motion to dismiss. It may
instead be raised as an affirmative defense in the answer.
 Remedy to dismiss a complaint based on lack of cause of action: A motion to dismiss under Rule 33 is in
the nature of a demurrer to evidence and is filed after the plaintiff has rested its case.
 Splitting of causes of causes of action: Act of dividing a single or indivisible cause of action into several parts
or claims and bringing several actions thereon. Applies not only to complaints but also to counterclaims and
cross-claims, is discouraged.
 Test to ascertain whether two suits relate to a single or common cause of action are as follows:
1. Same evidence test - Whether the same evidence would support and sustain both the first and
second causes of action;
2. Whether the defense in one case may be used to substantiate the complaint in the other
3. Whether the cause of action in the second case existed at the time of the filing of the first
complaint.
 The rule against splitting of causes of action: Based upon principles of public policy and of equity to prevent
the inconvenience and hardship incident to repeated and unnecessary litigation
 Remedies against splitting cause of action: Motion to dismiss on (a) Litis pendentia - there is another action
pending between the same parties for the same cause; or (b) Res judicata - if the first action has already
been terminated - the cause of action is barred by prior judgement or by the statute of limitations.
 Petitioner is merely invoking different grounds for the same cause of action. In both cases, petitioner has
the same cause of action – the declaration of nullity of his marriage to respondent. What differs is the
ground upon which the cause of action is predicated. These grounds essentially splits the various aspects of
the pivotal issue that holds the key to the resolution of this controversy, that is the actual status of
petitioner and respondent’s marriage.
A plaintiff is mandated to place in issue in his pleadings, all the issues existing when the suit began. Plaintiff
is bound to set forth in his first action every ground for relief which he claims to exist and upon which he
relied, and cannot be permitted to rely upon them by piecemeal in successive action to recover for the same
wrong or injury
 If two or more suits are instituted on the basis of the same cause of action, the filing of one is available as a
ground for the dismissal of the others. Here, a civil action for collection of debt and an action to foreclose
mortgage are both founded on the debtor’s indebtedness to the creditor. Both demands arise from the
same cause, the non-payment of the debt, and, for that reason, they constitute a single cause of action.
 Joinder of Causes of Action: It is the assertion of as many causes of action a party may have against another
in one pleading alone. It is the process of uniting two or more demands or rights of action in one action.
 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.
 A party may in one pleading assert, in the alternative or otherwise, as many causes of action as he may have
against an opposing party, subject to the following conditions:
a. comply with the rules on joinder of parties;
 b. shall not include special civil actions or actions governed by special rules;
c. Where the causes of action are between the same parties but pertain to different venues or
jurisdictions, the joinder may be allowed in the Regional Trial Court provided one of the causes of
action falls within the jurisdiction of said court and the venue lies therein
d. claims in all the causes of action are principally for recovery of money, the aggregate amount
claimed shall be the test of jurisdiction.
 Purpose of allowing joinder of causes of action: (1) to avoid multiplicity of suits where the same parties and
subject matter are to be dealt with by effecting in one action a complete determination of all matters in
controversy and litigation between the parties involving one subject matter, and (2) to expedite the
disposition of litigation at minimum cost.

 Permissive joinder of parties: All persons in whom or against whom any right to relief in respect to or
arising out of the same transaction or series of transactions is alleged to exist, whether jointly, severally, or
in the alternative, may join as plaintiffs or be joined as defendants in one complaint where any question of
law or fact are common to all such plaintiffs or to all such defendants may arise in the action. But the court
may make such orders as may be just to prevent any plaintiff or defendant from being embarrassed or put
to expense in connection with any proceedings in which he may have no interest.
1. Party shall comply with the rules on joinder of parties;
a. Right to relief exists in favor of or against several persons;
b. Arises out of the same transaction or series of transaction; and
c. common question of law or fact
2. joinder shall not include special civil actions governed by special rules;

Illustration: a special civil action for partition governed by Rule 69 of the ROC cannot be joined in an
ordinary civil action for rescission which is governed by the ordinary rule of civil procedure. In like
manner, an action for collection of sum of money may not be properly joined with an action for
ejectment.

The former is an ordinary civil action requiring a full-blown trial, while an action for unlawful
detainer is a special civil action which requires summary procedure

3. Where the causes of action are between the same parties but pertain to different venues or
jurisdiction, 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
4. Totality Test- Where claims in all causes of action are principally for recovery of money, the
aggregate amount claimed shall be the test for jurisdiction.

Note: “where there are several claims or causes of action between the same or different parties,
embodied in the same complaint, the amount of the demand shall be the totality of the claims in all
the causes of action, irrespective of whether the causes of action arouse out of the same or
different transactions.” (The totality or the aggregate amount contemplates the amount itself
without including exemplary, moral, and other type of damages that may be awarded by the court.)
 Joinder of claims in small claims cases: plaintiff may join, in a single statement of claim, one or more
separate small claims against a defendant provided that the total amount claimed, exclusive of interest and
costs, does not exceed P1M.
 Misjoinder of causes of action: Not a ground for dismissal of an action. May be severed and proceeded with
separately upon motion of a party or on the initiative of the court. However, if the plaintiff refuses to sever
the misjoined cause of action, the complaint may be dismissed for failure to comply with a lawful order of
the court, and not for the misjoined cause of action per se.
 If there is no objection to the improper joinder or the court did not motu proprio direct a severance, the
court may simultaneously adjudicate the erroneously joined causes of action, provided it has jurisdiction
over all causes of action.
 If the court trying the case has no jurisdiction over a misjoined cause of action, then such misjoined cause of
action has to be severed, any adjudication rendered by the court with respect to the same would be a
nullity.
 Splitting of cause of action vs. Joinder of causes of action
 Splitting of cause of action:
 Practice of dividing one cause of action into different parts and making each part the subject of
a separate complaint
 Prohibited. A party may not institute more than one suit for a single cause of action.
 Causes multiplicity of suits and double vexation on the part of the defendant
 The filing of one (litis pendentia) or a judgement upon the merits in any one (res judicata) is
available as a ground for the dismissal of the others
 Joinder of causes of action:
 Assertion of as many causes of action as a party may have against another in one pleading
alone.
 Encourage. No sanction against non-joinder of separate causes of action since a plaintiff needs
only a single cause of action to maintain an action.
 It minimizes multiplicity of suits and inconvenience on the parties.
 No adverse effect on the action.

D. Parties to Civil Actions (Rule 3)

 Only natural or juridical persons or entities authorized by law may be parties in a civil action.
 Juridical persons: (a) State and its political subdivisions; (b) Other corporations, institutions and entities for
public interest or purpose, created by law; their personality begins as soon as they have constituted
according to law; and (c) Corporations, partnerships and associations for private interest or purpose to
which the law grants a juridical personality, separate and distinct from that of each shareholder, partner or
member.
 Entities authorized by law to be a party in a civil action: (a) estate of a deceased person; (b) Legitimate
labor organization; and (c) Dissolved corporation provided that suits occur within 3 years after its dissolution
and the suits are in connection with the closure of its affairs
 Action if the party impleaded is not authorized to be a party: Raise as an affirmative defense based on the
ff grounds: (a) Plaintiff not authorized – the ground that “the plaintiff has no legal capacity to sue.”; and
(b) Defendant not authorized – the ground that the “pleading asserting a claim states no cause of action.”
 Lack of legal capacity to sue vs. Lack of legal personality to sue
 Lack of legal capacity to sue:
o Refers to the plaintiff’s general disability to sue such as on account of minority, insanity,
incompetence, lack of jurisdiction personality, or any other general disqualifications of a party.
o Remedy: File an answer and raise an affirmative defense lack of capacity to sue
 Lack of legal personality to sue
o The plaintiff is not the real party in interest.
o Remedy: File an answer and raise an affirmative defense that the complaint states not cause of
action.
 Effect if a suit is not brought by a person authorized to be a party in a civil action: Petition or complaint is
susceptible to dismissal for lack of legal capacity to sue. The defendant may allege that the plaintiff in has no
legal capacity to sue as an affirmative defense in his answer.
 Rules with regard to the right of a foreign corporation to bring suit in Philippine courts:
 Does business in the PH
 o W/ required license - can sue before the PH courts on any transaction;
o W/O a license - cannot sue before the PH courts
 Not doing business in the PH (No license requirement) – can sue before PH courts on an isolated
transaction or on a cause of action entirely independent of any business transactions;
 W/O license to do business and is not doing business in the PH - not disqualified from filing and
prosecuting an action for unfair competition and may be sued for acts done against a person or persons
in the PH, or may be sued in PH courts;
 Does business in the PH w/o license - a PH citizen or entity which has contracted with said corporation
may be estopped from challenging the foreign corporation’s corporate personality in a suit brought
before the PH courts.
 A minor or a person alleged to be incompetent, may sue or be sued, with the assistance of his father,
mother, guardian, or if he has none, a guardian ad litem.
 Rule on spouses as parties
 GR: Husband and wife shall sue or be sued jointly, except as provided by law. (co-administrators)
 XPNs:
1. A spouse without just cause abandons the other or fails to comply with his or her obligations to
the family with respect to marital, parental or property relations;
2. A spouse of age mortgages, encumbers, alienates or otherwise disposes of his or her exclusive
property;
3. The regime of separation of property governs the property relations between spouses.

 Note: In the foregoing exceptions, the presentation of the final judgement against the guilty or
absent spouse shall be sufficient basis for the grant of the decree of judicial separation of
property.
 Despite the separation of property, one spouse may end up being sued and held answerable
for the liabilities incurred by the other spouse because – “the liability of the spouses to
creditors for family expenses, however, be solidary.”

4. Any of the ff shall be considered sufficient cause for judicial separation of property:
a. spouse of the petitioner has been sentenced to a penalty which carries with it civil
interdiction;
b. spouse of the petitioner has been judicially declared absentee;
c. loss of parental authority of the spouse of petitioner has been decreed by the court;
d. spouse of the petitioner has abandoned the latter or failed to comply with his or her
obligations to the family
e. spouse granted the power of administration in the marriage settlements has abused
that power; and
f. at the time of the petition, the spouses have been separated in fact for at least one
year and reconciliation is highly improbable
5. administration of all classes of exclusive property of either spouse may be transferred by the
court to the other spouse:
a. spouse becomes the guardian of the other;
b. spouse is judicially declared an absentee;
c. spouse is sentenced to a penalty which carries with it civil interdiction;
d. spouse becomes a fugitive from justice or is in hiding as an accused in a criminal case.
 Note: If the other spouse is not qualified by reason of incompetence, conflict of interest, or any other
just cause, the court shall appoint a suitable person to be the administrator.
 Kinds of parties in a civil action:
 a. Real parties in interest; (b) Indispensable parties; (c) Representatives as parties; (d) Necessary parties;
(e) Indigent parties; and (f) Pro-forma parties.

 Whose name must an action be prosecuted: As a general rule, every action must be prosecuted or
defendant in the name of the real party in interest. However, an action may also be prosecuted by a
representative or someone acting in a fiduciary capacity. In such case, the beneficiary shall be included in
the title of the case and is considered the real party in interest.
 An agent acting in his own name and for the benefit of an undisclosed principal may sue or be sued
without joining the principal except when the contract involves things belonging to the principal.
 Real Party in Interest: Party who stands to be: (a) Benefited or Injured by the judgment in the suit; and (b)
entitled to the avails of the suit.
 Interest must be “real,” a present substantial interest as distinguished from a mere expectancy of a
future, contingent subordinate or consequential interest.
 Interest that is material and direct, as distinguished from a mere incidental interest in the question.
 As a grandchild, Susana has no successional rights to her grandmother’s land except only by virtue of
representation. Consequently, Susana must first establish that her mother cannot inherit the land to prove
that she actually stands to be benefited or injured by the result of the judgement in the suit
 Reasons why actions should be filed under the name of the real-party-in-interest
1. prevent the prosecution of actions by persons w/o any right, title or interest in the case;
2. require that the actual party entitled to legal relief be the one to prosecute the action;
3. avoid multiplicity of suits; and
4. discourage litigation and keep it within certain bounds, pursuant to sound public policy.
 Mere failure to include the name of a party in the title of the complaint is not fatal because the ROC
requires the courts to pierce the form and go into substance and not be misled by a false or wrong name in
the pleadings. Hence, if the body indicates the defendant as a party to the action, his omission in the title
is not fatal.
 Remedy if an action is prosecuted in the name of a person who is not a real party in interest: Raise in his
answer an affirmative defense on the ground of failure to state a cause of action.
 Lack of legal capacity to sue – Disability of the plaintiff to sue, such as on account of minority, insanity,
incompetence, lack of juridical personality or any other general disqualifications of a party
 Lack of personality to sue – Latter refers to the fact that the plaintiff is not the real-party-in-interest.
 Not being one of the bidders, he clearly has no legal personality to contest the alleged rigged bidding and
grant of franchise. Every action must be prosecuted or defended in the name of the real-party-in-interest,
who stands to be benefited or injured by the judgement in the suit, or the party entitled to the avails of
the suit.
 Eden is not a stranger to the action but a “transferee pendente lite.” His interest cannot be considered and
tried separately from the interest of the named defendants as his rights were derived from them. Eden’s
interest is independent of the interest of the named defendants. There may be no need for the transferee
pendente lite to be substituted or joined in the case, because in legal contemplation, he is not really
denied protection as his interest is one and the same as his transferors, who are already parties to case.
 Doctrine of locus standi - Requires a litigant to have a material interest in the outcome of the case. Refers
to a personal and substantial interest in a case such that the party has sustained or will sustain direct
injury because of the challenged governmental act.

Since the rule is a mere procedural technicality, the Court has waived or relaxed the rule, allowing persons
who may not have been personally injured by the operation of a law or a governmental act. The court has
laid out the bare minimum norm to extend the standing to sue the “non-traditional suites” as such:
1. Taxpayers- there must be a claim of illegal disbursement of public funds, or that the tax measure is
unconstitutional;
 2. Voters – there must be a showing of obvious interest in the validity of the law in question;
3. Concerned citizens – there must be showing that the issues raised are of transcendental
importance, which must be settled early; and
4. Legislators – there must be a claim that the official action complained of infringes on their
prerogative as legislators.
 Real Party-in-Interest vs. Locus standi
 Real Party-in-Interest: A party that (a) stands to be benefited or injured from the judgment (b)
entitled to the avails of the suit.
 Interest must be real, present substantial interest, as distinguished from mere expectancy or a future,
contingent subordinate or consequential interest.
 Every action must be prosecuted in the name of the real party in interest.

 Locus Standi - Right of appearance in a court of justice on a given question.

 One who sues must show that he has sustained injury or will sustain a direct injury as a result of a
government action, or has a material interest in the issue affected by the challenged official act.
 Significant in cases involving questions of constitutionality, because it is one of the essential requisites
before such questions may be judicially entertained.
 Alternative defendants. - Where the plaintiff is uncertain against who of several persons he is entitled to
relief, he may join any or all of them as defendants in the alternative, although a right to relief against one
may be inconsistent with a right of relief against the other
 If the identity of a defendant is unknown, he may be sued as the unknown owner, heir, devisee, or by such
other designation as the case may require and the pleading must be amended when his identity is
discovered. If the plaintiff is uncertain against who of several persons he is entitled to relief, he may join any
or all of them as defendants in the alternative.
 Sole proprietorship has no juridical personality separate and distinct from the personality of the owner.
The law merely recognizes the existence of a sole proprietorship as a form of business organization
conducted for profit by a single individual and requires its proprietor or owner to secure licenses and
permits, register its business name, and pay taxes to the national government The law does not vest a
separate and legal personality on the sole proprietorship or empower it to file or defend an action in court.
The proprietorship or proprietress can be considered as real party-in-interest and has a standing to file a
case.
 Pro forma party - One who is joined as plaintiff or defendant, not because such party has any real interest in
the subject matter or because any relief is demanded, but merely because the technical rules of pleadings
require the presence of such party on the record
 Indispensable Party - Party in interest without whom no final determination can be had of an action
 One whose interest in the subject matter of the suit and the relief sought are so inextricably intertwined
with other parties that his legal presence as a party to the proceeding is an absolute necessity.
 Compulsory joinder of indispensable parties. - Parties in interest without whom no final determination can
be had of an action shall be joined either as plaintiffs or defendants.
 Joinder of indispensable parties in an action mandatory - Parties in interest w/o whom no final
determination can be had of an action shall be joined either as plaintiffs or defendants. The joinder of all
indispensable parties is a condition sine qua non for the exercise of judicial power
 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
 Test to determine whether a party is an indispensable party: (a) Can relief be afforded to the plaintiff
without the presence of the other party?; and (b) Can the case be decided on its merits without prejudicing
the rights of other party?
 Failure to implead an indispensable party not a ground for dismissal - only if the plaintiff refuses to
implead an indispensable party despite the order of the court that the court may dismiss the complaint for
the plaintiff’s failure to comply with the order.
 The mere non-joinder of an indispensable party is not a ground for the dismissal of the action.
 With regard to actions for partition requires that all persons interested in the property shall be joined as
defendants. Thus, all the co-heirs and persons having an interest in the property are indispensable parties;
as such, an action for partition will not lie without the joinder of the said parties. However, the CA erred in
ordering the dismissal of the complaint because of Santiago’s failure to implead all the indispensable parties
in his complaint. The Court definitively explained that in instances of non-joinder of indispensable parties,
the proper remedy is to implead them all and not to dismiss the case
 Necessary party - A necessary party is one who is not indispensable but who ought to be joined as a party if
complete relief is to be accorded as to those already parties, or for a complete determination or settlement
of the claim subject of the action
 Indispensable party vs. Necessary party
 Indispensable party
 without whom no final determination can be had of an action shall be joined either as plaintiffs or
defendants
 Must be joined under any and all conditions because the court cannot proceed without him or her
 No valid judgement if they are not joined.
 Necessary parties
 one who is not indispensable but who ought to be joined as a party if (a) complete relief is to be
accorded as to those already parties, or for a (b) complete determination or settlement of the claim
subject of the action
 Necessary parties should be joined whenever possible; however, the action can proceed even in
their absence because his interest is separable from that of indispensable party
 case may be determined in court but the judgement therein will not afford a complete relief in favor
of the prevailing party.
 Those who are not indispensable but ought to be joined as parties: (a) If complete relief is to be accorded
to those already parties; or (b) complete determination or settlement of the claim subject of the action.
 Whenever in any pleading in which a claim is asserted, a necessary party is not joined, the pleader shall set
forth his name, if known, and shall state why he is omitted.
 Non-joinder of necessary parties to be pleaded. - Whenever in any pleading in which a claim is asserted, a
necessary party is not joined, the pleader shall set forth his name, if known, and shall state why he is
omitted. Should the court find the reason for the omission unmeritorious, it may order the inclusion of the
omitted necessary party if jurisdiction over his person may be obtained.
 The failure to comply with the order for his inclusion, without justifiable cause, shall be deemed a waiver of
the claim against such party
 Misjoinder of parties vs. Non-joinder of parties
 Misjoinder
 made a party to an action albeit he should not be impleaded.
 If there is a claim against a party misjoined, the same may be severed and proceeded with
separately
 Non-joinder
 supposed to be joined but is not impleaded in the action.
 When a pleading, a claim is asserted a necessary party is not joined, the pleader shall set forth his
name, if known, and shall state why he is omitted. Should the court find the reason unmeritorious, it
may order the inclusion of the omitted necessary party if jurisdiction over his person may be
obtained
  Neither a ground for the dismissal of an action. Parties may be dropped or added by the court on
motion of any party or sua sponte at any stage of the action and on such terms as are just.
 However, the failure to obey the order of the court to drop or add a party is a ground for the dismissal
of the complaint based on the failure of the plaintiff to comply with a court order
 Unwilling co-plaintiff. - If the consent of any party who should be joined as plaintiff cannot be obtained, he
may be made a defendant and the reason therefor shall be stated in the complaint. (Indispensable Party)
 Representatives as parties. - Where the action is allowed to be prosecuted or defended by a representative
or someone acting in a fiduciary capacity, beneficiary shall be included in the title of the case and shall be
deemed to be the real party in interest. A representative may be (1) a trustee of an express trust, guardian,
(2) executor or administrator, or (3) a party authorized by law. An agent acting in his own name and for the
benefit of an undisclosed principal may sue or be sued without joining the principal except when the
contract involves things belonging to the principal.
 Class suit – an action where on or some of the parties may sue for the benefit of all. (1) subject matter of
the controversy is one of common or general interest to many persons (2) so numerous that it is
impracticable to join all as parties, a number of them which the court finds to be (3) sufficiently numerous
and representative as to fully protect the interests of all concerned may (4) “Representative” sues or defend
for the benefit of all. Any party in interest shall have the right to intervene to protect his individual interest
 Illustration: A civil case instituted for the cancellation of existing timber license agreements in the country
by petitioners in behalf of themselves and others who are equally concerned about the preservation of the
country’s resources is indeed a class suit. The subject matter of the complaint is of common and general
interest not just to several, but to all citizens of the Philippines
 Instances where the requisite of common interest is not present: (1) Suit brought by a non-stock
corporation to recover property of its members; (2) Recovery of damages for personal reputation (Libel);
and (3) action for recovery of real property individually held (where each of the defendants has an interest
only in the particular portion of the land he is actually occupying, and not in the portions individually
occupied by the other defendants)
 Even if the parties are numerous, there must be a community of interest for a class suit because the subject
matter of the controversy must be of common interest among all of them. 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.
 Suits against entities without juridical personality - two or more persons not organized as an entity with
juridical personality enter into a transaction
 They may be sued under the name by which they are generally or commonly known.
 Answer of such defendant, the names and addresses of the persons composing said entity must all be
revealed.
 Persons associated in an entity without juridical personality, however, cannot sue under such name,
because, as stated in the Rules, its authority to be a party is confined only to being a defendant, as is evident
from the words “they may be sued.”
 Effect of death of party litigant
 Duty of counsel. - Whenever a party to a pending action dies, and the claim is not thereby extinguished, it
shall be the duty of his counsel to inform the court within thirty (30) days after such death of the fact
thereof, and to give the name and address of his legal representative or representatives. Failure of counsel
to comply with this duty shall be a ground for disciplinary action.
 Heirs of the deceased may be allowed to be substituted for the deceased, without requiring the
appointment of an executor or administrator and the court may appoint guardian ad litem for the minor
heirs
 Court shall forthwith order said legal representative or representatives to appear and be substituted within
a period of thirty (30) days from notice.
 If no legal representative is named by the counsel for the deceased party, or if the one so named shall fail to
appear within the specified period, the court may order the opposing party, to procure the appointment of
an executor or administrator for the estate of the deceased and the latter shall immediately appear for and
on behalf of the deceased. The court charges in procuring such appointment, if defrayed by the opposing
party, may be recovered as costs.
 Duty of litigant - to inform the court of its counsel’s demise, failure to apprise the court of such fact shall be
considered negligence on the part of said party.
 Illustration: For failure of the petitioner to notify the CA of the death of its counsel of record and have said
counsel substituted, service of the CA Decision at the place or law office designated by its counsel of record
as his address, is sufficient notice. The case then became final and executory when no motion for
reconsideration or appeal was filed within the reglementary period therefor
 Effect of the death of a party upon a pending action:
 Purely personal action - extinguishes the claim and the action is dismissed;
 Not purely personal - not extinguished and the party should be substituted;
 Recovery of money arising from contract - allowed to continue until entry of judgement and shall be
enforced in the manner provided in the rules for prosecuting claims against the estate

Substitute defendant need not be summoned. Order of substitution shall be served upon the parties
substituted for the court to acquire jurisdiction over the substitute party. If there is notice of death, the
court should await the appointment of legal representative; otherwise, subsequent proceedings are
void.
 Effect of the death of a party before an action is filed - Deceased person does not have capacity to be sued
and may not be made a defendant in a case. The complaint against him should be dismissed on the ground
that the pleading asserting the claim states no cause of action. Proper remedy is to file a claim against the
estate of the deceased in a proper proceeding.
 Claims that survive vs. Claims that do not survive
 Claims/actions that survive
 Recovery of contractual money claims (oral or written);
 Recovery/protection of property rights;
 Recovery of real or personal property or interest;
 Enforcement of lien;
 Recovery of damages for an injury to person or property and suits by reason of the alleged tortuous
acts of the defendant;
 Actions and obligations arising from delicts; and
 Ejectment case.

Note: The wrong complained [of] affects primarily and principally property and property rights, the
injuries to the person being merely incidental.
 Claims/actions that do not survive
 Purely personal (e.g. Legal separation);
 Performance that cannot be purely delegated; and
 Claim that cannot be instituted by executor or administrator.

Note: Injury complained of is to be the person, the property and rights of property affected being
incidental
 Purpose of non-survival of claims - Reason for the dismissal of the case is that upon the death of the
defendant a testate or intestate proceeding shall be instituted in the proper court wherein all his creditors
must appear and file their claims which shall be paid proportionately out of the property left by the
deceased
 Purpose and importance of substitution of the deceased - protection of the right of every party to due
process. To ensure that the deceased would continue to be properly represented in the suit thru duly
appointed legal representative of the estate.
 Heirs of deceased party automatically qualify as substitutes - Heirs of the deceased may be allowed to be
substituted for the deceased, without requiring the appointment of an executor or administrator and the
court may appoint guardian ad litem for the minor heirs.
 Effect of non-compliance with the rules on substitution
 GR: Renders the proceeding of the trial court infirm because the court acquired no jurisdiction over the
person of the legal representative.
 XPNs: non-compliance does not deprive the court of jurisdiction
 heirs themselves voluntarily appeared, participated in the case and presented evidence in
defense of deceased defendant;
 In ejectment cases, the counsel fails to inform the court of the death of his client and thereby
results to the non-substitution of the deceased by his legal representatives. (Binding upon the
Successor-in-interest of the deceased)
 Death or separation of a party who is a public officer - in an action in his official capacity and during its
pendency dies, resigns, or otherwise ceases to hold office, action may be continued and maintained by or
against his successor if, within thirty (30) days after the successor takes office or such time as may be
granted by the court, it is satisfactorily shown to the court by any party that there is a substantial need for
continuing or maintaining it and that the successor adopts or continues or threatens to adopt or continue
the action of his predecessor.
 Before a substitution is made, the party or officer to be affected, unless expressly assenting thereto, shall be
given reasonable notice of the application therefor and accorded an opportunity to be heard.
 Incompetency or incapacity - a party becomes incompetent or incapacitated, the court, upon motion with
notice, may allow the action to be continued by or against the incompetent or incapacitated person assisted
by his legal guardian or guardian ad litem.
 Transfer of interest. - action may be continued by or against the original party, unless the court upon motion
directs the person to whom the interest is transferred to be substituted in the action or joined with the
original party
 Indigent party. - one who has no money or property sufficient and available for food, shelter and basic
necessities for himself and his family. (a) immediate family’s gross income must not exceed double the
monthly minimum wage; and (b) Any real property that he or she owns should not exceed 300k in fair
market value.
 Include an exemption from payment of docket and other lawful fees, and of transcripts of stenographic
notes which the court may order to be furnished him
 amount of the docket and other lawful fees (exempted from paying) shall be a lien on any judgment
rendered in the case favorable to the indigent
 Any adverse party may contest the grant of such authority at any time before judgment is rendered by the
trial court. If the court should determine after hearing that the party declared as an indigent is in fact a
person with sufficient income or property, the proper docket and other lawful fees shall be assessed and
collected by the clerk of court
 If payment is not made within the time fixed by the court, execution shall issue or the payment thereof,
without prejudice to such other sanctions as the court may impose
 Notice to the Solicitor General. - In any action involving the validity of any treaty, law, ordinance, executive
order, presidential decree, rules or regulations, the court, in its discretion, may require the appearance of
the Solicitor General who may be heard in person or through a representative duly designated by him.
E. Venue (Rule 4)
 The place, or geographical area, in which a court with jurisdiction may hear and determine a case.
 Purpose: To attain the greatest convenience to the party litigants by taking into consideration the maximum
accessibility to them of the courts of justice.
 Improper venue is not one of the grounds wherein the court may dismiss an action motu proprio
 Improper venue is an affirmative defense which the defendant may raise in his or her answer seasonably,
else it is deemed waived.
 In civil cases, venue is not a matter of jurisdiction. Jurisdictional in criminal cases.
 Philippine courts to have jurisdiction when the abusive conduct or act of violence (c) was committed outside
the Philippine territory, the victim be a resident of the place where the complaint is filed in view of the
anguish suffered being a material element of the offense.
 There can be no election as to the venue of the filing of a complaint when the plaintiff has no residence in
the PH. Complaint in such case may only be filed in the court of the place where the defendant resides.
 Eliminate the qualifying term “principal” and the purpose of the Rule would, “be defeated where a nominal
or formal party is impleaded in the action since the latter would not have the degree of interest in the
subject of the action which would warrant and entail the desirably active participation expected of litigants
in a case.
 Venue of actions against nonresidents defendants - place where the plaintiff resides, or where the property
or any portion thereof is situated or found.
 Defendant does not reside but is found in the PH - Personal actions – plaintiff or any of the principal
plaintiffs resides, or where the non-resident defendant may be found, at the election of the plaintiff. Real
actions – proper court which has jurisdiction over the area wherein the real property involved, or a portion
thereof, is situated.
 When the Rules on Venue do not apply – (a) cases where a specific rule or law provides otherwise; or (b)
parties have validly agreed in writing before the filing of the action on the exclusive venue thereof.
 Effects of stipulations on venue - (a) In writing; (b) Exclusive as to the venue; and (c) Made before the filing
of the action.
 Parties may agree on a specific venue which could be in a place where neither of them resides. Stipulation
on venue is void and unenforceable when it is contrary to the public policy.
 When exclusive - stipulation clearly indicates, thru qualifying and restrictive words that the parties
deliberately exclude causes of actions from the operation of the ordinary permissive rules on venue and that
they intended contractually to designate a specific venue to the exclusion of any other court also competent
and accessible to the parties under the ordinary rules on venue of actions.
 Absence of restrictive words, the stipulation should be deemed as merely an agreement on an additional
forum, not as limiting venue.
 Examples of words with restrictive meaning: (a.) Only; (b.) Solely; (c.) Exclusively in this court; (d.) In no
other court save; (e.) Particularly; (f.) Nowhere else but/except; (g.) Words of similar import.
 Where the complaint assails only the terms, conditions, and/or coverage of a written instrument and not its
validity, the exclusive venue stipulation contained therein shall still be binding upon the parties, and thus,
the complaint may be properly dismissed on the ground of improper venue.
 A complaint directly assailing the validity of the written instrument itself should not be bound by the
exclusive venue stipulation contained therein and should be filed in accordance with the general rules on
venue.
 Venue may be changed or transferred from one province to another by agreement of the parties in writing,
such an agreement will not be held valid where it practically negates the action of the claimants
F. Pleadings
 Written allegations of the parties of their respective claims and defenses submitted to the court for trial and
judgment
 Pleading should state the ultimate facts essential to the rights of action or defense asserted
 Functions:
1. inform the defendant clearly and definitely of the claims made against him so that he may be
prepared to meet the issues at trial;
2. inform the defendant of all material facts on which the plaintiff relies to support his demand; and
3. state the theory of cause of action which forms the bases of plaintiff’s claim of liability

1. Kinds (Rule 6)
 (a.) Complaint; (b.) Answer; (c.) Counterclaim; (d.) Cross-claim; (e.) Reply; (f.) Rejoinder; (g.) Third
party (fourth-party etc.) complaint or counterclaim; (h.) Counter-cross-claim; and (i.) Complaint-in-
intervention.
 Complaint. — pleading alleging the plaintiffs or claiming party's cause or causes of action. Names
and residences of the plaintiff and defendant must be stated in the complaint, if known.
 Evidentiary facts - necessary for determination of the ultimate facts; premises upon which
conclusions of ultimate facts are based.
 Ultimate facts - essential facts constituting the plaintiff’s cause of action. It cannot be stricken out
without leaving the statement of the cause of action insufficient.
 Allegations of the complaint must be based on the ultimate facts, including the evidence on which
the party pleading relies for his claims or defenses which need to be attached to the complaint.
 Answer. — pleading in which a defendant or other adverse party sets forth the negative and
affirmative defenses upon which he relies. It may be an answer to the complaint, an answer to a
counterclaim, or an answer to a crossclaim.
 Filed within 30 days after service of summon.
 Defendant foreign private juridical entity - Filed within 60 days after summon made on the
government official designated by law to receive the same
 Period to file answer extendible once for meritorious reasons for 30 days.
 Negative defense - specific denial of the material fact or facts alleged in the pleading of the
claimant essential to his cause or causes of action
 Kinds of specific denials
1. Absolute denial - specifies each material allegation of fact the truth of which he or she
does not admit; sets forth the substance of the matters upon which he relies to support his
denial.
2. Partial denial - denies only a part of the averment, specifies that part the truth of which he
admits and denies only the remainder
3. Denial by disavowal of knowledge - alleges that he or she is without knowledge or
information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of a material averment made in the
complaint. Must be availed of with sincerity and good faith, not for the purpose of
confusing the other party, nor for purposes of delay.
 Insufficient denials or denials amount to an admission
1. General denial - admission of the material averments in the pleading asserting a claim or
claims
2. Denial in the form of a negative pregnant - negative implying also an affirmative, stated in
a negative form, really admits the allegations to which it related. Form of a negative
 expression which carries with it an affirmation or at least an implication of some kind
favorable to the adverse party.
Note: Does not qualify as a specific denial. Conceded to be actually an admission. Refers to
a denial which implies its affirmative opposite by seeming to deny only a qualification or
an incidental aspect of the allegation but not the main allegation itself.

An ambiguous pleading, since it cannot be ascertained whether it is the fact, or only the
qualification that is intended to be denied.

Example: Assertion of a defendant which questions the amount of money involved in a

bank account but does not deny its existence, when such is the issue in the case, is said to
have admitted the existence of such bank account. The denial of the amount of money
deposited is pregnant with an admission of the existence of the bank account.
 Affirmative Defense - allegation of a new matter; hypothetically admitting the material allegations
in the pleading of the claimant, would nevertheless prevent or bar recovery by him or her.
 Includes fraud, statute of limitations, release, payment, illegality, statute of frauds, estoppel,
former recovery, discharge in bankruptcy, and any other matter by way of confession and
avoidance. Grounds for the dismissal of the complaint: (1) lack of jurisdiction over the subject-
matter; (2) litis pendentia; and (3) res judicata.
 (1) court has no jurisdiction over the person of the defending party; (2) venue is improperly laid;
(3) plaintiff has no legal capacity to sue; (4) pleading asserting the claim states no cause of action;
and (5) condition precedent for filing the claim has not been complied with.
 Raising affirmative defenses does not amount to acceptance of the jurisdiction of the court, but
praying for affirmative reliefs is considered voluntary appearance and acquiescence to the court’s
jurisdiction.
 Counterclaim. — Any claim for money or other relief which a defending party may have against an
opposing party. Need not diminish or defeat the recovery sought by the opposing party, but may
claim relief exceeding in amount or different in kind from that sought by the opposing party's
claim.
 Any claim which a defending party may have against an opposing party. Partakes of a complaint by
the defendant against the plaintiff.
 A distinct and independent cause of action. When filed, there are two simultaneous actions
between the same parties
 Two kinds of counterclaims: Compulsory and Permissive
1. Compulsory - does not require for its adjudication the presence of third parties of whom
the court cannot acquire jurisdiction
 arises out of or is necessarily connected with the transaction or occurrence that is the
subject matter of the opposing party’s claim
 Barred if not set up in the same action; unless (a) Counterclaim arising after answer;
(b) Omitted counterclaim.
 Need not be answered; No default
 Not an initiatory pleading.
 Need not be accompanied by a certification against forum shopping and certificate to
file action by the Lupong Tagapamayapa: GR: court has jurisdiction to entertain both
as to the amount and nature; XPN: an original action before the RTC, the
counterclaim may be considered compulsory regardless of the amount
 Requisites of a compulsory counterclaim: (a) Cognizable by the regular courts of
justice; (b) Arises out of or is connected with the transaction or occurrence
constituting the subject matter of the opposing party’s claim; (c) Within the
 jurisdiction of the court both as to the amount and the nature thereof. (However, in
original claims before the Regional Trial Court, it may be compulsory notwithstanding
the amount.)
 A compulsory counterclaim not be raised in the same action is barred, unless
otherwise allowed by the Rules.
2. Permissive - does not arise out of nor is it necessarily connected with the subject matter
of the opposing party’s claim. Absence of a logical connection with the subject matter of
the complaint.
 Require for its adjudication the presence of third parties over whom the court cannot
acquire jurisdiction.
 Not barred even if not set up in the action.
 Must be answered; Otherwise, default.
 Accompanied by a certification against forum shopping and whenever required by
law, also a certificate to file action by the Lupong Tagapamayapa.
 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.
 Example of a compulsory counterclaim - moral, actual and exemplary damages, and attorney’s
fees against the respondent on account of his or her malicious and unfounded complaint are
compulsory
 Example of a permissive counterclaim - action for collection for unliquidated cash advances and
unremitted costs filed by an insurance company against its insurance agent, the latter
counterclaimed for the payment of direct commissions, profit commissions, contingent bonuses,
and accumulated premium.
 The evidence required to prove agent’s claim differed from that needed to establish insurance
company’s demands for the recovery. The recovery of insurance company’s claim is not contingent
or dependent upon establishing agent’s counterclaim, such that conducting separate trials will not
result in the substantial duplicate of the time and effort of the court and parties.
 Effect on Counterclaim when Complaint is Dismissed - the counterclaim shall not be dismissed in
the following instances:
 Dismissal by order of the court - a counterclaim has been pleaded by a defendant prior to the
service upon him of the plaintiff's motion to dismiss, unless the counterclaim can remain
pending for independent adjudication by the court
 Failure to prosecute - If the dismissal is due to the fault of the plaintiff
 Cross-claim. —any claim by one party against a co-party arising out of the transaction or
occurrence that is the subject matter either of the original action or of a counterclaim therein
 May cover all or part of the original claim
 Requisites of Crossclaim
1. Claim by one party against a co-party;
2. Arise out of the subject matter of the complaint or of the counterclaim;
3. Cross-claimant is prejudiced by the claim against him by the opposing party.
 GR: Barred if not set up
 XPNs: (1) Crossclaim arising after answer; and (2) Omitted crossclaim.
 Third, (fourth, etc.)-party complaint - a claim that a defending party may, with leave of court, file
against a person not a party to the action, called the third (fourth, etc.)-party defendant for
contribution, indemnity, subrogation or any other relief, in respect of his opponent's claim.
 Instances when Third-Party Complaint shall be Denied and Separate Action must be instituted
1. defendant cannot be located within thirty (30) calendar days from the grant of such leave
2. unnecessary issues may be introduced; or
 3. a new and separate controversy is introduced
 A third-party complaint is filed, it need not be based on the same theory as that in the main
complaint. It can be a different theory altogether.
 A third (fourth, etc.) – party defendant may allege in his or her answer his or her defenses,
counterclaims or cross-claims, including such defenses that the third (fourth, etc.) – party plaintiff
may have against the original plaintiff’s claim.
 In proper cases, he or she may also assert a counterclaim against the original plaintiff in respect of
the latter’s claim against the third-party plaintiff.
 Bringing new parties. — When the presence of parties other than those to the original action is
required for the granting of complete relief in the determination of a counterclaim or cross-claim,
the court shall order them to be brought in as defendants, if jurisdiction over them can be
obtained.
 Test to Determine Whether the Third-Party Complaint is in respect of Plaintiff’s Claim
1. it arises out of the same transaction on which the plaintiff’s claim is based, or, although
arising out of another or different transaction, is connected with the plaintiff’s claim;
2. third-party defendant would be liable to the plaintiff or to the defendant for all or part of the
plaintiff’s claim against the original defendant; and
3. defenses which the thirdparty plaintiff has or may have to the plaintiff’s claim.
 Where the trial court has jurisdiction over the main case, it also has jurisdiction over the third-
party complaint, regardless of the amount involved as a third-party complaint is merely auxiliary to
and is a continuation of the main action.
 Neither an appeal nor a petition for certiorari is the proper remedy from the denial of a third-party
claim. Since the third-party claimant is not one of the parties to the action, he could not, strictly
speak, appeal from the order denying its claim, but should file a separate reinvindicatory action
against the execution creditor or a complaint for damages against the bond filed by the judgment
creditor in favor of the sheriff. The rights of a third-party claimant should be decided in a separate
action to be instituted by the third person.
 Intervention - A person who has a (a) legal interest in the matter in litigation, or in the success of
either of the parties, or (b) an interest against both, or is so situated as to be adversely affected by
a distribution or other disposition of property in the custody of the court or of an officer thereof
may, with leave of court, be allowed to intervene in the action. The court shall consider whether or
not the intervention will unduly delay or prejudice the adjudication of the rights of the original
parties, and whether or not the intervenors rights may be fully protected in a separate proceeding.
 A remedy by which a third party, not originally impleaded in a proceeding, becomes a litigant
therein to enable him to protect or preserve a right or interest which may be affected by such
proceeding.
 How to intervene – (1) with leave of court; (2) filed before rendition of judgment; and (3) copy of
the pleadings-in-intervention attached to the motion and served to the original parties.
 GR: May be filed at any time before the rendition of judgment by the trial court.
 XPNs: (1) Indispensable parties; even on appeal (2) Republic; and (3) to protect some interest
which cannot otherwise be protected, and for the purpose of preserving the intervenor’s right to
appeal, even after judgment.
 Complaint-in-intervention - pleading filed for the purpose of asserting a claim against either or all
of the original parties
 Answer-in-intervention - if he or she unites with the defending party in resisting a claim against
the latter. Filed within fifteen (15) calendar days from notice of the order admitting the same
 Intervention is never an independent action, but is ancillary and supplemental to an existing
litigation, and in subordination to the main proceeding.
 Merely an interlocutory proceeding dependent or subsidiary to the main action.
 Main action ceased to exist, there is no pending proceeding wherein the intervention may be
based. A judgment approving a compromise agreement is final and immediately executory.
Continuance of an intervention in this case would serve no purpose at all.
 Requisites for an Intervention by a non-party in an action pending in court (2000 BAR)
1. motion for leave to intervene filed before rendition of judgment by the trial court
2. Movant must show that he or she has a:
(a) Legal interest in the matter in controversy;
(b) Legal interest in the success of either of the parties; or
(c) Legal interest against both;
(d) So situated as to be adversely affected by a distribution or other disposition of property;
(e) will not unduly delay or prejudice the adjudication of the rights of original parties; and
(f) will not unduly delay or prejudice the adjudication of the rights of original parties.
 In general, an independent controversy cannot be injected into a suit by intervention, where it
would enlarge the issues in the action and expand the scope of the remedies. Not proper where
there are certain facts giving the intervenor’s case an aspect peculiar to himself and differentiating
it clearly from that of the original parties; the proper course is for the would-be intervenor to
litigate his claim in a separate suit.
 Where the lower court’s denial of a motion for intervention amounts to a final order, an appeal is
the proper remedy, as when the denial leaves the intervenor without further remedy or resort to
judicial relief.
 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.
 Reply — All new matters alleged in the answer are deemed controverted. If the plaintiff wishes to
interpose any claims arising out of the new matters so alleged, such claims shall be set forth in an
amended or supplemental complaint
 Plaintiff may file a reply only if the defending party attaches an actionable document to his or her
answer
 It is a responsive pleading to an answer.
 In the event of an actionable document attached to the reply, the defendant may file a rejoinder if
the same is based solely on an actionable document.
 A rejoinder is the defendant’s answer to the plaintiff’s replication
 Filed within fifteen (15) calendar days from service of the pleading responded to.
 Where the defense in the answer is based on an actionable document, a reply under oath may be
made. Otherwise, the genuineness and due execution of the document shall be deemed admitted
 Pleadings allowed in Small Claims Cases
1. Statement of Claim (Form 1-SSC); accompanied by a certification of non-forum shopping.
Claim is based on an actionable document, required to attach two duly certified copies of
such document as well as affidavits of witnesses and other evidence to support the claim.
Mandatory requirement. No evidence shall be allowed during the hearing which was not
attached to the claim unless good cause is shown for the admission of the evidence
2. Response;
3. Counterclaim;
a. Compulsory counterclaim
i. within the coverage of the Rule, exclusive of interest and costs;
ii. Arises out of the same transaction or event that is the subject matter of
the plaintiff’s claim;
iii. Does not require for its adjudication the joinder of third parties;
iv. Not a subject of another pending action
 b. Permissive counterclaim - against the plaintiff that does not arise out of the same
transaction or occurrence, provided that the amount and nature thereof are
within the coverage and the prescribed docket and other legal fees are paid.
 Civil Cases covered by the Rule on Small Claims - Claims or demands may be:
1. For money owed under any of following: Contract of (a) loan; (b) lease; (c) services; (d) sale;
or (e) mortgage. - threshold amount P1M
 Pleadings allowed in Cases covered by the Rules on Summary Procedure: (a) complaint; (b)
Compulsory counterclaim; (c) Crossclaims pleaded in answer; and (d) Answers to these pleadings.
 Prohibited Pleadings, Motions, and Petitions in Small Claims and Summary Procedure
1. GR: Motion to dismiss the complaint.
XPNs: cases covered by summary procedure, a motion to dismiss may be filed only either
on the ground of:
a. Lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter; or
b. Failure to refer the dispute to the Lupon Tagapamayapa
Note: In cases covered by small claims, a Motion to Dismiss is a prohibited pleading
which admits no exceptions
2. Motion for a bill of particulars;
3. Motion for new trial, or for reconsideration of a judgment (on the merit), or for reopening
of trial;
4. Petition for relief from judgment;
5. Motion for extension of time to file pleadings, affidavits, or any other paper;
6. Memoranda
7. Petition for certiorari, mandamus, or prohibition against any interlocutory order issued by
the court;
8. Motion to declare the defendant in default;
9. Dilatory motions for postponement;
10. Reply;
11. Third-party complaints; and
12. Interventions (Sec.14, A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC)

2. Parts of a Pleading (Rule 7)

1. Caption – name of the court, title of the action; and docket number.
 Title of the action indicates the names of the parties. They shall all be named in the
original complaint or petition.
 In subsequent pleadings, it shall be sufficient if the name of the first party on each side be
stated with an appropriate indication when there are other parties. Their respective
participation in the case shall be indicated.
2. Body - designation, the allegations of the party’s claims or defenses, the relief prayed for, and
the date of the pleading
a. Paragraphs - allegations in the body of a pleading shall be divided into paragraphs, contain
a statement of a single set of circumstances so far as that can be done with convenience..
A paragraph may be referred to by its number in all succeeding pleadings.
b. Headings –
i. Two or more causes of action are joined - statement of the first shall be prefaced by the
words “first cause of action," of the second by "second cause of action," and so on for the
others
ii. One or more paragraphs in the answer are addressed to one of several causes of
action in the complaint - prefaced by the words "answer to the first cause of action" or
"answer to the second cause of action" and so on
 c. Relief - specify the relief sought, but it may add a general prayer for such further or other
relief as may be deemed just or equitable
d. Date;
e. Name of witnesses who will be presented to prove a party’s claim or defense;
f. Summary of the witnesses’ intended testimonies, thru attached judicial affidavits which
shall form an integral part of the pleading;
g. Documentary and object evidence in support of the allegations contained in the pleading
3. Signature and address – signed by the plaintiff or counsel representing him
 Effect of Counsel’s Signature - constitutes a certificate by him that:
1. He has read the pleading and document;
2. To the best of his knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable
under the circumstances:
a. not being presented for any improper purpose, such as to harass, cause
unnecessary delay, or needlessly increase the cost of litigation;
b. claims, defenses, and other legal contentions are warranted by existing law or
jurisprudence, or by a nonfrivolous argument for extending, modifying, or
reversing existing jurisprudence;
c. factual contentions have evidentiary support or, if specifically, so identified, will
likely have evidentiary support after availment of the modes of discovery under
these rules; and
d. denials of factual contentions are warranted on the evidence or, if specifically, so
identified, are reasonably based on belief or a lack of information
 Effect of Violation of the Rule on Signature and Address - impose an appropriate sanction or refer
such violation to the proper office for disciplinary action
 Absent exceptional circumstances, a law firm shall be held jointly and severally liable
 Lawyer or law firm cannot pass on the monetary penalty to the client.
 Verification. - Except when otherwise specifically required by law or rule, pleadings need not be
under oath or verified
 A pleading is verified by an affidavit of an affiant duly authorized to sign said verification. The
authorization of the affiant to act on behalf of a party, whether in the form of a secretary’s
certificate or a special power of attorney, should be attached to the pleading, and shall allege the
following attestations:
a. allegations in the pleading are true and correct based on his or her personal knowledge, or
based on authentic documents;
b. pleading is not filed to harass, cause unnecessary delay, or needlessly increase the cost of
litigation; and
c. factual allegations therein have evidentiary support or, if specifically, so identified, will
likewise have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for discovery.

The signature of the affiant shall further serve as a certification of the truthfulness of the
allegations in the pleading.
 Significance of Verification - to secure an assurance that the allegations in a pleading are true and
correct and not the product of the imagination or a matter of speculation, and that the pleading is
filed in good faith
 Effect of an improper or non-existent verification –
1. treated as an unsigned pleading.
2. does not necessarily render the pleading defective (formal requirement only)
3. absence of verification may be corrected by requiring an oath
 Non-compliance with the verification requirement or a defect therein does not necessarily render
the pleading fatally defective. Court may order its submission or correction or act on the pleading
if the attending circumstances are such that strict compliance with the Rule may be dispensed with
in order that the ends of justice may be served thereby.
 Certification against forum shopping - plaintiff or principal party shall certify under oath in the
complaint or other initiatory pleading asserting a claim for relief, or in a sworn certification
annexed thereto and simultaneously filed therewith: (a) that he [or she] has not theretofore
commenced any action or filed any claim involving the same issues in any court, tribunal or quasi-
judicial agency and, to the best of his [or her] knowledge, no such other action or claim is pending
therein; (b) if there is such other pending action or claim, a complete statement of the present
status thereof; and (c) if he [or she] should thereafter learn that the same or similar action or claim
has been filed or is pending, he [or she] shall report that fact within five (5) calendar days
therefrom to the court wherein his [or her] aforesaid complaint or initiatory pleading has been
filed
 The authorization of the affiant to act on behalf of a party, whether in the form of a secretary’s
certificate or a special power of attorney, should be attached to the pleading.
 Failure to comply with the foregoing requirements shall not be curable by mere amendment of the
complaint or other initiatory pleading but shall be cause for the dismissal of the case without
prejudice
 Submission of a false certification or non-compliance with any of the undertakings therein shall
constitute indirect contempt of court, without prejudice to the corresponding administrative and
criminal actions
 If the acts of the party or his [or her] counsel clearly constitute willful and deliberate forum
shopping, the same shall be ground for summary dismissal with prejudice and shall constitute
direct contempt, as well as a cause for administrative sanctions.
 Forum shopping – is the practice of resorting to multiple suits for the same relief for the purpose
of increasing a party’s chances of obtaining a favorable judgement.
 Elements: (1) Identity of parties; (b) Identity of rights asserted and reliefs prayed for; and (3) any
judgment rendered in the other action will amount to res judicata in the action under
consideration.
 The determinative factor in violations of the rule against forum shopping is whether the elements
of litis pendetia are present, or whether a final judgement in one case will amount to res judicata
in another.
 The ejectment case involves the issue of physical possession, while the collection case involves the
issue of payment. Thus, there is no identity of rights asserted and reliefs prayed for.
 Nature of the Certification against Forum Shopping - a mandatory requirement in filing a
complaint and other initiatory pleadings asserting a claim or relief
 Only required in a complaint or other initiatory pleading
 Applies to special civil actions since a special civil action is governed by the rules for ordinary civil
actions
 Who executes the Certification against Forum Shopping
 GR: It is the plaintiff or principal party who executes the certification under oath. The certification
must be executed by the party, not the attorney.
 Reason: It is the petitioner and not the counsel who is in the best position to know whether he or
she or it actually filed or caused the filing of a petition.
 Corporation - may be signed for and, on its behalf, by a specifically authorized lawyer who has
personal knowledge of the facts required to be disclosed in such document. (Board resolution)
 XPN: For reasonable or justifiable reasons, the party-pleader is unable to sign, he or she must
execute a Special Power of Attorney designating his counsel of record to sign on his behalf.
  Execution of Certificate against Forum Shopping when there are Two or More Plaintiffs
 GR: All of them must execute (Those who did not sign will be dropped as parties to the case.)
 XPN: Substantial compliance - Reasonable or justifiable circumstances, 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.
 The rule of substantial compliance may be availed of with respect to the contents of the
certification. This is because the requirement of strict compliance with the provisions regarding
the certification of non-forum shopping merely underscores its mandatory nature in that the
certification cannot be altogether dispensed with or its requirements completely disregarded. It
does not thereby interdict substantial compliance with its provisions under justifiable
circumstances.
 Court may, in its discretion, allow such deficiency to be remedied if it shall appear that the same
was due to mere inadvertence and not intended for delay. In the instant case, the Court accepts
petitioner Riel's explanation that the failure of her counsel to affix his signature in the Motion for
Reconsideration was due to an honest inadvertence without any intention to delay the
proceedings.
 Notarization per se is not a guarantee of the validity of the contents of a document. The
presumption of regularity of notarized documents cannot be made to apply and may be
overthrown by highly questionable circumstances, as may be pointed out by the trial court
 Any liberal application of the rule on attachment of certification against forum shopping has to be
justified by ample and sufficient reasons that maintain the integrity of, and do not detract from,
the mandatory character of the rule.
 Period to invoke Rule on Forum Shopping
 GR: It should be raised at the earliest opportunity.
 XPNs: It may be invoked in later stages only if the violation arises from or will result in:
1. Loss of jurisdiction over the subject matter
2. Pendency of another action between the same parties for the same cause;
3. Barring of the action by a prior judgment;
4. Statute of Limitations
 Miguel must necessarily be the one to sign the certification against forum-shopping, and not the
City Legal Officer, who, despite being an official of the City, was merely its counsel and not a party
to the case

3. Manner of Making Allegations (Rule 8)

a) In General - contain in a methodical and logical form, a plain, concise and direct statement of
the ultimate facts, including the evidence on which the party pleading relies for his [or her] claim
or defense. If a cause of action [or] defense relied on is based on law, the pertinent provisions
thereof and their applicability to him or her shall be clearly and concisely stated.
 Ultimate Facts - essential facts of the claim
 Essential if it cannot be stricken out without leaving the statement of the cause of action
inadequate.
 principal, determinate, constitutive facts, upon the existence of which, the entire cause of
action rests
 Evidentiary Facts - necessary for determination of the ultimate facts; they are the premises
upon which conclusions of ultimate facts are based.
 details of probative matter or to the particulars of evidence by which the material elements
are to be established.
 Facts that may be averred generally
a. Performance or occurrence of all conditions precedent;
b. Capacity to sue or be sued
c. Capacity to sue or be sued in a representative capacity
d. Legal existence of an organized association of persons that is made a party
e. Malice, intent, knowledge or other condition of the mind of a person
f. Judgment or decision of a domestic and foreign court, judicial or quasi-judicial
tribunal, or of a board or officer without setting forth matter showing jurisdiction to
render it. An authenticated copy of the judgment or decision shall be attached to
the pleading.
g. Official documents or acts
 Conditions Precedent/Condition Sine Qua Non - refers to matters which must be complied
with before a cause of action arises
 A general averment of the performance or occurrence of all conditions precedent shall be
sufficient. May be raised by the opposing party as an affirmative defense.
 Examples of Conditions Precedent
 A tender of payment is required before making a consignation
 Exhaustion of administrative remedies
 Prior resort to barangay conciliation
 Earnest efforts toward a compromise between family members
 Arbitration when contract provides
 Averments of Fraud, Mistake - circumstances constituting such fraud or mistake must be
stated with particularity to help apprise the judge of the kind of fraud involved in the
complaint.
 In case of ambiguity, or failure to allege the circumstances constituting the fraud or mistake,
the remedy is to file a Motion of Bill of Particulars.
 Averments of Malice, Intent, Knowledge or other conditions of the Mind of a Person - may
be averred generally. They need not be stated with particularity. The rule is borne out of
human experience. It is difficult to state the particulars constituting these matters.
 Allegations that the defendant acted in bad faith, arbitrarily, illegally, wrongfully and in
violation of law are mere conclusions of fact or conclusions of law.
 Averment of an Official Document or Act - sufficient to aver that the document or act was
issued or done in compliance with law
 Averments of Judgement - sufficient to aver the judgment or decision without setting forth
matter showing jurisdiction to render it. Authenticated copy of the judgment or decision
shall be attached to the pleading.

b) Action or Defense Based on Document – Pleading - (a) substance of such instrument or

document shall be set forth in the pleading, and the (b) original or a copy thereof shall be
attached to the pleading as an exhibit, which shall be deemed to be a part of the pleading
 Actionable document - written instrument or document which is the basis of an action or a
defense
 A variance in the substance of the document set forth in the pleading and the document
annexed thereto does not warrant the dismissal of the action. However, the contents of the
document annexed are controlling.
 A document is actionable when an action or defense is grounded upon such written
instrument or document. A copy of a page of a ledger is not an actionable document. The
ledger merely indicates that money was received as payment, but it is not evidence of the
 transaction between the parties. The ledger does not provide for the terms and conditions
of the loan transaction from which a right or obligation may be established.
 How to contest such documents - specifically deny under oath the genuineness and due
execution of the instrument. Deemed admitted if not.
 Requirement of an oath is not required when the (1) adverse party does not appear to be a
party to the instrument or (2) when compliance with an order for an inspection of the
original instrument is refused
 Where a defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
truth of a material averment made [to] the complaint, he or she shall so state, and this shall
have the effect of a denial.

c) Specific Denial
 Forms of Denials amounting to Negative Defenses
1. Absolute denial - specify each material allegation of fact the truth of which he or she
does not admit setting forth the substance of the matters which he relies to support
his denial;
2. Partial denial – denies only a part of an averment;
3. Denial by disavowal of knowledge - alleges that he or she is without knowledge or
information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of a material averment made in
the complaint

If such matters are plainly and necessarily within the defendant’s knowledge, a claim
of “ignorance of information will not be considered a specific denial.”
 Effect of Failure to make Specific Denials - deemed admitted.
 Material averments in a pleading asserting a claim or claims shall be deemed admitted when
not specifically denied. (XPN: amount of unliquidated damages)
 If the allegations are deemed admitted, there is no more triable issue between the parties
and if the admissions appear in the answer of the defendant, the plaintiff may file a motion
for judgment on the pleadings
 Mere statement in the Answer, i.e., that they "specifically deny" the pertinent allegations of
the Complaint "for being self-serving and pure conclusions intended to suit plaintiff’s
purposes," does not constitute an effective specific denial as contemplated by law
 Verily, a denial is not specific simply because it is so qualified by the defendant.

d) Affirmative Defenses - A defendant shall raise his or her affirmative defenses in his or her
answer.
 Under Sec. 5 (b), Rule 6, 2019 Revised Rules on Civil Procedure – (a) Fraud; (b) Statute of
Limitations; (c) Release; (d) Payment; (e) Illegality; (f) Statute of Frauds; (g) Estoppel; (h)
Former Recovery; (i) Discharge of Bankruptcy; (j) Any other matter by way of confession or
avoidance; and (k) Grounds for the dismissal of the complaint: (i) The court has no
jurisdiction over the subject matter; (ii) There is another action pending between the same
parties for the same cause; or (iii) The action is barred by a prior judgment.
 Summary Hearing for the Resolution of the Affirmative Defense (a to j) - court may
conduct a summary hearing within fifteen (15) calendar days from the filing of the answer
and shall be resolved by the court within thirty (30) calendar days from the termination of
the summary hearing.
 Under Sec. 12, Rule 8 of the 2019 Revised Rules on Civil Procedure
a. court has no jurisdiction over the person of the defending party;
b. venue is improperly laid;
 c. plaintiff has no legal capacity to sue;
d. the pleading asserting the claim states no cause of action; and
e. a condition precedent for filing the claim has not been complied with.
 Action of the Court on the Affirmative Defenses - motu proprio resolve the above
affirmative defenses within thirty (30) calendar days
 Not necessary for the Court to conduct a hearing before it can resolve these grounds.
 Waiver of Affirmative Defense - Failure to raise the affirmative defenses at the earliest
opportunity shall constitute a waiver thereof.
 Remedy on Denial of Affirmative Defenses - Assign the order of denial as among the
matters to be raised on appeal after a judgment on the merits.
 Striking out of pleading or matter contained therein - court may order any pleading or any
(1) false, redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter be stricken out upon
motion made by a party (2) before responding to a pleading, or if no responsive pleading is
permitted, upon motion (3) within 20 calendar days after service of the pleading on him, or
upon the court’s initiative at any time.

4. Effect of Failure to Plead (Rule 9) –

 GR: Defenses not pleaded in a motion to dismiss or in the answer are deemed waived.
 XPNs: Defenses may be raised at any stage of the proceedings even for the first time on appeal:
1. Lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter; (may, however, be barred by laches)
2. Litis pendentia;
3. Res judicata; and
4. Statute of limitations.
 Failure to Plead a Compulsory Counterclaim and Crossclaim –
 GR: barred
 XPNs: (1) omitted counterclaim and (2) counterclaim after an answer was filed
 Default – failure of defending party to file an answer within the time allowed.
 Effect of order of default – party in default entitled to notice[s] of subsequent proceedings but shall
not to take part in the trial.
 Effect of partial default (Claim against several parties) - court shall try the case against all upon the
answers thus filed and render judgment upon the evidence presented. (Applies only if there is a
common cause of action)
 Extent of relief to be awarded - shall [neither] exceed the amount or be different in kind from that
prayed for nor award unliquidated damages.
 Where no defaults allowed - annulment or declaration of nullity of marriage or for legal separation
 Remedies available to a defendant declared in default
a. Motion to Set Aside Order of Default – file a motion under oath, showing failure was due to
FAME and has meritorious defense, at any time after notice and before judgment. (In the
interest of justice)
b. Motion for New Trial - defendant discovers his or her default after judgement but prior to
the judgement becoming final and executory
c. Petition for Relief from Judgement - defendant discovers his or her default after the
judgement has become final and executory
d. Appeal - appeal the judgement for being contrary to the evidence or to the law, even if he or
she did not file a petition to set aside order of default;
e. Petition for Certiorari (Rule 65) - if the trial court declared the defendant in default with
grave abuse of discretion.
 The court should not declare Charybdis in default because there was no proper service of summons.
The ROC only allow service of summons by facsimile transmission for foreign private juridical
 entities that are not registered in the Philippines and have no resident agent, which does not apply
to individuals.
 Failure to file an answer a permissive counterclaim – plaintiff may be declared in default.
 The court’s decision is limited to the prayer
 In default cases, the court cannot award unliquidated damages

5. Amended and Supplemental Pleadings (Rule 10)

 Amendments in general, How - Pleadings may be amended (1) by adding or striking out an
allegation or the name of any party, or (2) by correcting a mistake in the name of a party or a
mistaken or inadequate allegation or description in any other respect, so that the actual merits of
the controversy may speedily be determined, without regard to technicalities, in the most
expeditious and inexpensive manner.
 Amendments as a matter of right – (1) Once, at any time before a responsive pleading is served or
(2) In the case of a reply, at any time within ten (10) calendar days after it is served.
 A motion to dismiss is not the responsive pleading. A plaintiff may file an amended complaint even
after the original complaint was ordered dismissed, provided that the order of dismissal is not yet
final. If the, court refuses to admit an amended pleading when its exercise is a matter of right, such
error is correctible by mandamus
 Amendments by leave of court - (1) Substantial amendments, after notice to the adverse party
after notice to the adverse party; and (2) Leave of court for substantial amendment is NOT required
when it is made as a matter of right
 Leave of court for substantial amendment is NOT required when it is made as a matter of right
 When refusal of Leave of Court to amend is allowed: (1) to delay the action; (2) to confer
jurisdiction on the court; (3) apparent no cause of action; and (4) cause of action or defense is
substantially altered.
 Formal amendments - defect in the designation of the parties and other clearly clerical or
typographical errors, may be summarily corrected by the court motu proprio or on motion at any
stage, provided no prejudice is caused thereby to adverse party.
 No amendment [necessary] to conform to or authorize presentation of evidence - issues not raised
by the pleadings are tried with the express or implied consent of the parties, shall be treated in all
respects as if they had been raised in the pleadings.
 It does not apply when the case was decided on a stipulation of facts in which case the pleadings are
not deemed amended to conform to the evidence.
 Court should not be precluded from awarding an amount higher than that claimed in the pleadings
provided that the evidence of such higher amount has been presented properly, with full
opportunity on the part of the opposing parties to support their respective contentions and to
refute each other’s evidence
 Effect of amended pleadings - supersedes the pleading that it amends
 Admissions in superseded pleadings may be offered in evidence against the pleader, and claims or
defenses alleged therein not incorporated in the amended pleading shall be deemed waived.
 Effect of Amended Pleading on the Admissions in the Original Pleading - They cease to be judicial
admissions. They are to be considered as extrajudicial admissions and may be proved by the party
relying thereon by formal offer in evidence of such original pleading.
 The settled rule is that the filing of an amended pleading does not retroact to the date of the filing
of the original pleading; hence, the statute of limitation runs until the submission of the amendment
 As an exception, this Court has held that an amendment which merely supplements and amplifies
facts originally alleged in the complaint relates back to the date of the commencement of the action
and is not barred by the statute of limitations which expired after the service of the original
 complaint. Thus, when the amended complaint does not introduce new issues, cause of action, or
demands, the suit is deemed to have commenced on the date the original complaint was filed
 Supplemental pleadings - refer to transactions, occurrences, or events which have happened since
the date of the pleading sought to be supplemented.
 Upon reasonable notice and upon such terms are just, adverse party may plead thereto within ten
(10) calendar days from notice of the order admitting the supplemental pleading.
 Cause of action stated in the supplemental complaint must be the same as that stated in the original
complaint. Otherwise, the court should not admit the supplemental complaint.
 It cannot be used to try a new matter or a new cause of action since it must be based on matters
arising subsequent to the original complaint.
 Difference between amended pleadings and supplemental pleadings - Amended pleadings refer to
facts already existing at the time of the filing of the original action. Supplemental pleadings refer to
facts which have happened since the date of the pleading sought to be supplemented.
 AP: Supersedes the original.
amended without leave of court before a responsive pleading is filed.
has retroactive application.
Amendment must be appropriately marked
 SP: Merely supplements the original pleading
Always with leave of court.
Sets forth facts which have happened since the date of the pleading sought to be
supplemented.
Need not be appropriately marked
 Purposes of Supplemental Pleading: (1) bring into the records new facts, which will enlarge or
change the kind of relief to which the plaintiff is entitled; and (2) meant to supply deficiencies in aid
of the original pleading, not to entirely substitute the latter.
 Filing an answer to a supplemental complaint is not mandatory because of the use of the word
“may”. Filing an answer to a supplemental complaint is not mandatory because of the use of the
word “may”

6. When to File Responsive Pleadings (Rule 11)

 Answer to the Complaint - 30 calendar days after service of summons
 Answer of a defendant foreign private juridical entity -
 service of summons is made on the government Page 127 of 1093 official designated by law to
receive the same, the answer shall be filed within sixty (60) calendar days after receipt of
summons by such entity.
 filing is not a matter of right; the defendant shall answer the amended complaint within fifteen
(15) calendar days from notice of the order admitting the same. An answer earlier filed may
serve as the answer to the amended complaint if no new answer is filed. (Applies to answer to
amended counterclaim, amended third-party complaint, and amendment complaint-in-
intervention)
 Answer to Amended Complaint
 matter of right, 30 days
 not a matter of right; 15 days. An answer earlier filed may serve as the answer to the amended
complaint if no new answer is filed
 Answer to Third (Fourth, etc.)- Party Complaint - 30 days
 Reply – 15 days
 Answer to Counterclaim or Crossclaim – 20 days
 Answer to Supplemental Complaint – 20 days
 Existing Counterclaim or Crossclaim - 20 days
  Counterclaim or Crossclaim arising after Answer - 20 day)
 Omitted Counterclaim or Crossclaim - 20 days
 A defendant is allowed to file only (1) motion for extension of time to file an answer.
 A motion for extension to file any pleading, other than an answer, is prohibited and considered a
mere scrap of paper or pro forma. The court, however, may allow any other pleading to be filed
after the time fixed by the Rules.

G. Filing and Service (Rule 13)

 Filing is the act of submitting the pleading or other paper to the court.
 Service is the act of providing a party with a copy of the pleading or any other court submission.
 If a party has appeared by counsel, service upon such party shall be made upon his or her counsel, unless
service upon the party and the partys counsel is ordered by the court.
 Where one counsel appears for several parties, such counsel shall only be entitled to one copy of any
paper served by the opposite side
 Filing of pleadings and other court submission shall be made as follows:
a. personally, the original thereof
Proof (Filing): (1) existence in the record of the case, (2) written or stamped acknowledgement of its
filing by the clerk of court on a copy of the pleading or court submission
Complete: upon actual delivery
Proof (Service):

b. registered mail;
Proof (Filing): (1) registry receipt and by the (2) affidavit of the person who mailed it, containing a
full statement of the date place of deposit of the mail in the post office in a sealed envelope
addressed to the court, (3) with postage fully prepaid, and (3) with instructions to the postmaster to
return the mail to the sender after 10 days;
Complete: actual receipt by the addressee, or after 5 calendar days from the date he or she received
the first notice of the postmaster, whichever date is earlier
Proof (Service: affidavit of the person mailing;

Ordinary mail
Complete: expiration of 10 calendar days after mailing;
Proof (Service): affidavit of the person mailing;

c. accredited courier; or
Proof: (1) affidavit of service of the person who brought the pleading or other document to the
service provider, (2) together with the courier’s official receipt and document tracking number;
Complete: upon actual receipt by the addressee, or after at least 2 attempts to deliver by the
courier service, or upon the expiration of 5 calendar days after the first attempt to deliver,
whichever is earlier;
Proof (Service): upon actual receipt by the addressee, or after at least 2 attempts to deliver by the
courier service, or upon the expiration of 5 calendar days after the first attempt to deliver,
whichever is earlier;

d. electronic mail or other electronic means as may be authorized by the court

Proof: (1) affidavit of electronic filing of the filing party accompanied by a paper copy of the
pleading or other document transmitted or (2) a written or stamped acknowledgement of its filing
by the clerk of court.
 Complete: time of the electronic transmission of the document, or when available, at the time that
the electronic notification of service of the document is sent
Facsimile transmission – complete upon receipt by the other party, as indicated in the facsimile
transmission printout.
Proof (Service): affidavit of service executed by the person who sent the e-mail, facsimile, or other
electronic transmission, together with a printed proof of transmittal
 Personal service done for court submissions –
(1) by personal delivery of a copy to the party or
(2) to the party’s counsel, or to their authorized representative named in the appropriate pleading or
motion, or
(3) by leaving it in his or her office with his or her clerk, or with a person having charge thereof
 Service by registered mail done for court submission –
(1) by depositing the copy in the post office, in a sealed envelope, plainly addressed to the party or to the
party’s counsel at his or her office, if known, otherwise at his or her residence, if known,
(2) with postage fully pre-paid, and with instructions to the postmaster to return the mail to the sender
after 10 calendar days if undelivered.
(3) If no registry service is available in the locality of either the sender or the addressee, service may be
done by ordinary mail.
 Substituted service be done for court submission - the office and place of residence of the party or his
counsel being unknown: by delivering the copy to the clerk of court, with proof of failure of both personal
service and service by mail (complete at the time of such delivery)
 Electronic service and how when may it be done for court submissions -
(1) Service by electronic means - by sending an e-mail to the partys’ or counsels electronic mail address,
or through other electronic means of transmission as the parties may agree on, or upon direction of the
court.
(2) Service by facsimile - by sending a facsimile copy to the partys’ or counsels given facsimile number.
 Documents must not be served or filed electronically unless granted by court -
a. Initiatory pleadings and initial responsive pleadings, such as an answer;
b. Subpoena, protection orders, and writs;
c. Appendices and exhibits to motions, or other documents that are not readily amenable to electronic
scanning may, at the option of the party filing such, be filed and served conventionally: and
d. Sealed and confidential documents or records.
 Presumptive service – (1) notice appears on the records to have been mailed at least twenty (20) calendar
days prior to the scheduled date of hearing and if the addressee is from within the same judicial region of
the court where the case is pending or (2) at least thirty (30) calendar days if the addressee is from outside
the judicial region.
 Judgements, final orders, or resolutions be served – (1) Personally or (2) Registered mail
 Upon ex parte motion of any party in the case, a copy of the judgment. final order, or resolution may be
delivered by accredited courier at the expense of such party.
 When a party summoned by publication has failed to appear in the action, judgments, final orders or
resolutions against him or her shall be served upon him or her also by [means of] publication at the
expense of the prevailing party.
 The burden of proving the affirmative allegation of when service was made is distinct from the burden of
proving the allegation of where service was or was not made. A party who fails to discharge his or her
burden of proof is not entitled to the relief prayed for
 Notice of lis pendens - In an action affecting the title or the right of possession of real property, the
plaintiff and the defendant, when affirmative relief is claimed in his or her answer, may record in the office
of the registry of deeds of the province in which the property is situated a notice of the pendency of the
action.
 Notice shall contain the names of the parties and the object of the action or defense, and a description of
the property in that province affected thereby
 Effect: Only from the time of filing such notice for record shall a purchaser, or encumbrancer of the
property affected thereby, be deemed to have constructive notice of the pendency of the action, and only
of its pendency against the parties designated by their real names.
 How cancelled: Only upon order of the court, after proper showing that the notice is for the purpose of
molesting the adverse party, or that it is not necessary to protect the rights of the party who caused it to
be recorded

1. Rules on Payment of Docket Fees; Effect of Non-Payment

 It is not simply the filing of the complaint or appropriate initiatory pleading but the payment of the
prescribed docket fee that vests a trial court with jurisdiction over the subject matter or nature of
the action.
 Payment of the docket and other legal fees within the prescribed period is both mandatory and
jurisdictional.
 Rules regarding Payment of Docket Fees
 A defect in the original pleading resulting in the underpayment of the docket fee cannot be cured by
amendment, such as the reduction of the claim. For all legal purposes, since there is no original
complaint over which the court has acquired jurisdiction.
 While the payment of prescribed docket fee is a jurisdictional requirement, even its non-payment at
the time of filing does not automatically cause the dismissal of the case, as long as the fee is paid
within the applicable prescriptive or reglementary period, more so when the party involved
demonstrates a willingness when insufficient filing fees were initially paid by the plaintiffs and there
was no intention to defraud the government, the Manchester rule does not apply.
NOTE: The Manchester Doctrine, on one hand, applies when there is a deliberate, willful, and
intentional refusal, avoidance, or evasion to pay the filing fee. The Sun Insurance, on the other hand,
applies if there is otherwise and that the insufficiency of payment was brought about without bad
faith.
 The same rule applies to permissive counterclaims, third party claims and similar pleadings, which
shall not be considered filed until and unless the filing fee prescribed therefor is paid. The court may
also allow payment of said fee within a reasonable time but also in no case beyond its applicable
prescriptive or reglementary period.
 Where the trial court acquires jurisdiction over a claim by the filing of the appropriate pleading and
payment of the prescribed filing fee but, subsequently, the judgment awards a claim not specified in
the pleading, or if specified the same has been left for determination by the court, the additional
filing fee therefor shall constitute a lien on the judgment. It shall be the responsibility of the Clerk of
Court or his duly authorized deputy to enforce said lien and assess and collect the additional fee.
 Cooperatives can no longer invoke Republic Act No. 6938 as basis for exemption from the payment
of legal fees by virtue of the court’s fiscal independence
 If the plaintiff fails to comply with the jurisdictional requirement of payment of the docket fees, the
defendant should timely raise the issue of jurisdiction otherwise the latter may be estopped.
 Exempted from paying docket fees –
 Indigent litigant. Amount of the docket and other lawful fees shall be a lien on any judgement
rendered in the case favorable to the indigent, unless the court otherwise provides
 The government and its instrumentalities are exempt from paying docket fees
 2. Efficient Use of Paper Rule; E-filing (A.M. No. 10-3-7-SC and A.M. No. 11-9-4-SC, as revised, approved
on February 22, 2022)
 Scope: Apply to all courts and quasi-judicial bodies under the administrative supervision of the
Supreme Court.
 Format and Style: single space with one-and-a –half space between paragraphs, using an easily
readable font style of the party’s choice, of 14-size font, and on a 13 –inch by 8.5- inch white bond
paper.
 Margins and Prints: a left-hand margin of 1.5 inches from the edge; an upper margin of 1.2 inches
from the edge; a right-hand margin of 1.0 inch from the edge; and a lower margin of 1.0 inch from
the edge. Every page must be consecutively numbered.
 Copies to be Filed
a. Supreme Court; one original (properly marked) and four copies, unless referred to En Banc;
ten additional copies.
En banc; only two sets of annexes, one attached to the original and an extra copy
Division; two sets of annexes, one attached to the original and an extra copy

Parties: to submit, simultaneously with their court-bound papers, soft copies of the same and
their annexes (the latter in PDF format) either by email to the Court’s e-mail address or by
compact disc (CD)
b. Court of Appeals and the Sandiganbayan; one original (properly marked) and two copies with
their annexes;
c. Court of Tax Appeals; one original (properly marked) and two copies with annexes
Appeal to En Banc; one Original (properly marked) and eight copies with annexes
d. Other courts; one original (properly marked) with the stated annexes attached to it.
 Annexes Served on Adverse Party – A party required to serve a copy need not enclose copies of
those annexes that based on the record of the court such party already has in his possession. In the
event a party requests a set of the annexes actually filed with the court, the part who filed the paper
shall comply with the request within five days from receipt
 Electronic copies of all SC-bound papers and their annexes must be submitted thru electronic mail
within 24 hours from the filing of the hard copies (personally or by registered mail).
 The date of the electronic transmission shall be considered as the date of filing, provided that an
express permission is granted by the court for the online filing of initiatory pleadings, initial
responsive pleadings, appendices and exhibits to motions, and sealed and confidential documents.
In the absence of express permission from the Court, the date of filing shall be the date when the
hard copy is filed.

H. Summons (Rule 14)

 Summons is a writ by which the defendant is notified of the action brought against him or her.
 Purpose is two-fold: (1) to acquire jurisdiction over the person of the defendant and (2) to notify the
defendant that an action has been commenced so that he may be given an opportunity to be heard on the
claim against him.

1. Nature and Purpose of Summons in Relation to Actions In Personam, In Rem, and Quasi In Rem
 Nature of Summons - It is the writ by which the defendant is notified of the action brought against
him or her. An important part of that notice is a direction to the defendant that he or she must
answer the complaint within the period fixed by the Rules, and that unless he or she so answers,
plaintiff will take judgment by default and may be granted the relief applied for
 Summons in relation to Actions In Personam, In Rem and Quasi In Rem
1. Actions in personam – (a) acquire jurisdiction over the person of the defendant; and (b) to give
notice that an action has been commenced against him.
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.
 When Summons is issued (Mandatory)
GR: Within five (5) calendar days from receipt of the initiatory pleading and proof of payment of the
requisite legal fees
XPN: Complaint is on its face dismissible
 Contents
1. Summons shall be: (a) Directed to the defendant; and (b) Signed by the clerk of court under
seal.
2. Summons shall contain: (a) name of court/parties; (b) authorization for the plaintiff to serve
summons to the defendant (ex parte); (c) direction that the defendant answer within period
fixed by the Rules; and (d) notice that unless the defendant so answers, plaintiff will take
judgment by default and may be granted the relief applied for
3. Following shall be attached to the original and each copy of the summons: (a) A copy of the
complaint, and (b) An order for appointment of guardian ad litem, if any

2. Who May Serve Summons

 Served by the sheriff, his or her deputy, or other proper court officer.
 In case of failure of service of summons by them, the court may authorize the plaintiff - to serve the
summons - together with the sheriff.
 Outside the judicial region of the court where the case is pending – plaintiff
 Plaintiff is a juridical entity – it shall notify the court, in writing, and name is authorized
representative therein, attaching a board resolution or secretary’s certificate thereto, as the case
may be, stating that such representative is duly authorized to serve the summons on behalf of the
plaintiff.
 Plaintiff misrepresents that the defendant was served summons - case shall be dismissed with
prejudice, the proceedings shall be nullified, and the plaintiff shall be meted appropriate sanctions.
 Summons is returned without being served on any or all the defendants - order the plaintiff to
cause the service of summons by other means available. Failure to comply with the order shall
cause the dismissal of the initiatory pleading without prejudice.
 A public official enjoys the presumption of regularity in the discharge of one's official duties and
functions. In the absence of clear indicia of partiality or malice, the service of Summons on
petitioner is perforce deemed regular and valid. Correspondingly, the Return of Service of process
server of the RTC constitutes prima facie evidence of the facts set out therein.

3. Validity of Summons and Issuance of Alias Summons

 Validity – valid until duly served, or recalled by the court
 Alias summon - in case of loss or destruction of summons (Upon Motion)
 Substituted service – failure of service after unsuccessful attempt to personally serve defendant in
his address indicated in the complaint

4. Personal Service
 Personal service of summons is the preferred mode of service of summons. Thus, as a rule,
summons must be served personally upon the defendant or respondent wherever he or she may be
found. Rules, however, allow service of summons through other modes, such as by substituted
service, and by publication
 Summons by publication may be effected, by leave of court, when the whereabouts of the
defendant is unknown and cannot be ascertained with diligent inquiry
 Summon by publication requirement:
1. Written motion for leave of court, supported by affidavit by the plaintiff or some person on
his behalf, setting forth the grounds for the application; and
2. Diligent efforts exerted by the sheriff in ascertaining the whereabouts of the defendant.
 How effected: (1) handing copy to the defendant in person and informing that he is being served;
and (2) leaving summons within the view and in the presence of defendant, if refuses to receive or
sign
 Locus of the Service is not controlling - What is determinative of the validity of personal service is,
therefore, the person of the defendant, not the locus of the service.
 Service of summons made on a domestic private juridical entity:
1. president, managing partner, general manager, corporate secretary, treasurer, or in-house
counsel of the corporation wherever they may be found;
2. absence or unavailability of those enumerated in (1), on their secretaries;
3. Absence of (1) or (2); made upon the person who customarily receives the correspondence
for the defendant at its principal officer;
4. Under receivership or liquidation, service of summons shall be made on the receiver or
liquidator, as the case may be.
 Service of summons made on a foreign private juridical entity
1. Doing business in the Philippines – (1) resident agent designated; (2) absence of agent,
government official designated by law to that effect; or (3) any of its officers, agents, directors
or trustees within the Philippines.
2. Not registered/No resident agent (Transacted or is doing business) – with leave of court be
effected outside the PH through:
a. personal service coursed through the appropriate court in the foreign country with
the assistance of the DFA;
b. publication once in a newspaper of general circulation in the country where the
defendant may be found and by serving a copy of the summons and the court order
by registered mail at the last known address of the defendant;
c. facsimile;
d. electronic means with the prescribed proof of service: or
e. other means as the court. in its discretion, may direct.
 Service of summons made on an entity without juridical personality - effected upon all the
defendants by serving upon anyone of them, or upon the person in charge of the office or place of
business maintained in such name.

5. Substituted Service
 For justifiable causes, the defendant cannot be served personally after at least three (3) attempts on
two (2) different dates, service may be effected:
a. leaving copies of the summons at the defendants residence to a person at least eighteen
(18) years of age and of sufficient discretion residing therein;
b. leaving copies of the summons at [the] defendants office or regular place of business with
some competent person in charge thereof (one who customarily receives correspondences
for the defendant)
c. if refused entry upon making his or her authority and purpose known, by leaving copies of
the summons, with any of the officers of the home owners association or condominium
corporation or its chief security officer in charge of the community or the building where
the defendant may be found
 d. sending an electronic mail to the defendant’s electronic mail address. if allowed by the
court
 Requisites - statutory requirements must be strictly, faithfully, and fully observed:
1. Indicate the impossibility of service of summons within a reasonable time;
2. Specify the efforts exerted to locate the defendant; and
3. State that the summons was served upon:
a. person of sufficient age and discretion who is residing in the address, or
b. person in charge of the office or regular place of business, of the defendant.
4. the pertinent facts proving these circumstances be stated in the proof of service or in the
officer’s return.
 Sheriff’s return must show the details of the efforts exerted to personally serve summons upon
defendants or respondents, before substituted service or service by publication is availed
 Failure to comply with this rule renders absolutely void the substituted service along with the
proceedings taken thereafter for lack of jurisdiction over the person of the defendant.
 Impossibility of Prompt Service - Only when the defendant cannot be served personally within a
reasonable time that a substituted service may be made. Shown by stating the efforts made to find
the defendant personally and the fact that such efforts failed. This statement should be made in the
proof of service
 Substituted Service of Pleadings and other Papers vs. Substitute Service of Summons
 SUBSTITUTED SERVICE OF PLEADINGS AND OTHER PAPERS
 Purpose is to provide a copy of the pleading or other papers to the defendant in order for him
to be informed.
 Availed of only when there is failure to effect service personally or by mail. This failure occurs
when the office and residence of the party or counsel are unknown.
 Effected by delivering the copy to the clerk of court, with proof of failure of both personal
service and service by mail
 SUBSTITUTED SERVICE OF SUMMONS
 Purpose is to acquire jurisdiction over the person of the defendant in actions in personam.
 Only if service in person cannot be made after at least three (3) attempts on two (2) different
dates can the process server resort to substituted service.
 Effected by leaving copies of the summons:
1. At the defendant’s residence to a person of suitable age and discretion residing therein; or
2. By leaving copies at the defendant’s office or regular place of business with some
competent person in charge thereof;
3. By leaving copies of the summons, if refused entry upon making his or her authority and
purpose known, with any of the officers of the homeowners’ association or condominium
corporation, or chief security officer in the building of the defendant; and
4. By sending an electronic mail to the defendant’s electronic mail address, if allowed by the
court

6. Constructive Service
 Summons by Publication - Rule authorizes summons by publication whatever the action may be as
long as the identity or whereabouts of the defendant is unknown.
 Within ninety (90) calendar days from the commencement of action, by leave of court:
1. identity of the defendant is unknown;
2. whereabouts of the defendants are unknown and cannot be ascertained by diligent inquiry;
3. defendant is a resident of the Philippines but is temporarily out of the country; or
 4. defendant does not reside and cannot be found in the Philippines, the remedy of the plaintiff
in order to acquire jurisdiction to try the case is to convert the action into a proceeding in rem
or quasi in rem by attaching the property of the defendant.
 Effected through publication in a newspaper of general circulation together with a registered
mailing of a copy of the summons and the order of the court to the last known address of the
defendant
 It can be done as a complementary to service of summons by publication, but it does not mean that
service by registered mail alone would suffice.
 There is no service of summons solely by registered mail except as an additional requirement to
service by publication.

7. Extraterritorial Service -
 Defendant does not reside and is not found in the Philippines, and the action affects the personal
status of the plaintiff or relates to, or the subject of which is, property within the Philippines, in
which the defendant has or claims a lien or interest, actual or contingent, or in which the relief
demanded consists, wholly or in part, in excluding the defendant from any interest therein, or the
property of the defendant has been attached within the Philippines,
 by leave of court, be effected out of the Philippines by personal service
 or as provided for in international conventions to which the Philippines is a party:
 by publication in a newspaper of general circulation in such places and for such time as the
court may order
 a copy of the summons and order of the court shall be sent by registered mail to the last
known address of the defendant
 or in any other manner the court may deem sufficient.
 Any order granting such leave shall specify a reasonable time, which shall not be less than sixty (60)
calendar days after notice, within which the defendant must answer.
 Requisites of Extra-Territorial Service of Summons (2009 BAR) – (a) defendant is non-resident; (b)
not found in the PH; (c) action is either in rem or quasi in rem.
 There is no extraterritorial service of summons in an action in personam. Hence, extraterritorial
service upon a nonresident in an action for injunction which is in personam is not proper
 Instances when Extra-Territorial Service of Summons is allowed:
1. action affects the personal status of the plaintiff;
2. relates to, or the subject is the property within the Philippines on which the defendant has or
claims a lien or interest, actual or contingent;
3. the relief demanded consists, wholly or in part, in excluding the defendant from any interest
therein
4. other manner the court may deem sufficient
 Hague Service Convention
1. Establishes a streamlined transmission of judicial and extrajudicial documents from one State
party to another;
2. Provides transnational litigants with methods for the service of documents abroad;
3. Simplifies and expedites the service of documents abroad; and
4. Guarantees that service will be brought to the notice of the recipient in sufficient time.
 Central Authority – refers to the receiving authority in charge of receiving requests for service from
Requesting States and executing them or causing them to be executed.
 May decline the request for service if it does not comply with the provisions of the Hague Service
Convention, or when compliance with the request would infringe upon its sovereignty or security
 (OCA) is designated as the Central Authority in the Philippines for judicial documents for purposes
 For extrajudicial documents, the Central Authority is the Integrated Bar of the Philippines
 The Guidelines shall govern the operation and implementation of the Hague Service Convention in
the Philippines, insofar as they concern judicial documents in civil or commercial matters.
 The Hague Service Convention shall apply in the Philippines, provided the following conditions
are present:
1. document is to be transmitted from one State Party for service to another State Party;
2. address of the intended recipient in the receiving State Party is known;
3. document to be served is a judicial document; and
4. relates to a civil or commercial matter
 Outbound Request for Service - Upon motion for leave of court of a party in a civil or commercial
proceeding, the court shall determine whether extraterritorial service through the Hague Service
Convention is necessary.
 If the court finds that extraterritorial service under the Hague Service Convention is warranted, it
shall issue an Order to that effect.
 Once all the requirements are submitted by the party requesting the extraterritorial service
through the Hague Service Convention, the court shall coordinate with the Central Authority of
the Requested State and transmit the following:
1. Order granting the extraterritorial service;
2. Filled-out Request and Summary of Document to be Served with Warning;
3. Blank Certificate (to be completed by the Central Authority of the Requested State);
4. Documents sought to be served; and
5. Certified translations of the Model Form and all accompanying documents, where necessary
 Inbound Request for Service - Forwarding Authority of the Requesting State from which the
documents originated shall transmit the request, together with all the documents, including proof
of payment, to the OCA.
 Should the request, upon evaluation of the OCA, fails to comply with any of the above-mentioned
requirements, or there are objections for the execution of the request, the OCA shall inform the
Forwarding Authority, specifying the objection/s thereto.
 If the objections are resolved, the processing of the request shall proceed. Otherwise, the request
shall be denied, and all documents relating thereto shall be returned to the Forwarding Authority,
along with a notice of objection or denial, stating the reasons therefor.
 When the request is sufficient in form, the OCA shall forward the request to the court having
jurisdiction over the area where the intended recipient resides.

8. Proof of Service
 Personal - Made in writing by the server and shall set forth the manner, place, and date of service;
shall specify any papers which have been served with the process and the name of the person who
received the same; and shall be sworn to when made by a person other than a sheriff or his or her
deputy
 Electronic mail, a printout said e-mail, with a copy of the summons as served, and the affidavit of
the person mailing, shall constitute as proof of service.
 Publication - proved by the affidavit of the publisher, editor, business, or advertising manager, to
which affidavit a copy of publication shall be attached and by an affidavit showing the deposit of a
copy of the summons and order for publication in the post office, postage prepaid, directed to the
defendant by registered mail to his or her last known address.
 Voluntary appearance. - The defendants voluntary appearance in the action shall be equivalent to
service of summons.
I. Motions (Rule 15)
1. In General - an application for relief other than by a pleading.
 Required form of motions - All motions shall be in writing except those made in open court or in the
course of a hearing or trial.
 Motion made in open court or in the course of a hearing or trial should immediately be resolved in
open court after the adverse party is given the opportunity to argue his or her opposition thereto.
 Motion based on facts not appearing on record, the court may hear the matter on affidavits or
depositions presented by the respective parties, but the court may direct that the matter be heard
wholly or partly on oral testimony or depositions
 Required contents of motions - State the relief sought to be obtained and the grounds upon which
it is based, and if required or necessary to prove facts alleged therein, shall be accompanied by
supporting affidavits and other papers.
 Omnibus Motion Rule - a motion attacking a pleading, order, judgement, or proceeding shall
include all objections then available, and all that objections not so included shall deemed waived

2. Non-litigious Motions - Court may act upon without prejudicing the rights of adverse parties are non-
litigious motions. These motions shall not be set for hearing and shall be resolved by the court within five
(5) calendar days from receipt thereof.
 Issuance of an alias summons;
 Extension to file answer;
 Postponement;
 Issuance of a writ of execution;
 Issuance of an alias writ of execution;
 Issuance of a writ of possession;
 Issuance of an order directing the sheriff to execute the final certificate of sale; and
 Other similar motions

3. Litigious Motions
 bill of particulars;
 Motion to dismiss;
 MNT;
 MR;
 execution pending appeal;
 amend after a responsive pleading has been filed;
 cancel statutory lien;
 an order to break in or for writ of demolition;
 intervention;
 judgment on pleadings;
 Summary judgment;
 Demurrer to evidence;
 Declare defendant in default; and
 Other similar motions
 Resolution of Written Motions – All motions shall be served by: (1) Personal service; (2) Accredited
carrier; (3) Registered mail; and (4) Electronic means so as to ensure their receipt by the other party.
 No written motion shall be acted upon by the court without proof of service thereof
 opposing party shall file his or her opposition to a litigious motion within 5 calendar days from
receipt thereof. No other submissions shall be considered by the court in the resolution of the
motion.
 Resolved by the court within 15 days from its receipt of opposition, or upon expiration of period to
file such opposition.
 Hearing on litigious motions; discretionary - Court may, in the exercise of its discretion, and if
deemed necessary for its resolution, call a hearing on the motion. Notice of hearing shall be
addressed to all parties concerned and shall specify date and time of hearing
 Effect of granting a motion to dismiss - Subject to the right of appeal, an order granting a motion to
dismiss or an affirmative defense shall bar the refiling of the same action or claim.

4. Prohibited Motions (DARSEP)

 Motion to dismiss –
 XPNs: (a) lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter; (b) litis pendentia; and (c) res judicata.
 Other grounds for dismissal of actions, such as that in Rule 17 (upon notice by plaintiff; upon motion
of plaintiff; due to fault of plaintiff) and that in Rule 33 (Demurrer to evidence, which is, in effect a
motion to dismiss).
 Motion to hear affirmative defenses - court shall motu proprio resolve the affirmative defenses
within 30 calendar days from the filing of the answer (Summary Hearing)
 MR of the court’s action on the affirmative defenses – Affirmative defenses, if denied, shall not be
the subject of a motion for reconsideration or petition for certiorari, prohibition or mandamus, but
may be among the matters to be raised on appeal after a judgment on the merits
 Motion to suspend proceedings without a temporary restraining order or injunction issued by a
higher court;
 Motion for extension of time to file pleadings, affidavits or any other papers; - XPN: Motion for
extension to file an answer
 Motion for postponement intended for delay; - XPN: (a) acts of God; (b) Force majeure; and (c)
Physical Inability of the witness to appear and testify.
 If the motion is granted based on such exceptions, the moving party shall be warned that the
presentation of its evidence must still be terminated on the dates previously agreed upon

5. Motion for Bill of Particulars (Rule 12) - a motion for a definitive statement for any matter which is not
averred to any by an adverse party with sufficient definiteness or particularity to enable him or her
properly to prepare his or her pleading
 Three Options available to the Defendant upon receipt of the Complaint (BAD)
1. Filing of a motion for bill of particulars;
2. Filing of an answer to the complaint; or
3. Filing of a motion to dismiss
 Purpose and when applied for - to clarify the allegations in the pleading so an adverse party may be
informed with certainty of the exact character of the cause of action or defense.
 Not to enable the movant to prepare for trial. Where the movant is to enable him to prepare for
trial, the appropriate remedy is to avail of the discovery procedures and even of a pretrial.
 Motion for a Bill of Particulars; when Available - Before responding to a pleading. If the pleading is
a reply, the motion must be filed within 10 calendar days from service thereof
 Instances when a Bill of Particulars is allowed:
1. allegations are indefinite and uncertain that the nature cannot be understood therefrom;
2. allegations are so vague that they do not appear therefrom in what capacity a party sues or is
issued;
3. allegations are uncertain as to time, place, quantity, title, person, or any other matter
required to be pleaded with certainty;
4. allegations are faulty in duplication, setting out two grounds for a single claim;
 5. denials are so indefinite and uncertain that it cannot be understood what is denied and what
is admitted;
6. Particulars of details of computation of bank account were allowed; technicalities are frowned
upon; or
7. Conclusions of law – deceit, machination, false pretenses, misrepresentations and threats are
conclusions of law and mere allegations thereof without a statement of the facts to which
such terms have references are not sufficient
 When Bill of Particular is Improper: (a) Specified with particularity; (b) within party’s knowledge; (c)
Irrelevant to the allegations of complaint; or (d) Properly ascertainable by discovery.
 Filing of Bill of Particulars - filed either through a separate or an amended pleading
 Who can avail of Motion for Bill of Particulars - Both parties
 Requirements of Bill of Particulars: Point out: (a) Defects complained of; (b) paragraphs wherein
they are contained; and (c) details desired.
 Action of the court: Court may: (a) Deny or Grant it outright; and (b) Allow parties the opportunity
to be heard.
 Motion granted - Either in whole or in part, it must be effected within 10 calendar days from notice
of the order, unless a different period is fixed by the court. The bill of particulars or a more definite
statement ordered by the court may be filed in a separate or in an amended pleading, serving a
copy thereof on the adverse party
 Non-Compliance with the Order of a Bill of Particular –
1. If order is not obeyed/insufficient compliance therewith, the court may:
(a) striking out of the pleading or the portion thereof to which the order is directed; or
(b) Make such orders as it may deem just.
2. Plaintiff is disobedient, his or her complaint will be stricken off and dismissed
3. Defendant is disobedient, his answer will be stricken off and his counterclaim dismissed,
and he will be declared in default upon motion of the plaintiff.

J. Dismissal of Actions (Rule 17)

 Dismissal upon notice by plaintiff - at any time before service of the answer or of a motion for summary
judgment. The court shall issue an order confirming the dismissal, without prejudice.
 With prejudice, when dismissed twice on action based on or including the same claim.
 Dismissal upon motion of plaintiff (without prejudice) - After the service of answer or of a motion for
summary judgement, a complaint shall not be dismissed at the plaintiff’s instance save upon approval of the
court and upon such terms and conditions as the court deems proper.
 Does not affect counterclaim if pleaded prior to service of the plaintiff’s motion for dismissal. Unless, within
15 days from notice of the motion he manifests preference to have his counterclaim resolved in the same
action.
 A class suit shall not be dismissed or compromised without approval of the court.
 Dismissal due to fault of plaintiff - for no justifiable cause, (1) the plaintiff fails to appear on the date of the
presentation of his or her evidence in chief on the complaint, or (2) to prosecute his or her action for an
unreasonable length of time, or (3) to comply with these Rules or any order of the court.
 The complaint may be dismissed upon motion of the defendant or upon the courts own motion, without
prejudice to the right of the defendant to prosecute his or her counterclaim in the same or in a separate
action.
 Dismissal shall have the effect of adjudication upon the merits, unless otherwise declared by the court.
 Dismissal of counterclaim, cross-claim, or third-party complaint - before a responsive pleading or a motion
for summary judgment is served or, if there is none, before the introduction of evidence at the trial or
hearing.
1. With Prejudice vs. Without Prejudice
 Dismissal with Prejudice –
 notice of dismissal by the plaintiff provides that the dismissal is with prejudice
 plaintiff has previously dismissed the same case in a court of competent jurisdiction based on or
including the same claim
 dismissal shall have the effect of adjudication on the merits, unless otherwise declared by the
court
 Dismissal without Prejudice - dismissal made by the filing of a notice of dismissal
 DISMISSAL UPON NOTICE BY THE PLAINTIFF; TWO-DISMISSAL RULE
 Dismissal upon Notice by the Plaintiff - at any time before service of the answer or of a motion for
summary judgment Upon such notice being filed, the court shall issue an order confirming the
dismissal, without prejudice.
 GR: A dismissal without prejudice
 XPNs:
1. Notice of dismissal by the plaintiff provides that the dismissal is with prejudice
2. Two-Dismissal Rule
3. Even where the notice of dismissal does not provide that it is with prejudice but it is
premised on the fact of payment by the defendant of the claim involved
 It is a matter of right
 Dismissal as a matter of right ceases when an answer or a motion for summary judgment is
served on the plaintiff and not when the answer or motion is filed with the court.
 Thus, if a notice of dismissal is filed by the plaintiff even after an answer has been filed in court
but before the responsive pleading has been served on the plaintiff, the notice of dismissal is
still a matter of right.
 Since there is no answer yet filed by the adverse party, no counterclaim is recoverable.
 Two-dismissal rule - When filed by a plaintiff who has once dismissed in a competent court an
action based on or including the same
 DISMISSAL UPON MOTION OF PLAINTIFF; EFFECT ON EXISTING COUNTERCLAIM
 After service of the answer or a motion for summary judgment by the adverse party.
 A matter of discretion upon the court
 A complaint shall not be dismissed at the plaintiff's instance without approval of the court and upon
such terms and conditions as the court deems proper
 GR: It is a dismissal without prejudice.
 XPN: If the order of dismissal specifies that it is with prejudice.
 A class suit shall not be dismissed or compromised without the approval of the court
 Effect: If a counterclaim has been pleaded by a defendant prior to the service upon him of the
plaintiff's motion for dismissal, the dismissal shall be limited to the complaint.
 GR: It is without prejudice to the right of defendant to prosecute his counterclaim in a separate
action
 XPN: Unless within fifteen (15) calendar days from notice of the motion he manifests his preference
to have his counterclaim resolved in the same action.
 DISMISSAL DUE TO THE FAULT OF PLAINTIFF
1. If, for no justifiable cause, the plaintiff fails to appear on the date of the presentation of his
evidence in chief on the complaint;
2. plaintiff fails to prosecute his action for an unreasonable length of time (nolle prosequi)
3. plaintiff fails to comply with the Rules or any order of the court
 The plaintiff’s failure to appear at the trial after he has presented his evidence and rested his case
does not warrant the dismissal of the case on the ground of failure to prosecute. It is merely a
waiver of his right to crossexamine and to object to the admissibility of evidence
  Matter of evidence
 GR: Dismissal is with prejudice because it has an effect of an adjudication on the merits.
 XPN: Unless otherwise declared by the court
 Dismissal upon motion of the defendant or upon the court's own motion is without prejudice to the
right of the defendant to prosecute his counterclaim on the same or separate action.
 Note: Failure of the plaintiff to appear at the pre-trial when so required shall cause for the dismissal
of the action.

2. Dismissals Which Have an Effect of an Adjudication on the Merits

 Judgement on the merits - one wherein there is an unequivocal determination of the rights and
obligations of the parties with respect to the causes of action and the subject matter
 When it determines the rights and liabilities of the parties based on the disclosed facts, irrespective
of formal, technical or dilatory objections
 Rendered after a determination of which party is right
 It is not required that a trial, actual hearing, or argument on the facts of the case ensued, for as long
as the parties had the full legal opportunity to be heard on their respective claims and contentions
 Consequences when a dismissal has the effect of an adjudication on the merits – (1) with prejudice
to the filing of another action; (2) remedy is to appeal the order of dismissal; and (3) res judicata
sets in.
 Dismissals which have an effect of an adjudication on the merits
1. Order granting a motion to dismiss or affirmative defense on litis pendentia, prescription,
extinguishment of claim, or unenforceability of claim;
2. Two-dismissal Rule;
3. Dismissal due to fault of the plaintiff; unless otherwise qualified by the court
4. Acts of the party or his counsel clearly constitute willful and deliberate forum shopping;
5. Dismissal by way of demurrer to evidence.

K. Pre-Trial (Rule 18)

 Concept of Pre-Trial - procedural device by which the court is called upon, after the filing of the last
pleading, (1) to compel the parties and their lawyers to appear before it, and (2) negotiate an amicable
settlement or otherwise make a formal statement and (3) embody in a single document the issues of fact
and law involved in the action, and (4) such other matters as may aid in the prompt disposition of the
action.
 Conduct of a pre-trial - Clerk of court, within five (5) calendar days from filing of the last responsive
pleading, issue a notice of pre-trial which shall be set not later than 60 calendar days.

1. Nature and Purpose

 Nature of a Pre-trial - Mandatory and should be terminated promptly. It is not a mere technicality in
court proceedings for it serves a vital objective: the simplification, abbreviation, and expedition of
the trial, if not indeed its dispensation
 Pre-trial Conference - Judge shall be the one to ask questions on issues raised by the parties and all
questions or comments by counsel or parties must be directed to the judge. (to avoid hostilities
between the parties)

 Purposes of Pre-trial
1. Possibility of an amicable settlement or of a submission to alternative modes of dispute
resolution;
 2. Simplification of the issues;
3. Possibility of obtaining stipulations or admissions of facts and of documents to avoid
unnecessary proof;
4. Limitation of the number and identification of witnesses and the setting of trial dates;
5. Advisability of a preliminary reference of issues to a commissioner;
6. Propriety of rendering judgment on the pleadings, or summary judgment, or of dismissing the
action should a valid ground therefore be found to exist;
7. The requirement for the parties to:
a. Mark their respective evidence if not yet marked in the judicial affidavits of their
witnesses;
b. Examine and make comparisons of the adverse parties’ evidence vis-à-vis the copies to be
marked;
c. Manifest for the record stipulations regarding the faithfulness of the reproductions and the
genuineness and due execution of the adverse parties’ evidence;
d. Reserve evidence not available at the pre-trial, but only in the following manner:
i. For testimonial evidence, by giving the name or position and the nature of the
testimony of the proposed witness;
ii. For documentary evidence and other object evidence, by giving a particular
description of the evidence
8. Such other matters as may aid in the prompt disposition of the action.
 Effect of failure of a party and counsel to appear without just cause, despite notice - result in a
waiver of any objections to the faithfulness of the reproductions marked, or their genuineness and
due execution.
 Effect of failure without just cause of a party and counsel to bring the evidence required - deemed
a waiver of the presentation of such evidence
 Effect of failure of the parties to settle the case during Pre-trial Proceeding - Judge should not
allow the termination of a pre-trial simply because of the manifestation of the parties that they
cannot settle the case. Instead, he should expose the parties to the advantages of pre-trial. He must
also be mindful that there are important aspects of the pre-trial that ought to be taken up to
expedite the disposition of the case.
 If all efforts to settle fail, judge shall endeavor to achieve the other purposes of a pre-trial like,
among others, obtaining admissions or stipulations of fact. Ask the parties to submit whatever
depositions have been taken, answers to written interrogatories, and the answers to request for
admissions by the adverse party. He may also require the production of documents or things
requested by a party and the results of the physical and mental examination of persons
 One Day Examination of Witness Rule (2009, 2016 BAR) - Court shall ask the parties to agree on the
specific dates for continuous trial, adhere to the case flow chart determined by the court and use
the time frame for each stage setting the trial dates.
 Witness shall be fully examined in 1 day only, subject to the court’s discretion during the trial on
whether or not to extend the examination for justifiable reasons.
 Most Important Witness Rule (2016 BAR) - Where no settlement has been effected, court shall
determine the most important witnesses and limit the number of such witnesses and require the
parties and/or counsels to submit to the branch clerk of court the names, addresses and contact
numbers of the witnesses to be summoned by subpoena
 The court may also refer the case to a trial by commissioner

2. Appearance of Parties; Effects of Failure to Appear

 Appearance of parties at pre-trial, CAM and ADR - Both the parties and their counsel must appear.
 Non-appearance of a party and counsel may be excused only for acts of God, force majeure or duly
substantiated physical inability
 Should the lawyer undertake to appear not only as an attorney but in substitution of his client’s
person, it is imperative for him to have “special authority” to make such substantive agreements as
only the client otherwise has capacity to make
 The “special authority” of the lawyer or representative should be in writing because the courts can
neither second-guess the specific powers given, nor can the courts assume that all the powers are
granted by a party to his representative.
 Representative may appear on behalf of a party - fully authorized in writing to enter into an
amicable settlement, to submit to alternative modes of dispute resolution, and to enter into
stipulations or admissions of facts and documents
 Failure to appear during pre-trial when duly notified
1. Plaintiff’s and counsel’s failure to appear without valid cause - cause for the dismissal of the
action, with prejudice, unless otherwise ordered by the court.
Remedy: (1) Appeal; or (2) Re-filing of the complaint, if without predudice.
2. Defendant’s and counsel’s non-attendance - cause to allow the plaintiff to present his or her
evidence ex parte, within ten (10) calendar days from termination of the pre-trial, and the court
to render judgment on the basis of the evidence offered
Remedy: MR of the order and if the denial is tainted with grave abuse of discretion, he may file
a petition for certiorari (Rule 65)
 When non-appearance of a party in a pre-trial conference excused
1. Valid cause is shown therefore; or
2. Representative shall appear on behalf of a party fully authorized in writing to: (a) enter
amicable settlement; (b) Submit to mode of ADR; and (c) enter stipulations/admissions of facts
and of documents.
Note: Mere presentation of such written authority is not sufficient, but must be complemented
by a showing of valid cause for the non-appearance of the party himself
 Effect of the non-appearance of a party on the dates set for CAM or JRD if necessary - deemed as
non-appearance at the pre-trial and shall merit the same sanctions.
 When is CAM conducted (Mandatory) - After pre-trial and, after issues are joined;
 Duration of CAM: 30 days without further extension
 When is JDR conducted - Only if the judge of the court to which the case was originally raffled is
convinced that settlement is still possible, case may be referred to another court for JDR.
 Duration of JDR – non extendible period of 15 calendar days from notice of failure of CAM

3. Pre-Trial Brief; Effect of Failure to File

 When filed – at least 3 days before the date of pre-trial.
 Contents of a pre-trial brief:
1. Concise statement of the case and the reliefs prayed for;
2. Summary of admitted facts and proposed stipulation of facts;
3. Main factual and legal issues to be tried or resolved;
4. Propriety of referral of factual issues to commissioners;
5. Documents or other object evidence to be marked, stating the purpose thereof;
6. Names of the witnesses, and the summary of their respective testimonies; and
7. brief statement of points of law and citation of authorities
 Parties are bound by the representations and statements in their respective pre-trial briefs. Hence,
such representations and statements are in the nature of judicial admissions
 Effect of Failure to file a Pre-trial Brief – same effect as failure to appear at the pre-trial
1. plaintiff fails to file a pre-trial brief- such failure shall be a cause for dismissal of the action;
 2. defendant fails to do so- such failure shall be a cause to allow the plaintiff to present his
evidence ex parte.
 The dismissal of the complaint for failure to file pre-trial brief is discretionary on the part of the trial
court
 Purpose of the pre-trial order - bind the parties, limit the trial matters not disposed of and control
the course of action during the trial.
 The non-inclusion of an issue in the pre-trial order bars its consideration during trial
 No evidence shall be allowed to be presented and offered during the trial in support of a party’s
evidence-in-chief other than those that had been earlier identified and pre-marked during the pre-
trial except if allowed by the court for good cause shown.

L. Intervention (Rule 19)

 A remedy by which a third party, not originally impleaded in the proceedings, becomes a litigant therein to
enable him or her or it to protect or preserve a right or interest which may be affected by such proceedings.
 A proceeding in a suit or action by which third person is permitted by the court to make himself a party,
either joining the plaintiff in claiming what is sought by the complaint, or uniting with the defendant in
resisting the claims of the plaintiff, or demanding something adverse from both of them
 Intervention is merely optional and permissive. Hence, the court has the full measure of discretion in
permitting or disallowing the same.
 Court can no longer allow to intervene in the intestate proceeding of estate that had already been closed
and terminated more than two years before their motion was filed
 Who may intervene – (a) A person who has a legal interest in the matter in litigation; (b) or in the success of
either parties; (c) or an interest against both, or is so situated as to be adversely affected by distribution or
other disposition of property in the custody of the court.
 Legal Interest - actual, material, direct and of an immediate character, so that the intervenor will either gain
or lose by the direct legal operation of judgment.
 Requirements for intervention – Prove: (a) Has legal interest in the matter litigated; [FACTORS IN
APPROVAL] (b) intervention will not unduly prejudice or delay the adjudication of the rights of the parties;
and (c) his claim is not capable of being properly decided in a separate proceeding.
 Requisites for Intervention
1. Motion for intervention filed before rendition of judgment by the trial court; (necessary – leave of
court required for allowance)
2. Show in his or her motion that he or she has/is:
a. immediate legal interest in the matter in controversy, not merely contingent;
b. legal interest in the success of either of the parties in the action;
c. so situated as to be adversely affected by a distribution or other disposition of the property in
the custody of the court or of an officer thereof
3. Intervention will not unduly delay or prejudice the adjudication of the rights of original parties; and
4. Intervenor’s rights may not be fully protected in a separate proceeding
 It is recognized that a judgment creditor who has reduced his claim to judgment may be allowed to
intervene and a purchaser who acquires an interest in property upon which an attachment has been levied
may intervene in the underlying action in which the writ of attachment was issued for the purpose of
challenging the attachment.
 Intervention is NOT an independent proceeding (2000 BAR) - ancillary and supplemental to an existing
litigation.
 Denial of a motion to intervene does not constitute res judicata. The remedy of the intervenor is to file a
separate action.
 Intervention cannot alter nature of action (2011 BAR) and the issues are already joined
 Time to Intervene - any time before rendition of judgment by the trial court. Copy of the pleading-in-
intervention shall be attached to the motion and served on the original parties
 Procedure for intervention
1. Intervenor shall file a motion for intervention attaching thereto his pleading-in-intervention
a. Complaint-in-intervention - assert a claim against either or all of the original parties
b. Answer-in-intervention - pleading seeks to unite with the defending party in resisting a claim
against the latter
2. Motion and the pleading shall be served upon the original parties
3. Answer to the complaint-in-intervention shall be filed within fifteen (15) calendar days from notice
of the order admitting the same, unless a different period is fixed by the courts
 Intervention may be allowed after judgment has been rendered by the court
 GR: After rendition of judgment, a motion to intervene is barred, even if the judgment itself recognizes the
right of the movant. Hence, intervention after trial and decision can no longer be permitted.
 XPNs:
1. Indispensable parties, allowed even on appeal
2. intervenor is the Republic (Prescription does not lie against the State)
3. Necessary to protect some interest which cannot otherwise be protected, and for the purpose of
preserving the intervenor’s right to appeal
4. During the pendency of the appeal, where the interest of justice so requires
 The allowance or disallowance of a motion for intervention rests on the sound discretion of the court after
consideration of the appropriate circumstances
 REMEDY FOR THE DENIAL OF MOTION TO INTERVENE - Mandamus from the Order of the court allowing or
disallowing intervention (arbitrary abuse of that discretion)
 GR: The granting or refusal of a motion to intervene is a matter of judicial discretion, and once exercised,
the decision of the court cannot be reviewed or controlled by mandamus, however erroneous it may be
 XPN: arbitrary abuse of that discretion, in which case mandamus may issue if there is no other adequate
remedy, though the result is that the court will be called upon to review the exercise of a discretionary
power
 A court’s power to allow or deny intervention is circumscribed by the basic juridical procedure that only a
person with interest in an action or proceeding may be allowed to intervene
 This discretion, however, must be exercised judiciously and only after consideration of all the circumstances
obtaining in the case. Thus, where substantial interest of the movant in the subject matter is undisputed, a
denial of a motion to intervene is an injustice.

M. Subpoena (Rule 21)

 SUBPOENA AD TESTIFICANDUM - process directed to a person requiring him or her to attend and to testify
at the hearing or the trial of an action, or at any investigation conducted by competent authority, or for the
taking of his or her deposition.
 Subpoena Duces Tecum - require him to bring with him or her any books, documents, or other things under
his or her control, in which case it is called a subpoena duces tecum
 May be served to a non-party
 Needs tender of kilometrage, attendance fee and reasonable cost of production fee.
 When a party may apply for the issuance of subpoena ad testificandum or duces tecum - If the
government employee or official, or the requested witness, who is neither the (a) witness of the adverse
party nor a (b) hostile witness:
1. Unjustifiably declines to execute a judicial affidavit; or
2. Refuses without just cause to make the relevant books, documents, or other things under his control
available for copying, authentication, and eventual production in court.
 The rules governing the issuance of a subpoena to the witness in this case shall be the same as when taking
his deposition except that the taking of a judicial affidavit shall be understood to be ex parte.
 The subpoena may be issued by any of the following:
1. court before whom the witness is required to attend;
2. court of the place where the deposition is to be taken;
3. officer or body authorized by law to do so in connection with investigations conducted by said officer
or body; or
4. Any Justice of the SC or of the CA in any case or investigation pending within the Philippines
 Quashing of Subpoena - Grounds in Subpoena duces tecum: Upon motion promptly made and, in any
event, at or before the time specified therein:
1. unreasonable and oppressive;
2. relevancy of the books, documents or things does not appear;
3. person in whose behalf the subpoena is issued fails to advance the reasonable cost of the production
thereof
4. witness fees and kilometrage allowed by the Rules were not tendered when the subpoena was served
 Effect of failure to comply with subpoena - Contempt
 GR: court or judge which issued the subpoena, issue a warrant for the arrest of the witness and require him
or her to pay the cost of such warrant and seizure (disobeyed w/o just cause)
 XPNs:
1. Viatory right – resides more than 100 Kms.
2. Permission of the court in which the detention prisoner’s case is pending was not obtained

N. Computation of Time (Rule 22)

 The day of the act or event from which the designated period of time begins to run is to be excluded and
the date of performance included.
 If the last day of the period falls on a Saturday, a Sunday, or a legal holiday in the place where the court sits,
the time shall not run until the next working day.
 Effect of interruption - the allowable period after such interruption shall start to run on the day after notice
of the cessation of the cause thereof
 The day of the act that caused the interruption shall be excluded in the computation of the period.

O. Modes of Discovery
 Discovery - device employed by a party to obtain information about relevant matters on the case from the
adverse party in preparation for the trial.
 The device may be used by all the parties to the case. Rules of Discovery also apply to special proceedings
 Purposes of the Rules of Discovery
1. enable a party to obtain knowledge of material facts within the knowledge of the adverse party or of
third parties through depositions;
2. obtain knowledge of material facts or admissions from the adverse party through written
interrogatories;
3. obtain admissions from the adverse party regarding the genuineness of relevant documents or
relevant matters of fact through requests for admissions;
4. inspect relevant documents or objects, and lands or other property in the possession and control of
the adverse party; and
5. determine the physical or mental condition of a party when such is in controversy.
 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.
 Modes of discovery provided by the Rules of Civil Procedure
a. Depositions pending action; before action or pending appeal;
b. Interrogatories to parties;
c. Admission by adverse party;
d. Production/inspection of documents or things; and
e. Physical & mental examinations of persons.

1. Depositions (Rules 23 and 24, See People v. Sergio, G.R. No. 240053, October 9, 2019)
 Testimony of a witness, put or taken in writing, under oath or affirmation, before a commissioner,
examiner or other judicial officer, in answer to interlocutory and cross-interlocutory, and usually
subscribed by the witnesses
 Scope of examination in a deposition - any matter, not privileged, which is relevant to the subject of
the pending action, whether relating to the claim or defense of any other party, including the
existence, description, nature, custody, condition, and location of any books, documents, or other
tangible things and the identity and location of persons having knowledge of relevant facts.
 May be applied suppletorily to criminal proceedings provided there are compelling reasons to do so.
 Deposition by written interrogatories can be made in criminal proceedings provided the two-fold
purpose of the accused’s right to confrontation is safeguarded.
1. Primarily, afford the accused an opportunity to test the testimony of the witness by cross-
examination
2. Secondarily, allow the judge to observe the deportment of the witness
 In the case of People v. Sergio, the trial court laid down the terms and conditions to ensure that the
accused may be given ample opportunity to cross-examine the witness by way of written
interrogatories so as not to defeat the first purpose of their constitutional right. The trial court judge
shall then be present during the conduct of written interrogatories as this will give ample
opportunity to observe and examine the demeanor of the witness closely which upholds the second
purpose of the constitutional right. The Supreme Court held that the constitutional right of the
accused was safeguarded
 Effect of substitution of parties - does not affect the right to use depositions previously taken, all
depositions lawfully taken and duly filed in the former action may be used in the latter as if
originally taken therefor
 Effect of taking depositions - party shall not be deemed to make a person his or her own witness for
any purpose
 Effect of using depositions
 GR: The introduction in evidence of the deposition, or any part thereof, makes the deponent the
witness of the party introducing the deposition.
 XPN:
1. deposition is used for impeaching or contradicting the deponent; or
2. adverse party uses the deposition of the other party
 Rebutting a deposition - during trial or hearing, any party may rebut any relevant evidence
contained in a deposition whether introduced by him or her or by any other party.
 Persons before whom deposition may be taken
1. If within the Philippines: (a) Any Judge; (b) Notary Public; or (c) Any person authorized to
administer oaths, as stipulated by the parties in writing
2. If outside the Philippines:
a. On notice, before a secretary of embassy or legation, consul-general, consul, vice-consul,
or consular agent of the Philippines
b. person or officer as may be appointed by commission or letters rogatory; or
 c. Any person authorized to administer oaths, as stipulated by the parties in writing
 Deposition as direct testimony - The taking of depositions has been allowed as a departure from
open-court testimony. Depositions may be taken at any time after the institution of any action,
whenever necessary or convenient." There is no rule that limits deposition taking only to the period
of pre-trial or before it; no prohibition against the taking of depositions after pre-trial." There can be
no valid objection to allowing them during the process of executing final and executory judgments,
when the material issues of fact have become numerous or complicated.
 Depositions are allowed, provided they are taken in accordance with the provisions of the Rules of
Court (that is, with leave of court if the summons have been served, without leave Page 179 of 1093
of court if an answer has been submitted); and provided, further, that a circumstance for their
admissibility exists.
 How can a person perpetuate his or her testimony even before the filing of any action - file a
verified petition in the court of the place of the residence of any expected adverse party.
 Disqualifications of a deposition officer:
1. related to the deponent within the 6th degree C/A
2. employee or attorney of one of the parties;
3. related to the attorney of the deponent within the same degree or employee of such attorney
4. financially interested in the action
 Modes of Discovery
1. Deposition Pending Action - Upon ex parte motion of a party, testimony of any person,
whether a party or not, taken by deposition upon oral examination or written interrogatories.
Compel attendance by subpoena. Deposition of a person confined in prison may be taken only
by leave of court on such terms as the court prescribes
2. Depositions before action or pending appeal - person who desires to perpetuate own or
another testimony, may file a verified petition in the court of the place of the residence of any
expected adverse party.
3. Written interrogatories to adverse parties - Upon ex parte motion, elicit material and relevant
facts from any adverse party, file and serve upon the latter written interrogatories, 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.
4. Admission by adverse party - any time after issues have been joined, file and serve upon any
other party a written request for the admission of the genuineness of any material and relevant
document or of the truth of any material and relevant matter of fact.
5. Production or inspection of documents or things - good cause therefor, court 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.
6. Physical and mental examination of persons - court in which the action is pending may in its
discretion order him or her to submit to a physical or mental examination by a physician.
 Rule on deposition by written interrogatories - may be applied suppletorily in criminal proceedings
so long as there is compelling reason.

2. Interrogatories to Parties (Rule 25)

 Mode of discovery intended as a means to compel disclosure of facts resting in the knowledge of a
party or other person which are relevant in some suit or proceeding in court
 Done by filing a set of written questions made by a party and is served to the adverse party where
the latter must respond in writing.
 Service - Upon ex parte motion, 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
 Answer to interrogatories - fully in writing and shall be signed and sworn to by the person making
them. File and serve a copy of the answers on the party submitting the interrogatories within fifteen
(15) calendar days after service thereof, unless the court, on motion and for good cause shown,
extends or shortens the time.
 Objections to interrogatories - presented to the court within ten (10) calendar days after service
thereof, with notice as in case of a motion; and answers shall be deferred until the objections are
resolved, which shall be at as early a time as is practicable
 Number of interrogatories - without leave of court, serve more than one set of interrogatories to be
answered by the same party.
 Scope and use of interrogatories. – relate to any matters that can be inquired into and the answers
may be used for the same purposes
 Effect of failure to serve written interrogatories. - may not be compelled by the adverse party to
give testimony in open court, or to give a deposition pending appeal.
 Purpose of interrogatories to parties - to obtain admissions and thus limit subjects of controversy at
trial and avoid unnecessary testimony and waste of time in preparation.
 The answers may now be used as judicial admissions of the adverse party.
 If a motion to a bill of particulars is denied, it will not bar the party to avail of modes of discovery.
 Effect of unsigned deposition - does not preclude its use during the trial. deponent’s signature to
the deposition is not in all events indispensable since the presence of signature goes primarily to the
form of deposition.
 DEPOSITIONS UPON WRITTEN INTERROGATORIES TO PARTIES
 Deponent – Party/ordinary witness
 Procedure – With intervention of officer authorized by the court to take deposition. Not served
to the adverse party directly, instead, delivered to the officer before whom the deposition is to
be taken.
 Scope – Direct, Cross, redirect, re-cross
 Interrogatories – no fixed time
 Binding effect – to anyone present during deposition
 INTERROGATORIES TO PARTIES
 Deponent – Party only
 Procedure – No intervention, directed to party himself, served directly upon adverse party.
 Scope – Direct, Cross, redirect, re-cross
 Interrogatories – 15 days to answer unless extended or reduced by the court.
 Binding effect – only to the parties.
 Procedure in taking interrogatories - upon ex parte motion, by filing and serving upon the adverse
party written interrogatories to be answered by the party served. If the party is a juridical entity, it
shall be answered by any of its officers competent to testify in its behalf
 No party may, without leave of court, serve more than one set of interrogatories to be answered by
the same party
 Necessity of leave of court before a party may be served with written interrogatories - the issues
are not yet joined and the disputed facts are not yet clear. However, it is not necessary after answer
has been served, for the first set of interrogatories.
 EFFECT OF FAILURE TO SERVE WRITTEN INTERROGATORIES
 GR: 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.
 XPN: When allowed by the court and there is good cause shown and the same is necessary to
prevent a failure of justice.
 As a rule, in civil cases, the procedure of calling the adverse party to the witness stand is not
allowed, unless written interrogatories are first served upon the latter. The rule aims to prevent
fishing expeditions and needless delays; it is there to maintain order and facilitate the conduct of
trial. It will be presumed that a party who does not serve written interrogatories on the adverse
party beforehand will most likely be unable to elicit facts useful to its case if it later opts to call the
adverse party to the witness stand as its witness

3. Admission by Adverse Party (Rule 26)

 Request for admission - any time after issues have been joined, file and serve upon any other party
a written request for the admission by the latter of the (1) genuineness of any material and relevant
document described in and exhibited with the request or of (2) the truth of any material and
relevant matter of fact set forth in the request.
 The answer to a request for admission properly served which was signed and sworn to by the
counsel of the party so requested is sufficient compliance with this rule, especially in the light of
counsel’s authority
 Implied admission - Each of the matters of which an admission is requested shall be deemed
admitted, unless within 15 calendar days, party (requested) 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 or she cannot truthfully either
admit or deny those matters
 Objections to any request for admission shall be submitted to the court by the party requested
within the period for and prior to the filing of his or her sworn statement as contemplated in the
preceding paragraph and his or her compliance therewith shall be deferred until such objections are
resolved, which resolution shall be made as early as practicable
 The answer to a request for admission properly served which was signed and sworn to by the
counsel of the party so requested is sufficient compliance with this rule, especially in the light of
counsel’s authority or relevant matters of fact set forth therein on account of failure to answer the
request for admission.
 Effect of admission - for the purpose of the pending action only and shall not constitute an
admission by him or her for any other purpose nor may the same be used against him or her in any
other proceeding.
 Withdrawal - court may allow the party making an admission under this Rule, whether express or
implied, to withdraw or amend it upon such terms as may be just.
 Effect of failure to file and serve request for admission - Effect of failure to file and serve request
for admission

4. Production or Inspection of Documents or Things (Rule 27)

 Motion for production or inspection; order - Upon motion of any party showing good cause
therefor, court may:
1. order any party to produce and permit the inspection and copying or photographing, by or
on behalf of the moving party, of any designated documents, papers, books, accounts,
letters, photographs, objects or tangible things, not privileged, which constitute or contain
evidence material to any matter involved in the action and which are in his or her
possession, custody or control; or
2. order any party to permit entry upon designated land or other property in his or her
possession or control for the purpose of inspecting, measuring, surveying, or photographing
the property or any designated relevant object or operation thereon. The order shall specify
the time, place and manner of making the inspection and taking copies and photographs,
and may prescribe such terms and conditions as are just.
 Limitations on the request for production or inspection of documents or things
1. Should not be privileged;
2. 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
3. the papers and documents to be produced must be sufficiently described.
 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.
 Requisites –
1. File a Motion for the production or inspection of documents or things, showing good cause
therefor;
2. Served to all other parties of the case;
3. Designate the documents, papers, books, accounts, letters, photographs, objects or tangible
things which the party wishes to be produced and inspected;
4. documents, etc., are not Privileged; and
5. are in the Possession, custody or control of the other party

5. Physical and Mental Examination of Persons (Rule 28)

 When examination may be ordered - the court in which the action is pending may in its discretion
order him or her to submit to a physical or mental examination by a physician
 Order for examination - only on motion for good cause shown and upon notice to the party to be
examined and to all other parties, and shall specify the time, place, manner, conditions and scope of
the examination and the person or persons by whom it is to be made
 Report of findings - If requested by the party examined, party causing the examination to be made
shall deliver to him or her a copy of a detailed written report of the examining physician setting out
his or her findings and conclusions.
 After such request and delivery, party causing the examination to be made shall be entitled upon
request to receive from the party examined a like report of any examination, previously or
thereafter made, of the same mental or physical condition.
 If party examined refuses to deliver such report, court on motion and notice may make an order
requiring delivery on such terms as are just, and if a physician fails or refuses to make such a report,
the court may exclude his or her testimony if offered at the trial
 Waiver of privilege - By requesting and obtaining a report of the examination so ordered or by
taking the deposition of the examiner, the party examined waives any privilege he or she may have
in that action or any other involving the same controversy, regarding the testimony of every other
person who has examined or may thereafter examine him or her in respect of the same mental or
physical examination.
 When available - action in which the physical or mental condition of a party is in controversy.

6. Refusal to Comply With Modes of Discovery (Rule 29

 Refusal to answer - examination may be completed on other matters or adjourned as the
proponent of the question may prefer. The proponent may thereafter apply to the proper court of
the place where the deposition is being taken, for an order to compel an answer. The same
procedure may be availed of when a party or a witness refuses to answer any interrogatory
submitted
 Application is granted, court shall require the refusing party or deponent to answer the question or
interrogatory and if it also finds that the refusal to answer was without substantial justification, it
may require the refusing party or deponent or the counsel advising the refusal, or both of them, to
 pay the proponent the amount of the reasonable expenses incurred in obtaining the order, including
attorney’s fees.
 Application is denied, court finds that it was filed without substantial justification, the court may
require the proponent or the counsel advising the filing of the application, or both of them, to pay
to the refusing party or deponent the amount of the reasonable expenses incurred in opposing the
application, including attorney’s fees.
 Contempt of court - refuses to answer any question after being directed to do so by the court of the
place in which the deposition is being taken, the refusal may be considered a contempt of that court
 Other consequences – (1) any party or an officer or managing agent of a party refuses to obey an
order made requiring him or her to answer designated questions; (2) to produce any document or
other thing for inspection, copying, or photographing or to permit it to be done, or to permit entry
upon land or other property; and (3) or an order made requiring him or her to submit to a physical
or mental examination.
 The court may make such orders in regard to the refusal as are just, and among others the following:
1. order that the matters regarding which the questions were ask ed, or the character or
description of the thing or land, or the contents of the paper, or the physical or mental
condition of the party, or any other 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;
2. order (1) refusing to allow the disobedient party to support or oppose designated claims or
defenses or (2) prohibiting him or her from introducing in evidence designated documents
or things or items of testimony, or from introducing evidence of physical or mental
condition;
3. order (1) striking out pleadings or parts thereof, or staying further proceedings until the
order is obeyed, or (2) dismissing the action or proceeding or any part thereof, or (3)
rendering a judgment by default against the disobedient party; and
4. In lieu of any of the foregoing orders or in addition thereto, an order directing the arrest of
any party or agent of a party for disobeying any of such orders except an order to submit to
a physical or mental examination
 Expenses on refusal to admit - If a party after being served with a request under Rule 26 to admit
the genuineness of any document or the truth of any matter of fact, serves a sworn denial thereof
and if the party requesting the admissions thereafter proves the genuineness of such document or
the truth of any such matter of fact, he or she may apply to the court for an order requiring the
other party to pay him or her the reasonable expenses incurred in making such proof, including
[reasonable] attorney’s fees. Unless the court finds that there were good reasons for the denial or
that admissions sought were of no substantial importance, such order shall be issued.
 Failure of party to attend or serve answers - The court on motion and notice, may strike out all or
any part of any pleading of that party, or dismiss the action or proceeding or any part thereof, or
enter a judgment by default against that party, and in its discretion, order him or her to pay
reasonable expenses incurred by the other, including attorney’s fees.
 Expenses against the Republic of the Philippines. - Expenses and attorney’s fees are not to be
imposed upon the Republic of the Philippines under this Rule.
 REFUSAL TO ANSWER ANY QUESTION UPON ORAL EXAMINATION:
1. Order to compel an answer;
2. Contempt;
3. 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, COPYING OR PHOTOGRAPHING
1. 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;
2. Refuse to allow the disobedient party to support or oppose claims or defenses;
3. Strike out all or any part of the pleading of the disobedient party;
4. Dismiss the action or the proceeding;
5. Render a judgment by default against the disobedient party;
6. Stay further proceedings until order is obeyed;
7. Render a judgment by default against the disobedient party; or
8. Order the arrest of the refusing party.
 REFUSAL TO SUBMIT TO PHYSICAL OR MENTAL EXAMINATION
1. 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;
2. Prohibit the disobedient party to introduce evidence of physical and mental conditions;
3. Strike out all or any part of the pleading of the disobedient party;
4. Dismiss the action or the proceeding;
5. Render a judgment by default against the disobedient party;
6. Stay further proceedings until order is obeyed; or
7. Render a judgment by default against the disobedient party
 REFUSAL TO THE REQUEST FOR ADMISSION BY ADVERSE PARTY
1. Require payment of reasonable fees incurred by the proponent
2. Each of the matters of which an admission is requested is deemed admitted.
 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.

P. Trial (Rule 30)

 Trial - Reception of evidence and other processes; period for the introduction of evidence by both parties.
 Hearing - embraces several stages of litigation, including pre-trial and determination of granting or denying
a motion; does not necessarily imply presentation of evidence in open court but the parties are afforded the
opportunity to be heard.

1. Schedule of Trial
 Schedule of trial - parties shall strictly observe the scheduled hearings as agreed upon and set forth
in the pre-trial order. Schedule of the trial dates, plaintiff and defendant shall be continuous and
within the following periods:
a. Presentation of plaintiff’s evidence shall be set not later than thirty (30) calendar days after
the termination of the pre-trial conference. Plaintiff shall be allowed to present its evidence
within a period of three (3) months or ninety (90) calendar days which shall include the date
of the judicial dispute resolution, if necessary;
b. Defendant’s evidence shall be set not later than thirty (30) calendar days after the court’s
ruling on plaintiff’s formal offer of evidence. The defendant shall be allowed to present its
evidence within a period of three (3) months or ninety (90) calendar days;
c. Period for the presentation of evidence on the third (fourth, etc.)-party claim, counterclaim
or cross-claim shall be determined by the court the total of which shall in no case exceed
ninety (90) calendar days;
 d. If deemed necessary, shall set the presentation of the parties respective rebuttal evidence,
which shall be completed within a period of thirty (30) calendar days
 Trial dates may be shortened depending on the number of witnesses to be presented, provided that
the presentation of evidence of all parties shall be terminated within a period of ten (10) months or
three hundred (300) calendar days. If there are no third (fourth, etc.)-party claim, counterclaim or
cross-claim, the presentation of evidence shall be terminated within a period of six (6) months or
one hundred eighty (180) calendar days.
 Court shall decide and serve copies of its decision to the parties within a period not exceeding
ninety (90) calendar days from the submission of the case for resolution, with or without
memoranda.
 Hearing days and calendar call - Monday to Thursday (8:30AM/2PM), Fridays (Motions). Schedule
posted outside courtroom 1 day before hearings.
 Order of trial - limited to the issues stated in the pre-trial order and shall proceed as follows:
a. plaintiff shall adduce evidence in support of his or her complaint;
b. defendant shall then adduce evidence in support of his or her defense, counterclaim, cross-
claim and third-party complaint;
c. third-party defendant, if any, shall adduce evidence of his or her defense, counterclaim,
cross-claim and fourth-party complaint;
d. parties against whom any counterclaim or cross-claim has been pleaded, shall adduce
evidence in support of their defense, in the order to be prescribed by the court
e. parties may then respectively adduce rebutting evidence only, unless the court, for good
reasons and in the furtherance of justice, permits them to adduce evidence upon their
original case; and
f. Upon admission of the evidence, the case shall be deemed submitted for decision, unless
the court directs the parties to argue or to submit their respective memoranda or any
further pleadings.
 If several defendants or third-party defendants, and so forth, having separate defenses appear by
different counsel, the court shall determine the relative order of presentation of their evidence
 Oral offer of exhibits - offer of evidence, the comment or objection thereto, and the court ruling
shall be made orally
 Agreed statement of facts - parties to any action may 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 the parties agree only on some of the facts in issue, the trial shall be held as to the
disputed facts in such order as the court shall prescribe.
 Suspension of actions - governed by the provisions of the Civil Code and other laws
 Judge to receive evidence; delegation to clerk of court - Judge of the court where the case is
pending shall personally receive the evidence to be adduced by the parties.
 However, in default or ex parte hearings, and in any case where the parties agree in writing, the
court may delegate the reception of evidence to its clerk of court who is a member of the bar
 The clerk of court shall have no power to rule on objections to any question or to the admission of
exhibits, which objections shall be resolved by the court upon submission of his or her report and
the transcripts within ten (10) calendar days from termination of the hearing.
 Necessity of trial
 GR: Trial is necessary when an issue exists. Decisions should not be made without trial.
 XPN: There is no need for trial in the following cases:
1. Pleadings of the parties tender no issue at all, judgment on the pleadings
2. Pleadings, affidavits, depositions and other papers, there is actually no genuine issue,
3. Parties have entered into a compromise or an amicable settlement
4. complaint has been dismissed with prejudice
 5. 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
6. civil case falls under the operation of the Rules on Summary Procedure
7. case falls under the Rule on Small Claims
 Cases where the clerk of court gives preference in scheduling of cases – (1) Habeas corpus; (2)
Election cases; (3) Special civil actions; and (4) Those so required by law.

2. Adjournments and Postponements-

 Court may adjourn a trial from day to day, and to any stated time, as the expeditious and convenient
transaction of business may require
 Limitations on the authority to adjourn - no power to adjourn a trial for a longer period than one
[(1)] month for each adjournment, nor more than three [(3)] months in all, except when authorized
in writing by the Court Administrator, Supreme Court.
 The party who caused the postponement is warned that the presentation of its evidence must still
be terminated on the remaining dates previously agreed upon

3. Requisites of Motion to Postpone Trial for Illness of Party or Counsel

 Requisites of motion to postpone trial for absence of evidence. – Deleted
 Requisites of motion to postpone trial for illness of party or counsel - may be granted if it appears
(1) upon affidavit or sworn certification that the (a) presence of such party or counsel at the trial is
indispensable and (b) that the character of his or her illness is such as to render his or her non-
attendance excusable
 Grant or denial of motion for postponement is addressed to the sound discretion of the court, which
should always be predicated on the consideration that the ends of justice and fairness are served by
the grant or denial of the motion, two things must be borne in mind: (1) the reason for
postponement and (2) the merits of the case of the movant.
 Unless grave abuse of discretion is shown, such discretion will not be interfered with either
mandamus or appeal. Because it is a matter of privilege, not a right, a movant for postponement
should not assume beforehand that his motion will be granted. In the absence of any clear and
manifest grave abuse of discretion resulting in lack or in excess of jurisdiction, we cannot overturn
the decision of the court a quo.

Q. Consolidation or Severance (Rule 31)

 Consolidation – (1) actions involving a common question of law or fact are pending before the court, (2)
court may order joint hearing or trial of any or all the matters in issue in the actions; (3) order all the actions
consolidated;
 Involves several actions having a common question of law or fact which may be jointly tried
 Rationale on Consolidation - aid in deciding how cases in its docket are to be tried so that the business of
the court may be dispatched expeditiously and with economy while providing justice to the parties.
 Kinds of consolidation of cases
1. Quasi-consolidation - All, except one of several actions are stayed until one is tried, in which case
the judgment in one trial is conclusive as to the others.
2. Actual consolidation - Several actions are combined into one. Cases lose their identity and become
a single action in which a single judgment is rendered.
3. Consolidation for trial - Several actions are ordered to be tried together, but each retains its
separate character and requires the entry of a separate judgment
 Rule on consolidation of cases
 GR: Consolidation is discretionary upon the court to avoid multiplicity of suits, guard against oppression or
abuse, prevent delay, clear congested dockets, and simplify the work of the trial court and save unnecessary
costs and expenses.
 XPN: Consolidation becomes a matter of duty when:
(1) Two or more cases are pending before the same judge; or
(2) If cases are filed with the different branches of the same RTC and one of such case has not been
partially tried.
 Suspension of civil actions
(1) If willingness to discuss a possible compromise is expressed by one or both parties;
(2) If it appears that one of the parties, before the commencement of the action or proceeding,
offered to discuss a possible compromise but the other party refused the offer.
 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 rentals.
 Separate trials/ Severance - in furtherance of convenience or to avoid prejudice, may order a separate trial
of any claim, cross-claim, counterclaim, or third-party complaint, or of any separate issue or of any number
of claims, cross-claims, counterclaims, third-party complaints or issues.
 Contemplates a single action having a number of claims, counterclaims, crossclaims, third-party complaints,
or issues which may be separately tried.

R. Demurrer to Evidence (Rule 33)

1. Grounds
 Upon showing that upon the facts and the law, the plaintiff has shown no right to relief.
 The question in a demurrer to evidence is whether the plaintiff, by his evidence in chief, had been
able to establish a prima facie case. In a demurrer to evidence, however, it is premature to speak of
“preponderance of evidence” because it is filed prior to the defendant’s presentation of evidence.
Hence, what is crucial is the determination as to whether the plaintiff’s evidence entitles it to the
relief sought.

2. Effect of Order Denying Demurrer to Evidence

1. Defendant shall have the right to present his or her evidence.
2. Court shall set the date for the reception of the defendant’s evidence-inchief. It should not
proceed to grant the relief demanded by the plaintiff
3. Not appealable (Interlocutory) or petition for certiorari, prohibition or mandamus before
judgment.
 Effect of Grant - Case shall be dismissed.
 The plaintiff may file an appeal and if that appeal was granted (reversed the order of dismissal); the
defendant loses his right to present evidence.
 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.
 Denial of a demurrer to evidence in an election case – cannot insist on the right to present
evidence. Provision of the Rules governing demurrer to evidence does not apply to an election case.
The Rules, under the express dictum in Sec. 4 of Rule 1 “shall not apply to election cases, land
registration, cadastral, naturalization and insolvency proceeding.

S. Judgments and Final Orders

1. Judgments on the Pleadings (Rule 34)
a) Grounds
 1. Answer fails to tender an issue because of:
a. General denial of the material allegations
b. Insufficient denial of the material allegations
2. Answer admits material allegations of the adverse party’s pleadings.
 The failure of the defendant to answer a request for admission results in an
implied admission of all the matters which an admission is requested.
 Instances when judgment on the pleadings is NOT applicable
1. declaration of nullity of marriage, annulment of marriage or for legal separation;
2. Unliquidated damages;
3. Insufficiency of fact – amendment is the remedy
b) Action on Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings
 Court may motu proprio or on motion render judgment on the pleadings if it is apparent
that the answer fails to tender an issue, or otherwise admits the material allegations of the
adverse party’s pleadings
 Any action of the court on a motion for judgment on the pleadings shall not be subject of
an appeal or petition for certiorari, prohibition or mandamus.
 Effect when the plaintiff moves for judgment on the pleadings and defendant interposes
no objection - deemed to have admitted the truth of the allegations of the complaint, so
that there is no longer any necessity for the plaintiff to submit evidence of his claims.
 Filed only by the plaintiff or the claimant.

2. Summary Judgments (Rule 35)

 Based on the pleadings, depositions, admissions, and affidavits
 Available to both plaintiff and defendant
 There is no genuine issue between the parties, i.e., there may be issues but these are irrelevant.
 May be interlocutory (i.e., partial summary judgments) or on the merits
 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, setup in bad faith, patently unsubstantial.
 Summary judgment for claimant - At any time after the pleading in answer thereto has been
served, move with supporting affidavits, depositions or admissions for a summary judgment in his or
her favor upon all or any part thereof.
 Summary judgment for defending party - at any time, move with supporting affidavits, depositions
or admissions for a summary judgment in his or her favor as to all or any part thereof.
 Requisites of Summary Judgment (2015 BAR)
 Motion and proceedings thereon - No notice to the adverse party is required. However, the adverse
party may file a comment and serve opposing affidavits, depositions, or admissions within a non-
extendible period of five (5) calendar days from receipt of motion
 Shall not be subject of an appeal or petition for certiorari, prohibition or mandamus
 Fictitious or Sham Issue - Trial may be dispensed with and a summary judgment rendered if the
case can be resolved judiciously by plain resort to the pleadings, affidavits, depositions, and other
papers filed by the parties
 Motion shall cite the supporting affidavits, depositions or admissions, and the specific law relied
upon.
 The remedy of summary judgment without a motion being filed is in derogation of a party's right to
a plenary trial of his case; the trial court cannot railroad the parties’ rights over their objections.
 Burden of demonstrating the absence of genuine issue of fact - party who moves for summary
judgment has the burden of demonstrating clearly that the issue posed in the complaint is patently
unsubstantial so as not to constitute a genuine issue for trial
 WHEN THE CASE NOT FULLY ADJUDICATED - judgment is not rendered upon the whole case or for
all the reliefs sought and a trial is necessary, the court may, by examining the pleadings and the
evidence before it and by interrogating counsel, ascertain what material facts exist without
substantial controversy, including the extent to which the amount of damages or other relief is not
in controversy, and direct such further proceedings in the action as are just.
 The facts so ascertained shall be deemed established, and the trial shall be conducted on the
controverted facts accordingly
 A partial summary judgment is not a final or appealable judgment.
a) Effect of Order Denying a Motion for Summary Judgment
 Proceed to trial and shall not be the subject of an appeal or petition for certiorari,
prohibition, or mandamus. However, the party aggrieved by the eventual summary
judgement is not proscribed to avail the remedies allowed by the rules.

3. Rendition and Entry of Judgments and Final Orders (Rule 36)

 Rendition - A judgment or final order determining the merits of the case
 shall be in writing
 personally, and directly prepared by the judge,
 stating clearly and distinctly the facts and the law on which it is based,
 signed by him, and filed with the clerk of the court
 the filing of the same with the clerk of court.
 still subject to amendment if it has not yet been filed with the clerk of court; and before its filing, it
does not yet constitute the real judgment of the court
 No requirement to state in its decision all the facts found in the records
 Promulgation - process by which a decision is published, officially announced, made known to the
public or delivered to the clerk of court for filing, coupled with notice to the parties or their counsel.
 In civil cases, a judgment is rendered, while in criminal cases and election cases, a judgment
is rendered and promulgated.
 A decision becomes binding only after it is validly promulgated. Consequently, if at the time
of the promulgation of a decision or resolution, a member of the collegiate court who had
earlier signed or registered his vote has vacated his office, his vote is automatically
withdrawn or cancelled
 Rendition of a judgment based on issues not raised –
 GR: A judgment going outside the issues and purporting to adjudicate something on which
the parties were not heard is invalid. Therefore, 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
 XPN: Such issues were tried with the express or implied consent of the parties
 Person to decide a case –
 GR: judge who takes over this branch inherits all these cases and assumes full responsibility
for them. He may decide them as they are his cases.
 XPN: Any of the parties moves that his case be decided by the judge who substantially heard
the evidence and before whom the case was submitted for decision
 A decision penned by a judge after his retirement cannot be validly promulgated and cannot
acquire a binding effect. In like manner, a decision penned by a judge during his incumbency
cannot be validly promulgated after his retirement
 Judgment may be penned by a judge who did not hear the evidence
 When decision is binding on the parties - until and unless notice thereof is duly served on them by
any of the modes prescribed by law.
 The doctrine of law of the case - means that when an appellate court has once declared the law in a
case, its declaration continues to be the law of that case even on a subsequent appeal,
notwithstanding that the rule thus laid down may have been reversed in other cases.
 Defined as the opinion delivered on a former appeal. More specifically, it means that
whatever is once irrevocably established as the controlling legal rule or decision between
the same parties in the same case continues to be the law of the case, whether correct on
general principles or not, so long as the facts on which such decision was predicated
continue to be the facts of the case before the court
 It is "merely a rule of procedure and does not go to the power of the court and will not be
adhered to where its application will result in an unjust decision. It relates entirely to
questions of law and is confined in its operation to subsequent proceedings in the same
case
 does not apply to resolutions rendered in connection with the case wherein no rationale has
been expounded on the merits of that action.
 Principle of stare decisis et non quieta movere - a point of law, once established by the SC, will
generally be followed by the same court and by all courts of lower rank in subsequent cases
involving a similar legal issue. This proceeds from the legal principle that, in the absence of powerful
countervailing considerations, like cases ought to be decided alike.
 founded on the necessity for securing certainty and stability in the law and does not require
identity of or privity of parties.
 Interlocutory Order (2006 BAR) - order which decides some point or matter between the
commencement and end of the suit but is not the final decision on the whole controversy. It leaves
something to be done by the court before the case is finally decided on the merits
 Remedy to question an improvident interlocutory order - File a petition for certiorari under Rule
65. One cannot appeal an interlocutory order.
 Entry of judgments and final orders – It refers to the physical act performed by the clerk of court in
entering the dispositive portion of the judgment in the book of entries of judgment and after the
same has become final and executory. The record shall contain the dispositive portion of the
judgment or final order and shall be signed by the clerk of court, with a certificate by said clerk that
the judgment has already become final and executor
 When entered: If no appeal or motion for new trial or reconsideration is filed,
 entered by the clerk in the book of entries of judgments.
 Date of finality of the judgment or final order shall be deemed to be the date of its entry.
 record shall contain the dispositive part of the judgment or final order and
 shall be signed by the clerk, with a certificate that such judgment or final order has become
final and executory
 There are some proceedings the filing of which is reckoned from the date of the entry of
judgment:
 execution of a judgment by motion is within 5 years from the entry of the judgment
 filing of a petition for relief must be filed not more than 60 days from knowledge of the
judgment and not more than 6 months from the entry of the judgment or final order.

 Finality of judgment
 lapse of the reglementary period to appeal, with no appeal perfected within such period,
the decision becomes final and executory
 lapse of the reglementary period to file an MR, decision rendered by the SC becomes final
and executory.
 A transferee pendente lite of registered land, whose title bears a notice of a pending litigation
involving his transferor’s title to the said land, is bound by the outcome of the litigation, whether it
be for or against his transferor. Given this principle, the modification of the final decision against the
transferor in order to include the transferee pendente lite does not violate the doctrine of
immutability of final judgments. His inclusion does not add to or change the judgment; it is only a
legal consequence of the established doctrine that a final judgment binds the privy of a litigating
party.
 AMENDED OR CLARIFIED JUDGMENT - an entirely new decision and supersedes the original
judgment
 Court makes a thorough study of the original judgment and renders the amended and clarified
judgment only after considering all the factual and legal issues
 Effect of amendment of judgment - date of the amendment should be considered as the date of the
decision for the computation of the period to perfect the appeal.
 Collateral attack on a judgment - 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
 SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION - Does not take the place of or extinguish the original judgment.
 Serves to bolster or add to the original judgment.
 Effect of void judgments (Doctrine of Total Nullity) - A void judgment is in legal effect no judgment.
By it no rights are divested, no rights can be obtained.
 Being worthless in itself, all proceeding founded upon it are equally worthless. It neither binds nor
bars anyone. All acts performed under it and all claims flowing out of it are void.
 Effect of a judgment or final order of a tribunal of a foreign country having jurisdiction to render
the judgment or final order (2007 BAR)
 1. If the judgment is on a specific thing, the judgment is conclusive upon the title to the
thing; and
 2. If the judgment is against a person, the judgment is presumptive evidence of a right as
between the parties and their successor in interest by a subsequent title.
 Grounds in assailing the judgment or final order of a foreign country (2007 BAR)
 1. Evidence of want of jurisdiction;
 2. Want of notice to the party;
 3. Collusion;
 4. Fraud; or
 5. Clear mistake of fact or law
 Judgment for or against one or more of several parties - given for or against one or more of several
plaintiffs, and for or against one or more of several defendants. When justice so demands, the court
may require the parties on each side to file adversary pleadings as between themselves and
determine their ultimate rights and obligations
 Several judgments - action against several defendants, the court may, when a several judgment is
proper, render judgment against one or more of them, leaving the action to proceed against the
others
 Separate judgments - more than one claim for relief is presented in an action, the court, at any
stage, upon a determination of the issues material to a particular claim and all counterclaims arising
out of the transaction or occurrence which is the subject matter of the claim, may render a separate
judgment disposing of such claim
 judgment shall terminate the action with respect to the claim so disposed of and the action shall
proceed as to the remaining claims
  court by order may stay its enforcement until the rendition of a subsequent judgment or judgments
and may prescribe such conditions as may be necessary to secure the benefit thereof to the party in
whose favor the judgment is rendered
 Judgment against entity without juridical personality - judgment shall set out their individual or
proper names, if known

T. Post-Judgment Remedies
1. Motion for New Trial or Reconsideration (Rule 37)
 Motion for New Trial – Period to file an appeal (15 days):
 (a) Fraud, accident, mistake or excusable negligence which ordinary prudence could not
have guarded against and by reason of which such aggrieved party has probably been
impaired in his rights; or
 (b) Newly discovered evidence, which he could not, with reasonable diligence, have
discovered and produced at the trial, and which if presented would probably alter the
result. (need NOT be newly created evidence)
 Requisites (Berry Rule):
 1. The evidence was discovered after trial;
 2. Such evidence could not have been discovered and produced at the trial with
reasonable diligence; and
 3. Such evidence is material, not merely cumulative, corroborative or impeaching,
and is of such weight that if admitted would probably change the judgment
 Requisites (Mandatory)
 in writing, stating the ground or grounds therefore, a written notice of which shall be served
by the movant on the adverse party
 Affidavit of merit setting forth the particular facts claimed to constitute a meritorious cause
of action in case the ground relied upon is (F-A-M-E);
 In case of newly discovered evidence: a. Affidavit of new witness; and b. Duly authenticated
documents to be introduced.
 Limitations - Second motion may be allowed so long as based on grounds not existing or available at
the time the first motion was mad.
 This is one instance wherein the Court of Appeals can act as a trial court.
 Motion for Reconsideration - Period to file an appeal (15 days):
 that the damages awarded are excessive, that the
 evidence is insufficient to justify the decision or final order, or that the
 decision or final order is contrary to law
 Requisites
 in writing, stating the ground or grounds therefore, a written notice of which shall be served
by the movant on the adverse party
 point out specifically the conclusion of judgment;
 Express reference to testimonial or documentary evidence or to provisions of law.
 MR/MNT: If denied, the remedy is to appeal from the judgment or final order.
 Resolution: Both must be resolved within 30 days from the time it is submitted for resolution
 Rule under Summery Procedure and Small Claims - Both are prohibited motions under Summary
Procedure and Small Claims
 When partial reconsideration allowed - affects the issues of the case as to only a part, or less than
all of the matters in controversy, or only one, or less than all, of the parties to it, the order may grant
a reconsideration as to such issues if severable without interfering with the judgment or final order
upon the rest
 Pro forma motion - one which does not satisfy the requirements of the rules and one which will be
treated as a motion intended to delay the proceedings, shall not toll the reglementary period of
appeal.
A Motion for Reconsideration is not a pro forma motion just because it reiterated arguments earlier
passed upon and rejected by the appellate court. A movant may raise the same arguments precisely
to convince the court that the ruling was erroneous
 Effect if a MR is granted - court may amend such judgment or final order accordingly. Amended
judgment is in the nature of a new judgment which supersedes the original judgment and is not a
mere supplemental decision.
 Effect if the MNT is granted - original judgment shall be vacated or set aside, and the action shall
stand for trial de novo; recorded evidence taken upon the former trial so far as the same is material
and competent to establish the issues, shall be used at the new trial without retaking the same
 Effect of an order reversing the grant of a new trial - original judgment shall be deemed as having
been repromulgated
 Remedy against order denying a motion for new trial or reconsideration. - An order denying a
motion for new trial or reconsideration is not appealable, the remedy being an appeal from the
judgment or final order.
 1. Before a judgment becomes final and executory,
 a. Motion for Reconsideration;
 b. Motion for New Trial; and
 c. Appeal
 2. After the judgment becomes executory,
 a. Petition for relief from judgment;
 b. Action to annul judgment;
 c. Certiorari; and
 d. Collateral attack of a judgment.

a) Remedy Against Denial

 Remedy is an appeal from the judgement or final order. An order denying a motion for new
trial or reconsideration is not appealable.
 Include such denial in the assignment of errors of the appeal from the judgment or final
order

b) Fresh-Period Rule
 fresh period of 15 days within which to file the notice of appeal, counted from the receipt of
the order dismissing a motion for new trial or motion for reconsideration
 Fresh period rule applies to criminal cases –
 Fresh period rule does NOT apply to administrative cases - applies only to judicial appeals
and proceedings
 Retroactive application of the Fresh Period Rule - fresh period rule may be applied
retroactively to cases where the period for appeal had lapsed prior to 14 September 2005

2. Appeals
a) Nature of Right to Appeal
 Elevation by an aggrieved party of any decision, order or award of a lower body to a higher
body, by means of a document which includes the assignment of errors, memorandum of
arguments in support thereof, and the reliefs prayed for.
 Appeal not a Constitutional Right - mere statutory privilege that has to be exercised only in
the manner and in accordance with the provisions of law.
 Basic Guidelines Regarding Appeal
1. GR: No trial de novo (starting from the beginning) shall be made. The appellate
courts must decide the case on the basis of the record.
XPNs:
a. When the proceedings were not duly recorded as when there was absence
of a qualified stenographer;
b. Instances when the CA may act as a trial court
2. No new parties;
3. No change of theory
4. No new matters
5. The amendment of pleadings allowed to conform to the evidence submitted before
the trial court
6. The liability of solidarity defendant who did not appeal is not affected by appeal of
solidarity debtor
7. Appeal by guarantor does not inure to the principal
8. In ejectment cases, the RTC cannot award to the appellant on his counterclaim
more than the amount of damages beyond the jurisdiction of the MTC
9. The appellate court cannot dismiss the appealed case for failure to prosecute
because the case must be decided on the basis of the record
 Appeal is a speedy remedy, as an adverse party can file its appeal from a final decision or
order immediately after receiving it. A party, who is alleging that an appeal will not promptly
relieve it of the injurious effects of the judgment, should establish facts to show how the
appeal is not speedy or adequate

b) Judgments and Final Orders Subject to Appeal

 Subject of appeal - 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.
 No appeal may be taken from:
(a) An order denying a petition for relief or any similar motion seeking relief from
judgement;
(b) An interlocutory order;
(c) An order disallowing or dismissing an appeal;
(d) An 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;
(e) An order of execution;
(f) A 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 case is pending, unless the court allows an appeal therefrom; and
(g) An order dismissing an action without prejudice.
 In any of the foregoing circumstances, the aggrieved party may file an appropriate special
civil action as provided in Rule 65
 Modes of appeal.
(a) Ordinary appeal – appeal to the Court of Appeals in cases decided by the Regional
Trial Court in the exercise of its original jurisdiction, by filing a notice of appeal with
the court which rendered the judgment or final order appealed from and serving a
copy thereof upon the adverse party. No record on appeal shall be required except in
 special proceedings and other cases of multiple or separate appeals, the record on
appeal shall be filed and served in like manner. (Rule 41)
(b) Petition for review - appeal to the Court of Appeals in cases decided by the
Regional Trial Court in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction shall be by petition for
review in accordance with Rule 42
(c) Appeal by certiorari. - In all cases where only questions of law are raised or
involved, the appeal shall be to the Supreme Court by petition for review on certiorari
in accordance with Rule 45
 Period of ordinary appeal; appeal in habeas corpus cases - taken within fifteen (15) days
from notice of the judgment or final order appealed from.
 Where a record on appeal is required, the appellants shall file a notice of appeal and a
record on appeal within thirty (30) days from notice of the judgment or final order
cases
 shall be taken within forty-eight (48) hours from notice of the judgment or final order
appealed from
 period of appeal shall be interrupted by a timely motion for new trial or reconsideration. No
motion for extension of time to file a motion for new trial or reconsideration shall be
allowed.
 Appellate court docket and other lawful fees - appellant shall pay to the clerk of the court
which rendered the judgment or final order appealed from, the full amount of the appellate
court dock et and other lawful fees. Proof of payment of said fees shall be transmitted to the
appellate court together with the original record or the record on appeal.
 Notice of appeal - indicate the parties to the appeal, specify the judgment or final order or
part thereof appealed from, specify the court to which the appeal is being taken, and state
the material dates showing the timeliness of the appeal
 Record on appeal; form and contents thereof - full names of all the parties to the
proceedings shall be stated in the caption of the record on appeal and it shall include the
judgment or final order from which the appeal is taken and, in chronological order, copies of
only such pleadings, petitions, motions and all interlocutory orders as are related to the
appealed judgment or final order for the proper understanding of the issue involved,
together with such data as will show that the appeal was perfected on time. If an issue of
fact is to be raised on appeal, the record on appeal shall include by reference all the
evidence, testimonial and documentary, taken upon the issue involved. The reference shall
specify the documentary evidence by the exhibit numbers or letters by which it was
identified when admitted or offered at the hearing, and the testimonial evidence by the
names of the corresponding witnesses. If the whole testimonial and documentary evidence
in the case is to be included, a statement to that effect will be sufficient without mentioning
the names of the witnesses or the numbers or letters of exhibits. Every record on appeal
exceeding twenty (20) pages must contain a subject index.
 Approval of record on appeal - Upon the filing of the record on appeal for approval and if
no objection is filed by the appellee within five (5) days from receipt of a copy thereof
 the trial court may approve it as presented or upon its own motion or at the instance of the
appellee, may direct its amendment by the inclusion of any omitted matters which are
deemed essential to the determination of the issue of law or fact involved in the appeal
 If the trial court orders the amendment of the record, the appellant, within the time limited
in the order, or such extension thereof as may be granted, or if no time is fixed by the order
within ten (10) days from receipt thereof
 shall redraft the record by including therein, in their proper chronological sequence, such
additional matters as the court may have directed him to incorporate, and shall thereupon
 submit the redrafted record for approval, upon notice to the appellee, in like manner as the
original draft
 Joint record on appeal - both parties are appellants, they may file a joint record on appeal
 Perfection of appeal; effect thereof - A party’s appeal by notice of appeal is deemed
perfected as to him, upon the filing of the notice of appeal in due time.
 party’s appeal by record on appeal is deemed perfected as to him, with respect to the
subject matter thereof, upon the approval of the record on appeal filed in due time
 appeals by notice of appeal, the court loses jurisdiction over the case upon the
perfection of the appeals filed in due time and the expiration of the time to appeal of
the other parties.
 appeals by record on appeal, the court loses jurisdiction only over the subject matter
thereof, upon the approval of the records on appeal filed in due time and the expiration
of the time to appeal of the other parties.
 In either case, prior to the transmittal of the original record or the record on appeal, the
court may issue orders for the protection and preservation of the rights of the parties which
do not involve any matter litigated by the appeal, approve compromises, permit appeals of
indigent litigants, order execution pending appeal and allow withdrawal of the appeal.
 Duty of clerk of court of the lower court upon perfection of appeal - Within thirty (30) days
after perfection of all the appeals in accordance with the preceding section, it shall be the
duty of the clerk of court of the lower court:
 (a) To verify the correctness of the original record or the record on appeal, as the case
may be, and to make a certification of its correctness;
 (b) To verify the completeness of the records that will be transmitted to the appellate
court;
 (c) If found to be incomplete, to take such measures as may be required to complete
the records, availing of the authority that he or the court may exercise for this purpose;
and
 (d) To transmit the records to the appellate court
 If the efforts to complete the records fail, he shall indicate in his letter of transmittal the
exhibits or transcripts not included in the records being transmitted to the appellate court,
the reasons for their non-transmittal, and the steps taken or that could be taken to have
them available.
 The clerk of court shall furnish the parties with copies of his letter of transmittal of the
records to the appellate court
 Transcript - Upon the perfection of the appeal, the clerk shall immediately direct the
stenographers concerned to attach to the record of the case five (5) copies of the transcripts
of the testimonial evidence referred to in the record on appeal.
 stenographers concerned shall transcribe such testimonial evidence and shall prepare and
affix to their transcripts an index containing the names of the witnesses and the pages
wherein their testimonies are found and a list of the exhibits and the pages wherein each of
them appears to have been offered and admitted or rejected by the trial court
 transcripts shall be transmitted to the clerk of the trial court who shall thereupon arrange
the same in the order in which the witnesses testified at the trial, and shall cause the pages
to be numbered consecutively.
 Transmittal - clerk of the trial court shall transmit to the appellate court the original record
or the approved record on appeal within thirty (30) days from the perfection of the appeal,
together with the proof of payment of the appellate court docket and other lawful fees
 a certified true copy of the minutes of the proceedings, the order of approval, the certificate
of correctness, the original documentary evidence referred to therein
 and the original and three (3) copies of the transcripts. Copies of the transcripts and
certified true copies of the documentary evidence shall remain in the lower court for the
examination of the parties
 Dismissal of appeal - Prior to the transmittal of the original record or the record on appeal
to the appellate court, the trial court may, motu proprio or on motion, dismiss the appeal
for having been taken out of time or for non-payment of the docket and other lawful fees
within the reglementary period.
 Examples of a particular matter in a judgement or final order that does not completely
dispose of a case but are declared by the Rules of Civil Procedure to be appealable
 a. Order of expropriation
 b. Order of partition
 c. Order allowing or disallowing a will

c) Matters Not Appealable; Available Remedies

1. Order denying a petition for relief or any similar motion seeking relief from judgment;
2. Interlocutory order;
3. Order disallowing or dismissing an appeal;
4. 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;
5. Order of execution;
6. 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 case is pending,
unless the court allows an appeal therefrom;
7. Order dismissing an action without prejudice (Sec. 1, Rule 41, ROC, as amended); and
8. A judgment based on compromise.
 An order denying a motion for new trial or a motion for reconsideration is no longer
appealable as it is no longer part of the enumeration
 Remedy against Judgment and Orders which are not Appealable - special civil action under
Rule 65.

d) Doctrine of Finality/Immutability of Judgment

 GR: a decision that has acquired finality becomes immutable and unalterable, and may no
longer be modified in any respect, even if the modification is meant to correct erroneous
conclusions of fact and law, and whether it be made by the court that rendered it or by the
Highest Court of the land.
 XPNs: This doctrine admits certain exceptions, these are:
1. Correction of clerical errors;
2. The so-called nunc protunc (act previously done by the court which has been omitted)
entries which cause no prejudice to any party;
3. Void judgments; and
4. circumstances transpire after the finality of the decision rendering its execution unjust
and inequitable.

e) Modes of Appeal (Period, Perfection, Issues to be Raised)

 a. Ordinary Appeal under Rule 41; This presupposes that the RTC rendered the
judgment or final order in the civil action or special proceeding in the exercise of its
original jurisdiction and appeal is taken to the CA on questions of fact or mixed questions
of fact and law. The appeal is taken by notice of appeal or by record on appeal.
 NOTE: An appeal on pure questions of law cannot be taken to the CA and such improper
appeal will be dismissed pursuant to Sec. 2, Rule 50.
 b. Petition for Review under Rule 42; The questioned judgment or final order was
rendered by RTC in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction over a judgment or final order
in a civil action or special proceeding originally commenced in and decided by a lower
court. The appeal is taken by a petition for review filed with CA on questions of facts, of
law or on mixed questions of fact and law.
 c. Appeal by certiorari under Rule 45. Taken to the SC only on questions of law from a
judgment or final order rendered in a civil action or special proceeding by RTC in the
exercise of its original jurisdiction. The appeal is taken by filing a petition for review on
certiorari with the SC.

(1) Appeal from Municipal Trial Courts to Regional Trial Courts (Rule 40)
 Issues - Questions of fact or mixed questions of law and fact.
 Where to appeal - taken to the Regional Trial Court, title of the case shall remain as
it was in the court of origin, party appealing the case shall be further referred to as
the appellant and the adverse party as the appellee
 When to appeal – within 15 days after notice; where a record on appeal is required,
within 30 days
 How to appeal - filing a notice of appeal with the court that rendered the judgment,
indicate the parties to the appeal, the judgment or final order or part thereof
appealed from, and state the material dates showing the timeliness of the appeal.
 Record on appeal shall be required only in special proceedings and in other cases of
multiple or separate appeals
 Copies of the notice of appeal, and the record on appeal where required, shall be
served on the adverse party.
 Perfection of appeal; effect thereof - perfection of the appeal and the effect thereof
shall be governed by the provisions of section 9, Rule 41
 Appellate court docket and other lawful fees - Within the period for taking an
appeal, the appellant shall pay to the clerk of the court which rendered the
judgment or final order appealed from the full amount of the appellate court docket
and other lawful fees
 Proof of payment thereof shall be transmitted to the appellate court together with
the original record or the record on appeal.
 Duty of the clerk of court - Within fifteen (15) days from the perfection of the
appeal, transmit the original record or the record on appeal, together with the
transcripts and exhibits, which he shall certify as complete, to the proper Regional
Trial Court.
 A copy of his letter of transmittal of the records to the appellate court shall be
furnished the parties

 Procedure in the Regional Trial Court –

 (a) Upon receipt of the complete record or the record on appeal, the clerk of
court of the Regional Trial Court shall notify the parties of such fact
 (b) Within fifteen (15) days from such notice, it shall be the duty of the
appellant to submit a memorandum which shall briefly discuss the errors
imputed to the lower court, a copy of which shall be furnished by him to the
adverse party.
  Within fifteen (15) days from receipt of the appellants memorandum, the
appellee may file his memorandum.
 Within fifteen (15) days from receipt of the appellants memorandum, the
appellee may file his memorandum.
 (c) Upon the filing of the memorandum of the appellee or the expiration of the
period to do so, the case shall be considered submitted for decision. The
Regional Trial Court shall decide the case on the basis of the entire record of
the proceedings had in the court of origin and such memoranda as are filed
 Appeal from orders dismissing case without trial; lack of jurisdiction - If an appeal
is taken from an order of the lower court dismissing the case without a trial on the
merits, the Regional Trial Court may affirm or reverse it, as the case may be.
 In case of affirmance and the ground of dismissal is lack of jurisdiction over the
subject matter, the Regional Trial Court, if it has jurisdiction thereover, shall try the
case on the merits as if the case was originally filed with it. In case of reversal, the
case shall be remanded for further proceedings
 If the case was tried on the merits by the lower court without jurisdiction over the
subject matter, the Regional Trial Court on appeal shall not dismiss the case if it has
original jurisdiction thereof, but shall decide the case in accordance with the
preceding section, without prejudice to the admission of amended pleadings and
additional evidence in the interest of justice.
 Applicability of Rule 41. - The other provisions of Rule 41 shall apply to appeals
provided for herein insofar as they are not inconsistent with or may serve to
supplement the provisions of this Rule.

(2) Appeal from the Regional Trial Courts (Rule 41)

 Issues: Questions of fact or law that have been raised in the court appealed from
and which are within the issues framed by the parties.
 Title of the case when Appealed to the CA under Rule 41 - remain as it was in the
court of origin but the party appealing the case shall be referred to as the appellant
and the adverse party appellee.
 Appellant to file with the court within 45 days from receipt of the notice of the clerk
that all the evidence, oral and documentary, are attached to the record, 7 copies of
his legibly typewritten, mimeographed or printed brief, with proof of service of 2
copies thereof upon the appellee.
 Within 45 days from receipt of appellant’s brief, the appellee shall file with the court
7 copies of his legibly typewritten, mimeographed or printed brief, with proof of
service of 2 copies thereof upon the appellant
 Purpose of an Appellant’s/Appellee’s Brief - present to the court in a concise form
the points and question in controversy, and by fair argument on the facts and law of
the case, to assist the court in arriving at a just and proper conclusion/decision
 Extensions of time for the filing of briefs will not be allowed except for good and
sufficient cause and only if the motion for extension is filed before the expiration of
the time sought to be extended.
 Litigant’s failure to furnish his opponent with a copy of his appeal brief does not
suffice to warrant dismissal of that appeal
 Brief
 As to applicability - Ordinary Appeals.
 As to Period of Filing - within 45 days from receipt of notice. The Appellant’s
Reply Brief is filed within 20 days from receipt of appellee’s brief.
  As to their Contents: Contents specified by Rules (Secs. 14-15, Rule 44, ROC, as
amended)
 Memorandum
 As to applicability - Certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo warranto and
habeas corpus cases.
 As to Period of Filing - within 30 days from receipt
 As to their Contents: Shorter, briefer, and with only one issue involved. There is
no subject index or assignment of errors, facts and applicable laws.
 Sec. 3, Rule 41 states the ff period to file an appeal:
 (a) 48 hours for habeas corpus;
 (b) 15 days if only a notice of appeal is required; and
 (c) 30 days if a record on appeal is required.
 Should the notice of appeal and record on appeal be filed simultaneously? - No, it
is not necessary to be filed simultaneously. While it is not necessary that a notice of
appeal and a record on appeal be filed simultaneously, the rule is unequivocal that
the notice of appeal and record of appeal shall be filed w/in 30 days from notice of
judgement or final order

(3) Petition for Review from the Regional Trial Court to the Court of Appeals (Rule 42)
1. A party aggrieved by the decision of RTC in the exercise of its appellate
jurisdiction, may file a verified petition for review with the CA;
2. At the same time, paying to the clerk of said court the corresponding docket
and other lawful fees, depositing the amount of Php500.00 for costs, and furnishing
the RTC and the adverse party with a copy of the petition;
3. The petition shall be filed and served within 15 days from notice of the
decision sought to be reviewed or of the denial of petitioner’s MNT or MR filed in
due time after judgment;
4. Upon proper motion and the payment of the full amount of the docket and
other lawful fees and the deposit for costs before the expiration of the reglementary
period, the CA may grant an additional period of 15 days only within which to file
the petition for review;
5. No further extension shall be granted except for the most compelling reason
and in no case to exceed 15 days
 Contents of the Petition for Review - The petition shall be filed in 7 legible copies,
with the original copy intended for the court being indicated as such by the
petitioner, and shall:
1. State the full names of the parties to the case, without impleading the lower
courts or judges thereof either as petitioners or respondents;
2. Indicate the specific material dates showing that it was filed on time;
3. Set forth concisely a statement of the matters involved, the issues raised, the
specification of errors of fact or law, or both, allegedly committed by the Regional
Trial Court, and the reasons or arguments relied upon for the allowance of the
appeal;
4. Must be accompanied by clearly legible duplicate originals or true copies of
the judgments or final orders of both lower courts, certified correct by the clerk of
court of the Regional Trial Court, the requisite number of plain copies thereof and of
the pleadings and other material portions of the record as would support the
allegations of the petition; and
5. There must be a certification against forum shopping
 Effect of Failure to comply with the Requirements - petition shall be sufficient
ground for the dismissal thereof
 Petition for Review NOT a Matter of Right - but discretionary on the CA. May only
be given due course if it shows on its face that the lower court has committed an
error of fact and/or law that will warrant a reversal or modification of the decision
or judgment sought to be reviewed or dismiss the petition if it finds that it is:
1. Patently without merit;
2. Prosecuted manifestly for delay; or
3. The questions raised therein are too unsubstantial to require consideration.
 Actions the CA may take in acting upon the Petition
1. The respondent may be required to file a comment on the petition, not a
motion to dismiss, within 10 days from notice; or
2. The petition may be dismissed if the CA finds the same to be patently without
merit, prosecuted manifestly for delay, or that the questions raised therein are
too unsubstantial to require consideration.
 Contents of Comment on the Petition
1. State whether or not he accepts the statement of matters involved in the
petition;
2. Point out the insufficiencies or inaccuracies in petitioner’s statement of facts
and issues; and
3. State the reasons why the petition should be denied or dismissed
 Doctrine of Residual Jurisdiction applicable to Appeals under Rule 42 - must be
exercised before the CA gives due course to the petition.
 Effect of an Appeal of the Judgment or Final Order under Rule 42 - Except in civil
cases decided under the Rule on Summary Procedure; shall stay the judgment or
final order; unless the CA, the law or the rules shall provide otherwise.
 Grounds for Dismissal of an Appeal by the CA
1. Failure of the record on appeal to show on its face that the appeal was taken
within the period fixed by the Rules;
2. Failure to file the notice of appeal or the record on appeal within the period
prescribed by the Rules;
3. Failure of the appellant to pay the docket and other lawful fees
4. Unauthorized alterations, omissions or additions in the approved record on
appeal
5. Failure of the appellant to serve and file the required number of copies of his
brief or memorandum within the time provided
6. Absence of specific assignment of errors in the appellant’s brief,
7. Failure of the appellant to take the necessary steps for the correction or
completion of the record within the time limited by the court in its order;
8. Failure of the appellant to appear at the preliminary conference under Rule 48
or to comply with orders, circulars, or directives of the court without justifiable
cause; and
9. The fact that the order or judgment appealed from is not appealable.
 Grounds are discretionary upon the appellate court; only directory and not
mandatory.
 Petition is given due course, set the case for oral argument or require the parties to
submit memoranda within a period of 15 days from notice. Case shall be deemed
submitted for decision upon the filing of the last pleading or memorandum required
by these Rules or by the court itself.
 Appeals from Quasi-judicial bodies NOT included under Rule 45
 Issues: Questions of facts, questions of law, or mixed questions of fact or law.

(4) Appeals from the Court of Tax Appeals, Civil Service Commission, and Quasi-
Judicial Agencies (Rule 43)
 Filing of petition with Supreme Court - file with the Supreme Court a verified
petition for review on certiorari;
 petition may include an application for a writ of preliminary injunction or other
provisional remedies and shall raise only questions of law which must be distinctly
set forth;
 petitioner may seek the same provisional remedies by verified motion filed in the
same action or proceeding at any time during its pendency
 Time for filing; extension - within fifteen (15) days from notice of the judgment; or
of the denial of the petitioners motion for new trial or reconsideration;
 On motion duly filed and served, with full payment of the docket and other lawful
fees and the deposit for costs before the expiration of the reglementary period,
 the Supreme Court may for justifiable reasons grant an extension of thirty (30) days
only within which to file the petition.
 Docket and other lawful fees; proof of service of petition - petitioner shall pay the
corresponding docket and other lawful fees to the clerk of court of the Supreme
Court and deposit the amount of P500.00 for costs at the time of the filing of the
petition. Proof of service of a copy thereof on the lower court concerned and on the
adverse party shall be submitted together with the petition
 Contents of petition - filed in eighteen (18) copies; original copy intended for the
court being indicated as such by the petitioner;
 (a) state the full name of the appealing party as the petitioner and the adverse
party as respondent, without impleading the lower courts or judges thereof
either as petitioners or respondents;
 (b) indicate the material dates showing when notice of the judgment or final
order or resolution subject thereof was received, when a motion for new trial
or reconsideration, if any, was filed and when notice of the denial thereof was
received
 (c) set forth concisely a statement of the matters involved, and the reasons or
arguments relied on for the allowance of the petition;
 (d) be accompanied by a clearly legible duplicate original, or a certified true
copy of the judgment or final order or resolution certified by the clerk of court
of the court a quo and the requisite number of plain copies thereof, and such
material portions of the record as would support the petition; and
 (e) contain a sworn certification against forum shopping
 Dismissal or denial of petition - failure of the petitioner to comply with any of the
foregoing requirements regarding the payment of the dock et and other lawful fees,
deposit for costs, proof of service of the petition, and the contents of and the
documents which should accompany the petition shall be sufficient ground for the
dismissal thereof.
 Court may on its own initiative deny the petition on the ground that the appeal is
without merit, or is prosecuted manifestly for delay, or that the questions raised
therein are too unsubstantial to require consideration
 Review discretionary - review is not a matter of right, but of sound judicial
discretion, and will be granted only when there are special and important reasons
therefor.
 (a) When the court a quo has decided a question of substance, not theretofore
determined by the Supreme Court, or has decided it in a way probably not in accord
with law or with the applicable decisions of the Supreme Court;
 (b) When the court a quo has so far departed from the accepted and usual course of
judicial proceedings, or so far sanctioned such departure by a lower court, as to call
for an exercise of the power of supervision
 Pleadings and documents that may be required; sanctions. - Court may require or
allow the filing of such pleadings, briefs, memoranda or documents as it may deem
necessary within such periods and under such conditions as it may consider
appropriate, and impose the corresponding sanctions in case of non-filing or
unauthorized filing of such pleadings and documents or non-compliance with the
conditions therefor
 Due course; elevation of records - Court may require the elevation of the complete
record of the case or specified parts thereof within fifteen (15) days from notice
 Rule applicable to both civil and criminal cases. - except in criminal cases where the
penalty imposed is death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment.
 Review by SC on the findings of fact of the CA
 GR: CA’s findings of fact are final and conclusive and cannot be reviewed on appeal
to the SC
 XPNs:
 1. The conclusion of the CA is grounded entirely on speculations, surmises and
conjectures;
 2. The inference made is manifestly mistaken, absurd or impossible;
 3. There is grave abuse of discretion;
 4. The judgment is based on misapprehension of facts;
 5. The findings of facts are conflicting;
 6. The CA in making its findings went beyond the issues of the case and the
same is contrary to the admissions of both appellant and appellee;
 7. The findings are contrary to those of the trial court;
 8. The findings of facts are conclusions without citation of specific evidence on
which they are based;
 9. The facts set forth in the petition as well as in the petitioner’s main and reply
briefs are not disputed by the respondents;
 10. The findings of fact of the CA are premised on the supposed absence of
evidence and contradicted by the evidence on record; or
 11. Those filed under Writs of amparo, habeas data, or kalikasan.

 Instances where the CA may act as a trial court (2008 BAR)

 1. In annulment of judgment; CA find prima facie merit 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;
 2. 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
 3. A petition for habeas corpus shall be set for hearing
 4. In petition for writs of amparo and habeas data, a hearing can be conducted;
  5. 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 original and appellate jurisdiction;
 6. The CA can grant a new trial based on the ground of newlydiscovered
evidence
 7. 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; and
 8. Human Security Act.
 Appeal under Rule 45 NOT a Matter of Right - but of sound judicial discretion with
the exception of cases where the penalty of death, or reclusion perpetua where the
appeal is a matter of right leaving the reviewing court without any discretion
 The following reasons may be considered in allowing the petition:
 1. When the court below has decided a question of substance not yet
determined by the SC;
 2. When the court below decided a question of substance in a way that is
probably not in accord with the law or with the applicable decisions of the SC;
or
 3. When the court below has departed from the accepted and usual course of
judicial proceedings or so far sanctioned such a departure by a lower court, as
to call for the exercise of the power of supervision of the SC
 Instances when an Appeal by Certiorari under Rule 45 may apply
 1. Appeal from RTC in cases where only questions of law are raised or are
involved and the case is one decided by the said court in the exercise of its
original jurisdiction
 2. Appeal from CA where the petition shall raise only questions of law
 3. Appeal from Sandiganbayan where the petition shall raise only questions of
law
 4. Appeals from the CTA en banc
 5. Appeals from a petition for writ of amparo to the SC which may raise
questions of fact, questions of law or of both fact and law
 6. Appeal from a petition for the writ of habeas data
 7. Appeal from a petition for a write of kalikasan, questions of fact or law or
both.
 Only Questions of Law under Rule 45 - Only Questions of Law under Rule 45
 Availment of Both Remedies under Rule 45 and 65 – GR: remedy of appeal under
Rule 45 and an original action for certiorari under Rule 65 are mutually exclusive and
not alternative or cumulative. Thus, a party should not join both petitions in one
pleading.
 XPN: The SC may set aside technicality for justifiable reasons as when the petition
before the Court is clearly meritorious and filed on time
 Appeal from Judgment or Final Order of the Sandiganbayan –
 1. The appeal to the SC in criminal cases decided by the Sandiganbayan in the
exercise of its original jurisdiction – by notice of appeal; and
 2. The appeal to the SC in criminal cases decided by the Sandiganbayan in the
exercise of its appellate jurisdiction – by petition for review on certiorari under
rule 45
(6) Review of Judgments or Final Orders of the Commission on Audit and Commission
on Elections (Rule 64)
 Mode of review - brought by the aggrieved party to the Supreme Court on certiorari
under Rule 65
 Time to file petition - within thirty (30) days from notice; filing of a motion for new
trial or reconsideration of said judgment or final order or resolution, if allowed
under the procedural rules of the Commission concerned, shall interrupt the period
herein fixed. If the motion is denied, the aggrieved party may; file the petition
within the remaining period, but which shall not be less than five (5) days in any
event, reckoned from notice of denial.
 Docket and other lawful fees - pay to the clerk of court the docket and other lawful
fees and deposit the amount of P500.00 for costs
 Form and contents of petition - eighteen (18) legible copies; petition shall name the
aggrieved party as petitioner and shall join as respondents the Commission
concerned and the person or persons interested in sustaining the judgment; state
the facts with certainty, present clearly the issues involved, set forth the grounds
and brief arguments relied upon for review; pray for judgment annulling or
modifying the questioned judgment; Findings of fact of the Commission supported
by substantial evidence shall be final and non-reviewable.
 accompanied by a clearly legible duplicate original or certified true copy of
the judgment; together with certified true copies of such material portions
of the record as are referred to therein and other documents relevant and
pertinent thereto; requisite number of copies of the petition shall contain
plain copies of all documents attached to the original copy of said petition.
 state the specific material dates showing that it was filed within the period
fixed herein, and shall contain a sworn certification against forum shopping
 further be accompanied by proof of service of a copy thereof on the
Commission concerned and on the adverse party, and of the timely payment
of docket and other lawful fees.
 failure of petitioner to comply with any of the foregoing requirements shall
be sufficient ground for the dismissal of the petition
 Order to comment - Court finds the petition sufficient in form and substance; order
the respondents to file their comments on the petition within ten (10) days from
notice thereof; otherwise, the Court may dismiss the petition outright. Court may
also dismiss the petition if it was filed manifestly for delay, or the questions raised
are too unsubstantial to warrant further proceedings
 Comments of respondents - filed in eighteen (18) legible copies; original shall be
accompanied by certified true copies of such material portions of the record as are
referred to therein together with other supporting papers; requisite number of
copies of the comments shall contain plain copies of all documents attached to the
original and a copy thereof shall be served on the petitioner
 No other pleading may be filed by any party unless required or allowed by the
Court.
 Effect of filing - shall not stay the execution of the judgment or final order or
resolution sought to be reviewed, unless the Supreme Court shall direct otherwise
upon such terms as it may deem just.
 Submission for decision - Unless the Court sets the case for oral argument, or
requires the parties to submit memoranda, the case shall be deemed submitted for
 decision upon the filing of the comments on the petition, or of such other pleadings
or papers as may be required or allowed, or the expiration of the period to do so.
 COMELEC and the COA - may be brought to the SC on certiorari under Rule 65 by
filing the petition within 30 days from notice of the judgment or final order
 CSC - may be taken to the CA under Rule 43 of the Rules of Court
 Jurisdiction of CA to Review the Decisions in Criminal and Administrative Cases of
the Ombudsman
 1. In administrative disciplinary cases, appealable to the CA under Rule 43.
 2. tainted with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of
jurisdiction, the aggrieved party may file a petition for certiorari with the SC
under Rule 65.
 3. In criminal cases, elevated to the SC by way of Rule 65.
 Review of Final Judgments or Final Orders of the NLRC - move for the
reconsideration of the decision and if denied, certiorari under Rule 65 within 60
days from notice of the decision. Doctrine of hierarchy of courts, the petition for
certiorari should be filed in the CA.
 Employees Compensation Commission - brought to the CA through a petition for
review under Rule 43
 DARAB possesses no power to issue writs of certiorari. Jurisdiction, or the legal
power to hear and determine a cause or causes of action, must exist as a matter of
law
 Remedy of a Party Aggrieved by the Decision of a Quasi-judicial Agency - file a
verified petition for review under Rule 43 in 7 legible copies within 15 days from:
 1. Notice of the award, judgment, final order or resolution;
 2. Date of publication, if publication is required by law for its effectivity; or
 3. Denial of petitioner’s MNT or MR
 Contents of Comment to the Petition
 1. Point out the insufficiencies or inaccuracies in petitioner’s statement of
facts and issues; and
 2. State the reasons why the petition should be denied or dismissed.
 filed within 10 days from notice in 7 legible copies and accompanied by clearly
legible certified true copies of such material portions of the record referred to
therein together with other supporting papers.
 Decision is immediately executory. It is not stayed by an appeal; CA shall direct
otherwise upon such terms as it may deem just.
 Extension of Time to file Petition for Review - 15 days only within which to file a
petition for review. No further extension shall be granted except for the most
compelling reason and in no case to exceed 15 days

(7) Dismissal, Reinstatement, and Withdrawal of Appeal

 Grounds for Dismissal of Appeal before the CA - on its own motion or on that of the
appellee, on the following grounds:
 a. Failure of the record on appeal to show on its face that the appeal was taken
within the period fixed by these Rules;
 b. Failure to file the notice of appeal or the record on appeal within the period
prescribed by these Rules;
 c. Failure of the appellant to pay the docket and other lawful fees
 d. Unauthorized alterations, omissions or additions in the approved record on
appeal
  e. Failure of the appellant to serve and file the required number of copies of his
brief or memorandum within the time provided
 f. Absence of specific assignment of errors in the appellant's brief, or of page
references to the record
 g. Failure of the appellant to take the necessary steps for the correction or
completion of the record within the time limited by the court in its order;
 h. Failure of the appellant to appear at the preliminary conference or to comply
with orders, circulars, or directives of the court without justifiable cause; and
 i. The fact that the order or judgment appealed from is not appealable
 The following improper appeals shall be dismissed:
 a. An appeal under Rule 41 taken from the RTC to the CA raising only questions
of law. Issues purely of law are not reviewable by the CA; and
 b. An appeal by notice of appeal instead of by petition for review from the
appellate judgement of RTC.
 An appeal erroneously taken to the CA shall not be transferred to the appropriate
court but shall be dismissed outright.
 Prior to the transmittal of the original record or the record on appeal to the
appellate court, the trial court, may motu proprio or on motion, dismiss the appeal
for having been taken out of time or for non-payment of the docket and other lawful
fees within the reglementary period
 Grounds for Dismissal of Appeal Before the SC - motu proprio or on motion of the
respondent on the following grounds:
 1. Failure to take the appeal within the reglementary period;
 2. Lack of merit in the petition;
 3. Failure to pay the requisite docket fee and other lawful fees or to make a
deposit for costs;
 4. Failure to comply with the requirements regarding proof of service and
contents of and the documents which should accompany the petition;
 5. Failure to comply with any circular, directive or order of the Supreme Court
without justifiable cause;
 6. Error in the choice or mode of appeal; and
 7. The fact that the case is not appealable to the Supreme Court.
 Reinstatement of Appeal - underlying consideration in this petition is that the act of
dismissing the notice of appeal, if done in excess of the trial court's jurisdiction,
amounts to an undue denial of the petitioner's right to appeal.
 importance and real purpose of the remedy of appeal; that an appeal is an essential
part of our judicial system and trial courts are advised to proceed with caution so as
not to deprive a party of the right to appeal and instructed that every party-litigant
should be afforded the amplest opportunity for the proper and just disposition of
his cause, freed from the constraints of technicalities
 Payment of Appellate Docket Fees - the payment in full of the docket fees within
the prescribed period is mandatory. Nevertheless, this rule must be qualified, to wit:
 1. The failure to pay appellate court docket fee within the reglementary period
allows only discretionary dismissal, not automatic dismissal, of the appeal; and
 2. Such power should be used in the exercise of the Courts' sound discretion ‘in
accordance with the tenets of justice and fair "play and with great deal of
circumspection considering all attendant circumstances
  SC has allowed the filing of an appeal in some cases where a stringent application of
the rules would have denied it, only when to do so would serve the demands of
justice and in the exercise of the SC’s equity jurisdiction
 Withdrawal of Appeal - appeal may be withdrawn as of right at any time before the
filing of the appellee's brief; Thereafter, the withdrawal may be allowed in the
discretion of the court
 Ordinary Appeal from the RTC to the CA - prior to the transmittal of the
original record or the record on appeal, the court may allow withdrawal of the
appeal
 Petition for Review from the RTC to the CA - before the Court of Appeals gives
due course to the petition, the Regional Trial Court may x x x allow withdrawal
of the appeal.
 DUAL FUNCTION OF APPELLATE COURTS
 Review for Correctness Function - to assure that substantial justice has been
done and is concerned with the justice of the particular case and with the
doctrine of res judicata.
 Institutional Function - to contribute to the progressive development of the
law for general application to the judicial system and is concerned with the
doctrine of stare decisis, which refers to the precedential value which assists in
deciding future similar cases
 The “Harmless Error Rule” in Appellate Decisions - No error in either the admission
or the exclusion of evidence and no error or defect in any ruling or order or in
anything done or omitted by the trial court or by any of the parties is ground for
granting a new trial or for setting aside, modifying, or otherwise disturbing a
judgment or order, unless refusal to take such action appears to the court
inconsistent with substantial justice

3. Petition for Relief from Judgment (Rule 38)

 A legal remedy whereby a party seeks to set aside a judgment rendered against him by a
court whenever he was unjustly deprived of a hearing or was prevented from taking an
appeal because of FAME
 An equitable remedy that is allowed only in exceptional cases when there is no other
available or adequate remedy
 It will not be entertained when the proper remedy is appeal or certiorari.
 Availability: Available after judgment has become final and executory
 Applicability: Applies to judgments, final orders and other proceedings.
 Grounds: FAME
 Period of filing: within 60 days from knowledge of the judgment and within 6 months from
entry of judgment. (Twin-period Jurisdictional)
 Nature of the Remedy: Equitable Remedy
 Available Remedy after its denial - Special civil action under Rule 65
 Verification requirement: must be verified
 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
 Who may avail: Only to parties in the proceedings
 Proceedings After an Answer is Filed
 1. After the filing of the answer or the expiration of the period therefor, the court shall
hear the petition and if after such hearing, it finds that the allegations thereof are not
true, the petition shall be dismissed.
  2. If the allegations are true, the court shall set aside the judgment, final order or
proceeding complained of upon such terms as may be just. Thereafter, the case shall
stand as if such judgment, final order or proceedings had never been rendered, issued
or taken. The court shall then proceed to hear and determine the case as if a timely
motion for new trial or reconsideration had been granted by it
 Failure to file an answer to the petition for relief does not constitute default, even without
such answer, the court will still have to hear the petition and determine its merits.
 Preliminary Injunction available pending the Resolution of the Petition for Relief - upon
the filing of a bond in favor of the adverse party
 Bond is conditioned that if the petition is dismissed or the petitioner fails on the trial of the
case upon its merits, he will pay the adverse party all damages and costs that may be
awarded to him by reason of issuance of such injunction or the other proceedings following
the petition
 Lien acquired over the property is NOT discharged by a Subsequent Issuance of a Writ of
Preliminary Injunction - Therefore, if the petition is denied, the court has the power to
reinstate the writ of execution.
 Execution of the judgment may proceed even if the Order denying the Petition for Relief is
pending appeal - Unless a writ of preliminary injunction has been issued. Writ may be
sought either in the trial or appellate courts
 Order granting Petition for Relief is Interlocutory and Non-appealable
 Grounds for Availing of the Remedy
 1. A judgment or final order is entered, or any other proceeding is thereafter taken
against a party in any court through fraud, accident, mistake, or excusable negligence
 2. The petitioner has been prevented from taking an appeal by fraud, accident,
mistake, or excusable negligence
 Fraud - pertains to extrinsic or collateral fraud
 There is extrinsic fraud when a party is prevented from fully presenting his case to the court
as when the lawyer connives to defeat or corruptly sells out his client’s interest. Extrinsic
fraud can be committed by a counsel against his client when the latter is prevented from
presenting his case to the court.
 Mistake - means mistake of fact
 Mistake can be of such nature as to cause substantial injustice to one of the parties. It may
be so palpable that it borders on extrinsic fraud
 A wrong choice in legal strategy or mode of procedure will not be considered a mistake for
purposes of granting a petition for relief from judgment. "Does not apply and was never
intended to apply to a judicial error which the court might have committed in the trial since
such error may be corrected by means of an appeal."

 Excusable negligence - requires that the negligence be so gross "that ordinary diligence and
prudence could not have guarded against it."
 Must also be imputable to the party-litigant and not to his or her counsel whose negligence
binds his or her client. The binding effect of counsel’s negligence ensures against the
resulting uncertainty and tentativeness of proceedings if clients were allowed to merely
disown their counsels’ conduct.
 XPNs:
 1. where the reckless or gross negligence of counsel deprives the client of due process
of law;
 petition shall be filed in such court and in the same case (not in another or higher
court). The petition shall pray that the judgment, order or proceeding be set aside
  2. when the rule’s application will result in outright deprivation of the client’s liberty
or property; or
 petition shall likewise be filed in such court and in the same case (not in another or
higher court) but the prayer this time is that the appeal be given due course
 3. where the interests of justice so require
 Certainly, excusable negligence must be proven
 Form and Contents of Petition for Relief
 1. The petition for relief must be verified;
 2. It must be supported by affidavit showing FAME relied upon; and
 3. The affidavit of merit accompanying the petition must also show facts constituting
the petitioner’s good or substantial cause of action or defense
Affidavit of Merit - recites the nature and character of FAME on which the motion is
based; serves as the jurisdictional basis for the court to entertain a petition for relief;
not a fatal defect to warrant denial of the petition so long as the facts required to be
set out also appear in the verified petition
 Issuance by the Court of the Order to Answer - within 15 days from the receipt thereof;
petition is sufficient in form and substance to justify relief
 The twin-period (60 days not more than 6 months) is mandatory, jurisdictional, and must
be strictly complied with, otherwise, the petition may be dismissed outright. - will not
apply when a petition for relief grounded on extrinsic fraud ultimately results in the court’s
lack of jurisdiction over the defendant, hence, judgment is void.
 Example - Respondents committed extrinsic fraud by providing the trial court an erroneous
address where summons may be served on the petitioner
 Petition for relief available against a judgement of the CA – not allowed
 Petition for relief is applicable to criminal cases

4. Annulment of Judgment (Rule 47)

 Coverage - govern the annulment by the Court of Appeals of judgments or final orders and
resolutions in civil actions of Regional Trial Courts for which the ordinary remedies of new
trial, appeal, petition for relief or other appropriate remedies are no longer available
through no fault of the petitioner
 Grounds for annulment - based only on the grounds of extrinsic fraud and lack of
jurisdiction.
 Extrinsic fraud shall 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.
 Period for filing action – based extrinsic fraud, the action must be filed within four (4) years
from its discovery; based on lack of jurisdiction, before it is barred by laches or estoppel.
 Filing and contents of petition - filing a verified petition alleging therein with particularity
the facts and the law relied upon for annulment, as well as those supporting the petitioners
good and substantial cause of action or defense,
 filed in seven (7) clearly legible copies, together with sufficient copies corresponding to the
number of respondents, certified true copy of the judgment or final order or resolution shall
be attached to the original copy of the petition intended for the court and indicated as such
by the petitioner.
 petitioner shall also submit together with the petition affidavits of witnesses or documents
supporting the cause of action or defense and a sworn certification that he has not
theretofore commenced any other action involving the same issues in the Supreme Court of
Appeals or different divisions thereof, or any other tribunal or agency; if there is such other
action or proceeding, he must state the status of the same, and if he should thereafter learn
 that a similar action or proceeding has been filed or is pending before the Supreme Court,
the Court of Appeals, or different divisions thereof, or any other tribunal or agency, he
undertakes to promptly inform the aforesaid courts and other tribunal or agency thereof
within five (5) days therefrom.
 Action by the court - Should the court find no substantial merit in the petition, the same
may be dismissed outright with specific reasons for such dismissal.
 Should prima facie merit be found in the petition, the same shall be given due course and
summons shall be served on the respondent
 Procedure - procedure in ordinary civil cases shall be observed. Should a trial be necessary,
the reception of the evidence may be referred to a member of the court or a judge of a
Regional Trial Court.
 Effect of judgment - judgment of annulment shall set aside the questioned judgment or final
order or resolution and render the same null and void, without prejudice to the original
action being refiled in the proper court. However, where the judgment or final order or
resolution is set aside on the ground of extrinsic fraud, the court may on motion order the
trial court to try the case as if a timely motion for new trial had been granted therein
 Suspension of prescriptive period - prescriptive period for the refiling of the aforesaid
original action shall be deemed suspended from the filing of such original action until the
finality of the judgment of annulment. However, the prescriptive period shall not be
suspended where the extrinsic fraud is attributable to the plaintiff in the original action
 Relief available - judgment of annulment may include the award of damages, attorney’s fees
and other relief.
 If the questioned judgment or final order or resolution had already been executed, the court
may issue such orders of restitution or other relief as justice and equity may warrant under
the circumstances
 Annulment of judgments or final orders of Municipal Trial Courts - action to annul a
judgment or final order of a Municipal Trial Court shall be filed in the Regional Trial Court
having jurisdiction over the former. It shall be treated as an ordinary civil action and sections
2, 3 4, 7, 8 and 9 of this Rule shall be applicable thereto.
 Annulment of Judgment - remedy in law independent of the case where the judgment
sought to be annulled was rendered.
 Like a petition for relief, a recourse equitable in character, allowed only in exceptional cases
where there is no available adequate remedy
 A co-equal court cannot annul the final judgment of a similar court. CA has exclusive
jurisdiction over actions for annulment of judgments of RTC. An action to annul a judgment
or final order of MTC shall be filed in the RTC having jurisdiction in the former and it shall be
treated as an ordinary civil action
 Purpose - To have the final and executory judgment set aside so that there will be renewal
of litigation
 Who may file - can be filed by one who was not a party to the action in which the assailed
judgment was rendered. It is a remedy in law independent of the case where the judgment
sought to be annulled is promulgated
 person need not be a party to the judgment sought to be annulled. What is essential is that
he can prove his allegation that the judgment was obtained by the use of fraud and
collusion and he would be adversely affected thereby
 When available - remedy of annulment of judgment may be availed of when the ordinary
remedies of new trial, appeal, petition for relief or other appropriate remedies are no longer
available through no fault of the petitioner.
  petitioner fails to avail of those other remedies without sufficient justification, he cannot
resort to the action for annulment provided in the Rules, otherwise he would benefit from
his own inaction or negligence
 Annulment of Judgments of Quasi-judicial bodies - does not apply to judgments rendered
by quasi-judicial bodies. It does not apply also to decisions or orders of the Ombudsman in
administrative cases whose decisions or orders may be appealed to the CA under Rule 43.
 silence of BP 129 on the jurisdiction of the CA to annul judgments or final orders and
resolutions of quasi-judicial bodies like the DARAB indicates its lack of such authority
 Contents of the Petition
 1. Verified petition alleging:
 a. The facts and the law relied upon for annulment; and
 b. As well as those supporting the petitioner’s good and substantial cause of
action or defense, as the case may be;
 2. A certified true copy of the judgment or final order or resolution intended for the
court and indicated as such by the petitioner;
 3. Affidavits of witnesses or documents supporting the cause of action or defense;
and
 4. Sworn certification against forum shopping
 The procedure in ordinary civil cases shall be observed. Should a trial be necessary, the
reception of the evidence may be referred to a member of the court or a judge of the RTC
 Grounds for the Annulment of Judgment of the RTC (2008 BAR)
 1. Lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter and over the person - barred by
estoppels by laches, which is that failure to do something which should be done or to
claim or enforce a right at a proper time or a neglect to do something which one
should do or to seek or enforce a right at a proper time.
 2. Extrinsic Fraud
 Extrinsic or Collateral Fraud - Fraudulent act committed by the prevailing party
outside of the trial of the case, which prevented the defeated party from having
a trial or from presenting his case to the court, or is used to procure the
judgment without fair submission of the controversy
 Intrinsic Fraud - It refers to the acts of a party at the trial that prevents a fair
and just determination of the case, and that could have been litigated and
determined at the trial such as falsification, false testimony. It does not
constitute a ground for new trial.
 3. Denial of due process.
 A petition for Annulment of Judgment may be based only on the grounds of extrinsic fraud
and lack of jurisdiction, jurisprudence recognizes lack of due process as additional ground to
annul a judgment.

5. Collateral Attack on Judgments

 Collateral Attack - Made in another action to obtain a different relief, an attack on the
judgment is made as an incident in said action.
 This is proper only when the judgment, on its face is null and void, as where it is patent that
the court which rendered such judgment has no jurisdiction.
 DIRECT ATTACK - Made through an action or proceeding the main object of which is to
annul, set aside or enjoin the enforcement of such judgment if not yet carried into effect; or
if the property has been disposed of, the aggrieved party may sue for recovery

U. Execution, Satisfaction, and Effect of Judgments (Rule 39)

 When Execution shall issue - within five (5) years from the date of its entry. After the lapse of such time,
and before it is barred by the stature of limitations, a judgment may be enforced by action
 No appeal may be taken from an order of execution; file an appropriate special civil action under Rule 65
 One exception is when the terms of the judgment are not clear enough and there remains room for
interpretation. If the exception applies, the adverse party may seek the stay of execution or the quashal of
the writ of execution
 Execution as a Matter of Right
 Judgment has become final and executory;
 Judgment debtor has renounced or waived his right to appeal;
 Period for appeal has lapsed without an appeal having been filed; or
 Having been filed, the appeal has been resolved and the records of the case have been returned to
the court of origin.
 How issued - prevailing party can have it executed as a matter of right, and the issuance of a writ of
execution becomes the ministerial duty of the court
 Execution shall issue upon motion. Even in judgments which are immediately executory, there must be a
motion to that effect and a hearing called for that purpose. A decision which is immediately executory does
not mean dispensing with 3-day notice required in the implementation of a writ of execution. A sheriff who
enforces the writ without the required notice is running afoul with the rules
 A motion for the issuance of a writ of execution shall contain a notice to the adverse party. A motion which
does not contain a notice of hearing of the time and place for the hearing of the motion, is a worthless piece
of paper which the clerk has no right to receive and which the court has no authority to act upon
 Refusal of the Court to issue a writ of execution – GR: Execution of judgment is a matter of right on the part
of the winning party. The court cannot refuse execution.
 XPNs:
 execution is sought more than five (5) years from its entry without the judgment having been revived;
 judgment has already been executed by the voluntary compliance thereof by the parties
 judgment has been novated by the parties (compromise)
 petition for relief is filed and a preliminary injunction is granted
 judgment sought to be executed is conditional or incomplete
 facts and circumstances transpire which would render execution inequitable or unjust
 equitable grounds, as when there has been change in the situation of the parties which makes
execution inequitable.
 Remedy if a Motion for Execution is denied - Writ of mandamus
 DISCRETIONARY EXECUTION - exception to the rule that a judgment cannot be executed before the lapse of
the period for appeal or during the pendency of an appeal.
 Discretionary execution may only issue upon good reasons to be stated in a special order after due hearing
 “Good reasons” have been held to consist of compelling circumstances that justify immediate execution lest
the judgment becomes illusory. Circumstances must be superior, outweighing the injury or damages that
might result should the losing party secure a reversal of the judgment
 The following are examples of good reasons that would justify a discretionary execution:
 proven insolvency of the debtors
 purpose of preventing irreparable injury
 fact that the goods subject of the judgments will perish or deteriorate during the pendency of the
appeal, a fact which would render the judgment in favor of the prevailing party ineffective
 failure of an unlawful detainer case to make the required periodic deposits to cover the amount of
rentals due under the contract or for payment of the reasonable value of the use and occupation of
the premises, or the failure to post a supersedeas bond may be good reasons to allow execution
pending appeal
 The following examples are NOT good reasons that would justify a discretionary execution:
 sole reason given by the trial court in allowing execution is that the appeal is frivolous and dilatory
 mere filing of a bond by the successful party
 fact that the prevailing party is in financial distress.
 Requisites for discretionary execution
 motion with notice to the adverse party;
 hearing
 good reasons to justify
 good reasons must be stated in a special order
 Instances when execution is discretionary
 pending appeal;
 court has jurisdiction over the case and is in possession of either the original record or record on
appeal;
 court has lost jurisdiction but has not transmitted records of the case to the appellate court;
 court has lost jurisdiction and has transmitted records (motion for execution pending appeal with
appellate court); and
 Execution of several, separate or partial judgment
 Instances when execution may issue before judgment has become executory and before the appeal was
perfected
 lapse of time would make the ultimate judgment ineffective; debtors were withdrawing their business
and assets from the country;
 appeal is clearly dilatory;
 judgment is for support and the beneficiary is in need thereof;
 articles subject of the case would deteriorate;
 defendants are exhausting their income and have no other property aside from the proceeds of a
property subject of the action;
 judgment debtor is in imminent danger of insolvency or is actually insolvent;
 prevailing party is of advanced age and in a precarious state of health, and the obligation in the
judgment is nontransmissible; and
 case involved escrow deposits and the prevailing party posts sufficient bond to answer for damages in
case of reversal of the judgment

 Where to file an application for discretionary execution

 1. The motion for discretionary execution shall be filed with the trial court:
 has jurisdiction over the case; and
 in possession of either the original record or the record on appeal; or
 2. After the trial court has lost jurisdiction, the motion for execution pending appeal may be filed in
the appellate court
 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.
 Remedy when the judgment is reversed or annulled - trial court may, on motion, issue such orders of
restitution or reparation of damages as equity and justice may warrant under the circumstances
 Supreme Court held that one party may validly question a decision in a regular appeal and at the same time
assail the execution pending appeal via certiorari without violating the rule against forum shopping. This is
because the merits of the case will not be addressed in the Petition dealing with the execution and vice
versa
 Resolution or a favorable judgment in either will not amount to res judicata in the subsequent proceedings
between the same parties
 Moral and exemplary damages may be the subject of an execution pending appeal if they are NOT
dependent on other type of damages and that there is a good reason to grant the execution pending appeal.
However, if they are dependent upon the outcome of the case, they may not be awarded.
 Staying the discretionary execution - sufficient supersedeas bond 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.
 Modes of execution of final and executory judgment or order and revived Judgment
 1. Execution by motion – if the enforcement of the judgment is sought within five (5) years from the
date of its entry;
 2. Execution by independent action – if the five (5) year period has elapsed and before it is barred by
statute of limitations which is 10 years from the date entry. This action is a personal one and not quasi
in rem.
 Date of finality of judgment or final order shall be deemed to be the date of its entry. However, if the
judgment is based upon a compromise which is immediately final and executory, prescription runs from the
date of its rendition and not from date of entry
 Instances where the five- and ten-year periods do not apply
 1. Special proceedings, e.g., land registration and cadastral cases; and
 2. Judgments for support.
 Motion and hearing are indispensable even if judgment is immediately executory -
 Execution by motion after the lapse of 5 years
 GR: Execution of a judgment can no longer be effected by filing a motion, after 5 years.
 XPNs:
 1. The delay in the execution of the judgment was through causes attributable to the judgment
debtor; or
 2. When delay is incurred for his or her benefit; and
 3. The period may also be interrupted by the agreement of the parties to suspend the enforcement of
the judgment
 Dormant judgment - one which has not been enforced by motion within 5 years after its entry and is thus
reduced to a mere right of action in favor of judgment-obligee. It may be enforced by filing an action for
revival of judgment and enforcing the decision therein
 Revival of judgment - action for revival of judgment is no more than a procedural means of securing the
execution of a previous judgment which has become dormant after the passage of five (5) years without it
being executed upon motion of the prevailing party. It is not intended to re-open any issue affecting the
merits of the judgment debtor’s case nor the propriety or correctness of the first judgment.
 A revived judgment is deemed a new judgment separate and distinct from the original judgment. It is not a
continuation of the original judgment. The action to revive the judgment is a new action and results in a
new judgment constituting a new cause of action with a new period of limitations.
 When a judgment is revived, such revived judgment may also be enforced by motion within 5 years from the
date of its entry and thereafter by action also before it is barred by the statute of limitations.
 The 10-year period to revive the revived judgment shall commence to run from the date of the finality of
the revived judgment and not from the date of finality of the old, original judgment
 Proper venue of revival of judgment – Real action – location; Personal – residence
 Effect of an appeal to the execution of the judgment
 GR: An appeal perfected in due time stays the execution of a judgment.
 XPNs: There are judgments which by express provision of law are not stayed by appeal:
  1. judgment for injunction, receivership, accounting and support unless the court rules otherwise or
the appellate court on appeal suspends, modifies, restores or grants the same. Judgments appealed
under Rule 43 are not stayed unless ordered by the Court; or
 2. Those judgments that have become the object of discretionary execution
 Judgments or final orders that are immediately final and executory
 1. Judgments in summary judicial proceedings in the family law (Art. 247, FC);
 2. Compromise judgments;
 3. Judgments of direct contempt
 4. Judgments in cases covered by the Rule of Procedure for Small Claims Cases
 Defenses available in an action for enforcement
 1. Prescription;
 2. Satisfaction of claim; and
 3. Counterclaims.
 Issuance of Execution in case of death of a party
 1. Death of an obligee – execution will issue in any case, upon application of his or her executor,
administrator, or successor-in-interest;
 2. Death of an obligor
 a. Death before levy:
 i. Action for recovery of real or personal property or enforcement of any lien thereon –
execution shall issue against his or her executor or administrator or successor-ininterest; or
 ii. Action for a sum of money – execution will NOT issue. The judgment obligee should file a
claim against the estate of the judgment obligor
 b. Death after levy: Execution will issue against his or her executor, administrator, or successor-in-
interest because the property is already separated from the estate of the deceased and is
deemed in custodia legis.
 Writ of execution - Judicial writ issued to an officer authorizing him or her to execute the judgment of the
court.
 Fruit and end of the suit and is the life of law. A judgment that is left unexecuted is nothing but an empty
victory for the prevailing party.
 Motion for the Issuance of a Writ of Execution must contain a notice to the adverse party. Execution shall
issue as a matter of right, on motion, upon a judgment or order that disposes of the action or proceeding
upon the expiration of the period to appeal therefrom if no appeal has been duly perfected

 Lifetime of a writ of execution

 1. A final and executory judgment or order may be executed on motion within five (5) years from the
date of its entry. After the lapse of such time, and before it is barred by the statute of limitations, a
judgment may be enforced by action.
 2. The revived judgment may also be enforced by motion within five (5) years from the date of its
entry and thereafter by action before it is barred by the statute of limitations
 Contents of a writ of execution -
 The writ of execution is issued in the name of the Philippines and shall state
 1. The name of the court which granted the motion;
 2. The case number;
 3. The dispositive portion of the judgment or order subject of the execution; and
 4. A statement requiring the sheriff or other proper officer to whom it is directed to enforce the writ
according to its terms, in the manner hereinafter provided:
 a. If the execution be against the property of the judgment obligor, to satisfy the judgment, with
interest, out of the real or personal property of such judgment obligor;
  b. If it be against real or personal property in the hands of personal representatives, heirs,
devisees, legatees, tenants, or trustees of the judgment obligor, to satisfy the judgment, with
interest, out of such property;
 c. If it be for the sale of real or personal property, to sell such property, describing it, and apply
the proceeds in conformity with the judgment, the material parts of which shall be recited in the
writ of execution;
 d. If it be for the delivery of the possession of real or personal property, to deliver the possession
of the same, describing it, to the party entitled thereto, and to satisfy any costs, damages, rents,
or profits covered by the judgment out of the personal property of the person against whom it
was rendered, and if sufficient personal property cannot be found, then out of the real property;
and
 e. In all cases, the writ of execution shall specifically state the amount of the interest, costs,
damages, rents, or profits due as of the date of the issuance of the writ, aside from the principal
obligation under the judgment. For this purpose, the motion for execution shall specify the
amounts of the foregoing reliefs sought by the movants
 Effect when the writ of execution does not conform to the judgment – void, may be quashed on motion
 Cases where a writ of possession may be issued
 1. Land registration proceedings (in rem);
 2. Extrajudicial foreclosure of a real estate mortgage;
 3. Judicial foreclosure of mortgage, (quasi in rem); mortgagor is in possession; no third person,
not a party to the foreclosure suit, had intervened; and
 4. Execution sale
 An order granting the issuance of a writ of execution of a final judgment is not appealable, except when the
order varies in term, vague, and a wrong interpretation of judgment
 Grounds to quash the writ of execution
 varies the judgment;
 change in the situation of the parties making the execution inequitable or unjust;
 exempt from execution;
 controversy has never been submitted to the judgment of the court;
 terms of the judgment are not clear enough and there remains room for interpretation thereof;
 improvidently issued
 defective in substance, or is issued against the wrong party, or that the judgment debt has been
paid or otherwise satisfied or the writ is issued without authority
 EXECUTION OF JUDGMENTS FOR MONEY
 1. Immediate payment on demand;
 2. Satisfaction by levy; and
 3. Garnishment of debts and credits
 Steps in executing a judgment for money
 demand from the obligor the immediate payment of the full amount stated in the judgment
including the lawful fees in cash, certified check payable to the judgment obligee or any other
form of payment acceptable to him;
 cannot pay all or part of the obligation in cash, certified check or other mode of payment - levy
upon the properties of the judgment; judgment obligor shall have the option to choose which
property or part thereof may be levied upon; judgment obligor does not exercise the option, the
officer shall first levy on the personal properties; then on the real properties if the personal
properties are insufficient to answer for the personal judgment but the sheriff shall sell only so
much of the property that is sufficient to satisfy the judgment and lawful fees;
  Garnishment - levy on the debts due the judgment debtor including bank deposits, financial
interests, royalties, commissions and other personal property not capable of manual delivery in
the possession or control of third parties
 A lawful levy on execution is indispensable to a valid sale on execution. A sale, unless preceded by a valid
levy, is void, and the purchaser acquires no title to the property sold
 Garnishment - form of levy on the debts due the debtor including bank deposits, financial interests,
royalties, commissions and other personal property not capable of manual delivery in the possession or
control of third parties
 kind of attachment for reaching credits belonging to the judgment debtor and owing to him from a stranger
to the litigation. writ of attachment is substantially a writ of execution except that it emanates at the
beginning, instead of at the termination, of a suit. places the attached properties in custodia legis, obtaining
pendente lite a lien until the judgment of the proper tribunal on the plaintiff’s claim is established, when the
lien becomes effective as of the date of the levy.
 garnishee or the third person who is in the possession of the property of the judgment debtor is deemed a
forced intervenor. It is a settled rule that upon service of the writ of garnishment, the garnishee becomes a
“virtual party” or “forced intervenor” to the case and the trial court thereby acquires jurisdiction to bind the
garnishee to comply
 Procedure in garnishment
 notice is served upon the third person or garnishee
 garnishee shall make a written report to the court within 5 days from service stating whether or
not the judgment obligor has sufficient funds to satisfy the judgment; If sufficient - deliver the
amount in cash or certified check issued in the name of the judgment obligee shall be delivered
directly to the judgment obligee within 10 working days;
 lawful fees shall be directly paid to the court;
 if insufficient - report as to the amount he holds for the judgment creditor
 Implementation of Judgment if the obligee is absent at the time of payment - sheriff is authorized to
receive it; money received must be remitted to the clerk of court within the same day; if not practicable,
deposited in a fiduciary account with the nearest government depository bank;
 EXECUTION OF JUDGMENTS FOR SPECIFIC ACTS
 Conveyance, delivery of deeds, or other specific acts, vesting title. - appoint some other person at
the cost of the disobedient party and the act when so done shall have the same effect as if done by
the required party
 Sale of real and personal property - Sell and apply the proceeds in conformity with the judgment.
 Delivery or restitution of real property - party refuses to deliver, a writ of execution directing the
sheriff to cause the defendant to vacate is in the nature of a habere facias possesionem and
authorizes the sheriff to break open the premises where there is no occupant therein
 party refuses to vacate property, the remedy is not contempt. The sheriff must oust the party. But if
demolition is involved, there must be a special order. A demolition order from the court is required to
effect removal of an improvement constructed by the defeated party
 Removal of improvements on property subject of execution - officer may destroy, demolish or
remove the improvements upon special order of the court, issued upon motion of the judgment
obligee.
 Delivery of personal property - Delivery of personal property
 Remedy when a party refuses to comply with the judgment
 1. Vacate the property – The sheriff must oust the party. A demolition order from the court is required
to effect removal of an improvement constructed by the defeated party;
 2. Deliver – The sheriff will take possession and deliver it to the winning party; and
 3. Comply – The court can appoint some other person at the expense of the disobedient party and
the act shall have the same effect as if the required party performed it.
 Contempt in case of refusal to comply with the judgment of the court
 GR: The judgment debtor cannot be cited in contempt of court.
 XPNs:
 Refusal to perform a particular act or special judgments
 support pendente lite
 If a judgment requires a person to perform a specific act, said act must be performed, but if the party fails to
comply within the specified time, the court may direct the act to be done by someone at the cost of the
disobedient party and the act when so done shall have the effect as if done by the party (no contempt)
 EXECUTION OF SPECIAL JUDGMENTS - requires the performance of any act
 Effect of failure to comply with special judgments - punishable by imprisonment
 How executed - certified copy of the judgment shall be attached to the writ of execution and shall be served
by the officer upon the party against whom the same is rendered, or upon any other person required
thereby, or by law, to obey the same, and such party or person may be punished for contempt if he disobeys
such judgment
 EFFECT OF LEVY ON THIRD PERSONS - creates a lien in favor of the judgment obligee over the right, title and
interest of the judgment obligor in such property at the time of the levy, subject to liens and encumbrances
then existing
 Remedies available to a third-party claimant in levy of real property
 1. Summary hearing before the court which authorized the execution;
 2. Terceria or a third-party claim filed with the sheriff;
 3. Action for damages on the bond posted by judgment creditors; or
 4. Independent reinvindicatory action
 The remedies are cumulative and may be resorted to by the third-party claimant independently of or
separately from the others. Availment of the terceria is not a condition sine qua non to the institution of
“separate action.”
 if there is a bond filed by the winning party - officer shall not be liable for damages
 If there is no bond, the sale cannot proceed
 judgment obligee can claim damages against a third-party claimant who filed a frivolous or plainly spurious
claim, and such judgment obligee can institute proceedings therefor in the same or separate action.

 REMEDIES WHEN PROPERTY IS CLAIMED BY THIRD PERSONS – at any time, file with the sheriff in
possession or before sale under execution.
 1. Terciera – third party claim
 Requisites (Terciera)
 Property is levied
 Claimant is a third person
 affidavit of his title thereto or right to the possession thereof stating the grounds of such right or
title
 serves the same upon the officer making the levy and the judgment oblige
 Duty of the officer if the property sought to be levied on is claimed by another person and proper
proof of ownership or possession is served such officer - not be bound to keep the property, unless
the judgment obligee, on demand of the officer, files a bond approved by the court to indemnify the
third-party claimant in a sum not less than the value of the property levied on
 disagreement as to the value, the same shall be determined by the court issuing the writ of execution.
No claim for damages for the taking or keeping of the property may be enforced against the bond
unless the action therefor is filed within 120 days from the date of the filing of the bond.
  2. Exclusion or release of property – motion to set aside the levy on attachment; questions
performance of duty of sheriff in execution of writ of attachment
 3. Intervention - This is possible because no judgment has yet been rendered and under the rules, a
motion for intervention may be filed any time before the rendition of the judgment by the trial court.
 4. Accion Reivindicatoria – third-party claimant is not precluded, from vindicating his claim to the
property in the same or in a separate action, file a separate action to nullify the levy with damages
resulting from the unlawful levy and seizure. action may be a totally distinct action from the former
case.
 RULES ON REDEMPTION - no right of redemption as to personal properties for the sale is absolute. Such
right is available only to real properties
 period of redemption is not suspended by an action to annul the foreclosure sale. The periods for
redemption are not extendible. However, the parties may agree on a longer period, in a in such case, it
would be a conventional redemption.
 Person/party to redeem the real property sold
 1. Judgment obligor
 2. Judgment obligor’s, successor-in-interest in the whole or any part of the property;
 3. Redemptioner – a creditor having a lien by virtue of an attachment, judgment or mortgage on the
property sold, or on some part thereof, subsequent to the lien under which the property was sold
 no right of redemption in judicial foreclosure of mortgage
 The right of redemption exists only in execution sales and extrajudicial foreclosures where there is always a
right of redemption
 Redemption price
 1. By judgment obligor or the first redemptioner: purchase price + 1%/month +any assessment. If
redeeming from Creditor purchaser; amount of other lien + interest
 2. By subsequent redemptioners: amount on last redemption + 2%/month + any assessments + liens of
last redemptioner + interests
 Effect of Redemption by Judgment Obligor - person to whom the redemption payment is made must
execute and deliver to the judgment obligor a notarized certificate of redemption, which is filed, registered,
and annotated with the Register of Deeds.
 Rights Pending Redemption - judgment obligee may apply for injunction to restrain the commission or
waste on the property
 It is not waste for a person in possession of the property at the time of the sale, or entitled to possession
afterwards, during the period allowed for redemption to:
 1. Continue to use it in the same manner in which it was previously used;
 2. Use it in the ordinary course of husbandry; or
 3. Make the necessary repairs to buildings thereon while he occupies the property.
 Rights of a judgment debtor
 1. To remain in possession of the property until the expiration of period of redemption;
 2. To collect rents and profits until the expiration of period of redemption
 3. To use the property in the same manner it was previously used;
 4. To make necessary repairs; and
 5. Use it in the ordinary course of husbandry
 Purchaser entitled to possession and conveyance of the property sold on Execution - if no redemption is
made within 1 year from the date of the registration of the certificate of sale
 upon the expiration of the right of redemption, the purchaser or redemptioner shall be substituted to and
acquire all the rights, title, interest and claim of the judgment obligor to the property as of the time of the
levy; the possession of the property shall be given to the purchaser or last redemptioner by the same
officer.
 As an exception, whenever a third party is actually holding the property adversely to the judgment obligor
 Instances when the purchaser may recover the purchase price from the judgment obligor
 1. If the purchaser or his or her successor-in-interest fails to recover possession of the property sold on
execution sale; or
 2. Is evicted due to:
 a. Irregularities in the proceedings concerning the sale;
 b. Reversal or setting aside of judgment;
 c. The fact that the property was exempt from execution; or
 d. If a third person has vindicated his claim to the property.
 Remedy of a purchaser of real property sold on execution in instances when purchaser may recover the
purchase price
 1. Bring an action against the judgment creditor;
 2. File a motion for revival of judgment in his name against the judgment debtor; or
 3. Bring an action to recover possession of property.
 EXAMINATION OF JUDGMENT OBLIGOR WHEN JUDGMENT IS UNSATISFIED
 judgment creditor may cause examination of the judgment debtor as to his or her property and
income
 judgment creditor may cause examination of the debtors of the judgment debtor as to any debt
owed by him or her or to any property of the judgment debtor in his or her possession before the
court or a commissioner appointed by it, at a time and place within the province or city where
such debtor resides or is found
 court finds, after examination, that there is property of the judgment debtor either in his or her
own hands or that of any person, the court may order the property applied to the satisfaction of
the judgment
 court finds the earnings of the judgment debtor are more than sufficient for his or her family’s
needs, it may order payment in fixed monthly installments
 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
 court finds that the judgment debtor has an ascertainable interest in real property either as
mortgagor, mortgagee, or otherwise, and his or her interest can be ascertained without
controversy, the court may order the sale of such interest
 court finds that the judgment debtor has an ascertainable interest in real property either as
mortgagor, mortgagee, or otherwise, and his or her interest can be ascertained without
controversy, the court may order the sale of such interest
 No judgment obligor shall be so required to appear before a court or commissioner outside the province or
city in which such obligor resides or is found
 EXAMINATION OF OBLIGOR OF JUDGMENT OBLIGOR - upon proof to the satisfaction of the court which
issued the writ, that a person, corporation, or other judicial entity has property of such judgment obligor or
is indebted to him, the court may, by an order, require such person, corporation, or other juridical entity, or
any officer or member thereof, to appear before the court or a commissioner appointed by it, at a time and
place within the province or city where such debtor resides or is found, and be examined concerning the
same
 A party or other person may be compelled, by an order of subpoena, to appear before the court or
commissioner to testify. Failure to obey may be punished by contempt. If examination is before a
commissioner, the commissioner must put it in writing and certify it to the court. All examinations and
answers must be under oath.
 EFFECT OF JUDGMENTS OR FINAL ORDERS
 1. If judgment or final order is on a specific thing – the same is conclusive upon the title to thing;
  2. If judgment or final order is in respect to the probate of a will, or the administration of the
estate of a deceased person – the same is conclusive upon the will or administration, but the
probate of the will or the granting of letters of administration shall only be prima facie evidence of
the death of the testator or intestate and not a conclusive presumption of death;
 3. If judgment or final order is in respect to the personal, political or legal condition or status of a
particular person or his relationship to another – the judgment or final order is conclusive upon
the condition, status or relationship;
 4. In other cases, if the judgment be with respect to the matter directly adjudged or as to any
other matter that could have been raised in relation thereto – the judgment or final order is
conclusive between the parties and their successors-in-interest by title subsequent to the
commencement of the action or special proceeding, litigating for the same thing and under the
same title and in the same capacity, relationship
 5. In any other litigation between the same parties or their successors-in-interest – that only is
deemed to be adjudged in a former judgment or final order which appear upon its face to have
been adjudged, or which was actually and necessarily included therein or necessary thereto.
 Refusal to issue writ of execution after judgment has become final
 GR: The trial court has ministerial duty to order execution of final and executory judgments. It cannot refuse
execution and is compellable by mandamus.
 XPNs: (Same as the grounds to quash a writ of execution)
 1. Change in the situation of the parties which makes the execution inequitable or unjust;
 2. Writ of execution varies judgment;
 3. Controversy was never submitted to the judgment of the court;
 4. Execution is sought against property exempt from execution;
 5. Terms of the judgment are not clear and leaves room for interpretation;
 6. Writ of execution is improvidently issued;
 7. Writ of execution is defective in substance;
 8. Writ of execution is issued against the wrong party;
 9. Judgment debtor has been paid or otherwise satisfied; and
 10. Writ of execution was issued without authority.
 The proper remedy is petition for certiorari under Rule 65

 Instances when execution of final and executory judgment is not allowed

 1. Upon filing of a petition for relief from judgment;
 2. Attack against a judgment which is void for lack of jurisdiction, or obtained through fraud;
 3. On equitable grounds; and
 4. In cases falling under the 10 exceptions above
 Modifying final and executory judgments
 GR: Final and executory judgments cannot be amended or modified. Any amendment which substantially
affects a final and executory judgment is null and void for lack of jurisdiction
 XPN: Judgment may be modified as to:
 1. Clerical errors or mistakes - errors which are not the result of the exercise of judicial functions;
 2. To clarify ambiguity;
 3. To enter nunc pro tunc orders – to make a present record of an order which the court rendered
at a previous time but, by inadvertence has not been entered; and
 4. In judgments for support which can always be amended from time to time, in light of the
circumstances of the parties
 Two Aspects of Res Judicata
  1. "Bar by prior judgment" or "estoppel by verdict - effect of a judgment as a bar to the
prosecution of a second action upon the same claim, demand or cause of action.
 2. "Conclusiveness of judgment" or the “rule of auter action pendant” - issues actually and directly
resolved in a former suit cannot again be raised in any future case between the same parties
involving a different cause of action. It has the effect of preclusion of issues only
 Essential requisites
 (1) finality of the former judgment;
 (2) the court had jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties;
 (3) it must be a judgment on the merits; and
 (4) there must be, between the first and second actions, identity of parties, subject matter and
causes of action.
 Effect of a Foreign Order (2007 BAR)
 1. Against a specific thing – conclusive upon title to the thing
 2. Against a person – presumptive evidence of a right as between the parties and their successors-
in-interest by a subsequent title
 Enforcement of a judgment of a foreign court (2007 BAR) - may only be enforced in the Philippines through
an action validly heard in an RTC. Thus, it is actually the judgment of the Philippine court enforcing the
foreign judgment that shall be executed
 Period: action upon a judgment must be brought within 10 years from the time the right of action accrues.
 Where a foreign law is not pleaded or, even if pleaded, is not proved, the presumption is that the foreign
law is the same as local law under the doctrine of processual presumption
 Judgement immediately executory without the expiration of period to appeal
 a. Injunction, receivership, accounting and support;
 b. Forcible entry or unlawful detainer;
 c. Decision of the RTC in civil cases governed by the Rules of Summary Procedure; and
 d. Decision of the Labor Arbiter reinstating a dismissed or separated employee.

IV. Provisional Remedies

A. Nature, Purpose, and Jurisdiction Over Provisional Remedies
 Nature
 Writs and processes which are temporary, auxiliary, and ancillary remedies available to a litigant for
the protection and preservation of his rights until the final disposition of a matter in litigation
 Dependent for their application upon the existence of a main action.
 Purpose
 1. To preserve or protect their rights or interests while the main action is pending;
 2. To secure the judgment;
 3. To preserve the status quo; or
 4. To preserve the subject matter of the action.
 Both cases involve the same facts, parties and arguments. For these reasons, the Court believes that
the doctrine of the law of the case is applicable. The doctrine of the law of the case precludes
departure from a rule previously made by an appellate court in a subsequent proceeding essentially
involving the same case.
 Provisional Remedies in Criminal Cases - may be availed of in connection with the civil aspect
deemed instituted with the criminal action, insofar as they are applicable
 Requirements:
 1. Affidavits are required to support the issuance of these remedies, except preliminary
injunction and receivership;
 2. A bond is required to answer for damages by reason of the improvident issuance of the writ
except on support pendete lite, inspection of accounts and freeze order, inspection and
production orders (Rule on the Writ of Amparo), seizure and sequestration of accounts and
assets, restriction of travel and hold departure order.
 Filed with the court having jurisdiction over the pending principal/main action. An inferior court
may grant a provisional remedy in an action pending with it
 Courts with jurisdiction over provisional remedies - SC, CA, RTC and all first-level courts
 (1) Attachment; (2) Injunction; (3) Receivership; and (4) Replevin.
 Provisional remedy of support pendente lite can only be issued by the RTC/Family Court since an
action for support can only be filed with it being an action the subject matter of which is incapable
of pecuniary estimation.
 GR: Can only be granted with notice and hearing
 XPN:
 1. Writ for preliminary attachment - may be issued ex parte or upon motion with notice and
hearing.
 2. Writ of replevin – issued upon the filing of such affidavit and approval of the bond. There are
no requirements of prior notice and hearing.
 When to apply and in what principal actions available
 Preliminary Attachment (Rule 57) –
 When: commencement of the action or at any time before entry of judgment.
 Principal Action:
 (1) Recovery of liquidated sum of money; and
 (2) Recovery of possession of property unjustly or fraudulently taken, detained or
converted
 Preliminary Injunction (Rule 58) –
 When: any stage of the action prior to the judgment or final order.
 Principal Action: Action for injunction, whether or not coupled with other prayers.

 Receivership (Rule 59)

 When: any stage of the proceedings and even after judgment has become final and executory
as means of enforcing judgment.
 Principal Action:
 (1) Receivership action;
 (2) Real action involving title to or possession of realty;
 (3) Foreclosure of mortgage;
 (4) Dissolution of corporation
 Replevin (Rule 60)
 When: commencement of the action or at any time before answer.
 Principal Action:
 (1) Recovery of possession of personal property;
 (2) Recovery of personal property subject of chattel mortgage as a preliminary step to
extrajudicial foreclosure
B. Preliminary Attachment (Rule 57)
 A plaintiff or other party, may have the property of the adverse party be taken into the custody of
the court as security for the satisfaction of any judgment. It is ancillary and preliminary, resorted
before the finality of judgment to secure the property of the adverse party and prevent its
dissipation.
 Purposes
 1. To seize the property of the debtor before final judgment and to hold it in custodia legis
while the action is pending for purposes of satisfying the said judgment; and
 2. To enable the court to acquire jurisdiction over the res or the property where service over
the person of the defendant cannot be effected.
 Nature of proceeding - quasi-in-rem although sometimes referred to as an action in rem.
 It is against a particular property, enforceable against the whole world.
 Jurisdiction over the person of the defendant is not required as long as the court acquires
jurisdiction over the res.
 Availed of and is granted in an action purely in personam, it converts the action to one that is quasi
in rem.
 Grounds
 1. actions for the recovery of a specified amount of money or damages, other than moral and
exemplary, on a cause of action arising from law, contract, quasi-contract, delict or quasi-delict
against a party who is about to depart from the Philippines with intent to defraud his or her
creditors;
 2. Actions for money or property embezzled or fraudulently misapplied or converted to his own
use by a public officer, or an officer of a corporation, or an attorney, factor, broker agent, or
clerk, in the course of his employment as such, or by other person in a fiduciary capacity, or for
a willful violation of duty;
 3. Actions to recover the possession of property unjustly or fraudulently taken, detained or
converted, when the property, or any part thereof, has been concealed, removed, or disposed
of to prevent its being found or taken by the applicant or an authorized person;
 4. Actions against a party who has been guilty of fraud (Fraud in contracting
obligation/performance thereof) in contracting the debt or incurring the obligation upon which
the action is brought or in the performance thereof;
 5. Actions against a party who has removed or disposed of his property, or is about to do so,
with intent to defraud his creditors;
 6. Actions against non-resident not found in the Philippines, or person upon whom summons
may be served by publication.
 When to apply– at the commencement or at any time before entry of judgment.
 Who may apply - plaintiff or any proper party [(a) defendant on his or her counterclaim; (2) co-party
on his crossclaim; and (c) third-party plaintiff on his third-party claim]
 Requisites
 1. Affidavit executed by the applicant, or of some other person who personally knows the facts.
The affidavit must show that:
 a. A sufficient cause of action exists;
 b. The case must be any of those where preliminary attachment is proper
 c. There is no sufficient security for the claim sought to be enforced; and
 d. The amount due to the applicant, or the value of the property the possession of which
he is entitled to recover, is as much as the sum for which the order is granted above all
legal counterclaims.
 2. Attachment bond – a bond executed in favor of the adverse party in an amount to be fixed by
the judge, not exceeding the plaintiff’s claim,
 Failure to allege matters required under Sec. 3, Rule 57 renders the writ totally defective as the
judge issuing the writ acts in excess of jurisdiction.
 The application may be incorporated in the verified complaint alleging all the grounds and
complying with all the requisites for the grant of the application.
 Effect of existence of a mortgage - writ will not be issued; To justify the issuance of the writ of
preliminary attachment, it must be shown that the security is insufficient to cover the claim.
 Stages in the issuance of a writ of attachment
 1. The court issues the Order granting the application;
 2. The Writ of attachment is issued pursuant to the order granting the writ; and
 3. The writ is Implemented
 For the initial two stages, it is not necessary that jurisdiction over the person of the defendant
should first be obtained. However, to validly implement the writ, it is required that the court acquire
jurisdiction over the person of the defendant for without such jurisdiction, the court has no power
and authority to act in any manner against the defendant. Thus, any order issued by the court will
not bind the defendant
 Issuance of order of attachment (2001 BAR)
 1. Ex parte and even before summons is served upon the defendant - intended to pre-empt any
possible disposition of property by the adverse party
 2. Upon motion and notice of hearing, by the court in which the action is pending and may
even be issued by the CA or the SC.
 A hearing on a motion or application for preliminary attachment is not generally necessary unless
otherwise directed by the trial court. This is because an order of attachment may also be issued ex
parte.
 Contents of the order of attachment – require the sheriff to attach so much of property against it is
issued, sufficient to satisfy the claimant’s demand;
 Unless such party makes deposit or gives a bond in an amount equal to that fixed in the order, which
may be the amount sufficient to satisfy the applicant’s demand or the value of the property to be
attached as stated by the applicant, exclusive of costs.
 Several writs may be issued at the same time to the sheriffs of the courts of different judicial
regions.

 RULE ON PRIOR OR CONTEMPORANEOUS SERVICE OF SUMMONS

 GR: The writ of attachment is implemented by the sheriff who shall make a levy on attachment
pursuant to the writ issued. However, no levy shall be allowed unless preceded or
contemporaneously accompanied by:
 1. Service of summons;
 2. Copy of the complaint;
 3. Application for attachment;
 4. Affidavit and Bond of the applicant; and
 5. Order and writ of attachment.
 XPNs:
 1. Summons could not be served Personally despite diligent efforts;
 2. Summons could not be served by substituted service despite diligent efforts;
 3. The defendant is a resident of the Philippines Temporarily Absent therefrom
 4. The defendant is a Non-resident of the Philippines; or
 5. The action is one in Rem or Quasi in rem
 Mere change in the name of the plaintiff in the amended complaint does not affect the validity of
the attachment.
 Fact that the writ of preliminary attachment was served ahead of the summons did not affect the
jurisdiction of the court over his person. It makes the writ unenforceable; however, all that is
required is to re-serve the writ
 Where the writ of preliminary attachment had already been implemented, the subsequent service
of summons does not confer a retroactive acquisition of jurisdiction over her person because the
law does not allow for retroactivity of a belated service
 The writ was improvidently issued if indeed it can be shown that the obligation was already fully
paid.
 MANNER OF ATTACHING REAL AND PERSONAL PROPERTY; WHEN PROPERTY ATTACHED IS
CLAIMED BY THIRD PERSONS/DUTY OF SHERIFF
 Sheriff enforcing the writ shall without delay and with all reasonable diligence attach, to await
judgment and execution in the action, only so much of the property in the Philippines of the party
against whom the writ is issued, not exempt from execution, as may be sufficient to satisfy the
applicant’s demand, unless the former makes a deposit with the court from which the writ is issued,
or gives a counter-bond executed to the applicant, in an amount equal to the bond fixed by the
court in the order of attachment or to the value of the property to be attached, exclusive of costs.
 Manner of attaching real and personal property - Real and personal property shall be attached by
the sheriff executing the writ in the following manner:
 1. Real property, growing crops thereon, or interest therein –
 a. By filing with the Registry of Deeds:
 i. A copy of the order granting the application;
 ii. A description of the property attached;
 iii. A notice that it is attached, or that such real property and any interest therein held by
or standing in the name of such other person are attached; and
 b. By leaving a copy of such order, description, and notice with the occupant of the property, if
any, or with such other person or his agent if found within the province.
 2. Personal property capable of manual delivery – By the sheriff taking into custody and safely
keeping the property after issuing the corresponding receipt therefor.
 3. Stocks, shares or interest in stocks or shares of any corporation or company – By leaving with the
president or managing agent thereof:
 a. A copy of the writ; and
 b. A notice stating that the stock or interest of the party against whom the attachment is
issued, is attached in pursuance of such writ;
 4. Debts and credits, bank deposits, financial interests, royalties, commission and other personal
property not capable of manual delivery – By leaving with the person owing debts or having in his
possession and control, such credits or other personal property, or with his agent:
 a. A copy of the writ; and
 b. A notice that the debts owing by him to the party against whom attachment is issued
and the credits and other personal property in his possession, or under his control,
belonging to said party, are attached in pursuance of such writ
 5. Interest in the estate of a decedent – By serving copy of writ and notice that the said interest is
attached upon the:
 a. Executor or administrator of estate or another personal representative of the decedent;
 b. Clerk of Court where estate is being settled; and
 c. Heir, devisee, or legatee;
 6. Property in custodia legis (1999 BAR) – A copy of the writ shall be filed with the proper court or
quasi-judicial agency and notice of the attachment shall be served upon the custodian of such
property.
 Salary subject of attachment – Can only be attached at the end of the month or on payday provided
by contract or law, as prior thereto; the same do not constitute money “due” to the debtor from his
employer.
 If the employer is the Government, before payday, such funds are public funds and are exempt from
attachment or execution.
 Wages due to a laborer – XPN: For debts incurred for food, shelter, clothing and medical
attendance.
 Government funds
 1. Commercial business/Proprietary - funds may be subject to a duly issued writ of garnishment
or writ of execution
 2. Public purpose, public funds of a municipality are not subject to levy or execution and such
funds cannot be disbursed without a lawful appropriation or statutory authority as required by
law (Ordinance).
 Even when the immunity of state is relaxed, the power of the court ends when judgment is
rendered, and state is at liberty to determine whether or not to appropriate funds for the
satisfaction of the judgment
 Principle of Seniority of Liens - property attached by the judgment creditor had previously been
mortgaged, the judgment creditor’s lien is inferior to that of the mortgagee, which must first be
satisfied in the event of foreclosure. In reality, what was attached by the judgment creditor was
merely the judgment debtor’s right or equity of redemption.
 Preference between duly registered attachment by levy and lis pendens - given to a duly registered
attachment over a subsequent notice of lis pendens, even if the beneficiary of the notice acquired
the subject property before registration of the attachment.
 Such notice does not establish a lien or an encumbrance on the property affected. As the name
suggests, a notice of lis pendens with respect to a disputed property is intended merely to inform
third persons that any of their transactions in connection therewith if entered into subsequent to
the notation would be subject to the result of the suit.
 Preference between duly registered attachment by levy and prior sale of property - evy on
execution duly registered takes preference over a prior unregistered sale; and that even if the prior
sale is subsequently registered before the sale in execution but after the levy was duly made
because it retroacts to the date of the levy.
 Remedies available if the property is being claimed by third person:
 1. Terceria or 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 must serve such affidavit upon the sheriff while the latter has possession of the
attached property and a copy thereof upon the attaching property;
 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 third-party claimant in a
sum not less than the value of the property levied upon
 2. Independent action to recover his property; or
 3. Motion for intervention – which is available only before judgment is rendered
 Claim for damages may be enforced against the bond
 1. sheriff shall not be liable for damages for the taking or keeping of such property, to any such
third-party claimant, if such bond shall be filed. No claim for damages for the taking or keeping of
 the property may be enforced against the bond unless the action therefor is filed within 120 days
from the date of the filing of the bond.
 2. claimant or any third person is not prevented from vindicating his claim to the property or
prevent the attaching party from claiming damages against a third-party claimant who filed a
frivolous or plainly spurious claim, in the same or a separate action.
 Sale of property covered by a writ of preliminary attachment before entry of judgment
 GR: Property may not be sold. A writ of preliminary attachment is a provisional remedy, and its
issuance does not have the effect of a final judgment over the property attached.
 XPN: attached property is perishable or that the interests of all the parties to the action will be
subserved by the sale of the attached property
 DISCHARGE AND THE COUNTER-BOND - A party whose property is sought to be attached may
prevent the enforcement of the writ of attachment:
 1. By depositing with the court from which the writ was issued;
 2. By giving a counter-bond executed to the applicant, in an amount equal to the bond fixed by
the court in the order of attachment or to the value of the property to be attached, exclusive of
costs; or
 3. By raising the defense that the property covered is exempt from execution.
 A writ of attachment already enforced may be discharged in the following ways:
 1. File a motion to discharge the attachment, make a cash deposit and file a counter-bond
executed to the attaching party equal to the amount fixed by the court in the order of
attachment, exclusive of the costs;
 Respect to a particular property only, the counter-bond shall be equal to the value of that
property only as determined by the court. A notice of the deposit shall be served on the
attaching party. The court shall, after due notice and hearing, order the discharge of
attachment.
 Should the counter-bond be found to be or become insufficient, and the party furnishing
the same fail to file an additional counter-bond, the attaching party may apply for a new
order of attachment.
 2. By filing a motion to set aside or discharge the bond without the need to file a counter-bond
based on the following grounds:
 a. The attachment was improperly or irregularly issued;
 b. The bond is insufficient;
 c. The attachment is excessive, wherein the discharge shall be limited to the excess
 d. The property is exempt from execution; or
 e. Judgment is rendered against the attaching party
 The motion may be filed (i) before levy, (ii) after levy, or (iii) even after the release of the attached
property. If the motion be made on affidavits on the part of the movant but not otherwise, the
attaching party may oppose the motion by counter-affidavits or other evidence in addition to that
on which the attachment was made.
 After due notice and hearing, the court shall order the setting aside or the corresponding discharge
of the attachment.
 An ex parte discharge or suspension of the attachment is a disfavor to the orderly administration of
justice and nullifies the underlying role and purpose of preliminary attachment in preserving the
rights of parties as an ancillary remedy
 Counterbonds - replacements of the property formerly attached, and just as the latter, may be
levied upon after final judgment.
 Mere posting of the counter-bond does not automatically discharge the writ of attachment. It is only
after the hearing and after judge orders the discharge of attachment that the same is properly
discharged.
 Effects if the judgment was rendered in favor of the party against whom attachment was issued
 1. The order of attachment will be discharged and all the proceeds of sales and money
collected or received by the sheriff, under the order of attachment, and all property attached
remaining in any such officer’s hands, shall be delivered to the party against whom attachment
was issued.
 2. The whole sum deposited must be refunded to him or his assignee if the party against whom
attachment had been issued has deposited money instead of giving counterbond.
 Judgment against the surety is not sound if due notice was not given to him of the application for
damages. Moreover, the judgment against the surety cannot exceed the amount of its counterbond.
 Duty of the surety or sureties on counterbond when the judgment becomes executory - shall
become charged on such counter-bond and bound to pay the judgment obligee upon demand the
amount due under the judgment, which amount may be recovered from such surety or sureties
after notice and summary hearing in the same action.
 Damages for a wrongful attachment - Damages may be awarded on account of improper, irregular
or excessive attachment.
 Damages may be claimed even by the losing party where the attachment caused him damage
because the attachment was improper, irregular or excessive. An improper, irregular or excessive
attachment is not validated by the fact that the attaching party prevailed in the main action.
 Application for damages
 1. Before the trial;
 2. Before appeal is perfected; or
 3. Before the judgment becomes executory.
 If the case is on appeal and the judgment of the appellate court is favorable to the party against
whom the attachment was issued, he must claim damages sustained during the pendency of the
appeal by filing an application with the appellate court with due notice to the attaching party and
his surety of sureties
 SATISFACTION OF JUDGMENT OUT OF PROPERTY ATTACHED - If judgment is in favor of the
attaching party and execution has issued thereon, the sheriff may cause the judgment to be satisfied
out of the property attached, if it be sufficient for that purpose, in the following manners:
 1. Payment to judgment obligee the proceeds of all sales of perishable or other property in
pursuance of the order of the court or so much necessary to satisfy the judgment;
 2. If any balance remains, selling so much of the property, real or personal, as may be necessary
to satisfy the judgment;
 3. Collecting from all persons having possession of credits belonging to the judgment obligor or
debts belonging to the latter at the time of the attachment and paying the proceeds to
judgment obligee
 4. Ordinary execution
 If it remains unsatisfied, recovery may be had on the counter-bond upon demand and notice and
hearing to surety
 When the property attached is not sufficient to satisfy the judgment - Any balance shall remain
due and the sheriff must proceed to collect such balance as upon ordinary execution.
 When there is excess after applying the proceeds thereof - the sheriff, upon reasonable demand,
must return to the judgment obligor the attached property remaining in his hands, and any
proceeds of the sale of the property attached not applied to the judgment.
 When the party against whom attachment had been issued deposited money instead of giving
counter-bond – it shall be applied under the direction of the court to the satisfaction of any
judgment rendered in favor of the attaching party, and after satisfying the judgment, the balance
shall be refunded to the depositor or his assignee.
C. Preliminary Injunction (Rule 58)
 An order granted at any stage of an action or proceeding prior to the judgment or final order,
requiring a party or a court, agency or person to:
 1. Refrain from a particular act or acts (Preliminary prohibitory injunction); or
 2. To require the performance of a particular act or acts. (Preliminary mandatory injunction)
 Requisites for issuance of writ of preliminary injunction whether mandatory or prohibitory
injunction
 1. Clear and unmistakable right, that is a right in esse;
 2. Material and substantive invasion of such right;
 3. An urgent need to issue the writ in order to prevent irreparable injury to the applicant; and
 4. No other ordinary, speedy, and adequate remedy exists to prevent the infliction of
irreparable injury
 Nature - Ancillary or preventive remedy
 As a rule, courts cannot enjoin an agency from performing an act within its prerogative, except
when in the exercise of its authority, it gravely abused or exceeded its jurisdiction. Administrative
decisions on matters within the executive jurisdiction can be set aside on proof of grave abuse of
discretion, fraud, or error of law, and in such cases, injunction may be granted.
 A petition for a preliminary injunction is an equitable remedy, and one who comes to claim for
equity must do so with clean hands.
 An action for injunction, the auxiliary remedy of preliminary injunction, whether prohibitory or
mandatory, may issue. Under the present state of the law, the main action of injunction seeks a
judgment embodying a final injunction which is distinct from and should not be confused with the
provisional remedy of preliminary injunction, the sole object of which is to preserve the status quo
until the merits can be heard.
 Purpose - To preserve and protect certain rights and interests during the pendency of an action. Its
objective is to preserve the status quo until the merits of the case can be fully heard.
 Resorted to only when there is a pressing necessity to avoid injurious consequences which cannot
be remedied under any standard of compensation.
 Status quo is the last actual, peaceable and uncontested status which precedes a controversy. It is
the situation existing at the time of the filing of the case.
 Showing of Clear Legal Right - contemplates a right “clearly founded in or granted by law.”
 May be granted only where the plaintiff appears to be clearly entitled to the relief sought and has
substantial interest in the right sought to be defended. While the existence of the right need not be
conclusively established, it must be clear.
 Two requisites must concur for injunction to issue: (1) there must be a right to be protected and (2)
the acts against which the injunction is to be directed are violative of said right.
 Quantum of evidence required in a preliminary injunction - applicant is required to show only that
he has an ostensible right to the final relief prayed for in his complaint.
 Findings of the trial court granting or denying a petition for a writ of preliminary injunction based on
the evidence on record are merely provisional until after the trial on the merits of the case shall
have been concluded
 Who may grant preliminary injunction
 1. Supreme Court in its original and appellate jurisdiction;
 2. Court of Appeals;
 3. Trial Court in cases pending before it;
 4. Sandiganbayan;
 5. Court of Tax Appeals.
 Requisites of writ of preliminary injunction or temporary restraining order
 1. Verified application stating the grounds for its issuance
  2. Applicant must establish: i) the existence of a right that must be protected and ii) an urgent
and paramount necessity for the writ to prevent serious damage;
 3. 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;
 4. post a bond, unless exempted by the court.
 5. Notice and hearing are required.
 GR: Contemporaneous service of summons;
 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; or
 c. Adverse party is a non-resident of the Philippines
 RTC can issue an injunction without the posting of a bond - injunction issued is a final injunction
 Kinds of Injunctions; Kinds of Temporary Restraining Order
 PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION (Sec. 1, Rule 58) - order granted at any stage of the action prior to the
judgment or final order therein
 FINAL INJUNCTION (Sec. 9, Rule 58) - Issued in the judgment in the case permanently restraining
the defendant or making the preliminary injunction permanent
 PRELIMINARY PROHIBITORY INJUNCTION - Provisional remedy; It is not a cause of action itself but
merely an adjunct to a main suit; Seeks to preserve the status quo until the merits can be heard
 MAIN ACTION FOR INJUNCTION - Independent/Primary Action; Independent/Primary Action
 PRELIMINARY PROHIBITORY INJUNCTION - prevent a person from the performance of an act; act
has not yet been performed; Status quo is restored.
 PRELIMINARY MANDATORY INJUNCTION - require a person to perform a particular act.; act has
already been performed and this act has violated the rights of another; Status quo is restored.
 Requisites
 1. Material and substantial invasion of right;
 2. Clear and unmistakable right of complainant;
 3. Urgent and paramount necessity for the writ to prevent serious damages
 4. The effect would not be to create a new relation between the parties
 PROHIBITORY INJUNCTION - PROHIBITORY INJUNCTION; Directed against a party litigant in the
action; does not involve the jurisdiction of the court.
 PROHIBITION - Special Civil Action, Rule 65.; Directed against a court, tribunal or person exercising
judicial powers; on the ground that the court against whom the writ is sought acted without or in
excess of jurisdiction
 Instances when mandatory injunction does not lie
 1. To compel cohabitation
 2. Cancellation of attachment
 3. Release imported goods pending hearing before the Commissioner of Customs
 4. To take property out of the possession or control of one party and place it into that of
another whose title has not clearly been established.
 Instances when mandatory injunction does not lie
 1. To compel cohabitation
 2. Cancellation of attachment
 3. Release imported goods pending hearing before the Commissioner of Customs
 4. To take property out of the possession or control of one party and place it into that of
another whose title has not clearly been established.
 Ex parte writ of preliminary injunction - No preliminary injunction shall be granted without hearing
and prior notice to the party or person sought to be enjoined. The reason is that a preliminary
injunction may cause grave and irreparable injury to the party enjoined
 If it shall appear from facts shown by affidavits or by the verified application that great or
irreparable injury would result to the applicant before the matter can be heard on notice, the court
may issue ex parte a TRO (72 hours).
 Matter is of extreme urgency and the applicant will suffer grave injustice and irreparable injury,
court may issue ex parte a temporary restraining order effective for only 72 hours; immediately
comply with the provisions as to service of summons and the documents to be served therewith;
within the aforesaid 72 hours; conduct a summary hearing to determine whether the temporary
restraining order shall be extended until the application for preliminary injunction can be heard; In
no case shall the total period of effectivity of the temporary restraining order exceed 20 days,
including the original seventy-two (72) hours.
 Application for preliminary injunction is denied or not resolved within the said period, the
temporary restraining order is deemed automatically vacated.
 Court cannot issue a writ of preliminary injunction based solely on the applicant’s evidence. It
commits grave abuse of discretion when it issues such writ prior to the termination of the
presentation of evidence by the party against whom the injunction shall be issued.
 “No preliminary injunction shall be granted without hearing and prior notice to the party or person
sought to be enjoined." Here, petitioner was not only not impleaded as party to the case, but that it
was never given prior notice regarding the writ of injunction.
 Instances when a writ of preliminary injunction may be issued
 1. In petitions for relief from judgment entered through FAME;
 2. In petitions for certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus;
 3. In actions for annulment of judgments obtained through fraud;
 4. In actions for annulment of judgment which are not patent nullity (i.e. want of jurisdiction,
lack of due process of law)
 5. To restrain continued breach of valid negative obligation;
 6. To enjoin repeated trespass on land;
 7. To restrain city from proceeding with abatement of nuisance per accidens before it has been
judicially declared as such;
 8. To restrain voting of disputed shares of stocks; and
 9. To restrain the sheriff from selling property on execution not belonging to the judgment
debtor.
 A writ of preliminary mandatory injunction will not be set aside unless it was issued with grave
abuse of discretion.
 As a rule, no TRO/WPI shall be issued against the extrajudicial foreclosure of real estate mortgage on
the allegation that the interest on the loan is unconscionable. However, a TRO/WPI may be issued if
the debtor pays the mortgagee the 6% required interest on the principal obligation as stated in the
application for foreclosure sale, which shall be updated monthly.
 Issuance of writ of injunction to enjoin criminal prosecution
 GR: A writ of injunction cannot be issued to enjoin criminal prosecution. Public interest requires that
criminal acts be immediately investigated and prosecuted for the protection of society
 XPNs:
 1. afford adequate protection to the constitutional rights of the accused;
 2. necessary for the orderly administration of justice or to avoid oppression or multiplicity of
actions;
 3. prejudicial question which is subjudice;
 4. acts of the officer are without or in excess of authority;
  5. prosecution is under an invalid law, ordinance or regulation;
 6. double jeopardy is clearly apparent;
 7. court has no jurisdiction over the offense;
 8. case of persecution rather than prosecution;
 9. charges are manifestly false and motivated by the lust for vengeance;
 10. clearly no prima facie case against the accused and a motion to quash on that ground has
been denied;
 11. Preliminary injunction has been issued by the SC when there is a need to prevent the
threatened unlawful arrest of petitioners.
 Second application for preliminary injunction - rests in the sound discretion of the court, will
ordinarily be denied unless it is based on facts unknown at the time of the first application
 Actions where Preliminary Injunction will not lie
 1. Against the DPWH to stop government infrastructure projects;
 XPNs:
 a. Extreme urgency;
 b. Matter involves a constitutional issue;
 c. Grave injustice and irreparable injury will arise;
 d. When it is the SC which will issue the writ of preliminary injunction.

 Only the SC may issue injunction against the government, its officials or any person or
entity whether public or private acting under the government direction, to restrain,
prohibit, or compel acts pursuant to the implementation and completion of
infrastructure projects
 2. Act/s perpetrated outside the inferior courts’ territorial jurisdiction;
 3. Against judgments of coordinate courts and quasi-judicial bodies of equal rank;
 4. Issuance will effectively dispose of the main case without trial and/or due process;
 5. Labor disputes;
 6. In issuance of licenses, or concessions as to disposition, exploitation, utilization, exploration
and/or development of natural resources;
 7. Implementation of Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program, collection of taxes, criminal
prosecutions;
 8. GR: Mandatory foreclosure of a mortgage by a government financial institution is a proper
subject of preliminary injunction
XPN: When it is established after hearing that 20% of outstanding arrearages is paid after the
filing of the foreclosure proceedings, preliminary injunction will not lie.
 9. GR: Act/s sought to be enjoined already consummated;
XPN: Acts which are continuing in nature and were in derogation of plaintiff’s rights at the
outset, preliminary mandatory injunction may be availed of to restore the parties to the status
quo
 10. GR: To transfer the property in litigation from the possession of one party to another where
the legal title is in dispute and the party having possession asserts ownership thereto.
XPN: Forcible entry and unlawful detainer cases – preliminary mandatory injunction may be
issued.
 11. Generally, injunction will not be granted to take property out of the possession of one party
and place it in another whose title not clearly established;
 12. When action for damages would adequately compensate injuries caused;
 13. To prevent directors from discharging their offices and restoring former directors
  14. To restrain criminal prosecution where the Ombudsman had authorized the Special
prosecutor to conduct a preliminary investigation or to file an injunction;
 15. To restrain the enforcement of a law alleged to be unconstitutional except if it will result in
injury to rights in private property;
 16. GR: To restrain collection of taxes.
XPN: There are special circumstances that bear the existence of irreparable
 Grounds For Issuance of Preliminary Injunction
 1. Applicant is entitled to the relief demanded, and the whole or part of such relief consists in
restraining the commission or continuance of the act or acts complained of, or in requiring the
performance of an act or acts either for a limited period or perpetually;
 2. Commission, continuance or non-performance of the act or acts complained of during the
litigation would probably work injustice to the applicant; or
 3. A party, court, agency or a person is doing, threatening, or is attempting to do, or is procuring
or suffering to be done some act or acts probably in violation of the rights of the applicant
respecting the subject of the action or proceeding, and tending to render the judgment
ineffectual
 Dissolution of Writ of Preliminary Injunction or Restraining Order - party enjoined may file a
motion to dissolve the injunction or TRO with notice and hearing of the motion upon showing by
affidavits that the person enjoined would suffer irreparable damage while the applicant can be fully
compensated for such damages as he may suffer.
 Movant must also file a bond conditioned upon payment of all damages which the applicant may
suffer by the dissolution of the injunction or restraining order
 Grounds for objections or dissolution of Injunction or Restraining Order
 1. Insufficiency of application for injunction or restraining order. The application may be
considered insufficient if it is not verified and supported by any of the grounds
 2. Issuance or continuance of injunction or restraining order causes irreparable injury while
applicant may be fully compensated for damages by the bond filed by the person sought to be
enjoined;
 3. Extent of injunction or restraining order is too great; Effect: Modification
 4. Insufficiency or defective bond
 Filing of verified motion and bond as well as hearing is required.
 Duty of the Court within 20-day period:
 1. order said party or person to show cause why the injunction should not be granted
 2. shall determine whether the preliminary injunction shall be granted and then issue the
corresponding order
 Writ of prohibition will not lie to enjoin acts already done. However, as an exception to the rule on
mootness, courts will decide a question otherwise moot if it is capable of repetition yet evading
review.
 Preliminary Injunction or TRO in cases involving Government Infrastructure Projects
 GR: No court, except the Supreme Court shall issue any TRO, preliminary injunction or
preliminary mandatory injunction against the government
 1. Acquisition, clearance and development of the right-of-way and/or site or location of
any national government project;
 2. Bidding or awarding of contract/ project of the national government
 3. Commencement prosecution, execution, implementation, operation of any such
contract or project;
 4. Termination or rescission of any such contract/project
 5. The undertaking or authorization of any other lawful activity necessary for such
contract/project.
  Any TRO or preliminary injunction issued in violation of Sec. 3 is void and of no force and
effect
 XPNs: The prohibition does not apply when:
 1. The matter is of extreme urgency involving a constitutional issue; and
 2. Grave injustice and irreparable injury will arise unless a temporary restraining order is
issued. In this case, the applicant shall file a bond in an amount to fixed by court and which
shall accrue in favor of the government if the court should finally decide that the applicant
was not entitled to the relief sought.
 Imposes a penalty on a judge who issues a TRO in violation of Sec. 3 of R.A. No. 8975. In addition to
any civil and criminal liability he or she may incur, the judge may suffer the penalty of suspension for
at least 60 days without pay.
 RULE ON PRIOR OR CONTEMPORANEOUS SERVICE OF SUMMONS IN RELATION TO ATTACHMENT
 GR: There must be proof of prior or contemporaneous service of summons with a copy of the
complaint or initiatory pleading and applicant’s affidavit and bond on the adverse party.
 XPN: When summons could not be served upon the defendant either in person or by
substituted service despite diligent efforts or when the defendant is temporarily out of the
Philippines or when he or she is a non-resident, the requirement of prior contemporaneous
service shall not apply
 TRO is effective for a period (Days): RTC – 20; CA – 60; SC – Until lifted
 Matter is of extreme urgency and the applicant will suffer grave injustice and irreparable injury – 72
hours

D. Receivership (Rule 59)

 Provisional remedy wherein the court appoints a representative to preserve, administer, dispose of and
prevent the loss or dissipation of real or personal property during the pendency of an action
 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.
 Receivership, like injunction, may also be a principal action as the one referred to in Sec. 4 of Rule 39. Rule
59 is a receivership that is ancillary to a main action.
 Purpose - To prevent imminent danger to the property. The purpose of receivership as a provisional remedy
is to protect and preserve the rights of the parties during:
 1. The pendency of the main action;
 2. During the pendency of an appeal, or;
 3. In the execution of judgment as when the writ of execution has been returned unsatisfied
 Receivership under Rule 59 is directed to the property which is the subject of the action—not to the
receivership authorized under the banking laws and other rules or laws. Rule 59 presupposes that there is
an action wherein preservation is needed for the subject property.
 When to file Receivership
 1. At any stage of the proceedings;
 2. Even after finality of judgment.
 CASES WHEREIN A RECEIVER MAY BE APPOINTED
 Receiver - a person appointed by the court on behalf of all the parties to the action for the purpose of
preserving and conserving the property in litigation and of preventing its possible destruction if it were left
to any of the parties.
 A party to an action may not be appointed as a receiver unless consented to by all parties.
 Necessary since the court is not provided with adequate machinery and resources for dealing with the
situation presented by the appointment of a receiver and all the details connected therewith
 Who may appoint a Receiver
  1. Court where action is pending;
 2. Court of Appeals; or
 3. Supreme Court or a member thereof
 During the pendency of an appeal, the appellate court may allow an application for the appointment of a
receiver to be filed in and decided by the court of origin and the receiver appointed to be subject to the
control of the latter court.
 Cases that justify when Receiver may be appointed
 1. The applicant has an interest in the property or fund subject of the proceeding and such property is
in danger of being lost, removed, or materially injured;
 2. In foreclosure of mortgage when the property is in danger of being wasted, dissipated, or materially
injured, and that its value is probably insufficient to discharge the mortgage debt or that it has been
agreed upon by the parties;
 3. After judgment, to preserve the property during the pendency of an appeal, or to dispose it
according to the judgment, or in aid of execution when execution has remained unsatisfied;
 4. In other cases, where the appointment of a receiver is the most convenient and feasible means of
preserving, administering, or disposing the property.
 Instances when receivership will not lie
 1. On a property in custodia legis. However, a receiver can be appointed where a property in custody of
an administrator or executor is in danger of imminent loss or injury.
 2. Where the action is merely to obtain a money judgment on unpaid credits and not to enforce a lien
upon specific property or funds in the possession of the defendant
 3. In actions involving possession of or title to real property, the appointment of receiver may be made
only if there is clear necessity to protect the applicant from grave or irremediable damages.
 Effect of a contract executed by a Receiver without court approval - will constitute his personal
undertakings and obligations.
 Liability of a person who refuses or neglects to deliver property to the Receiver - punished for contempt
and shall be liable to the receiver for the money or the value of the property and other things so refused or
neglected to be surrendered, together with all damages that may have been sustained by the party or
parties entitled thereto as a consequence of such refusal or neglect.
 Requisites
 1. an existing interest in the property or funds subject of the action and the property or funds is in
danger of being lost, wasted or dissipated;
 2. an existing interest in the property or funds subject of the action and the property or funds is in
danger of being lost, wasted or dissipated;
 3. with notice and hearing;
 4. post a bond executed to the party against whom the application is presented
 5. Receiver must be sworn to perform his duties faithfully and shall file a bond
 Requirements before issuance of an Order appointing a Receiver - applicant must file a bond executed to
the party against whom the application is presented in an amount fixed by the court. The bond is
undertaken to the effect that the applicant will pay the other party damages that he or she may sustain by
reason of the appointment of the receiver.
 Court, in its discretion, may require an additional bond for further security for damages.
 General Powers of a Receiver
 1. Bring and defend in his or her capacity as a receiver, actions in his or her own name;
 2. Take and keep possession of the property in controversy;
 3. Receive rents;
 4. Collect debts due to himself or herself as receiver or to the fund, property, estate, person or
corporation of which he or she is a receiver;
  5. Compound for and compromise debts collected;
 6. Make transfers;
 7. Pay outstanding debts;
 8. Divide money and other property that shall remain among the persons legally entitled to receive the
same;
 9. Do such acts respecting the property as the court may authorize; and
 10. Invest funds in his or her hands only by order of the court upon the written consent of all the
parties
 Two kinds of bonds in receivership
 1. Applicant’s Bond - the bond required before the appointment of a receiver
 2. Receiver’s Bond – the bond required to be filed by the receiver before entering upon his duties as
such to the effect that he or her will faithfully discharge his duties in the action and to obey the order of
the court
 A counterbond may be filed by the adverse party executed to the applicant, in an amount to be fixed by the
court, to the effect that such party will pay the applicant all damages he may suffer by reason of the acts,
omissions, or other matters specified in the application as ground for such appointment in which case, the
application may be denied, or the receiver discharged, when the adverse party files a bond.
 Termination of Receivership
 1. Posting of counterbond by adverse party (insufficient or defective, receiver may be re-appointed.)
 2. Made without sufficient cause
 3. Insufficient or defective applicant’s bond
 4. Insufficient or defective receiver’s bond
 5. No longer necessary
 How is Receivership Terminated
 1. court motu propio or on motion by either party;
 2. Based on the following grounds: a. Necessity for receiver no longer exists; b. Receiver asserts
ownership over the property.
 Court, after due notice and hearing to all interested parties, shall settle the accounts of the receiver, direct
the delivery of funds in his possession to the person adjudged to be entitled to receive them, and order the
discharge of the receiver.
 Suits against a Receiver - No action may be filed against a receiver without leave of the court which
appointed him.
 Any action filed against a receiver without the requisite judicial authority may be dismissed upon proper
motion for failure to comply with a condition precedent
 A verified application for the appointment by the court of one or more receivers. Receivership is proper in
an action by the mortgagee for the foreclosure of a mortgage when it appears that the property is in danger
of being wasted or dissipated or materially injured and that its value is probably insufficient to discharge the
mortgage debt.
E. Replevin (Rule 60)
 May be a principal remedy or a provisional relief.
 1. As a main action- seeks to regain the possession of personal chattels being wrongfully detained from
the plaintiff
 2. As a provisional remedy- to allow the plaintiff to retain the thing during the pendency of the action
and hold it pendente lite.
 Nature - primarily possessory in nature and generally determines nothing more than the right of possession.
 Replevin is so usually described as a mixed action, being partly in rem and partly in personam – in rem
insofar as the recovery of specific property is concerned, and in personam as regards to damages involved.
As an “action in rem”, the gist of the replevin action is the right of the plaintiff to obtain possession of
 specific personal property by reason of his or her being the owner or of his or her having a special interest
therein.
 Machineries bolted to the ground are real properties that may not be the subject to replevin
 When may a writ of replevin be issued - may only be obtained when the defendant in the action has not
yet filed his answer to the complaint where it is necessary to:
 1. Protect plaintiff’s right of possession to property; or
 2. Prevent defendant from destroying, damaging or disposing of the property.
 Writ of Replevin may be served anywhere in the Philippines..
 Requisites
 1. filed at the commencement of the action or at any time before the defendant answers
 2. 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
 property is wrongfully detained by the adverse party; alleging the cause of detention according to
applicant’s knowledge, information and belief
 property has not been distrained or taken for tax assessment or fine, or seized by writ of
execution, preliminary attachment, or placed in custodia legis, or if so seized, that is exempt or
should be released from custody
 Actual market value of the property
 3. give a bond, executed to the adverse party in double the value of the property as stated in the
affidavit
 The applicant need not be the owner of the property. It is enough that he or she has a right to its
possession.
 In a complaint for replevin, the claimant must convincingly show that he is either the owner or clearly
entitled to the possession of the object sought to be recovered. By entrusting the vehicle to Frankie, William
constituted the former his agent, who by acting in the latter’s behalf, was able to sell the vehicle. Since
Frankie was able to sell the subject vehicle, William thus ceased to be the owner thereof. Nor is William
entitled to the possession of the vehicle; together with his ownership, William lost his right of possession
over the vehicle. Considering that he was no longer the owner or rightful possessor of the subject vehicle at
the time he filed the case, he may not seek a return of the same through replevin
 Replevin Bond – For:
 a) return of the property to the adverse party if such return is adjudged;
 b) payment to the adverse party of such sum as he may recover from the applicant in the action
 It is intended to indemnify the defendant against the loss that he may suffer by being compelled to
surrender the possession of the property pending the action.
 Redelivery of Bond (Filed within 5 days after taking of the property) - Adverse party objects to the
sufficiency of the applicant’s bond or of the surety, at any time before the delivery of the property to the
applicant, the adverse party may file a redelivery bond executed to the applicant, double the value of the
property as stated in the applicant’s affidavit to answer for the return of property if adjudged and pay for
such sum as may be recovered against him.
 Duties of the sheriff upon receipt of the court order
 serve a copy of the writ on the adverse party, together with a copy of the application, affidavit and
bond
 take the property, if it be in the possession of the adverse party, or his agent, and retain it in his
custody;
 property or any part thereof be concealed in a building or enclosure, the sheriff must demand its
delivery, and if itis not delivered, he or she must cause the building or enclosure to be broken open and
take the property into his possession;
 keep it in a secure place
  Within (5) days from the taking of the property, the sheriff shall wait for the move of the adverse party.
If the adverse party does not object or fails to perform acts to effect the return to him or her the
property, the property shall be delivered to the applicant
 Return of the property to defendant
 1. He or she seasonably posts a redelivery bond
 2. Plaintiff’s bond is found to be insufficient or defective and is not replaced with proper bond; and
 3. Property is not delivered to the plaintiff for any reason
 When the property is claimed by a third party
 1. Third party shall file and serve affidavit upon sheriff and applicant stating his or her entitlement to
possession and shall serve the affidavit upon the sheriff while the latter has possession of the property;
 2. Sheriff shall return the property to third person unless applicant files a bond in an amount equal to
the value of the property approved by court to indemnify the third person; and
 3. Claim for damages upon said bond must be filed within 120 days from date of filing of the bond.
 When the bond is filed, the sheriff shall not be liable for damages for the taking or keeping of such property.
The party-claimant is not precluded from vindicating his claim and may maintain an action and seek
injunctive relief against the sheriff. The applicant is likewise not precluded from claiming damages against
the third party who filed a frivolous or spurious claim in the same or separate action.
 Writ issued in favor of the Republic - filing of such bond shall not be required; sheriff is sued for damages as
a result of replevin, he shall be represented by the Solicitor General, and if held liable therefor, the actual
damages adjudged by the court shall be paid by the National Treasurer out of the funds to be appropriated
for the purpose.

V. Special Civil Actions

A. Jurisdiction and Venue
 B. Interpleader – Rule 62
 Jurisdiction: MTC – value does not exceed P2M (Personal); P400K (Real); RTC if exceeds
 Venue - plaintiff or any of the principal plaintiffs resides or where the defendant or any of the principal
defendants resides at the option of the plaintiff
 A special civil remedy whereby a party who has property in his possession but who claims no interest in the
subject, or whose interest, in whole or in part, is not disputed by others, goes to court and asks that
conflicting claimants to the property or obligation be required to litigate among themselves in order to
determine finally who is entitled to the same.
 REQUISITES
 two or more claimants with adverse or conflicting interests upon a subject matter;
 conflicting claims involve the same subject matter and against the same person (plaintiff); and
 plaintiff has no claim upon the subject matter of the adverse claims or if he has an interest at all, such
interest is not disputed by the claimants
 WHEN TO FILE
 GR: An action for interpleader must be filed within a reasonable time after the dispute has arisen,
otherwise it may be barred by laches
 XPN: Where a stakeholder acts with reasonable diligence in view of the environmental circumstances,
the remedy is not barred.
 It is proper when the lessee, for instance, does not know who is entitled to the payment of the rentals due
because of conflicting claims on the property.
 Who may file - by the person against whom the conflicting claims are made
 person who files the complaint shall pay the docket fees and other lawful fees and shall bear the costs and
other litigation expenses even if he has no interest in the subject matter of the action, unless the court shall
order otherwise
 costs, expenses, and attorney’s fees incurred by plaintiff in the action is recoverable from the defendant who
loses in the action and is found by the court to have caused the unnecessary litigation
 costs, expenses, and attorney’s fees incurred by plaintiff in the action is recoverable from the defendant who
loses in the action and is found by the court to have caused the unnecessary litigation
 The remedy is afforded not to protect a person against double liability but to protect him against double
vexation in respect of one liability.
 GROUNDS FOR DISMISSAL
 1. Impropriety of Interpleader
 2. Grounds for a motion to dismiss
 a. Lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter
 b. Litis pendentia
 c. Res judicata
 d. Prescription
 Hernando Ruling: A successful litigant who has secured a final judgment in its favor cannot later be
impleaded by its defeated adversary in an interpleader suit, and compelled to prove its claim anew against
other adverse claimants, as that would in effect be a collateral attack upon the judgment. In other words, an
action for interpleader may not be utilized to circumvent the immutability of a final and executory
judgment.

 C. Declaratory reliefs and Similar reliefs - Rule 63

 Jurisdiction –
 Declaratory relief – RTC, since the subject in a petition for declaratory relief is incapable of pecuniary
estimation
 Similar reliefs under second paragraph, Sec. 1, Rule 63;
 MTC - where the value of the real property does not exceed P400,000.
 RTC – if the value exceeds the above amounts or if the subject matter is exclusively within the
jurisdiction of the RTC
 NOTE: It would be an error to file the petition with the SC which has no original jurisdiction to
entertain a petition for declaratory relief
 Venue - petitioner or the respondent resides at the election of the petitioner
 A special civil action brought by 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 before breach or violation thereof, asking the court to determine any
question of construction or validity arising, and for a declaration of his rights or duties thereunder
 Two types of action covered by Rule 63
 1. Petition for declaratory relief; and
 2. Similar remedies:
 a. Action for reformation of an instrument;
 b. Action to quiet title; and
 c. Action to consolidate ownership
 These 3 remedies are considered similar to declaratory relief because they also result in the
adjudication of the legal rights of the litigants, often without the need of execution to carry judgment
into effect
 WHEN MAY THE COURT REFUSE TO MAKE JUDICIAL DECLARATION
 GR: The court, motu proprio or upon motion, may refuse to exercise the power to declare rights and to
construe instruments in any case:
 1. Where a decision would not terminate the uncertainty or controversy which gave rise to the
action; or
 2. Where the declaration or construction is not necessary and proper under the circumstances.
 XPN: In actions falling under special remedies:
 1. Action for reformation of an instrument authorized
 2. Action to quiet title authorized; and
 3. Action to consolidate ownership
 Where the relief sought would be determinative of issues rather than a construction of definite stated
rights, status, and other relations commonly expressed in written instruments, the case is not one for
declaratory judgment. Considering that in a proceeding for declaratory judgment the relief which may
be sought is limited only to a declaration of rights and not a determination or trial of issues, a
declaratory relief proceeding is unavailable where a judgment may be made only after a judicial
investigation of the issues.
 A refusal of the court to declare a right or construe an instrument may be considered as the functional
equivalent of the dismissal of the petition.
 With respect to actions described as “similar remedies,” the court cannot refuse to render a judgment
thereon
 Declaratory judgments are to be distinguished from those which are advisory in character, since they
are res judicata and binding upon the parties and those in privity with them, and from decisions of
abstract or moot questions since they must involve a real controversy
 The enumeration of subject matter is EXCLUSIVE, subject to clear and unambiguous contract or statute
 WHO MAY FILE THE ACTION - Any person: (I-A-C)
 1. Interested under a deed, will, contract or other written instrument
 2. Whose rights are affected by a statute, executive order or regulation, ordinance or any other
governmental regulation
 3. The other parties are all persons who have or claim any interest which would be affected by the
declaration
 Notice shall be sent to the Solicitor General if subject matter involves the validity of a statute, EO or
regulation, ordinance or any governmental regulation.
 In any action involving the validity of a local government ordinance notice shall be sent to the
prosecutor or lawyer of the local government unit.
 REQUISITES OF AN ACTION FOR DECLARATORY RELIEF
 subject-matter of the controversy must be a deed, will, contract, or other written instrument,
statute, executive order or regulation or ordinance;
 terms of said documents and validity thereof are doubtful and require judicial construction
 no breach of the document in question (Otherwise, an ordinary civil action is the remedy)
 an actual justiciable controversy or ripening seeds of one between persons whose interests are
adverse;
 ripe for judicial determination; administrative remedies have been exhausted
 Adequate relief is not available through other means or other forms of action or proceedings.
 When Relief is not Available
 1. To obtain judicial declaration of citizenship;
  2. In actions to resolve political questions;
 3. Those determinatives of the issues rather than a construction of definite status, rights and
relations;
 4. Terms of assailed ordinances are not ambiguous or of doubtful meaning;
 5. In a petition to seek relief from a moot and academic question;
 6. Where the contract or statute on which action is based has been breached;
 7.petition is based on the happening of a contingent event;
 8.petitioner is not the real party in interest;
 9. administrative remedies have not yet been exhausted;
 10. decision does not terminate uncertainty or controversy
 11. Action to assail judgment; and
 12. Action to ask the court to declare filiation and consequently hereditary rights
 Petition for declaratory relief is not proper for the purpose of seeking enlightenment as to the true
import of a judgment. The remedy is to move for a clarificatory judgment.
 Hernando Ruling - petitions for declaratory relief do not apply to cases where a taxpayer questions his
liability for the payment of any tax under any law administered by the BIR. Courts have no jurisdiction
over petitions for declaratory relief against the imposition of tax liability or validity of tax assessments.
Principle deeply embedded in our jurisprudence is that taxes being the lifeblood of the government
should be collected promptly, without unnecessary hindrance or delay. No court shall have the
authority to grant an injunction to restrain the collection of any national internal revenue tax, fee or
charge imposed by the code. Exception to this rule, obtains only when in the opinion of the Court of Tax
Appeals (CTA) the collection thereof may jeopardize the interest of the government and/or the
taxpayer.
 CONVERSION TO ORDINARY ACTION - 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, the action may be converted into an ordinary action
 The law does not require that there shall be an actual pending case. It is sufficient that there is a breach
of law, an actionable violation, to bar a complaint for declaratory relief.
 Third-party Complaint NOT PROPER in actions for Declaratory Relief - third-party complaint is
supposed to seek contribution, indemnity, subrogation or other relief from the third-party defendant in
respect to the claim of the plaintiff against him, and hence it is improper when the main case is for
declaratory relief which purpose is mere interpretation and construction.
 A compulsory counterclaim may be set up - nothing in the nature of a special civil action for
declaratory relief that proscribes the filing of a counterclaim based on the same transaction, deed or
contract subject of the complaint.
 A special civil action is after all not essentially different from an ordinary civil action, except that the
former deals with a special subject matter which makes necessary some special regulation. But the
identity between their fundamental nature is such that the same rules governing ordinary civil suits
may and do apply to special civil actions if not inconsistent with or if they may serve to supplement the
provisions of the peculiar rules governing special civil actions
 PROCEEDINGS CONSIDERED AS SIMILAR REMEDIES
 When to reform Instrument
 there having been a meeting of the minds of the parties to a contract, their true intention is not
expressed in the instrument purporting to embody the agreement, by reason of mistake, fraud,
inequitable conduct or accident
 When a mutual mistake of the parties causes the failure of the instrument to disclose their real
agreement
 one party was mistaken and the other acted fraudulently or inequitably in such a way that the
instrument does not show their true intention
  one party was mistaken and the other knew or believed that the instrument did not state their real
agreement, but concealed that fact from the former
 through the ignorance, lack of skill, negligence or bad faith on the part of the person drafting the
instrument or of the clerk or typist, the instrument does not express the true intention of the
parties,
 parties agree upon the mortgage or pledge of property, but the instrument states that the
property is sold absolutely or with a right of repurchase
 instance of either party or his successors in interest, if the mistake was mutual; otherwise, upon
petition of the injured party
 Remedy if the consent of a party to a contract has been procured by Fraud, Inequitable Conduct, or
Accident - The remedy is not to bring an action for reformation of the instrument but to file an action
for annulment of the contract.
 Reformation of the instrument CANNOT be brought to reform any of the following:
 1. Simple donation inter vivos wherein no condition is imposed;
 2. Wills; or
 3. When the real agreement is void
 4. When one party was mistaken and the other knew or believed that the instrument did not state
their real agreement, but concealed that fact from the former, the instrument may be reformed
 When one of the parties has brought an action to enforce the instrument, he cannot subsequently ask
for its reformation.
 Consolidation of Ownership - action brought to consolidate ownership is not for the purpose of
consolidating the ownership of the property in the person of the vendee or buyer but for the
registration of the property.
 Filing of the petition to consolidate ownership because the law precludes the registration of the
consolidated title without judicial order.
 concept of consolidation of ownership has its origin in the substantive provisions of the law on sales
Under the law, a contract of sale may be extinguished either by legal redemption or conventional
redemption.
 Legal redemption (retracto legal) - statutory mandated redemption of a property previously sold.
 Conventional redemption (pacto de retro) sale is one that is not mandated by the statute but one
which takes place because of the stipulation of the parties to the sale
 The period of redemption may be fixed by the parties in which case the period cannot exceed 10 years
from the date of the contract. In the absence of any agreement, the redemption period shall be 4 years
from the date of the contract
 When the redemption is not made within the period agreed upon, in case the subject matter of the
sale is a real property, Art. 1607 provides that the consolidation of ownership in the vendee shall not be
recorded in the Registry of Property without a judicial order, after the vendor has been duly heard.
 Quieting of Title to Real Property - a situation where the instrument or a record is apparently valid or
effective but is in truth and in fact invalid, ineffective, voidable or unenforceable, and may be
prejudicial to said title to real property
 This action is then brought to remove a cloud on title to real property or any interest therein. It may
also be brought as a preventive remedy to prevent a cloud from being cast upon title to real property or
any interest therein.
 Court which has jurisdiction – MTC – assessed value does not exceed P400K; RTC – exceeds 400K
 Land not declared for taxation purposes value of such property shall be determined by the assessed
value of the adjacent lots
 Review of Judgements of COMELEC and COA – Rule 64 in re Rule 65
 Jurisdiction – SC under Rule 65
 Venue - SC
 D. Petition for Certiorari, Prohibition and Mandamus -Rule 65
 Jurisdiction - RTC; CA; SC; Sandiganbayan, COMELEC in aid of their appellate jurisdiction
 Venue –
 RTC, if it is directed against a municipal trial court, corporation, board, an officer or a person;
 CA or with the SB, whether or not the same is in aid of the court’s appellate jurisdiction;
 only by the CA; If the petition involves an act or an omission of a quasi-judicial agency, unless
otherwise provided by law or the Rules
 exclusively with the COMELEC, in aid of its appellate jurisdiction - In election cases involving an
act or omission of MTC/RTC
 Certiorari - an extraordinary writ annulling or modifying the proceedings of a tribunal, board or officer
exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions when such tribunal, board or officer has acted without or
in excess of its or his jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of
jurisdiction, there being no appeal or any other plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary
course of law.
 Against whom - any tribunal, board or officer exercising judicial or quasi-judicial function
 Ground - alleged to have acted without jurisdiction; in excess of jurisdiction; or with grave abuse
of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction.
 Purpose - annul or nullify a proceeding
 Nature - remedy is corrective – to correct usurpation of jurisdiction
 Scope - Extends to discretionary acts.
 When to file: not later than sixty (60) days from notice of the judgment; In case a motion for
reconsideration or new trial is timely filed petition shall be filed not later than sixty (60) day period shall
be counted from notice of the denial of motion.
 petition shall be accompanied by a certified true copy of the judgment, order or resolution subject
thereof, copies of all pleadings and documents relevant and pertinent thereto, and a sworn certification
of non-forum shopping
 Where to file:
 RTC, if it is directed against a municipal trial court, corporation, board, an officer or a person;
 CA or with the SB, whether or not the same is in aid of the court’s appellate jurisdiction;
 only by the CA; If the petition involves an act or an omission of a quasi-judicial agency, unless
otherwise provided by law or the Rules
 exclusively with the COMELEC, in aid of its appellate jurisdiction - In election cases involving an
act or omission of MTC/RTC
 Requisites:
 1. The petition is directed against a tribunal, board or officer exercising judicial or quasi-judicial
functions;
 2. has acted without or in excess of jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion
 3. 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
 Prohibition - an extraordinary writ commanding a tribunal, corporation, board or person, whether
exercising judicial, quasi-judicial or ministerial functions, to desist from further proceedings when said
proceedings are without or in excess of its jurisdiction, or with abuse of its discretion, there being no
appeal or any other plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law.
 Against whom - any tribunal, corporation board officer or person exercising judicial, quasi-judicial
or ministerial function.
 Ground – alleged to have acted: without jurisdiction; in excess of jurisdiction; or with grave abuse
of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction
 Purpose - desist from further proceeding.
  Nature - preventive and negative – to restrain or prevent usurpation of jurisdiction
 Scope - Extends to discretionary and ministerial acts
 When to file: not later than sixty (60) days from notice of the judgment; In case a motion for
reconsideration or new trial is timely filed petition shall be filed not later than sixty (60) day period shall
be counted from notice of the denial of motion.
 The petition shall likewise be accompanied by a certified true copy of the judgment, order or resolution
subject thereof, copies of all pleadings and documents relevant and pertinent thereto, and a sworn
certification of non-forum shopping
 Where to file:
 RTC, if it is directed against a municipal trial court, corporation, board, an officer or a person;
 CA or with the SB, whether or not the same is in aid of the court’s appellate jurisdiction;
 only by the CA; If the petition involves an act or an omission of a quasi-judicial agency, unless
otherwise provided by law or the Rules
 exclusively with the COMELEC, in aid of its appellate jurisdiction - In election cases involving an
act or omission of MTC/RTC
 Requisites:
 impugned act must be that of a tribunal, corporation, board or person;
 respondent must be exercising judicial, quasi-judicial functions or ministerial functions;
 acted without or in excess of its jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of
jurisdiction; and
 no appeal or other plain, speedy and adequate remedy
 Mandamus - an extraordinary writ commanding a tribunal, corporation, board or person, to do an act
required to be done:
 unlawfully neglects the performance of an act which the law specifically enjoins as a duty, and there is
no other plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law; or
 unlawfully excludes another from the use and enjoyment of a right or office to which the other is
entitled
 Against whom - any tribunal, corporation board officer or person exercising ministerial function.
 Ground: alleged to have unlawfully neglected a ministerial duty; or excluded another from the use of a
right or enjoyment of an office
 Purpose – For respondent to (1) Do the act required; and (2) To pay damage.
 Nature - affirmative or positive (if the performance is ordered) or it is negative (if ordered to desist
from excluding another from a right or office)
 Scope: Only for ministerial acts.
 When to file: not later than sixty (60) days from notice of the judgment; In case a motion for
reconsideration or new trial is timely filed petition shall be filed not later than sixty (60) day period shall
be counted from notice of the denial of motion.
 The petition shall also contain a sworn certification of non-forum shopping
 Where to file:
 RTC, if it is directed against a municipal trial court, corporation, board, an officer or a person;
 CA or with the SB, whether or not the same is in aid of the court’s appellate jurisdiction;
 only by the CA; If the petition involves an act or an omission of a quasi-judicial agency, unless
otherwise provided by law or the Rules
 exclusively with the COMELEC, in aid of its appellate jurisdiction - In election cases involving an
act or omission of MTC/RTC
 Requisites
 a clear legal right to the act demanded;
 duty of the defendant to perform the act because it is mandated by law;
  defendant:
 (a) unlawfully neglects the performance of the duty enjoined by law; or
 (b) unlawfully excludes another from the use and enjoyment of a right or office which such
other is entitled;
 act to be performed is ministerial, not discretionary;
 no appeal or other plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law.
 A petition for mandamus, invoking the right to a speedy trial. Mandamus is a proper recourse for
citizens who seek to enforce a public right and to compel the performance of a public duty, most
especially when the public right involved is mandated by the Constitution. Besides, it has long been
established in this jurisdiction that the writ of mandamus is available to the accused to compel a
dismissal of the case. Here, the arraignment of Roldan was postponed 19 times over a period of 2
years. Hence, the petition for mandamus is proper in this case
 For a writ of certiorari to issue, a petitioner must not only prove that the tribunal, board or officer
exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions has acted without or in excess of jurisdiction. He must also
show that there is no plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law against what he
perceives to be a legitimate grievance. An available recourse affording prompt relief from the injurious
effects of the judgment or acts of a lower court or tribunal is considered a plain, speedy and adequate
remedy.
 By simply alleging grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or in excess of jurisdiction without
explaining why an appeal could not cure the errors by the CA, petitioner failed to prove that there was
no other plain, speedy, and adequate remedy under the law
 The 60-day period was non-extendible and the CA no longer had the authority to grant the motion for
extension. Court held that the strict observance of the 60-day period to file a petition for certiorari is
not absolute. This Court ruled that absent any express prohibition under Rule 65, a motion for
extension is still permitted, subject to the Court's sound discretion.
 To recapitulate, the recognized exceptions to the strict observance of the aforementioned rule are
encapsulated in the case of Labao v. Flores
 (1) most persuasive and weighty reasons;
 (2) to relieve a litigant from an injustice not commensurate with [their] failure to comply with the
prescribed procedure;
 (3) good faith of the defaulting party by immediately paying within a reasonable time from the
time of the default;
 (4) the existence of special or compelling circumstances;
 (5) the merits of the case;
 (6) a cause not entirely attributable to the fault or negligence of the party favored by the
suspension of the rules;
 (7) a lack of any showing that the review sought is merely frivolous and dilatory;
 (8) the other party will not be unjustly prejudiced thereby;
 (9) fraud, accident, mistake[,] or excusable negligence without appellant's fault;
 (10) peculiar legal and equitable circumstances attendant to each case;
 (11) in the name of substantial justice and fair play;
 (12) importance of the issues involved; and
 (13) exercise of sound discretion by the judge guided by all the attendant circumstances.
 Thus, there should be an effort on the part of the party invoking liberality to advance a reasonable or
meritorious explanation for [their] failure to comply with the rules.
 Hernando Ruling: If the petition involves an act or an omission of a quasi-judicial agency, unless
otherwise provided by law or these rules, the petition shall be filed with and be cognizable only by the
Court of Appeals.”
  It is the duty of the court to dismiss an action whenever it appears that the court has no jurisdiction
over the subject matter; the CA did not err in dismissing the case before the trial court since the latter
did not have jurisdiction over the petition for certiorari filed by petitioner against respondents

3. Exceptions to Filing of Motion for Reconsideration Before Filing Petition

 GR: Motion for reconsideration is required before certiorari can be filed.
 objective of this mandate is to allow the lower court, or tribunal, the opportunity to correct any actual
or perceived error imputed to it
 XPN:
 (a) order is a patent nullity, as where the court a quo had no jurisdiction;
 (b) questions raised in the certiorari proceeding have been duly raised and passed upon by the
lower court, or are the same as those raised and passed upon in the lower court;
 (c) an urgent necessity for the resolution of the question and any further delay would prejudice
the interests of the Government or of the petitioner or the subject matter of the action is
perishable;
 (d) under the circumstances, a motion for reconsideration would be useless;
 (e) petitioner was deprived of due process and there is extreme urgency for relief;
 (f) in a criminal case, relief from an order of arrest is urgent and the granting of such relief by the
trial court is improbable;
 (g) proceedings in the lower court are a nullity for lack of due process;
 (h) proceedings were ex parte, or in which the petitioner had no opportunity to object; and
 (i) issue raised is one purely of law or where public interest is involved.
 Hernando Ruling: under the circumstances, a motion for reconsideration would be useless
 Filing of a written motion for reconsideration before SDT would have been useless, and thus falls on the
exceptions above, precisely because it is prohibited by the Rules Governing Fraternities. Thus, the same
may be dispensed with and should not operate as a bar to the filing of a petition for certiorari, contrary
to the pronouncement of the CA.
 Expediting proceedings; injunctive relief - court in which the petition is filed may issue orders
expediting the proceedings, grant a temporary restraining order or a writ of preliminary injunction for
the preservation of the rights of the parties pending such proceedings. The petition shall not interrupt
the course of the principal case unless a temporary restraining order or a writ of preliminary injunction
has been issued against the public respondent from further proceeding in the case.
 The public respondent shall proceed with the principal case within 10 days from the filing of a petition
for certiorari with a higher court or tribunal, absent a TRO or a Writ of Preliminary Injunction, or upon
its expiration. Failure of the respondent to proceed with the principal case may be a ground for
administrative charge

 E. Quo warranto Rule 66

 Jurisdiction - RTC, CA, Supreme Court, Sandiganbayan in aid of its appellate jurisdiction
 Venue - Where the respondent or any of the respondents resides.
 When the Solicitor General commences the action, it may be brought in the RTC of the City of
Manila, in the CA, or in the SC
 Subject to the principle of Hierarchy of Courts
 Distinguished from Quo Warranto in the Omnibus Election Code
 Issue:
 QW (Rule 66): Legality of the occupancy of the office by virtue of a legal appointment. (Subject of
the petition is in relation to an appointive office)
 QWEC: Eligibility of the person elected. (Subject of the petition is in relation to an elective office)
 Grounds:
  QW (Rule 66): usurpation, forfeiture, or illegal association
 Presupposes that the respondent is already actually holding office
 QWEC: ineligibility or disqualification to hold the office
 Petioner:
 QW (Rule 66): entitled to office.
 QWEC: any voter even if he is not entitled to the office
 Where to file:
 QW (Rule 66): Filed before the Supreme Court, CA or RTC Manila if filed by the Solicitor General.
 Otherwise, RTC with jurisdiction over the territorial area where respondent or any of the
respondents resides
 QWEC: COMELEC if filed against the election of a Member of Congress, regional, provincial or city
officer;
 RTC or MTC, if filed against a municipal or barangay official, respectively.
 When to file:
 QW (Rule 66): within one year after the cause of such ouster, or the right of the petitioner to hold
such office or position arose
 QWEC: within 10 days after proclamation of results
 Effect:
 QW (Rule 66): Person adjudged entitled to the office may bring a separate action against the
respondent to recover damage
 QWEC: Actual or compensatory damages are recoverable in quo warranto proceedings under the
Omnibus Election Code
 When Government commences an action against Individuals and Corporations - commenced by a
verified petition brought in the name of the Republic of the Philippines against:
 1. A person who usurps, intrudes into, or unlawfully holds or exercises a public office, position or
franchise;
 2. A public officer who does or suffers an act which, by the provision of law, constitutes a ground
for the forfeiture of his office; and
 3. An association which acts as a corporation within the Philippines without being legally
incorporated or without lawful authority so to act. (de facto corporation)
 When Individual may commence an action
 A person claiming to be entitled to a public office or position usurped or unlawfully held or exercised by
another may bring an action therefor in his own name
 The person authorized to file the same is the one who claims to be entitled to a public office or position
which was usurped or unlawfully held or exercised by another person
 Such person may maintain action without the intervention of the Solicitor General and without need
for any leave of court. He must show that he has a clear right to the office allegedly being held by
another
 Who may commence the action – When directed by the President of the Philippines, or when upon
complaint or otherwise he or she has good reason to believe that any case specified in the Rules can be
established by proof, the Solicitor general or the public prosecutor must commence the action
 1. Solicitor General
 2. Public Prosecutor
 3. Individual
 Court which has Jurisdiction
 1. Can be brought only in the SC, CA, or in RTC exercising jurisdiction over the territorial area
where the respondent or any of the respondents resides;
  The petition may be brought in the SB in certain cases but when in aid of its appellate
jurisdiction
 2. Action for Quo Warranto may be dismissed at any stage when it becomes apparent that the
plaintiff is not entitled to the disputed pubic office, position or franchise. Hence, the RTC is not
compelled to still proceed with the trial when it is already apparent on the face of the Petition for
Quo Warranto that it is insufficient.
 3. 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.
 Period within which a Person ousted from Office must file a Petition for Quo Warranto
 GR: within 1 year after the cause of such ouster, or the right of the petitioner to hold such office or
position, arose
 XPN:
 1. If the failure to file the action can be attributed to the acts of a responsible government officer
and not of the dismissed employee
 2. When the action is filed by the Republic
 Judgement in Quo Warranto Action - respondent is found guilty; judgment shall be rendered that such
respondent be ousted and altogether excluded therefrom, and that the petitioner or relator, recover his
costs; further judgment may be rendered determining the respective rights in and to the public office,
position or franchise of the parties to the action as justice requires.

 F. Expropriation (Rule 67)

 Jurisdiction - RTC since incapable of pecuniary estimation
 Venue -
 Real Property: Where the property is located
 Personal property: the place where the plaintiff or defendant resides, at the election of the
plaintiff
1. Two Stages in Every Action for Expropriation
 I. First Stage: Determination of the right to expropriate or the authority of the plaintiff to
exercise power of eminent domain and propriety of its exercise in the context of the facts. It
ends with an order of condemnation declaring that plaintiff has lawful right to take the
property for public use or purpose after payment of just compensation to be determined as of
the date of filing of the complaint. It may be an order of dismissal. Both orders are final orders,
hence appealable within 30 days
 II. Second stage: Determination by the court of just compensation with the assistance of three
commissioners. Order fixing just compensation also final because it leaves nothing more to be
done by the court regarding the issue. Also appealable but within 15 days.
 Requisites in order that plaintiff may be authorized to immediately enter into property under Rule
67
 1. Filing of complaint, serving notice to defendant and after depositing the assessed value of
property for taxation purposes with the authorized government depositary;
 2. Tender, or payment with legal interest from the taking of possession of the property, of
compensation fixed by the judgment and payment of costs by plaintiff.
 Deposit shall be in money, unless in lieu thereof the court authorizes the deposit of a certificate of
deposit of a government bank of the Republic of the Philippines payable on demand to the
authorized government depositary.
 If personal property is involved, its value shall be provisionally ascertained and the amount to be
deposited shall be promptly fixed by the court.
 Once the preliminary deposit has been made, expropriator is entitled to a writ of possession as a
matter of right, and the issuance of said writ becomes ministerial on the part of the trial court.
Defenses by the owner against immediate possession can be considered during trial on the merits.
 Entry of plaintiff upon depositing value with authorized government depositary (Rule 66) -
deposits with the authorized government depositary an amount equivalent to the assessed value of
the property for purposes of taxation.
 When plaintiff can immediately enter into possession of real property in relation to RA 8974 -
specifically governing expropriation procedures for national government infrastructure projects.
 direct payment based on the zonal valuation of the BIR in the case of land, the value of
improvements or structures under the replacement cost method, or if no such valuation is available
and in cases of utmost urgency, the proferred value of the property to be seized
 Scheme of immediate payment in cases involving national government infrastructure projects.

2. Order of Expropriation
 When issued - court may issue an order of expropriation declaring that the plaintiff has a lawful
right to take the property sought to be expropriated, for the public use or purpose described in the
complaint, upon payment of just compensation, when:
 (1) If the objections to and the defenses against the right of the plaintiff to expropriate the
property are overruled, or when
 (2) no party appears to defend,
 Plaintiff shall not be permitted to dismiss or discontinue the proceeding except on such terms as the
court deems just and equitable
 When should just compensation be determined - at the time of actual taking or the filing of the
complaint whichever came first.
 Local Government Code - “amount to be paid for the expropriated property shall be determined by
the proper court based on the fair market value at the time of taking the property.”

3. Ascertainment of Just Compensation

 Court shall appoint not more than three (3) competent and disinterested persons as commissioners
to ascertain and report to the court the just compensation for the property sought to be taken.
 Order of appointment shall designate the time and place of the first session of the hearing to be
held by the commissioners and specify the time within which their report shall be submitted to the
court.
 Copies of the order shall be served on the parties. Objections to the appointment of any of the
commissioners shall be filed with the court within ten (10) days from service, and shall be resolved
within thirty (30) days after all the commissioners shall have received copies of the objections
 Hernando Ruling - Just compensation refers to the just and complete equivalent of the loss which
the owner of the thing expropriated has to suffer by reason of the expropriation and is ordinarily
determined by referring to the value of the land and its character at the time it was taken by the
expropriating authority
 Just compensation is the "equivalent for the value of the property at the time of its taking. Anything
beyond that is more and anything short of that is less, than just compensation.
 Just compensation is the "equivalent for the value of the property at the time of its taking. Anything
beyond that is more and anything short of that is less, than just compensation.
 Measure of just compensation "is not the taker's gain but the owner's loss.
 State's obligation to compensate the landowner arises only if the owner suffered a loss in the hands
of the State. Just compensation must not extend beyond the property owner's loss or injury. Even as
undervaluation would deprive the owner of his property without due process, so too would its
overvaluation unduly favor him to the prejudice of the public. In this manner, the compensation to
 be paid is truly just, not only for the owner whose property was taken, but also to the public who
bears the cost of expropriation
 Hernando Ruling - As between the filing of the original Complaint and Amended Complaint, we rule
that the computation of just compensation should be reckoned from the time of the filing of the
original Complaint.
 There was no actual taking in this case prior to the filing of the Complaint, thus, the time of taking
should be reckoned from the filing of the Complaint.
 Leonen J. - In an expropriation case such as this one where the principal issue is the determination
of just compensation, a trial before the Commissioners is indispensable to allow the parties to
present evidence on the issue of just compensation. The appointment of at least three (3)
competent persons as commissioners to ascertain just compensation for the property sought to be
taken is a mandatory requirement in expropriation cases.

4. Rights of Plaintiff Upon Judgment and Payment

 1. Enter upon the property expropriated and to appropriate the same for the public use or
purpose defined in the judgment; or
 2. To retain possession already previously made
 Legal Interest due on the amount of just compensation, Sec 10 of Rule 67 in relation to RA 8974 -
just compensation contemplates just and prompt payment, and 'prompt' payment, in turn, requires
the payment in full of the just compensation as finally determined by the courts.
 this means that the Petitioner incurs in delay if it does not pay the property owner in the full
amount of just compensation as of the date of the taking.
 "[w]hen the decision of the court becomes final and executory, the implementing agency shall pay
the owner the difference between the amount already paid and the just compensation as
determined by the court."
 R.A. 8974 requires the government to pay at two stages: first, immediately upon the filing of the
complaint, the initial deposit which is 100% of the value of the property based on the current
relevant zonal valuation of the BIR, and the value of the improvements and/or structures sought to
be expropriated; and second, the just compensation as determined by the court, when the decision
becomes final and executory, in which case the implementing agency shall pay the owner the
difference between the just compensation as determined by the court and the amount already or
initially paid.
 Absent full payment of just compensation, interest on the unpaid portion likewise runs as a matter
of law and follows as a matter of course — in order to place the owner in a position as good as (but
not better than) the position he was in before the taking occurred.
 Compensation would not be "just" if the government does not pay the property owner interest on
the just compensation from the date of the taking of the property.
 When legal interest accrues - Where the institution of the action precedes entry into the property,
the just compensation is to be ascertained as of the time of the filing of the complaint.
 In a situation where the property is taken for public use before the initial deposit is made — such as
in this case — interest must necessarily accrue from the time the property is taken to the time when
compensation is actually paid or deposited with the court, [ in order to ensure that the owner is
fully placed in a position as whole as he was before the taking occurred

 G. Foreclosure of REM (Rule 68)

 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.
 To be a real estate mortgage, the contract must be constituted on either immovable (real property) or
alienable real rights.
 A contract embodied in a public instrument recorded in the Registry of Property, by which the owner of
an immovable or an alienable real right imposed upon immovables directly and immediately subjects it,
whoever the possessor may be, to the fulfillment of the obligation for whose security it was
constituted.
 It is a contract in which the debtors guarantee to the creditor the fulfillment of a principal obligation,
subjecting for the faithful compliance therewith a real property in case of non-fulfillment of said
obligation at the time stipulated
 Nature of action - it is a real right following the property, such that in subsequent transfers by the
mortgagor, the transferee must respect the mortgage.
 A registered mortgage lien is considered inseparable from the property inasmuch as it is a right in rem.
The mortgage creates a real right or a lien which, after being recorded, follows the chattel wherever it
goes. The mortgage on the property may still be foreclosed despite the transfer. Indeed, even if the
mortgaged property is in the possession of the debtor, the creditor is still protected
 When Foreclosure is proper - debtor failed to pay his debt despite demand. The default of the debtor
must first be established. Such default occurs when payment is not made after a valid demand, unless
the contract between the parties carries with a stipulation that demand is not necessary for default to
arise
 In case of default of the debtor, the creditor has two alternatives: (1) to file an action for collection of a
sum of money; or (2) to foreclose the mortgage, if one has been constituted. An election of the first
bars the recourse to the second.
 The mere act of filing an ordinary action for collection against the principal debtor, the creditor is
deemed to have elected a remedy, as a result of which a waiver of the other must necessarily arise.
 Jurisdiction over Foreclosure of REM - action is one “involving title to, or possession of, real property or
any interest therein,” the determination of jurisdiction shall be made by inquiring into the assessed
value of the property. From this point of view, exclusive jurisdiction would fall either in the MTC or the
RTC depending on the assessed value of the property involved.
 Hernando Ruling - When the entire obligation of the spouses Berris under the Discounting Line became
due and demandable upon their default, FEBTC had the option to either foreclose the real estate
mortgage or to file a collection suit.
 Since FEBTC opted to file a petition for extrajudicial foreclosure of real estate mortgage on some PNs,
the instant collection suit to recover the amounts covered by the other PNs is therefore barred.
Petitioner cannot claim that only PN Nos. 2-104-90258 BDC and 2-104-980888 BDC were due and
demandable at that time as their demand letters clearly show otherwise. Also, with the application of
the acceleration clause, all the PNs became due and demandable even before its maturity upon the
happening of the default.
 Petitioner cannot split its cause of action on the Discounting Line by first filing a petition for
extrajudicial foreclosure of the real estate mortgage on some PNs and then institute a personal action
for the collection of the other four PNs without violating the proscription against splitting a single cause
of action..
 Pactum Commissorium - a stipulation empowering the creditor to appropriate the thing given as a
guaranty for the fulfillment of the obligation in the event the obligor fails to live up to his undertakings,
without further formality, such as foreclosure proceedings, and a public sale.
 The elements of Pactum Commissorium are:
 1. a property mortgaged by way of security for the payment of principal obligation, and
 2. a stipulation for automatic appropriation by the creditor of the thing mortgaged in case of non-
payment of the principal obligation within the stipulated period
 Distinguished Extrajudicial Foreclosure Act 3135 from Judicial Foreclosure Rule 68
 Filing of complaint
 Extrajudicial Foreclosure Act 3135 - No complaint is filed
  Judicial Foreclosure Rule 68 - Complaint is filed with the courts
 Right of redemption vs Equity of redemption
 Extrajudicial Foreclosure Act 3135 - Complaint is filed with the courts
 Right of redemption for 1 year from registration of the sale
 Judicial Foreclosure Rule 68 - No right of redemption
 Mortgagee is a banking institution; equity of redemption only (90 to 120 days, and any time
before confirmation of foreclosure sale)
 Recovery of deficiency
 Extrajudicial Foreclosure Act 3135 - file a separate action to recovery any deficiency.
 Judicial Foreclosure Rule 68 - move for deficiency judgment in the same action.
 When buyer at public auction becomes absolute owner
 Extrajudicial Foreclosure Act 3135 - only after finality of an action for consolidation of
ownership.
 Judicial Foreclosure Rule 68 - only after confirmation of the sale
 Need for special power of attorney
 Extrajudicial Foreclosure Act 3135 - given a special power of attorney in the mortgage
contract to foreclose the mortgaged property in case of default
 Judicial Foreclosure Rule 68 - need not be given a special power of attorney.

 Procedure
 Where to file –
 Judicial - court which has jurisdiction over the area where the property is situated.
 Extrajudicial - filed with the Executive Judge, through the Clerk of Court, who is also the Ex-
Officio Sheriff.
 Where to sell –
 Judicial - place of sale may be agreed upon by the parties
 absence of such agreement, the sale of real property shall be held in the office of the clerk of
court of the RTC or MTC which issued the writ or which was designated by the appellate
court.
 Extrajudicial – within the province, made in said place or in the municipal building of the
municipality in which the property or part thereof is situated.
 Posting requirement –
 Judicial - Before the sale of real property on execution, notice thereof must be given by
posting a similar notice describing the property and stating where the property is to be sold
for 20 days in 3 public places (conspicuous area) of the municipal or city hall, post office and
public market in the municipality or city where the sale is to take place
 Extrajudicial - Notice shall be given by posting notices of the sale for not less than 20 days in
at least three public places of the municipality or city where the property is situated.
 Failure to post notice is not per se a ground for invalidating a foreclosure sale provided that
the notice thereof is duly published in a newspaper of general circulation.
 Must be strictly complied with and slight deviations therefrom will invalidate the notice and
render the sale at the very least voidable
 Publication requirement –
 Judicial - assessed value of the property exceeds P50,000, by publishing a copy of the notice
once a week for 2 consecutive weeks in one newspaper selected or that having general
circulation in the province or city.
  Extrajudicial - assessed value of the property exceeds P50,000, by publishing a copy of the
notice once a week for 2 consecutive weeks in one newspaper selected or that having general
circulation in the province or city.

1. Judicial Foreclosure
 Where to File: Either MTC or RTC depending on the assessed value of the property.
 Complaint in action for foreclosure - set forth:
 1.The date and due execution of the mortgage;
 2. The assignments of the mortgage, if any;
 3. The names and residences of the mortgagor and the mortgagee;
 4. A description of the mortgaged property;
 5. Date of the note or other documentary evidence of the obligation secured by the mortgage,
the amount claimed to be unpaid thereon; and
 6. The names and residences of all persons having or claiming an interest in the property
subordinate in right to that of the holder of the mortgage.
 All of whom shall be made defendants in the action. - not mandatory in character but merely
directory
 A decree of foreclosure in a suit to which the holders of a second lien are not parties leaves the
equity of redemption in favor of the lien holders unforeclosed and unaffected

 Judgment on foreclosure for payment or sale – Procedure:

 1. Filing of the complaint either in MTC or RTC, depending on the assessed value of the
property
 2. Conduct of Trial and rendition of judgement
 a. ascertainment of the amount due to the plaintiff upon the mortgage debt or obligation,
including interest and other charges as approved by the court, as well as costs
 b. judgement for the sum found due;
 c. order that the amount found due be paid to the court or to the judgement obligee
within a period of not less than 90 days nor more than 120 days from the entry of
judgement (Bar 2000)
 d. admonition that, in default of such payment, the property shall be sold at public auction
to satisfy the judgment.

 Judgment of the court on the above matters is considered a final adjudication of the case
and, hence, subject to challenge by the aggrieved party by appeal or other post judgement
remedies.
 3. Within the period assigned by the court, the mortgagor has the chance to pay the obligation
to prevent his property from being sold (Equity of Redemption period)
 4. If mortgagor fails to pay within the 90-120 days given to him by the court, the property shall
be sold to the highest bidder at public auction to satisfy the judgment.
 Sale of mortgaged property; effect – it shall operate to divest the rights in the property of all the
parties to the action and to vest their rights in the purchaser, subject to such rights of redemption as
may be allowed by law.
 but shall not affect the rights of persons holding prior encumbrances upon the property or a part
thereof
 It would be a good practice for the mortgagee to file a motion for the sale of the mortgaged
property because under the rules, the court shall order the sale of the property only “upon motion”.
Such motion is non-litigable and may be made ex parte.
 Judicial confirmation of the Sale - Upon the finality of the order of confirmation or upon the
expiration of the period of redemption when allowed by law, the purchaser at the auction sale or
last redemptioner, if any, shall be entitled to the possession of the property unless a third party is
actually holding the same adversely to the judgment obligor. The said purchaser or last
redemptioner may secure a writ of possession, upon motion, from the court which ordered the
foreclosure.
 Unlike the motion for the sale of the mortgaged property, which is done ex parte, the motion for the
confirmation of the sale requires a notice and a hearing. In the hearing, the mortgagor will be
allowed the opportunity to show cause why the sale should not be confirmed. If the mortgagor was
not notified of the hearing, the subsequent confirmation of the sale is vitiated and consequently, it
is as if no confirmation ever took place. Being so, the mortgagor may, therefore, still insist on his
right to exercise his equity of redemption even after the alleged confirmation which is, in fact, of no
effect.
 After the hearing and the court finds valid grounds for its confirmation, it shall issue an order
confirming the foreclosure sale. This order confirming the sale is a judgement in itself and is deemed
a final adjudication on the propriety and merits of the sale. It is, hence, also appealable.
 Confirmation of the sale shall operate to divest the rights in the property of all the parties to the
action and vest their rights in the purchaser, subject to such rights of redemption as may be allowed
by law
 Writ of possession shall be issued upon motion. Hence, the purchaser or last redemption must file a
motion for the issuance of a writ of possession in the court with ordered the foreclosure
 Deficiency judgment - court, upon motion, shall render judgment against the defendant for any
such balance for which, by the record of the case, he may be personally liable to the plaintiff, upon
which execution may issue immediately if the balance is all due at the time of the rendition of the
judgment; otherwise, the plaintiff shall be entitled to execution at such time as the balance
remaining becomes due under the terms of the original contract, which time shall be stated in the
judgment
 Deficiency judgment is, in itself, a judgement, hence, also appealable.
 No independent action need be filed to recover the deficiency from the defendant. The deficiency
judgement shall be rendered upon motion of the mortgagee.
 It has been suggested that the mortgagor, who is not the debtor and who merely executed the
mortgage to secure the principal debtor’s obligation, is not liable for the deficiency unless he
assumed liability for the same in the contract.
 Procedure of Foreclosure Proceedings
 1. Judgment of Foreclosure
 2. Order confirming the foreclosure sale with respect to the validity of the sale
 3. Deficiency judgment as to the correctness of the award
 These 3 stages culminate to a final judgment. Each judgment or final order can be subject to an
appeal and the period of appeal is 30 days. A record on appeal shall be submitted.
 Prescriptive period to file action for deficiency in extrajudicial foreclosure of real estate mortgage -
10 years

2. Extrajudicial Foreclosure (Act No. 3135, as amended)

 Mode to be used if there is a special power inserted in the real estate mortgage contract allowing an
extrajudicial foreclosure sale. Where there is no such special power, the foreclosure shall be done
judicially.
 Article 1879, NCC provides that a special power to sell excludes the special power to mortgage.
 Provides for the requirements, procedure, venue, and the mortgagor’s right to redeem the property
 Procedure - foreclosure suit will proceed like an ordinary civil action insofar as they are not
inconsistent with Rule 68
 How initiated - filing a Petition with the Executive Judge through the Clerk of Court who is also the
ex-officio Sheriff of the City or Province where the property is located. The venue is where the
mortgaged property is located.
 Notice and Publication
 1. Posting of notices of sale in three public places for not less than 20 days in atleast three
public places of the municipality or city where the property is situated;
 2. Publication of the notice of sale in a newspaper of general circulation
 This requirement is complied with when the publication is circulated at least in the city where the
property is located
 Without compliance to the formal requirements of posting and publication, the sale is null and void.
The mortgagor may be barred by estoppel or laches from claiming that the requirements have not
been complied with.
 Posting in three public places doesn’t mean to be in the place where the property is.
 If the original date of the sale has been moved, the requirements of notice and publication should
be done again, otherwise, the sale shall be invalid.
 Personal notice to the mortgagor-debtor is not necessary for the validity of the extrajudicial
foreclosure proceedings, unless there is a stipulation in the mortgage contract for the same

 Complaint in Action for Foreclosure - Defendants that must be joined

 1. persons obligated to pay the mortgage debt;
 2. persons who own, occupy or control the mortgaged premises;
 3. transferee or grantee of the property; and
 4. second mortgagee or junior encumbrancer, or any person claiming a right or interest in the
property subordinate to the mortgage sought to be foreclosed
 If the action is brought by the junior encumbrancer, the first mortgagee or the senior one need not
be joined. A property is taken subject to the first lien. What is now required by law is to implead the
junior mortgagee.
 Hernando Ruling - Personal notice to the mortgagor in extrajudicial foreclosure proceedings is not
necessary. Law requires only the posting of the notice of sale in three public places and the
publication of that notice in a newspaper of general circulation. An exception to this rule is when the
parties stipulate that personal notice is additionally required to be given to the mortgagor. Failure to
abide by the general rule or its exception renders the foreclosure proceedings null and void.
 Notice is for the bidders and to prevent a sacrifice of the property. There is no requirement for the
appraisal value, nor for minimum bidding prices
 Possession by purchaser of foreclosed property - purchaser at public auction, who has a right to
possession that extends after the expiration of the redemption period becomes the absolute owner
of the property when no redemption is made.
 After the one-year period, the mortgagor loses all interest over it. Possession becomes an absolute
right of the purchaser as confirmed owner. It becomes the ministerial duty of the court to issue writ
of possession in favor of the purchaser in a foreclosure sale.
 Remedy of Debtor if Foreclosure is not proper; Judicial
 The judgment of the court is considered a final adjudication of the case and hence, is subject to
challenge by the aggrieved party by appeal or by other post judgment remedies.
 period given is not merely a procedural requirement, it is a substantive right given to the mortgage
debtor as the last opportunity to pay the debt and save his mortgaged property from final
disposition at the foreclosure sale
 Remedy of Debtor; Extrajudicial Foreclosure
 in the proceedings in which possession was requested but not later than thirty days after the
purchaser was given possession, petition that the sale be set aside and the writ of possession
cancelled, specifying the damages suffered by him, because the mortgage was not violated or the
sale was not made in accordance with the provisions hereof
 Remedy of the debtor is to have the sale set aside and the writ of possession cancelled
 court shall take cognizance of this petition in accordance with the summary procedure
 Hernando Ruling - When the redemption period has already expired, and the purchaser in the
foreclosure sale has already consolidated his ownership over the property and moved for the
issuance of the writ of possession.
 The proper recourse is for Respondents-Appellants to file a separate action in another proceeding,
like for instance, an action for recovery of ownership, for annulment of mortgage and/or annulment
of foreclosure
 Right of Redemption - A transaction by which the mortgagor reacquires or buys back the property
which may have passed under the mortgage or divests the property of the lien which the mortgage
may have created.
 No such right is recognized in judicial foreclosure except only when mortgagee is the PNB or a bank
or a banking institution.
 Who may Redeem (1 year) - debtor, his successors in interest or any judicial creditor or judgment
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
 Amount of Redemption - purchase price plus 1% interest per month, together with assessments or
taxes thereon, if any, paid by the purchaser after the sale with the same rate of interests.
 Effect of Pendency of action for annulment of sale - period to redeem a property sold in an
extrajudicial foreclosure sale does not toll the running of the one-year period of redemption
 Hernando Ruling - Writ of Possession (Ministerial duty of the court) - once title to the property has
been consolidated in the buyer's name upon failure of the mortgagor to redeem the property within
the one-year redemption period, the writ of possession becomes a matter of right belonging to the
buyer
 buyer can demand possession of the property at any time. Its right of possession has then ripened
into the right of a confirmed absolute owner and the issuance of the writ becomes a ministerial
function that does not admit of the exercise of the court's discretion. The court, acting on an
application for its issuance, should issue the writ as a matter of course and without any delay."
 exceptions to the rule that the trial court's duty to issue the writ of possession in favor of the
purchaser is ministerial
 (a) gross inadequacy of the purchase price
 (b) third party claiming right adverse to the mortgagor/debtor
 (c) failure to pay the surplus proceeds of the sale to the mortgagor."
 Right of transferee or successor-in-interest of the auction buyer - The transferee can exercise the
right of the auction buyer. A transferee or successor-in-interest of the auction buyer by virtue of the
contract of sale between them, is considered to have stepped into the shoes of the auction buyer
 When the lot purchased at a foreclosure sale is in turn sold or transferred, the right to the
possession thereof, along with all other rights of ownership, transfers to its new owner. Ergo, it is a
ministerial duty of the court to issue a writ of possession in favor of the transferee of the auction
buyer.
 Third-party possessor - To be considered in adverse possession, the third-party possessor must have
done so in his own right and not as a mere successor or transferee of the debtor or mortgagor.
 Agricultural tenancy of a property constitutes a third-party claim that bars the ex parte issuance of a
writ of possession in favor of the winning bidder in a public sale of a foreclosed property
 Notice of Sale - well-settled rule that statutory provisions governing publication of notice of
mortgage foreclosure sales must be strictly complied with and that even slight deviations therefrom
will invalidate the notice. This is to inform the public of the nature and condition of the property to
be sold, and of the time, place and terms of the sale.
 mortgagor is entitled to a notice of hearing of the confirmation of the sale; otherwise, the order is
void. Due process requires that said notice be given so that the mortgagor can resist the motion and
be informed that his right to redeem is cut-off.
 Effect of Order of Confirmation - operate to divest the rights in the property of all the parties to the
action and to vest their rights in the purchaser, subject to such rights of redemption as may be
allowed by law.
 title vests in the purchaser upon a valid confirmation of the sale and retroacts to the date of the sale
 Remedy if the Mortgagor refuses to vacate - secure a writ of possession, upon motion, from the
court which ordered the foreclosure unless a third party is actually holding the same adversely to
the judgment obligor
 It is an established rule that the purchaser in an extra-judicial foreclosure sale is entitled to the
possession of the property and can demand that he be placed in possession of the same either
during (with bond) or after the expiration (without bond) of the redemption period therefor. The
issuance of a writ of possession to a purchaser in a public auction is a ministerial act. That said, the
RTC therefore gravely abused its discretion when it issued the injunctive writ which enjoined Sps.
Marquez from taking possession of the subject property. To be sure, grave abuse of discretion arises
when a lower court or tribunal patently violates the Constitution, the law or existing jurisprudence.
Here, while the RTC had initially issued a writ of possession in favor of Sps. Marquez, it defied
existing jurisprudence when it effectively rescinded the said writ by subsequently granting Sps.
Alindog's prayer for injunctive relief.
 Disposition of proceeds of sale.
 1. The proceeds of the sale of the mortgaged property shall, after deducting the costs of the
sale, be paid to the person foreclosing the mortgage;
 2. When there is any balance or residue after paying off the mortgage debt due, the same shall
be paid to junior encumbrances in the order of their priority.
 3. If there be any further balance after paying them or if there be no junior encumbrances, the
same shall be paid to the mortgagor or any person entitled thereto
 How sale to proceed in case the debt is not all due - as soon as a sufficient portion of the property
has been sold to pay the total amount and the costs due, the sale shall terminate; and afterwards,
as often as more becomes due for principal or interest and other valid charges, the court may, on
motion, order more to be sold.
 But if the property cannot be sold in portions without prejudice to the parties, the whole shall be
ordered to be sold in the first instance, and the entire debt and costs shall be paid, if the proceeds of
the sale be sufficient therefor, there being a rebate of interest where such rebate is proper.
 Extrajudicial Foreclosure; not Res Judicata - there is no deficiency judgment because the
extrajudicial foreclosure is not a judicial procedure.
 However, the mortgagee can recover by action any deficiency in the mortgage account which was
not realized in the foreclosure sale. This will not violate the res judicata rule because the petition for
extrajudicial foreclosure is not an action in court.
 Instances when Court cannot Render Deficiency Judgment
 1. Case is covered by the Recto Law
 2. 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;
 3. Mortgagor dies, the mortgagee may file his claim with the probate court
  4. Mortgagee is a third person but not solidarily liable with the debtor.
 Registration - certified copy of the final order of the court confirming the sale shall be registered in
the registry of deeds. If no right of redemption exists, the certificate of title in the name of the
mortgagor shall be cancelled, and a new one issued in the name of the purchaser.
 a right of redemption exists, the certificate of title in the name of the mortgagor shall not be
cancelled, but the certificate of sale and the order confirming the sale shall be registered and a brief
memorandum thereof made by the registrar of deeds upon the certificate of title. In the event the
property is redeemed, the deed of redemption shall be registered with the registry of deeds, and a
brief memorandum thereof shall be made by the registrar of deeds on said certificate of title
 If the property is not redeemed, the final deed of sale executed by the sheriff in favor of the
purchaser at the foreclosure sale shall be registered with the registry of deeds; whereupon the
certificate of title in the name of the mortgagor shall be cancelled and a new one issued in the name
of the purchaser.

 Kinds of Redemption
 1. Equity of redemption – Right of mortgagor to redeem the mortgaged property after his
default in the performance of the conditions of the mortgage but before the sale of the
mortgaged property or confirmation of sale. The mortgagor pays the secured debt within the
period specified.
 Where applicable: Judicial foreclosure of real estate mortgage;
 XPN: There is no right of redemption from a judicial foreclosure sale after the confirmation
of the sale, except those granted by banks and financial institutions as provided by the
General Banking Act.
 If the mortgagee is a bank, the mortgagor may exercise a right of redemption and this rule
applies even if the foreclosure is judicial
 Period to exercise: within 90-120 days from the date of the service of the order of foreclosure
or even thereafter but before the order of confirmation of the sale
 2. Right of redemption – Right of the mortgagor to redeem the mortgaged property within one year
from the date of registration of the certificate of sale. It applies in case of extrajudicial foreclosure.
 Period to exercise: within 1 year from the date of registration of the certificate of sale
 The right of redemption, as long as within the period prescribed, may be exercised regardless of
whether or not the mortgagee has subsequently conveyed the property to some other party.
 juridical persons whose property is being sold pursuant to an extrajudicial foreclosure, shall
have the right to redeem the property but not after, the registration of the certificate of sale
with the applicable Register of Deeds which in no case shall be more than 3 months after
foreclosure, whichever is earlier.
 Owners of property that has been sold in a foreclosure sale prior to the effectivity of this
General Banking Act shall retain their redemption rights until their expiration.
 Who may Redeem
 1. Mortgagor or one in privity of title with the mortgagor;
 2. Successors-in-interest
 Amount of Redemption Price
 1. When mortgagee is not a bank
 a. Purchase price of the property;
 b. 1% interest per month on the purchase price from the date of registration of the
certificate up to the time of redemption;
  c. Necessary expenses incurred by the purchase for the improvements made by him to
preserve the property during the period of redemption; and,
 d. Taxes paid and amount of purchaser’s prior lien, if any, with the same rate of interest
computed from the date of registration of sale, up to the time of redemption.
 2. When mortgagee is a bank:
 a. Amount fixed by the court or amount due under the mortgage deed;
 b. Interest;
 c. Cost and expenses.
 Requisites for valid Right of Redemption
 made within twelve (12) months from the time of the registration of the sale in the Office of
the Registry of Property;
 Payment of the purchase price of the property plus 1% interest per month together with the
taxes thereon, if any, paid by the purchaser with the same rate of interest computed from the
date of registration of the sale;
 Written notice of the redemption must be served on the officer who made the sale and a
duplicate filed with the proper Register of Deeds; and
 Tender of payment within the prescribed period to make the redemption for future
enforcement.
 filing of a court action to enforce redemption, being equivalent to a formal offer to redeem, would
have the effect of “freezing” the expiration of the one-year period.
 Period of Redemption
 1. Extrajudicial Foreclosure
 a. Natural Person- one (1) year from registration of the certificate of sale with the Registry
of Deeds.
 NOTE: The statutory period of redemption is only directory and can be extended by
agreement of the parties provided:
 i. The agreement to extend is voluntary; and
 ii. The debtor commits to pay the redemption price on a fixed date.
 b. Juridical Person – same rule as natural person.
 c. Juridical Person (mortgagor) and Bank (mortgagee) – three (3) months after foreclosure
or before registration of certificate of foreclosure whichever is earlier.
 2. Judicial Foreclosure – within the period of 90- 120 days from the date of the service of the
order of foreclosure or even thereafter but before the order of the confirmation of the sale.
 Allowing redemption after the lapse of the statutory period, when the buyer at the foreclosure sale
does not object but even consents to the redemption, will uphold the policy of the law which is to
aid rather than defeat the right of redemption.
 Doctrine - There can be several mortgages over the same property. Multiple encumbrances have no
effect on the ownership of the property and are treated merely as liens, the first one being normally
treated as more superior over subsequent encumbrances. However, even a junior encumbrancer is
not precluded by any rule from initiating foreclosure proceedings ahead of a prior encumbrancer in
case the debt in his favor matures.

3. The General Banking Law of 2000 (Sec. 47, RA 8791)

 Foreclosure of Real Estate Mortgage. –
 GR: Redemption period is one year from registration of the certificate of sale.
 XPN: Section 47 of the General Banking Law:
 a. Juridical persons are allowed to exercise the right of redemption until the registration, and in
no case more than three months after the foreclosure sale, whichever comes first.
  b. Section 47 did not divest juridical persons of the right to redeem their foreclosed properties
but only modified the time for the exercise of such right by reducing the one provided for in
R.A. No. 3135.
 Period of Redemption is not a prescriptive period – but a condition precedent provided by law to
restrict the right of the person exercising redemption.
 If a person exercising the right of redemption has offered to redeem the property within the period
fixed, he is considered to have complied with the condition precedent prescribed by law and may
thereafter bring an action to enforce redemption
 If, on the other hand, the period is allowed to lapse before the right of redemption is exercised, then
the action to enforce redemption will not prosper, even if the action is brought within the ordinary
prescriptive period
 Enforcement against Third Persons – a hearing must be conducted to determine whether
possession over the subject property is still with the mortgagor or is already in the possession of a
third party holding the same adversely to the defaulting debtor or mortgagor. If the property is in
the possession of the mortgagor, a writ of possession could thus be issued.
 Otherwise, the remedy of a writ of possession is no longer available to such purchaser, but he can
wrest possession over the property through an ordinary action of ejectment.
 Pendency of action for Annulment of Sale - right of the purchaser to have possession of the subject
property would not be defeated notwithstanding the pendency of a civil case seeking the
annulment of the mortgage or of the extrajudicial foreclosure
 When Writ of Possession not available:
 mortgaged property under lease previously registered in the Registry of Property or despite
non-registration, the mortgagee has prior knowledge of the existence and duration of the
lease;
 mortgagor refuses to surrender property sold. The remedy is to file an ordinary action for the
recovery of possession in order that the mortgagor may be given opportunity to be heard; and
 third party is in actual possession adverse to the judgment debtor.
 Possession in Extrajudicial Foreclosure - purchaser may petition the Court of First Instance of the
province or place where the property or any part thereof is situated, to give him possession thereof
during the redemption period, furnishing bond in an amount equivalent to the use of the property
for a period of twelve months, to indemnify the debtor in case it be shown that the sale was made
without violating the mortgage or without complying with the requirements
 Petition for Annulment of Foreclosure Proceedings - contests the presumed right of ownership of
the buyer in a foreclosure sale and puts in issue such presumed right of ownership while an ex parte
petition for issuance of a writ of possession is a non-litigious proceeding.
 Filing of a petition for nullification of foreclosure proceedings with motion for consolidation is not
allowed as it will render nugatory the presumed right of ownership, as well as the right of
possession, of a buyer in a foreclosure sale.
 Should the bid price approximate the value of the mortgaged property - No. There is no
requirement for the determination of the mortgaged properties’ appraisal value
 Does inadequacy of bid price void a forced sale - inadequacy of the price at a forced sale is
immaterial and does not nullify a sale since, in a forced sale, a low price is more beneficial to the
mortgage debtor for it makes redemption of the property easier
 It bears pointing out though that under the law, if the mortgagee is a bank, quasibank, or trust
entity, the redemption price is the outstanding obligation plus interest stipulated in the mortgage
agreement and not the bid price.
 Are different redemption period for natural and juridical persons violative of the equal protection
clause under the Philippine Constitution - General Banking Law does not infringe on the equal
protection clause nor discriminate mortgagors/property owners who are juridical persons. One class
 may be treated differently from another where the groupings are based on reasonable and real
distinctions
 The difference in the treatment of juridical and natural persons was based on the nature of the
properties foreclosed, whether these are used as residence, for which the more liberal one-year
redemption period is retained, or used for industrial or commercial purposes, in which case a
shorter term is deemed necessary to reduce the period of uncertainty in the ownership of property
and enable mortgagee-banks to dispose sooner of these acquired assets
 one of such safe and sound practices aimed at ensuring the solvency and liquidity of our banks
 It cannot therefore be disputed that the said provision amending the redemption period in Act. No.
3135 was based on a reasonable classification and germane to the purpose of the law.
 The right of redemption being statutory, it must be exercised in the manner prescribed by the
statute, and within the prescribed time limit to make it effective. Furthermore, as with other
individual rights to contract and to property, it has to give way to police power exercised for public
welfare
 May a party enjoin or restrain the conduct of foreclosure proceedings instituted pursuant to Sec.
47 of the General Banking Law - given due course only upon the filing by the petitioner of a bond in
an amount fixed by the court conditioned that he will pay all the damages which the bank may
suffer by the enjoining or the restraint of the foreclosure proceeding.

 H. Partition (Rule 69)

 Jurisdiction –
 RTC – Real: excess P400K; Personal: excess P2M;
 MTC if does not exceed P400K/P2M
 Venue
 Real property – where the property is located
 Personal property – the place where the plaintiff or defendant resides at the election of the
plaintiff
 a process of dividing and assigning property owned in common among the various co-owners thereof
in proportion to their respective interests in said property
 the separation, division and assignment of a thing held in common among those to whom it may
belong
 The thing itself may be divided, or its value
 commenced by a complaint by a person claiming to be the owner of a specified property against a
defendant or defendants whom the plaintiff recognizes to be his co-owners, and is premised on the
existence or non-existence of co-ownership between the parties.
 Nature - nature of an action quasi in rem
 Kinds of Partition – (1) Judicia partition; and (2) Extrajudicial partition
 Requisites –
 1. Right to compel the partition;
 2. 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 property must be joined as defendants.
 Partition of personal property - apply to partitions of estates composed of personal or real, or of both
 brought by the person who has a right to compel the partition
 plaintiff is a person who is supposed to be a co-owner of the property or estate sought to be
partitioned. The defendants are all the co-owners who are indispensable parties
 All the co-owners are indispensable parties
 Non-inclusion of a Co-owner in an Action for Partition
  1. Before judgment – Not a ground for a motion to dismiss, file a motion to include the party.
 2. After judgment – judgment therein void because co-owners are indispensable parties.
 Neither paramount rights nor amicable partition affected by this Rule - by agreement and suitable
instruments of conveyance without recourse to an action.
 Creditors or assignees of co-owners 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
 Subject Matter is Real Property - filed in the MTC or RTC of the province where the property or part
thereof is situated.
 parcels of land are situated in different provinces; venue may be laid in the MTC or RTC of any of said
provinces.
 Subject Matter is Personal Property - plaintiff or the defendant resides, at the election of the plaintiff.

 Matters to allege in the Complaint for Partition

 1. Nature and extent of his title;
 2. Adequate description of the real estate of which partition is demanded;
 3. Join as defendants all other persons interested in the property
 4. Demand for the accounting of the rents, profits and other income from the property which he
may be entitled to.
 Action for recovery of property - allegations of the complaint allege that the plaintiff asserts exclusive
ownership
 Issues to be resolved in an Action for Partition
 1. Whether the plaintiff is indeed a co-owner of the property sought to be partitioned.
 2. How the property is to be divided between the plaintiff and defendant or what portion should
go to each co-owner
 When court can issue the Order of Partition - TWO STAGES IN EVERY ACTION FOR PARTITION
 1. First stage/phase - determination of whether or not a co-ownership in fact exists and a partition
is proper.
 partition is at once an action for declaration of co-ownership and for segregation and
conveyance of a determinate portion of the properties involved
 court should find after trial the existence of co ownership among the parties, it may and
should order the partition of the properties in the same action.
 2. Second stage/phase - commences when it appears that the parties are unable to agree upon
the partition directed by the court.
 Multiple Appeals - judgment declaring the existence of a co-ownership may be appealed
 The record on appeal is required to be submitted. The period to appeal is 30 days
 Modes of Partition
 1. By agreement of the parties (Extrajudicial) – where they make the partition among themselves
by proper instruments of conveyance
 The court shall confirm the partition so agreed upon by all the parties, and such partition,
together with the order of the court confirming the same, shall be recorded in the registry of
deeds of the place in which the property is situated.
 A final order decreeing partition and accounting may be appealed by any party aggrieved
thereby.
 2. By judicial proceedings under Rule 69 (order of partition) – if the co-owners are unable to agree
upon the partition
 PARTITION BY COMMISSIONERS; APPOINTMENT OF COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER’S REPORT;
COURT ACTION UPON COMMISSIONER’S REPORT
 Appointment of Commissioners - co-owners are unable to agree upon the partition of the property
 court shall appoint not more than 3 commissioners of competent and disinterested persons to make or
effect the partition
 mandatory unless there is an extrajudicial partition between the parties
 have the power to affect the partition but not to inquire into the question of ownership or possession.
 Assignment or sale of real estate by commissioners - real estate, or a portion thereof, cannot be
divided without prejudice to the interests of the parties;
 court may order it assigned to one of the parties willing to take the same, provided he pays to the other
parties such amounts as the commissioners deem equitable, unless one of the interested parties asks
that the property be sold instead of being so assigned
 court shall order the commissioners to sell the real estate at public sale under such conditions and
within such time as the court may determine.

 Duties of the Commissioners in an Action for Partition (R-A-S)

 1. Make a full and accurate Report to the court of all their proceedings as to the partition;
 2. The Assignment of real estate to one of the parties; or
 3. The Sale of the same.
 The interested parties are allowed 10 days within which to file objections to the findings of the report.
It is not binding until the count has accepted it and rendered judgment thereon.
 Action of the court upon commissioners report - court may, upon hearing, accept the report and
render judgment in accordance therewith; or, for cause shown, recommit the same to the
commissioners for further report of facts; or set aside the report and appoint new commissioners; or
accept the report in part and reject it in part; and may make such order and render such judgment as
shall effectuate a fair and just partition of the real estate, or of its value, if assigned or sold as above
provided, between the several owners thereof.
 rule mandates that a hearing must be conducted before a rendition of a judgment.
 Judgment and its effects
 1. If actual partition of property is made, the judgment shall state definitely:
 a. The metes and bounds and adequate description; and
 b. The particular portion of the real estate assigned to each party.
 judgment shall have the effect of vesting in each party to the action the portion of the real estate
assigned to him.
 2. If the whole property is assigned to one of the parties upon his paying to the others the sum or
sums ordered by the court, the effect of judgment shall be to vest in the party making the
payment the whole of the real estate free from any interest in the part of the other parties to the
action
 3. If the property is sold and the sale confirmed by the court, the judgment shall state:
 a. The name of the purchaser/s making the payment; and
 b. A definite description of the parcels of real estate sold to each purchaser.
 certified copy of the judgment shall in either case be recorded in the registry of deeds of the place
in which the real estate is situated, and the expenses of such recording shall be taxed as part of the
costs of the action
 Stages in an Action for Partition could be the Subject of Appeal
 1. Order determining the propriety of the partition;
 2. Judgment as to the fruits and income of the property;
 3. Judgment of partition
  Partition of personal property - provisions of this Rule shall apply
 mode of appeal is record on appeal.
 This is one of the instances when the rules allow multiple appeals. A judgment declaring the existence
of coownership is immediately appealable. Judgment directing an accounting is appealable regardless
of whether the accounting is the principal relief sought or a mere incident, and becomes final and
executory within the reglementary period.
 Prescription of Action
 GR: does not prescribe as long as there is a recognition of the co-ownership, expressly or impliedly
 XPN: co-owner may acquire ownership thereof by prescription where there exists a clear repudiation of
the co-ownership and the co-owners are apprised of the claim of adverse and exclusive ownership.
 where the transferees of an undivided portion of the land allowed a co-owner of the property to
occupy a definite portion thereof and had not disturbed the same for a period too long to be ignored,
the possessor is in a better condition or right than said transferees (Potior est conditio possidentis).
Such undisturbed possession had the effect of a partial partition of the co-owned property which
entitles the possessor to the definite portion which he occupies.
 WHEN PARTITION IS NOT ALLOWED
 a. Agreement among the co-owners to keep the property undivided for a certain period of time
but not exceeding ten years
 b. prohibited by the Donor or testator for a period not exceeding 20 years
 c. prohibited by Law
 d. not subject to physical division and to do so would render it Unserviceable for the use for which
it is intended
 e. condition imposed upon voluntary heirs before they can demand partition has not yet been
fulfilled.
 The action for partition cannot be acted upon since Luna failed to establish any rightful interest in the
properties. A division of property cannot be ordered by the court unless the existence of co-ownership
is first established. The issue of ownership or coownership is first established. The issue of ownership or
co-ownership must first be resolved in order to effect a partition of properties. This should be done in
the action for partition itself. Unless the issue of ownership is definitely and finally resolved, it would be
premature to effect a partition of the disputed properties

 I. Forcible Entry (Rule 70)/ Unlawful Detainer (Rule 70)

 Jurisdiction - MTC, MTCCs, MCTC, MeTC; covered by Rule on Summary Procedure
 Venue - Where the property is located because it is a real action.
 Ejectment Proceedings - designed to summarily restore physical possession of a piece of land or
building to one who has been illegally or forcibly deprived thereof, without prejudice to the settlement
of the parties' opposing claims of juridical possession in appropriate proceedings.
 Nature - real action because it involves the issue of possession of real property
 also, an action in personam because the action is directed against a particular person who is sought to
be held liable.
 Forcible Entry - action to recover possession founded upon illegal possession from the beginning when
one is deprived of physical possession of real property by means of force, intimidation, threat, strategy,
or stealth
 Commenced by a verified complaint
 Requisites
 1. A person is deprived of Possession of any land or building;
 2. by Force, Intimidation, Strategy, Threat, or Stealth (FISTS); and
 3. Action is brought within 1 year from the unlawful deprivation.
 Questions to be resolved in an action for forcible entry:
  1. Who has Actual possession over the real property;
 2. Was the possessor Ousted therefrom within 1 year from the filing of the complaint by force,
intimidation, strategy, threat or stealth; and
 3. Does the plaintiff ask for the Restoration of his possession?
 Unlawful Detainer - one illegally withholds possession after the expiration or termination of his right to
hold possession under any contract, express or implied.
 It is commenced by a verified complaint
 NOTE: In a summary action of unlawful detainer, the question to be resolved is which party has the
better or superior right to the physical/material possession (or de facto possession) of the disputed
premises. Whereas in the action for recovery of ownership, the question to be resolved is which party
has the lawful title or dominical right (i.e., owner's right) to the disputed premises
 Requisites –
 1. Possession of any land or building is unlawfully withheld, after the expiration or termination of
the right to hold possession by virtue of any contract express or implied;
 prior physical possession by the plaintiff is not an indispensable requirement
 2. Action is brought within 1 year after such unlawful deprivation or withholding of possession;
and
 3. Demand to pay or comply with the conditions of the lease and to vacate is made upon the
lessee
 In an unlawful detainer case, the key jurisdictional fact that should be proved is that the acts of
tolerance should have been present right from the very start of possession, and We may hasten to add,
that such nature of possession by tolerance shall continue up to the filing of the ejectment complaint
 In the absence of proof of tolerated possession up to the filing of the complaint for unlawful detainer,
the jurisdictional element of an illegal detainer case is not satisfied.
 Formal Contract not a prerequisite in Unlawful Detainer – there can still be an unlawful detainer
because implied contracts are covered by ejectment proceedings. Possession by tolerance creates an
implied promise to vacate the premises upon the demand of the owner.
 Tolerance must be present right from the start of possession sought to be recovered to categorize a
cause of action as one for unlawful detainer. Otherwise, the proper remedy would be forcible entry.
 Mandatory Allegations - rule is that the allegations in the complaint determine both the nature of the
action and the jurisdiction of the court.
 cause of action in a complaint is what the allegations in the body of the complaint define and describe
 complaint must specifically allege the facts constituting unlawful detainer or forcible entry if the
complaint filed was for unlawful detainer, or forcible entry, respectively.
 cannot be made to depend on the exclusive characterization of the case by one of the parties,
jurisdiction cannot be made to depend upon the defenses set up in the answer, in a motion to dismiss
or in a motion for reconsideration
 Lessor to proceed against lessee only after demand - action by the lessor shall be commenced only
after demand to payor to comply with the conditions of the lease and to vacate is made upon the
lessee, or by serving written notice of such demand upon the person found on the premises, or by
posting such notice on the premises if no person be found thereon, and the lessee fails to comply
therewith after fifteen (15) days in the case of land or five (5) days in the case of buildings.
 Summary procedure - all actions for forcible entry and unlawful detainer, irrespective of the amount of
damages or unpaid rentals sought to be recovered, shall be governed by the summary procedure
hereunder provided
 Except in cases covered by the agricultural tenancy laws or when the law otherwise expressly provides
 Pleadings allowed - complaint, compulsory counterclaim and cross-claim pleaded in the answer, and
the answers thereto.
 All pleadings shall be verified.
 Action on complaint - from an examination of the allegations in the complaint and such evidence as
may be attached thereto, dismiss the case outright on any of the grounds for the dismissal of a civil
action which are apparent therein. If no ground for dismissal is found, it shall forthwith issue summons
 Answer - Within ten (10) days, file his answer to the complaint and serve a copy thereof on the plaintiff,
 Affirmative and negative defenses not pleaded therein shall be deemed waived, except lack of
jurisdiction over the subject matter
 Cross-claims and compulsory counterclaims not asserted in the answer shall be considered barred
 answer to counterclaims or cross-claims shall be served and filed within ten (10) days from service of
the answer in which they are pleaded
 Effect of failure to answer. - Should the defendant fail to answer the complaint within the period above
provided, the court, motu proprio or on motion of the plaintiff, shall render judgment as may be
warranted by the facts alleged in the complaint and limited to what is prayed for therein
 court may in its discretion reduce the amount of damages and attorney’s fees claimed for being
excessive or otherwise unconscionable, without prejudice if there are two or more defendants
 Preliminary conference; appearance of parties - Not later than thirty (30) days after the last answer is
filed,
 failure of the plaintiff to appear in the preliminary conference shall be cause for the dismissal of his
complaint
 defendant who appears in the absence of the plaintiff shall be entitled to judgment on his counterclaim
 All cross-claims shall be dismissed.
 sole defendant shall fail to appear, the plaintiff shall likewise be entitled to judgment
 procedure shall not apply where one of two or more defendants sued under a common cause of action
who had pleaded a common defense shall appear at the preliminary conference.
 No postponement of the preliminary conference except for highly meritorious grounds and without
prejudice to such sanctions at the court’s discretion may impose on the movant
 Record of preliminary conference - Within five (5) days after the termination of the preliminary
conference
 1. Whether the parties have arrived at an amicable settlement, and if so, the terms thereof;
 2. stipulations or admissions entered into by the parties;
 3. Whether, on the basis of the pleadings and the stipulations and admissions made by the parties,
judgment may be rendered without the need of further proceedings, in which event the judgment
shall be rendered within thirty (30) days from issuance of the order;
 4. clear specification of material facts which remain controverted; and
 5. other matters intended to expedite the disposition of the case
 Submission of affidavits and position papers - Within ten (10) days, submit the affidavits of their
witnesses and other evidence on the factual issues defined in the order, together with their position
papers setting forth the law and the facts relied upon by them
 Period for rendition of judgment. - Within thirty (30) days after receipt of the affidavits and position
papers, or the expiration of the period for filing the same, the court shall render judgment.
 should the court find it necessary to clarify certain material facts, it may, during the said period, issue
an order specifying the matters to be clarified, and require the parties to submit affidavits or other
evidence on the said matters within ten (10) days from receipt of said order. Judgment shall be
rendered within fifteen (15) days after the receipt of the last affidavit or the expiration of the period for
filing the same - court shall not resort to the foregoing procedure just to gain time for the rendition of
the judgment
 Referral for conciliation - no showing of compliance with such requirement, shall be dismissed without
prejudice, and may be re-filed only after that requirement shall have been complied with.
 Prohibited pleadings and motions –
  1. Motion to dismiss the complaint except on the ground of lack of jurisdiction over the subject
matter, or failure to comply with section 12 (conciliation);
 2. Motion for a bill of particulars;
 3. Motion for new trial, or for reconsideration of a judgment, or for reopening of trial;
 4. Petition for relief from judgment;
 5. Motion for extension of time to file pleadings, affidavits or any other paper;
 6. Memoranda;
 7. Petition for certiorari, mandamus, or prohibition against any interlocutory order issued by the
court; 8. Motion to declare the defendant in default;
 9. Dilatory motions for postponement;
 10. Reply;
 11. Third-party complaints;
 12. Interventions.
 Affidavits - state only facts of direct personal knowledge of the affiants which are admissible in
evidence, and shall show their competence to testify to the matters stated therein.
 violation of this requirement may subject the party or the counsel who submits the same to disciplinary
action, and shall be cause to expunge the inadmissible affidavit or portion thereof from the record
 Preliminary injunction - to prevent the defendant from committing further acts of dispossession
against the plaintiff.
 possessor deprived of his possession through forcible entry or unlawful detainer may, within five (5)
days from the filing of the complaint, present a motion in the action for forcible entry or unlawful
detainer for the issuance of a writ of preliminary mandatory injunction to restore him in his possession
– decided within 30 days from filing
 Resolving defense of ownership - issue of ownership shall be resolved only to determine the issue of
possession
 Judgment - allegations of the complaint are true, it shall render judgment in favor of the plaintiff for
the restitution of the premises, the sum justly due as arrears of rent or as reasonable compensation for
the use and occupation of the premises, attorneys fees and costs
 allegations are not true, it shall render judgment for the defendant to recover his costs.
 If a counterclaim is established, the court shall render judgment for the sum found in arrears from
either party and award costs as justice requires
 Judgment conclusive only on possession; not conclusive in actions involving title or ownership - and
shall in no wise bind the title or affect the ownership of the land or building. Such judgment shall not
bar an action between the same parties respecting title to the land or building.
 appealable to the appropriate Regional Trial Court which shall decide the same on the basis of the
entire record of the proceedings had in the court of origin and such memoranda and/or briefs as may
be submitted by the parties or required by the Regional Trial Court.
 Immediate execution of judgment; how to stay same - execution shall issue immediately upon motion,
 unless an appeal has been perfected and the defendant to stay execution files a sufficient supersedeas
bond, approved by the MTC and executed in favor of the plaintiff to pay the rents, damages, and costs
accruing down to the time of the judgment appealed from
 and unless, during the pendency of the appeal, he deposits with the appellate court the amount of rent
due from time to time under the contract
 In the absence of a contract, he shall deposit with the Regional Trial Court the reasonable value of the
use and occupation of the premises for the preceding month or period at the rate determined by the
judgment of the lower court on or before the tenth day of each succeeding month or period. The
supersedeas bond shall be transmitted by the Municipal Trial Court, with the other papers, to the clerk
of the Regional Trial Court to which the action is appealed.
 appellate court, upon motion of the plaintiff, and upon proof of such failure, shall order the execution
of the judgment appealed from with respect to the restoration of possession, but such execution shall
not be a bar to the appeal taking its course until the final disposition thereof on the merits.
 After the case is decided by the Regional Trial Court, any money paid to the court by the defendant for
purposes of the stay of execution shall be disposed of in accordance with the provisions of the
judgment of the Regional Trial Court. In any case wherein it appears that the defendant has been
deprived of the lawful possession of land or building pending the appeal by virtue of the execution of
the judgment of the Municipal Trial Court, damages for such deprivation of possession and restoration
of possession may be allowed the defendant in the judgment of the Regional Trial Court disposing of
the appeal.
 Preliminary mandatory injunction in case of appeal - within ten (10) days from the perfection of the
appeal to the Regional Trial Court, the latter may issue a writ of preliminary mandatory injunction to
restore the plaintiff in possession if the court is satisfied that the defendants appeal is frivolous or
dilatory, or that the appeal of the plaintiff is prima facie meritorious
 Immediate execution on appeal to Court of Appeals or Supreme Court - judgment of the Regional Trial
Court against the defendant shall be immediately executory, without prejudice to a further appeal that
may be taken therefrom.

1. Differentiate from Accion Publiciana and Accion Reivindicatoria Actions available to recover
Possession of Real Property
 Accion Publiciana (Recovery of right of poesssion) - plenary action for the recovery of the real
right of possession when the dispossession has lasted for more than 1 year.
 filed more than 1 year after but within 10 years from dispossession
 right of possession lost after 10 years)
 RTC – excess 400K; MTC – below 400K
 Accion Reinvindicatoria (Recovery of ownership includes possession) - action for the recovery of
ownership, which necessarily includes the recovery of possession.
 action is imprescriptible
 RTC – excess 400K; MTC – below 400K
 Accion Interdictal (Ejectment cases) - Summary action for the recovery of physical possession
where the dispossession has not lasted for more than 1 year.
 action must be filed within 1 year from dispossession
 MTC
 material element that determines the proper action to be filed for the recovery of the possession
of the property in this case is the length of time of dispossession.
 Rule that should govern the Proceedings of Accion Interdictal
 GR: Ejectment cases are summary proceedings intended to provide an expeditious means of
protecting actual possession or right to possession of property.
 XPN: When the decision of the MTC is appealed to the RTC, the applicable rules are those of the
latter court
 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 Cour
 The amount of rents and damages claimed does not affect jurisdiction of the MTCs because the
same are only incidental or accessory to the main action.
 If only rents or damages are claimed in an ordinary action, the action is personal and the amount
claimed determines whether it falls within the jurisdiction of the RTC or the MTC
 Effect of the pendency of an Action involving Ownership on an Action for Forcible Entry and
Unlawful Detainer - does not bar the filing of an ejectment suit, nor suspend the proceedings of
one already instituted.
 to prevent the defendant from trifling with the summary nature of an ejectment suit by the simple
expedient of asserting ownership over the disputed property
 What constitutes a Demand in Unlawful Detainer
 1. To pay and to vacate – If the suit is based on defendant’s failure to pay the rentals agreed
upon; or
 2. To comply and to vacate – If suit is predicated upon the defendant’s non-compliance with
the conditions of the lease contract
 Reckoning point for determining the one-year period within which to file the action is the receipt
of the last demand to vacate and pay
 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
 Form of Demand - written notice served upon the person found in the premises; or written notice
on the premises if no person can be found thereon
 It has been ruled, however, that the demand upon a tenant may be oral - sufficient evidence must
be adduced to show that there was indeed a demand like testimonies from disinterested and
unbiased witnesses.
 Prior Demand in Unlawful Detainer not required (T-R-I-D)
 purpose of the action is to Terminate the lease by reason of expiry of its term;
 purpose of the suit is not for ejectment but for the Reinforcement of the terms of the
contract;
 defendant is not a tenant but a mere Intruder;
 stipulation Dispensing with a demand.
 Rule in case of Tacita Reconduccion in relation to Unlawful Detainer - 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.
 When there is tacita reconduccion, the lessee cannot be deemed as unlawfully withholding the
property. There is no unlawful detainer
 term of the original contract of lease has expired;
 lessor has not given the lessee a notice to vacate; and
 lessee continued enjoying the thing leased for fifteen days with the acquiescence of the
lessor.
 Remedy of the Plaintiff in order to obtain Possession of the Premises during the Pendency of an
Action - within 5 days from filing of the complaint file a motion in the same action for the issuance
of a writ of preliminary mandatory injunction to restore him his possession. This motion shall be
resolved within 30 days from its filing.
 Grant of Injunction while the case is pending - to prevent the defendant from committing further
acts of dispossession against the plaintiff
 judgment is appealed to the Regional Trial Court, said court may issue a writ of preliminary
mandatory injunction to restore the plaintiff in possession if the court is satisfied that the
defendant's appeal is frivolous or dilatory or that the appeal of the plaintiff is prima facie
meritorious.
 Binding Judgment
 GR: Judgment in an ejectment case is binding only upon the parties properly impleaded and given
an opportunity to be heard.
 XPNs: It becomes binding on anyone who has not been impleaded in certain instances as in the
following:
 sublessee because his right to the premises is merely subsidiary to that of the lessee;
 guest or a successor in interest, the members of the family of the lessee or his servants and
employees
 Trespassers, squatters or agents of the defendant fraudulently occupying the property to
frustrate the judgment; and
 Transferees pendente lite and other privies of the defendant.
 plaintiff, in ejectment cases, is entitled to damages caused by his loss of the use and possession of
the premises, but not for damages caused on the land or building, which latter items of damages
should be recovered by plaintiff, if he is the owner, in an ordinary action
 plaintiff can recover from defendant liquidated damages stipulated in the lease contract
 How to Stay the Immediate Execution of Judgment
 1. Perfect an appeal
 2. supersedeas bond to pay for the rents, damages and costs accruing down to the time of the
judgment appealed from
 3. Deposit periodically with the RTC, during the pendency of the appeal, the adjudged amount
of rent due under the contract or if there be no contract, the reasonable value of the use and
occupation of the premises
 order for the issuance of a writ of execution to immediately enforce the judgment of the inferior
court is interlocutory and not appealable. Immediate execution is proper if the judgment is in favor
of the plaintiff.
 If the judgment is in favor of the defendant with an award for damages under his counterclaims,
such judgment is not immediately executory and can be executed only after the lapse of the 15-
day period to appeal without the plaintiff having perfected his.
 Execution Pending Appeal Rule 70 Section 19
 Applies in actions for unlawful detainer and forcible entry.
 Ministerial on the part of the trial court
 Upon the non-compliance of the defendant on the three requisites of perfection of appeal,
bond and deposit, the judgement automatically executed pending appeal.
 Proof of good cause or reason is not required.
 Supersedeas Bond - shall answer for the rents, damages and costs accruing down to the time of
judgement of the inferior court appealed from. The filing of such bond is mandatory to stay the
judgement of the MTC.
 Attorney’s fees shall not be covered by the supersedeas bond.
 Supersedeas Bond NOT required
 1. Monetary award in the judgment of the inferior court has been deposited with the court;
or
 2. Judgment of the lower court did not make findings with respect to any amount in arrears,
damages, or costs against the defendant.
 A supersedeas bond is necessary to prevent immediate execution only if the judgment awarded
rents, damages, and costs. Where the judgment only ordered the defendant to vacate and to pay
attorney’s fees, a supersedeas bond is not required to cover attorney’s fees.
 Rules of Res Judicata and Conclusiveness of Judgment apply in Ejectment Case - subject to the
qualification that judgment is conclusive with respect to the right of possession under and by
virtue of a contract the existence of which has been proved in said ejectment suit
 If the unlawful detainer case is anchored on the non-compliance of the terms of the lease, the
demand to vacate is jurisdictional such that there should first be a demand to pay or to comply
with the terms of the lease and a demand to vacate before unlawful detainer arises. It is the
 owner’s demand for the tenant to vacate the premises and the tenant’s refusal to do so which
makes unlawful the withholding of possession. Such refusal violates the owner’s right of
possession giving rise to an action for unlawful detainer.

 J. Contempt (Rule 71)

 Jurisdiction - MTC, RTC, CA, Supreme Court
 Venue
 charge for indirect contempt has been committed against RTC or a court of equivalent or higher
rank, or against an officer appointed by it, the charge may be filed with such court
 contempt has been committed against a lower court, the charge may be filed with the RTC of the
place in which the lower court is sitting; but the proceedings may also be instituted in such lower
court subject to appeal to the RTC of such place
 Disobedience to the court by acting in opposition to its authority, justice and dignity
 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
 Kinds of Contempt
 1. As to nature (depending on the nature and effect of the contemptuous act):
 a. Civil; and
 b. Criminal.
 2. As to the manner of commission:
 a. Direct; and
 b. Indirect.
 Purpose
 1. Vindication of public interest by punishment of contemptuous conduct; and
 2. Coercion to compel the contemnor to do what the law requires him to uphold the power of the
court, and also to secure the rights of the parties to a suit awarded by the court
 Nature - power to punish for contempt is inherent in all courts; its existence is essential to the
preservation of order in judicial proceedings and to the enforcement of judgments, orders and
mandates of the courts, and, consequently, to the due administration of justice.
 settled that the power is to be exercised with the end in view of utilizing the same for correction and
preservation of the dignity of the court, and not for retaliation or vindictiveness
 The purpose of the filing and the nature of the contempt proceeding show that the original
complainant was seeking enforcement of the trial court orders in the intra-corporate controversy
because the adverse parties refused to comply. Hence, this is a civil contempt case, which does not
need proof beyond reasonable doubt. This Court has ruled that while the power to cite parties in
contempt should be used sparingly, it should be allowed to exercise its power of contempt to maintain
the respect due to it and to ensure the infallibility of justice where the defiance is so clear and
contumacious and there is an evident refusal to obey
 Direct contempt punished summarily - guilty of misbehavior in the presence of or so near a court as to
obstruct or interrupt the proceedings before the same, including disrespect toward the court, offensive
personalities toward others, or refusal to be sworn or to answer as a witness, or to subscribe an
affidavit or deposition when lawfully required to do so
 summarily adjudged in contempt by such court and punished by a fine not exceeding two thousand
pesos or imprisonment not exceeding ten (10) days, or both, if it be a Regional Trial Court or a court of
equivalent or higher rank
 or by a fine not exceeding two hundred pesos or imprisonment not exceeding one (1) day, or both, if it
be a lower court.
 Criminal Contempt vs. Civil Contempt
 Definition
 Criminal - conduct directed against the authority and dignity of the court or a judge acting
judicially; conduct obstructing the administration of justice which tends to bring the court into
disrepute or disrespect
 Civil - Committed by a person who does the following acts:
 Disobedience or resistance to a lawful writ, process, order or judgment of a court;
 Abuse of or any unlawful interference with the processes or proceedings of a court not
constituting direct contempt
 Improper conduct tending, directly or indirectly, to impede, obstruct or degrade the
administration of justice
 Location
 Criminal - in the presence of or so near a court
 Civil – not in the presence of the court.
 Nature
 Criminal - Summary in nature
 Civil - Punished after being charged and heard.
 How done
 Criminal - Contempt in facie curiae (in the face of the court)
 Civil - Constructive contempt
 Grounds
 Criminal - Misbehavior in the presence of or so near a court as to obstruct or interrupt the
proceedings;
 Disrespect towards the court;
 Offensive personalities toward others;
 Refusal to be sworn or to answer as a witness, or to subscribe an affidavit or deposition when
lawfully required to do so
 Civil - Misbehavior of an officer of a court in the performance of his official duties or in his official
transactions;
 Abuse or any unlawful interference with the proceedings not constituting direct contempt;
 Disobedience of or resistance to a lawful writ, process, order, or judgment of a court or
unauthorized intrusion to any real property after being ejected;
 Failure to obey a subpoena duly served;
 Assuming to be an attorney or an officer of the court without authority;
 Rescue or attempted rescue, of a person or property in the custody of an officer;
 Any improper conduct tending to degrade the administration of justice.
 Penalty - depends upon the court to which the act was committed:
 Criminal - RTC or a court of equivalent or higher rank (Not exceeding 2K fine; 10 days
imprisonment or both)
 Lower Court – fine not exceeding 200 or imprisonment 1 day or both
 consists in the refusal or omission to do an act which is yet within the power of the
respondent to perform, he may be imprisoned by order of the court concerned until he
performs it
 Civil - depends upon the level of the court against which the act was committed:
 RTC or a court of equivalent or higher rank, fine not exceeding P30,000 or imprisonment not
exceeding 6 months, or both;
 lower court, fine not exceeding 5,000 pesos or imprisonment not exceeding one month, or
both.
  if the contempt consists in the violation of a writ of injunction, TRO or status quo order, he
may also be ordered to make complete restitution to the party injured
 person or entity exercising quasi-judicial functions, penalty imposed shall depend upon the
provisions of the law which authorizes a penalty for contempt against such persons or
entities.
 Remedy
 Criminal - avail himself of the remedies of special civil action of certiorari or prohibition
 Pending the resolution of the petition, execution of the judgment shall be suspended,
provided such person files a bond, conditioned that he will abide by and perform the
judgment should the petition be decided against him.
 Civil - Appeal (by notice of appeal)
 appeal will not however have the effect of suspending the judgment if the person adjudged in
contempt does not file a bond
 bond is conditioned upon his performance of the judgment or final order if the appeal is
decided against him.
 Commencement of Contempt Proceeding
 Criminal - No formal proceeding; court against which the contempt is directed may summarily
adjudge a person
 Civil –
 1. initiated motu proprio by the court against which the contempt was committed by order or
other formal charge by the court requiring the respondent to show cause why he should not
be punished for contempt;
 applies only when the indirect contempt is committed against a court of judge possessed
and clothed with contempt powers
 2. verified petition with supporting particulars and certified true copies of the necessary
documents and papers (independent action; must comply with requirements of an initiatory
pleadings)
 contempt charges arose out of or are related to a principal action pending in the court,
the petition for contempt shall allege that fact but said petition shall be docketed, heard
and decided separately, unless the court in its discretion orders the consolidation of the
contempt charge and the principal action for joint hearing and decision
 Contempt against quasi-judicial entities - RTC of the place wherein the contempt has been
committed shall have jurisdiction
 act was committed against a RTC or a court of equivalent or higher rank, or against an officer
appointed by it
 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;
 act was committed against persons or entities exercising quasi-judicial functions, the charge
shall be filed in RTC of the place wherein the contempt was committed.
 Non-party cannot be held for contempt, unless guilty of conspiracy with any one of the parties
violating the court’s order.
 Direct contempt is a contumacious act done facie curiae and may be punished summarily without
hearing. Indirect or constructive contempt, in turn, is one perpetrated outside of the sitting of the
court
 Use of falsified and forged documents is a contumacious act. However, it constitutes indirect
contempt not direct contempt. The imputed use of a falsified document, more so where the falsity of
the document is not apparent on its face, merely constitutes indirect contempt, and as such is subject
to such defenses as the accused may raise in the proper proceedings.
  A contemnor may be punished only after a charge in writing has been filed, and an opportunity has
been given to the accused to be heard by himself and counsel.
 Extension of the TRO by the RTC was invalid since it was for the same ground for which the TRO was
issued. Hence the TRO was deemed automatically vacated and thus Jeff may not be liable for
contempt for ignoring it.
 A pleading containing derogatory, offensive or malicious statements submitted before the court or
judge where the proceedings are pending constitutes direct contempt - equivalent to misbehavior
committed in the presence of or so near a court or judge as to interrupt the administration of justice
 An order of direct contempt is not immediately executory or enforceable - The contemner must be
afforded a reasonable remedy to extricate or purge himself of the contempt
 person adjudged in direct contempt by any court may not appeal therefrom but may avail himself of
the remedies of certiorari or prohibition. The execution of the judgment shall be suspended pending
resolution of such petition, provided such person files a bond fixed by the court which rendered the
judgment and conditioned that he will abide by and perform the judgment should the petition be
decided against him.
 How Contempt Proceedings are Commenced - Due to its primitive aspect, contempt proceeding is in
the nature of a criminal action, hence procedural and evidentiary rules of criminal action are applied
as far as practicable. Doubts shall always be resolved in favor of the person charged with contempt.
 Indirect Contempt - procedural requisites before the accused be punished for indirect contempt are:
 a. Charge in writing;
 b. Opportunity for the person charged to appear and explain his conduct; and
 c. Opportunity to be heard by himself or counsel.
 indirect contempt charge partakes the nature of a criminal charge, conviction cannot be had merely
on the basis of written pleadings. A respondent in a contempt charge must be served with a copy of
the motion/petition
 Unlike in civil actions, the Court does not issue summons on the respondent. While the respondent is
not required to file a formal
 answer similar to that in ordinary civil actions, the court must set the contempt charge for hearing on
a fixed date and time on which the respondent must make his appearance to answer the charge
 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.
 a person charged with indirect contempt fails to appear on that date after due notice without
justifiable reason, the court may order his arrest, just like the accused in a criminal case. The court
does not declare the respondent in default.
 Sub Judice Rule (Indirect Contempt)- restricts comments and disclosures pertaining to the judicial
proceedings in order to avoid prejudging the issue, influencing the court, or obstructing the
administration of justice.

VI. Special Proceedings and Special Writs

 A remedy by which a party seeks to establish a status, a right, or a particular fact.
 Special proceeding is initiated by petition.
 Rules of ordinary civil action. – Shall be applicable to special proceedings insofar as they are convenient and
practicable
A. Settlement of Estate of Deceased Persons
 Applicant seeks to establish the fact of death of the decedent and to be duly recognized as among the
heirs to be able to participate in the settlement and liquidation of the estate.
 Settlement of estate proceeding is subject to mediation
1. Venue and Process (Rule 73)
 Venue: (Citizenship is immaterial) (Jurisdiction – Exceeding 2M RTC, 2M or below MTC)
 a. Inhabitant of the Philippines - Court in which he resides at the time of his death.
 resident being contemplated is the actual residence of the decedent, and not the legal
residence or domicile
 b. not an inhabitant of the Philippines - Court which he had estate.
 Principle of Preferential Jurisdiction/Exclusionary Rule
 c. first court taking cognizance of the settlement of the estate of a decedent, shall exercise
jurisdiction to the exclusion of all other courts;
 rule on venue does not state that the court with whom the estate or intestate petition is
first filed acquires jurisdiction. In order for the court to acquire, said court must also first
take COGNIZANCE of the same, to the exclusion of all other courts
 d. Jurisdiction based on the decedent, or of the location of his estate, shall not be contested
in a suit or proceeding;
 e. Once the court assumes jurisdiction, it shall not be contested so far as it depends on the
decedent’s place of residence or the location of the estate;
 f. Motion to dismiss on the ground of improper venue is inappropriate since Rule 73 refers
exclusively to the special proceeding of estates and not to ordinary actions
 XPNs: In an appeal from that court, in the original case, or when the want of jurisdiction
appears on the record.
 The prohibition of filing an action relating to the estate other than in the probate court where the
petition for the settlement of estate was filed refers only to courts in the Philippines and does not
include foreign courts; and
 The rule applies both to intestate and testate proceedings.
 Testate proceedings take precedence over intestate proceedings.
 Limited Authority of Court in Settlement of Estate:
 GR:
 a. Jurisdiction only to settle estate and appointment or removal of an administrator or
executor;
 b. Generally, does not have the power to determine issue of ownership and adjudication of
title;
 c. A separate action must be filed for the purpose above (issue if ownership);
 d. Jurisdiction only to ascertain whether the testator being of sound mind, freely executed the
will in accordance with formalities prescribed by law.
 XPNS:
 a. If parties are all heirs;
 b. The question is one of collation or advancement of share;
 c. Parties consent to assumption of jurisdiction and rights are not impaired;
 d. Probate court is competent to decide the question of ownership;
 Can the probate court rule on ownership of property - Yes. During inventory without prejudice to
the final determination of ownership. (Provisional determination of ownership)
 Probate court cannot act on the rights of parties arising from contract.
 Probate court shall not probate a will that preterited a compulsory heir.
 Probate court cannot act on the side agreement of parties on right of way.
 Only those judicially approved compromise agreement between the parties shall be binding upon
the latter.
 Determination of Heirship - The compulsory or intestate heirs may commence an ordinary civil
action to declare the nullity of a deed or instrument, and for recovery of property, or any other
 action in the enforcement of their ownership rights acquired by virtue of succession, “without the
necessity of a prior and separate judicial declaration of their statutes as such.”
 Unless there is a pending special proceeding for the settlement of the decedent’s estate or for the
determination of heirship.
 Reason for the ruling: The rights to the succession are transmitted from the moment of the death of
the decedent.
 Nature – Proceeding in Rem
 Publication vests upon the court with jurisdiction over all persons and personal notice upon heirs is
a matter of procedural convenience and not a jurisdictional requirement
 Kinds of Settlement
 a. Extrajudicial Settlement – If decedent left no will and no debts, which is presumed if no
creditor files a petition for letters of administration within 2 years after the death of the
decedent.
 It may be in the following forms:
 i. Public instrument executed by all the heirs and filed with the ROD; or
 ii. An affidavit of self-adjudication if there is only one heir executing an affidavit
adjudicating to himself the entire estate, which affidavit is filed with the ROD.
 b. Summary Settlement of Estate of Small Value - gross value of the estate of a deceased person
does not exceed P10,000.00, court having jurisdiction may proceed summarily to settle the
estate, without the appointment of an executor or administrator, and without delay,
 Bond is required if property other than real, is to be distributed, in an amount fixed by the
court, conditioned for the payment of any just claim.
 c. Judicial Partition - heirs cannot agree on the division of the estate, and the conditions for
extrajudicial settlement are present.
 Rules of Court on partition shall apply to partitions of estates composed of personal
property, or both real and personal property, insofar as they may be applicable
 If the applicable provision is an action for partition, there is no requirement for
publication.
 d. Judicial Settlement Through Letters Testamentary or Letters of Administration With or
Without the Will Annexed - other forms of settlement of estate shall be by court proceedings
with either and administrator or executor managing the estate of the deceased until there is
partition and distribution after the payment of debts, legacies, and devisees.
 Remedies if Deprived of Participation:
 a. Within 2 years:
 i. Claim is payable in money – court order against the distributees or execution against
the bond;
 ii. Non-money claims – compel settlement of estate. (Sec. 4, Rule 74)
 b. After 2 years – Ordinary action against the distributees.
 Where estate settled upon dissolution of the marriage – Death of husband or wife, community
property shall be inventoried, administered, and liquidated, and the debts thereof paid, in the
testate or intestate proceedings of the deceased spouse.
 If both spouses have died, the conjugal partnership shall be liquidated in the testate or intestate
proceedings of either.
 Process - RTC or MTC may issue warrants and process necessary to compel the attendance of
witnesses or to carry into effect their orders and judgements, and all other powers granted to them
by law
 If a person, does not perform an order or judgement rendered by a court in the exercise of its
probate jurisdiction, it may issue a warrant for the apprehension and imprisonment of such person
until he performs such order or judgement, or is released.
  Presumption of death - absent and unheard from for the periods fixed in the Civil Code.
 But if such person proves to be alive, he shall be entitled to the balance of his estate after payment
of all its debts. The balance may be recovered by motion in the same proceeding
 When two proceedings were filed - intestate case should be consolidated with testate proceedings
and the judge assigned to the testate proceedings should continue hearing the two cases;
 Testate proceeding takes precedence over intestate proceeding - If in the course of intestate
proceeding, it is found that decedent left a will, proceeding for probate of will should replace the
intestate proceeding even if at that stage an administrator has already been appointed; (Uriarte
Case)
 The petitioner in the probate proceeding had knowledge prior to the filing the testate
proceeding that an intestate proceeding was already pending.
 The first court, upon learning that petition for probate has been presented in another court, may
decline to take cognizance of and hold in abeyance the petition before it, and instead defer to the
second court which has before it the petition for probate of the defendant’s alleged last will. If the
will is admitted to probate, it will definitely decline to take cognizance. (Cuenco Case)
 The petition for probate was filed without knowledge of an existing intestate proceeding, which
was filed just a week earlier.

2. Summary Settlement of Estates (Rule 74)

 Extrajudicial settlement by agreement between heirs - decedent left no will and no debts, and the
heirs are all of age, or the minors are represented by their judicial or legal representatives duly
authorized for the purpose, parties may without securing letters of administration,
 divide the estate among themselves, as they see fit by means of a public instrument filed in the
office of the ROD and should they disagree, they may do so in an ordinary action of partition.
 If there is only one heir, he may adjudicate to himself the entire estate by means of an affidavit filed in
the office of the register of deeds. The parties to an extrajudicial settlement, whether by public
instrument or by stipulation in a pending action for partition, or the sole heir who adjudicates the
entire estate to himself
 shall file, simultaneously with and as a condition precedent to the filing of the public instrument,
or of the affidavit in the office of the ROD, a bond with the said ROD, in an amount equivalent to
the value of the personal property involved as certified under oath by the parties concerned and
conditioned upon the payment of any just claim.
 It shall be presumed that the decedent left no debts if no creditor files a petition for letters of
administration within 2 years after the death of the decedent.
 The fact of the extrajudicial settlement or administration shall be published in a newspaper of general
circulation in the manner provided in the next succeeding section; but no extrajudicial settlement shall
be binding upon any person who has not participated therein or had no notice thereof.
 Requirements for Extrajudicial Settlement of Estate:
 a. No will;
 b. No debts;
 c. Heirs of age, minors are represented;
 d. Public instrument;
 e. Registered with the ROD;
 f. Bond in the amount equivalent to the value of the personal properties involved conditioned
upon the payment of any just claim that may crop up within 2 years;
 g. Publication for 3 consecutive weeks.
 Publication is required for the protection of creditors and was never intended to deprive heirs of their
lawful participation in the decedent’s estate.
 The publication does not constitute as constructive notice to the heirs who had no knowledge or did
not take part in it because the same was notice after the fact of execution.
 Jurisprudence - E can still file a complaint to ANNUL the extrajudicial settlement and she can recover
what is due her as such heir, if her status as an illegitimate child of the deceased has been established.
The publication of the settlement does not constitute constructive notice to the heirs who had NO
KNOWLEDGE or DID NOT TAKE PART IN IT because the same was NOTICE AFTER THE FACT OF
EXECTUION.
 TWO-YEAR PRESCRIPTIVE PERIOD
 GR: After the expiration of two (2) years from the extrajudicial partition, distributives or heirs are
barred from objecting to an extrajudicial partition.
 To persons who have PARTICIPATED OR TAKE PART or HAD NOTICE of the extrajudicial partition;
and
 When all the persons or heirs of the decedent have taken part in the extrajudicial settlement or
are represented by themselves or through their guardians.
 XPN: The person authorized to file a claim is a minor or mentally incapacitated, or is in prison or
outside the Philippines, he may represent his claim within one (1) year after such disability is removed.
 Nature of Extrajudicial Settlement of Estate:
 a. Partakes the nature of a contract – comply: consent, object, and cause of obligation;
 b. An unnotarized extrajudicial settlement is considered as a private document and can only bind
the parties thereto;
 c. Time bar for parties to object the EJS;
 d. Time bar for reconveyance;
 e. Time bar for excluded heirs;
 f. Time bar to annul fictitious EJS (e.g. signatures are forged)
 g. Foreigners.
 Remedies of Aggrieved Parties after Extrajudicial Settlement of Estate:
 Claim against the bond or real estate
 Grounds: Within 2 years after the settlement and distribution of estate.
 a. If there is undue deprivation of lawful participation in the estate;
 b. Existence of outstanding debts against the estate.
 Note: Such bond and real estate shall remain charged with a liability to creditors, heirs, or
other person for the full period of 2 years after distribution, notwithstanding any transfer of
real estate that may have been made.
 Compel the settlement of estate in courts - brought within 2 years after settlement and distribution of
the estate
 Ordinary action but not against the bond - order of closure has already became final and executory,
the heir must file an independent civil action of “accion reivindicatoria to recover his deprived share.”
 Brought within 10 years form the time the right of action accrues
 After the lapse of 2 years, an ordinary action may be instituted against the distributes within
the statute of limitations but not against the bond.
 Also applicable in judicial proceedings not covered by summary settlement of estate of small
value.
 Action for rescission (Applicable in both extrajudicial settlement or summary settlement) - preterition
of compulsory heir tainted with bad faith.
 Availed within 5 years from the time the cause of action accrues.
 applicable in judicial proceedings not covered by summary settlement of estate of small value
 Action for reconveyance of real property (Applicable in both extrajudicial settlement or summary
settlement)
  GR: prescriptive period for the reconveyance of fraudulently registered real property is 10
years from issuance of certificate of title.
 XPN: party seeking reconveyance based on implied or constructive trust is in actual,
continuous, and peaceful possession of the property involved.
 Prescription does not commence to run against him because the action would be in
the nature of a suit for quieting of title, an action that is imprescriptible.
 Reconveyance can no longer be availed of once the property has passed to an
innocent purchaser for value. The aggrieved parties may sue for damages against co-
heirs who have perpetrated the fraud.
 Action to annul a deed of extrajudicial settlement or judgement in summary settlement - ground of
fraud which should be filed w/in 4 years from the discovery of fraud.
 Reopening of the proceedings by motion in summary settlement - Upon motion of a person who
either:
 a. Has a legal interest in the matter in litigation;
 b. Has such legal interest in the success of either of the parties, or an interest against
both; or
 c. Is so situated as to be adversely affected by the distribution of property in the custody
of the court or of an officer.
 May be availed of after judgement but before the finality of the closure order.
 Note: Also applicable in judicial proceedings not covered by summary settlement of estate of
small value.
 Petition for reopening of proceedings (Summary Settlement) - proceedings are already
closed and the heir is excluded, within a prescriptive period of 10 years.
 applicable in judicial proceedings not covered by summary settlement of estate of small
value.
 Motion to deliver share (Extrajudicial settlement and summary settlement) - heir is not
excluded but failed to receive his share.
 applicable in judicial proceedings not covered by summary settlement of estate of small
value.
 Petition for Relief (Summary Settlement - grounds of FAME within 60 days after petitioner
learns of the judgement, final order, or other proceedings to be set aside, and not more than
6 months after such judgement or final order was entered.
 Applicable also in judicial proceedings.
 Three instances when an heir may be compelled to settle the decedent’s estate in court:
 undue deprivation of lawful participation in the estate on the part of an heir or other
interested person;
 exist debts against the estate; and
 undue deprivation of lawful participation payable in money on the part of an heir or
other interested person.
 Order denying probate of will be overturned after period to appeal has lapsed - order
denying probate of will be overturned after period to appeal has lapsed. action for annulment
may also be filed on the ground of extrinsic fraud w/in 4 years from its discovery, and if based
on lack of jurisdiction, before it is barred by laches or estoppe
 Production and Probate of Will
 Nature of probate proceedings:
 a. In rem – It is binding upon the whole world;
 b. Mandatory – No will shall pass either real or personal property unless it is proved and
allowed in the proper court;
  However, a will may be sustained “if the testator should make a partition by an act
inter vivos, or by will, such partition shall stand insofar as it does not prejudice the
legitime of the forced heirs.”
 c. Imprescriptible – Because of the public policy to obey the will of the testator
 d. Doctrine of estoppel does not apply - presentation and probate of a will are
requirements of public policy, being primarily designed to protect the testator’s
expressed wishes, which are entitled to respect as a consequence of the decedent’s
ownership and right of disposition within legal limits;
 e. Res judicata – Once allowed, by the court, it can no longer be questioned, irrespective
of an erroneous judgement because it serves as the law of the case.
 Summary Settlement of Estates of Small Value, When Allowed - chosen by the heirs
regardless of whether the decedent died intestate or testate.
 Requisites
 a. The complaint must allege that the gross value of the estate of the deceased does not
exceed P10,000.00;
 b. A bond has been duly field in an amount fixed by the court; and
 c. A proper hearing is held not less than 1 month nor more than 3 months from date of
last publication of the notice.
 It is not proper to delay the summary settlement of a deceased person just because an heir or
a third person claims that certain properties do not belong to the estate but to him.
 Such claim must be ventilated in an independent action, and the probate court should
proceed to the distribution of the estate, if there are no other legal obstacles to it, for after
all, such distribution must always be subject to the results of the suit.
 Extrajudicial Settlement – (1) No court intervention; (2) value of the estate is immaterial; (3)
only in intestate succession; (4) no outstanding debts of the estate at the time of the
settlement; (5) instance and by agreement of all heirs; (6) bond is equal to the value of person
property, real property period for 2 years; (7) Publication of notice of fact of extrajudicial
settlement once a week for three (3) consecutive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation.
 Summary Settlement – (1) Requires summary adjudication filed with the MTC; (2) value
exceed P10,000.00; (3) both testate and intestate succession; (4) even if there are debts. It is
the court which will make provision for its payment; (5) instituted by any interested party
even a creditor of the estate w/o the consent of all the heirs; (6) bond is to be determined by
the court irrespective of whether the estate consists of real or personal property; (7)
Publication of notice once a week for three (3) consecutive weeks; court may likewise order
that notice be given to persons - There is also hearing to be held not less than one (1) month
nor more than three (3) months from the date of last publication of notice.
 Liability of distributees and estate - within two (2) years after the settlement and distribution
of an estate, an heir or other person has been unduly deprived of his lawful participation in
the estate, heir or such other person may compel the settlement of the estate in the courts,
for the purpose of satisfying such lawful participation,
 And if within the same time of two (2) years, appear that there are debts outstanding against
the estate which have not been paid, that an heir or other person has been unduly deprived
of his lawful participation payable in money, court having jurisdiction of the estate may, settle
the amount of such debts or lawful participation and order how much and in what manner
each distributee shall contribute in the payment thereof, issue execution, if circumstances
require, against the bond.
 Such bond and such real estate shall remain charged with a liability to creditors, heirs, or
other persons for the full period of two (2) years after such distribution, notwithstanding any
transfers of real estate that may have been made.
 Period for claim of minor or incapacitated person - on the date of the expiration of the
period of two (2) years, person authorized to file a claim is a minor or mentally incapacitated,
or is in prison or outside the Philippines, he may present his claim within one (1) year after
such disability is removed.

3. Allowance or Disallowance of Wills (Rule 76)

 Scope
 GR: The probate (allowance or authentication) of a will refers to its DUE EXECUTION and
settles only the FORMAL or EXTRINSIC VALIDITY of the will.
 Limited to ascertaining whether the testator, being of sound mind, freely executed the
will in accordance with the formalities prescribed by law.
 Does not have jurisdiction with finality on the issue of ownership. A probate court may
provisionally pass upon questions of ownership, determination is without prejudice to
the filing of a separate reinvidicatory action by the aggrieved party. The liquidation of the
estate of a testator requires the final resolution of all issues pertaining to ownership of
property.
 XPNs: Principle of practical considerations – Wherein the court may pass upon the intrinsic
validity of the will:
 a. In the case of absolute preterition without any provision in favor of any devises or
legatee;
 b. defect is apparent on its face, the probate court may determine the intrinsic validity of
the will even before its formal validity is established, as the probate of a will may become
a useless ceremony if the will is intrinsically invalid.
 Who may petition for probate, persons entitled to notice:
 a. Executor;
 b. Devisee or legatee named in the will;
 c. Person interested in the estate (heir, or one who has a claim against the estate such as
a creditor)
 d. Testator himself during his lifetime; or
 e. Any creditor – as preparatory step for filing of his claim therein.
 Parties entitled to notice in a probate hearing:
 a. Designated or known as compulsory heirs, legatees and devisees of the testator
resident in the Philippines at their place of residence, at least 20 days before the hearing,
if such places of residence be known;
 b. Person named executor, if he be not the petitioner;
 c. Any person named as co-executor not petitioning, if their places of residence be
known; and
 d. If the testator asks for the allowance of his own will, notice shall be sent only to his
compulsory heirs.
 Note: Petitioners, as nephews and nieces of the decedent, are neither compulsory nor testate
heirs who are entitled to be notified of the probate proceedings under the Rules. Respondent
has no legal obligation to mention petitioners in the petition for probate, or to personally
notify them of the same. Besides, assuming arguendo that petitioners are entitled to be
notified, the purported infirmity is cured by the publication of the notice. After all, personal
notice upon the heirs is a matter of procedural convenience and not a jurisdictional requisite.
 How is jurisdiction acquired:
 a. Attachment of a copy of the will to the petition; or
 b. Delivery of the will to the court.
 The submission of the original will is not a jurisdictional requirement.
 Custodian - person who receives a will with knowledge, or under such circumstances that he
ought to have known that he was receiving custody of a will.
 Mere possession of a will does not make the holder thereof a custodian of the will. A
custodian is chosen by the testator in advance and entrusted with the custody of a will by
mutual agreement with the testator. This custodianship creates a bailor-bailee relationship.
 Obligations of a custodian:
 a. keep and preserve the will safely for the benefit of the testator until the latter’s death;
 b. keep the contents of the will inviolate and must not reveal its contents to anyone; and
 c. Deliver the will either to the clerk of court in the place where the decedent last resided
or to the executor named in the will within 20 days after he knows of the death of the
testator
 Note: The failure of a custodian to present the will to the court for probate within the period
given in the rule does not preclude its probate.
 When is probate instituted?
 GR: Probate proceedings are instituted only after the death of the testator. (Postmortem
probate) [Executor, Devisee, Legatee, or Any other person interested in the estate may file the
this]
 XPN: The testator himself may, during his lifetime, petition the court having jurisdiction for
the allowance of the will. (Ante-mortem probate) [Only the testator may file this]
 Contents of the petition for allowance of will:
 a. Jurisdictional facts;
 i. Death of the testator;
 ii. His residence at the time of his death;
 iii. If non-resident, the province where the estate was left; and
 iv. The fact that the will has been delivered to the court.
 b. The names, ages and residences of the heirs, legatees, and devisees of the testator or
decedent;
 c. The probable value and character of the property of the estate;
 d. The name of the persons for whom letters are prayed; and
 e. If the will has not been delivered to the court, the name of the person having custody
of it.
 No defect in the petition shall render void the allowance of the will or the issuance of letters
testamentary or of administration with the will annexed
 Mere delivery of will is sufficient - court may act upon the mere deposit therein of a
decedent’s testament, even if no petition for its allowance is yet filed.
 petition for probate is made after the deposit of the will, the petition is deemed to retroact
from the time the will was deposited.
 Obligations of the court after the delivery of will or petition for its allowance is filed:
 a. Fix the time and place for proving the will;
 b. Cause the notice of the time and place be published for three successive weeks in
newspaper of general circulation in the province.
 The requirement of publication tantamount to constructive notice that binds the whole
world. A settlement proceeding may be annulled if it is shown that notice is not published.
 Grounds for disallowing will –
 a. If not executed and attested as required by law;
 b. If the testator was insane, or otherwise mentally incapable to make a will, at the time
of its execution;
 c. If it was executed under duress, or the influence of fear, or threats;
  d. If it was procured by undue and improper pressure and influence, on the part of the
beneficiary, or of some other person for his benefit;
 e. If the signature of the testator was procured by fraud or trick, and he did not intend
that the instrument should be his will at the time of fixing his signature thereto.
 Effects of the allowance of the will:
 a. Conclusive as to its due execution;
 b. Binding against everybody, even against the State.
 Subscribing witnesses produced or accounted for where will contested - all the subscribing
witnesses, and the notary in the case of wills executed under the Civil Code of the Philippines,
if present in the Philippines and not insane, must be produced and examined, and the death,
absence, or insanity of any of them must be satisfactorily shown to the court
 present in the Philippines but outside the province where the will has been filed, their
deposition must be taken
 If any or all of them testify against the due execution of the will, or do not remember having
attested to it, or are otherwise of doubtful credibility, the will may nevertheless, be allowed if
the court is satisfied from the testimony of other witnesses and from all the evidence
presented that the will was executed and attested in the manner required by law.
 If a holographic will is contested, the same shall be allowed if at least three (3) witnesses who
know the handwriting of the testator explicitly declare that the will and the signature are in
the handwriting of the testator; in the absence of any competent witnesses, and if the court
deem it necessary, expert testimony may be resorted to.
 witnesses are not from the region or province where the will is being probated, a motion for
taking deposition of one or more of them shall be allowed.
 Deposition may be resorted to if the deponent lives at least 100 KM away from the territorial
jurisdiction of the probate court. (Viatory Right)
 Testimony of the witnesses other than the subscribing witnesses may be allowed if, the
subscribing witnesses are dead or insane, or living outside the Philippines
 Matters to be testified by the witnesses:
 a. Sanity of the testator; and
 b. Due execution of the will.
 Proof where testator petitions for allowance of holographic will - testator himself petitions
for the probate of his holographic will and no contest is filed
 the fact that he affirms that the holographic will and the signature are in his own handwriting,
shall be sufficient evidence of the genuineness and due execution thereof
 Holographic will is contested, the burden of disproving the genuineness and due execution
thereof shall be on the contestant. The testator to rebut the evidence for the contestant.
 Certificate of allowance attached to prove will. To be recorded in the Office of Register of
Deeds - court is satisfied, upon proof taken and filed, that the will was duly executed
 the testator at the time of its execution was of sound and disposing mind, and not acting
under duress, menace, and undue influence, or fraud
 a certificate of its allowance, signed by the judge, and attested by the seal of the court shall
be attached to the will and the will and certificate filed and recorded by the clerk
 Attested copies of the will devising real estate and of certificate of allowance thereof, shall be
recorded in the register of deeds of the province in which the lands lie.
 Notarial Will
 Uncontested - Testimony of at least one subscribing witness
 Contested - all the subscribing witnesses and the notary public
 Holographic Will
 Uncontested - one witness who knows the handwriting and signature of the testator.
  Contested - 3 witnesses who know the handwriting and signature
 Holographic will petitioned by the testator himself
 Uncontested - Fact that he affirms that the holographic will and the signature are in his
own handwriting.
 Contested - burden of disproving shall be on the contestant.
 Foreign will be allowed probate in the Philippines - Yes. Provided, however, that the law on
which the will was made/based is proven in court.

4. Claims Against the Estate (Rule 86)

 Notice to creditors to be issued by court - Immediately after granting letters testamentary or
of administration
 court shall issue a notice requiring all persons having money claims against the decedent to
file them in the office of the clerk of said court.
 Letters of administration - no executor is named in the will, or the executor or executors are
incompetent, refuse the trust or fail to give bond, or a person dies intestate, administration
shall be granted to and observing the following order of preference:
 a. surviving spouse or next of kin or both or to such person requested by them, if
competent and willing to serve;
 b. one or more of the principal creditors; or,
 c. any other person that the court may select
 Time within which claims shall be filed – After granting letters testamentary or
administration, the court will issue an order requiring all persons having money claims against
the estate to file the same with the Office of the Clerk of Court not more than twelve (12) nor
less than six (6) months after the date of first publication of notice.
 Claims which must be filed under the notice. If not filed, barred; exceptions
 GR: Failure to file a claim within the reglementary period as provided for above, the claim is
already barred.
 XPNs:
 a. Claims for money against the decedent, arising from contract, express or implied,
whether the same be due, or contingent;
 b. All claims for funeral expenses and expense for the last sickness of the decedent; and
 c. Judgement for money against the decedent, must be filed within the time limited in
the notice; otherwise, they are barred forever.
 However, they may be set forth as counterclaims in any action that the executor or
administrator against the claimants.
 Where an executor or administrator commences an action, or prosecutes an action
commenced by the deceased in his lifetime, the debtor may set forth by answer the claims he
has against the decedent, instead of presenting them independently to the court as herein
provided.
 The mutual claims may be set-off against each other in such action, and if final judgement is
rendered in favor of the defendant, the amount so determined shall be considered the true
balance against the estate “as though the claim had been presented directly before the court
in the administration proceedings.”
 The claim pertained herein refers to claims for the recovery of money which are not secured
by a lien against the property of the estate.
 If the claim is secured apply Sec. 7, Rule 8 (Claims against the estate).
 Solidary obligation of decedent - claim shall be filed against the decedent as if he were the
only debtor, without prejudice to the right of the estate to recover contribution from the
debtor.
 In a joint obligation of the decedent, the claim shall be confined to the portion belonging to
him.
 Claim of executor or administrator against an estate - give notice thereof, in writing, to the
court, and the court shall appoint a special administrator,
 who shall, in the adjustment of such claim, have the same power and be subject to the same
liability as the general administrator or executor in the settlement of other claims. The court
may order the executor or administrator to pay to the special administrator necessary funds
to defend such claim.
 Judgment appealable - filed with the record of the administration proceedings with notice to
both parties, and is appealable as in ordinary cases
 A judgment against the executor or administrator shall be that he pays, in due course of
administration, the amount ascertained to be due, and it shall not create any lien upon the
property of the estate, or give to the judgment creditor any priority of payment.
 Costs - executor or administrator, in his answer, admits and offers to pay part of a claim, and
the claimant refuses to accept the amount offered in satisfaction of his claim, if he fails to
obtain a more favorable judgment, he cannot recover costs, but must pay to the executor or
administrator costs from the time of the offer
 an action commenced against the deceased for money has been discontinued and the claim
embraced therein presented as in this rule provided, the prevailing party shall be allowed the
costs of his action up to the time of its discontinuance

5. Payment of the Debts of the Estate (Rule 88)

 Debts paid in full if estate sufficient - after hearing all the money claims against the estate,
and after ascertaining the amount of such claims, it appears that there are sufficient assets to
pay the debts
 the executor or administrator pay the same within the time limited for that purpose
 Requisites before executor or administrator may pay the money claims:
 a. Hearing;
 b. Amounts of such claim are ascertained; and
 c. Sufficient assets to pay the debt.
 A writ of execution is not the proper procedure to satisfy debts. The court must order the sale
or mortgage of the properties of the decedent, the proceeds of which will satisfy the debts
and expenses.
 Part of estate from which debt paid when provision made by will - designates the estate to
be appropriated for the payment of his debts, the expenses of administration, or the family
expenses, they shall be paid according to the provisions of the will;
 but if the provision made by the will or the estate appropriated, is not sufficient for that
purpose, such part of the estate of the testator, real or personal, as is not disposed of by will,
if any shall be appropriated for that purpose.
 Personalty first chargeable for debts, then realty –
 GR: The payment of the debts of the estate must be taken from the following order:
 a. Portion of property designated in the will;
 b. Personal property not disposed of by will; (chargeable with the payment of debts and
expenses); and
 c. Real property not disposed of by will
 XPN: The Court, on petition of interested persons may modify such order of dispositions.
 Use of proceeds from sale of personal property - court may order the whole or part of the
personal estate to be sold if necessary:
 a. To pay the debts and expenses of administration;
  b. To pay legacies; and
 c. To cover expenses for the preservation of the estate.
 Estate to be retained to meet contingent claims - court is satisfied that a contingent claim
duly filed is valid, it may order the executor or administrator to retain in his hands sufficient
estate to pay such contingent claim when the same becomes absolute, or if the estate is
insolvent, sufficient to pay a portion equal to the dividend of the other creditors
 a. Duly filed within the 2-year period allowed for creditors to present their claims;
 b. The claim is valid; and c.
 c. The claim becomes absolute
 How contingent claim becoming absolute in two years allowed and paid - Action against
distributees later - may be allowed by the court if not disputed by the executor or
administrator and, if disputed, it may be proved and allowed or disallowed by the court as the
facts may warrant
 If the contingent claim is allowed, the creditor shall receive payment to the same extent as
the other creditors if the estate retained by the executor or administrator is sufficient.
 But if the claim is not so presented, after having become absolute, within said two (2) years,
and allowed, the assets retained in the hands of the executor or administrator, not exhausted
in the payment of claims, shall be disturbed by the order of the court to the persons entitled
to the same; but the assets so distributed may still be applied to the payment of the claim
when established, and the creditor may maintain an action against the distributees to recover
the debt, and such distributees and their estates shall be liable for the debt in proportion to
the estate they have respectively received from the property of the deceased.
 The only instance wherein a creditor can file an action against a distributee of the debtor’s
assets is under Sec. 5, Rule 88 (Claims against the estate). The contingent claims must first
have been established and allowed in the probate court before the creditors can file an action
directly against the distributes.
 Court to fix contributive shares where devisees, legatees or heirs have been possession -
devisees, legatees, or heirs have entered into possession of portions of the estate before the
debts and expenses have been settled and paid, and have become liable to contribute for the
payment of such debts and expenses
 court having jurisdiction of the estate may, by order for that purpose, after hearing, settle the
amount of their several liabilities, and order how much and in what manner each person shall
contribute, and may issue execution as circumstances require.
 This is one of the instances where the court may issue a writ of execution.
 Even after partition, devisees, legatees, or heirs shall be liable individually for the payment of
all lawful outstanding claims against the estate in proportion to the amount or value of the
property they have respectively received from the estate.
 Order of payment if estate is insolvent or assets are insufficient - according to the
concurrence and preference of credits
 Disposition of estate in the Philippines of an insolvent non-resident - in a manner where his
creditors in and outside of the Philippines may receive an equal share, in proportion to their
respective credits
 When and how claim proved outside the Philippines against insolvent resident's estate paid
- executor or administrator in the Philippines had knowledge of the presentation of such
claims in such country and an opportunity to contest their allowance,
 may be added to the list of claims proved against the decedent in the Philippines and the
estate will be distributed equally among those creditors.
 Principle of reciprocity - shall not be extended to the creditors in another country if the
property of such deceased person there found is not equally apportioned to the creditors
residing in the Philippines and other creditors, according to their respective claims
 Orders relating to payment of debts where appeal is taken - court may suspend the order for
the payment of the debts or may order the distributions among the creditors whose claims
are definitely allowed,
 leaving in the hands of the executor or administrator sufficient assets to pay the claim
disputed and appealed. When a disputed claim is finally settled the court having jurisdiction
of the estate shall order the same to be paid out of the assets retained to the same extent
and in the same proportion with the claims of other creditors.

6. Sales, Mortgages, and Other Encumbrances of Property of Decedent (Rule 89)

 Instances when real properties may be ordered sole, mortgaged, or encumbered - Upon
application of the executor or administrator with written notice to heirs and other persons
interested residing in the Philippines, and after hearing, real properties shall be liable for
debts and expenses, or may be sold mortgaged or otherwise encumbered for that purpose
upon order of the court if
 personal property is not sufficient to pay the debts, expenses of administration, and
legacies;
 sale of such personal property would be detrimental to the participants of the estate;
 sale of personal property may injure the business or other interest of those interested in
the estate;
 testator has not made sufficient provision for the payment of such debts, expenses or
legacies;
 decedent was, in his lifetime, under contract, binding in law, to deed real property, or
interest therein to a beneficiary;
 decedent during his lifetime held real property in trust for another.
 Disposal of estate property requires judicial approval before it could be executed. Implicit in
the requirement for judicial approval was that the probate court could rescind or nullify the
disposition of a property under administration that was effected without its authority.
 Without notice and hearing the sale, mortgage, or encumbrance is void because the heirs are
the presumptive owners. Since they succeed to all the rights and obligations of the deceased
from the moment of the latter’s death, they are the persons directly affected by the sale or
mortgage therefore they cannot be deprived of the property, except in the manner provided
by law.
 Such conveyance shall not be allowed when notice of the application was not given to
persons interested; or if the assets in the hands of the executor or administrator will be
reduced so as to prevent a creditor from receiving his full debt or diminish the dividend.
 How to prevent authority to sell, mortgage, or encumber property of the estate - any person
interested in the estate gives a bond in the sum fixed by the court conditioned to pay the
debts, expenses of administration and legacies
 If the opposition to the sale is based on the fact that the oppositor claims title to the property
to be sold, the court will hold in abeyance the authority to sell such property until the issue of
ownership has been settled in an ordinary action, since the probate court generally has no
jurisdiction to resolve issues of ownership in the administration proceedings
 Persons interested may prevent such sale, etc., by giving bond - any person interested in the
estate gives a bond, in a sum to be fixed by the court, conditioned to pay the debts, expenses
of administration, and legacies within such time as the court directs; and such bond shall be
 for the security of the creditors, as well as of the executor or administrator, and may be
prosecuted for the benefit of either.
 Regulations for granting authority to sell, mortgage, or otherwise encumber estate –
 1. The executor or administrator shall file written petition setting forth:
 a. Debts due from deceased, expenses for administration, legacies;
 b. Value of personal estate;
 c. Situation of estate to be sold, mortgaged, encumbered; and
 d. Such other facts showing that the sale etc, mortgage, or other encumbrance is
necessary or beneficial.
 2. The court shall thereupon fix a time and place for hearing such petition, and cause
notice stating:
 a. The nature of the petition;
 b. The reason for the same; and
 c. The time and place of hearing.
To be given personally or by mail to the persons interested, and may cause such
further notice to be given, by publication or otherwise, as it shall deem proper
 3. court may require the executor or administrator to give an additional bond, in such
sum as the court directs, conditioned that such executor or administrator will account for
the proceeds of the sale, mortgage, or other encumbrance;
 4. The court may authorize the sale to be public or private;
 5. If estate is to be sold at auction, mode of giving notice shall be governed by provisions
concerning notice of execution sale;
 6. A certified copy of the order of the court together with the deed of the executor or
administrator for such real estate shall be recorded in the registry of deeds of the
province in which the real estate thus sold, mortgaged, or otherwise encumbered is
situated.
 Administrator or executor sells property of estate without the requisite authority of the court,
such sale is null and void. This rule applies to the sale of immovable property of the estate,
albeit the rules do not specifically so provide, as such authority is vested in a probate court.

 When court may authorize conveyance of realty which deceased contracted to convey.
Notice - Effect of deed - Where the deceased was in his lifetime under contract, binding in
law, to deed real property, or an interest therein, the court having jurisdiction of the estate
may
 on application for that purpose, authorize the executor or administrator to convey such
property according to such contract, or with such modifications as are agreed upon by the
parties and approved by the court; and if the contract is to convey real property to the
executor or administrator, the clerk of court shall execute the deed
 deed executed by such executor, administrator, or clerk of court shall be as effectual to convey
the property as if executed by the deceased in his lifetime; but no such conveyance shall be
authorized until notice of the application for that purpose has been given personally or by
mail to all persons interested, and such further notice has been given, by publication or
otherwise, as the court deems proper; nor if the assets in the hands of the executor or
administrator will thereby be reduced so as to prevent a creditor from receiving his full debt
or diminish his dividend
 Deed of sale, mortgage, or encumbrance - valid as if executed by deceased in his lifetime
 When court may authorize conveyance of lands which deceased held in trust - court may
after notice given as required in the last preceding section, authorize the executor or
 administrator to deed such property to the person, or his executor or administrator, for
whose use and benefit it was so held; and the court may order the execution of such trust,
whether created by deed or by law

7. Distribution and Partition (Rule 90)

 Liquidation – means the determination of all assets of the estate and payment of all debts
and expenses
 probate court loses jurisdiction over the settlement proceedings only upon payment of all
debts and expenses of the obligor and delivery of the entire estate to all heirs.
 Two requisites before the distribution of the estate
 a. Liquidation; and
 b. Declaration of heirs.
 When order for distribution of residue made
 GR: Distribution of the residue to persons entitled thereto after notice and hearing and after
payment:
 a. Debts;
 b. Expenses of administration;
 c. Funeral charges;
 d. Allowance to widow; and
 e. Inheritance tax
 XPN: Distribution before payment of obligations provided distributees give a bond fixed by
the court conditioned for payment thereof within such time as court directs.
 The order that determines distributive share is appealable. Title to property is vested from
finality of the order of distribution
 Process for the distribution of the residue of the estate –
 Even if the testator stated in his will that he owes a certain person and order that the same be
paid, if the estate is insolvent, the creditor shall not enjoy priority over other claimants. The
provision in the will should only establish the claim of the creditor against the estate. He must
still file his claim according to Sec. 9, Rule 86, and must comply with the statute of non-claims.
 net estate of the decedent must be ascertained, by deducting all payable obligations and
charges from the value of the property owned by the deceased at the time of his death; then,
all donations subject to collation would be added to it. With the partible estate thus
determined, the legitime of the compulsory heirs can be established, and only then it can be
ascertained whether or not a donation had prejudiced the legitime
 Decree of distribution - vests the title to the land of the estate in the distributees, which, if
erroneous may be corrected by a timely appeal. Once it becomes final, its binding effect is like
any other judgement in rem.
 However, in exceptional cases, a final decree of distribution of the estate may be set aside for
lack of jurisdiction or fraud
 Party interested in a probate proceeding may have a final liquidation set aside when he is left
out by reason of circumstances beyond his control or through mistake or inadvertence not
imputable to negligence.
 However, where the order closing the intestate proceedings was already final and executory,
the same cannot be reopened on a motion therefore filed after the lapse of the reglementary
period.
 Declaration of heirship - undertaken to determine to whom the residue of the estate should
be distributed. The declaration is made in the same proceeding, a separate action for the
declaration of heirs not being the proper recourse.
 probate court has the power to entertain question of whether or not a person is an
acknowledged natural child of the decedent. Thus, an action for recognition of a natural child
may be instituted and decided in the proceeding for the settlement of the estate of the
ancestor.
 However, an adoption decree cannot be assailed in the settlement of the estate of the
ancestor
 A claim of status as heir of a decedent must always be substantially supported by evidence as
required under our law. Not all rights to property and incidents thereof, such as titling, ought
to be preceded by a declaration of heirship, albeit supposedly traced to a single decedent and
original titleholder. In this case, there is no need for the petitioners to first be declared heirs
of the Valentin Basbas before they can file an action for annulment of title and reconveyance
of real property originally owned by Severo Basbas, father of Valentin Basbas, if Valentin has
long possessed the status of a legitimate child.
 Court may make a declaration of heirship even before the payment of obligations - provision
is not mandatory because it is the distribution of the residue of the estate, before its
obligations are paid, which the court is enjoined to do but not the declaration of heirs prior to
the satisfaction of these obligations.
 Project Partition - document prepared by the executor or administrator setting forth the
manner in which the estate of the deceased is to be distributed among the heirs.
 finality of the approval of the project partition by itself alone does not terminate the probate
proceeding. As long as the order of the distribution of the estate has not been complied with,
the probate proceedings cannot be deemed closed and terminated.
 probate court may require the executrix to present a project partition to better inform itself
of the condition of the estate to be distributed and so facilitate the prompt distribution
thereof
 Project of partition is not mandatory.
 appeal from an order of execution, which albeit generally not appealable, may be allowed if
the Project of Partition submitted to implement the decision was not in accordance with the
final decision in the case. However, seeking an order from the court to allow the petitioner to
present evidence with regard to the properties comprising the estate of the deceased and the
heirs who are to share in the inheritance is, in effect an appeal from a decision which has long
become final and executory, and not from an order of execution which is yet to be carried out,
thru a Project of Partition is still to be submitted to and approved by the court.
 Right of an heir over the property of the decedent - Although the right of an heir over the
property of the decedent is inchoate, as long as estate has not been fully settled and
partitioned, the law allows the co-owner to exercise the rights of ownership over such
inchoate right.
 Before partition, the heirs become co-owners of the property they inherited subject to the
payment of the debts of the deceased.
 During the pendency of the estate proceedings without prior approval of the probate court,
an heir has the right to sell his undivided or ideal share of the estate, he being the co-owner
with other heirs of the estate. Court approval is necessary only if specific property of the
estate is sold
 Partial distribution - partial distribution of the decedent’s estate pending the final
termination of the testate or intestate proceedings should as much as possible be discouraged
by the courts, and unless in extreme cases, such form of advances of inheritance should not
be countenanced.
 Reason: Courts should guard with utmost zeal the estate of the decedent to the end that
creditors be adequately protected, and rightful heirs assured of their shares in the inheritance
 The order of partial distribution appealed from is unwarranted. Firstly, because it was
prematurely issued, the period for the presentation of claims not having as yet elapsed; and
secondly, because no bond was fixed by the court as a condition sine qua non to the partial
distribution ordered by it.
 Questions as to advancement to be determined - or alleged to have been made, by the
deceased to any heir may be heard and determined by the court having jurisdiction of the
estate proceedings; and the final order of the court thereon shall be binding on the person
raising the questions and on the heir.
 Jurisdiction of the probate court
 a. Collate;
 b. Determine heirs; and
 c. Determine the shares of each heir.
 Once an action for the settlement of estate is filed with the court, the properties included
therein are under the control of the estate court. And not even the administrator may take
possession of any property that is part of the estate without the prior authority of the court.
 probate court has the power to enforce an accounting as a necessary means to its authority
to determine the properties included in the inventory of the estate to be administered,
divided up, and distributed. Beyond this, the determination of title or ownership over the
subject shares may be conclusively settled by the probate court as a question of collation or
advancement
 Power to issue writ of possession - for the recovery of the share by the heir or other
interested person from the executor or administrator or other persons having possession of
the property without the need of previous demand.
 Remedy of an heir entitled to residue but not given his share
 a. Motion to set aside the distribution - heir appears after the court approved the project
of partition, the heir must file a motion to set aside the distribution with the court so
that the court will not proceed with the distribution of the residue
 court shall determine whether such heir has a right to participate in the distribution of
the residue, if it has proven that the heir has a right, the court may order the revision of
the project of partition for its adjustment;
 b. Motion to deliver share – If the heir was not excluded from the proceedings but was
not able to receive his share;
 c. Motion for the reopening of the settlement proceedings – If the distribution has
already been made, a motion for closure has already been granted, the heir must file a
motion for the reopening of the settlement proceedings within the reglementary period,
provided the order of close has not yet became final and executory. The period is within
30 days from the date the order of closure of the administration proceeding was served
on the executor or administrator;
 When motion to intervene is made by non-marital children, there must be proof beyond
allegations in such motion to show the interest of the private movants. In the absence
thereof, the action taken by the judge allowing said intervention could be considered
premature.
 d. Petition for the re-opening of the settlement proceedings – Albeit closed and
terminated, the preterited heir who was excluded from the settlement proceedings can
still file a petition to reopen within a period of 10 years; and
 e. Accion reinvindicatoria – If the order of closure has already become final and
executory, the remedy is to file an independent suit against the parties and all other heirs
for his/her share.
 Instances when probate court may issue Writ of Execution
  GR: Probate court cannot issue writs of execution.
 Execution is not the proper remedy to satisfy an approved claim because payment approving
the claim does not create a lien upon the property of the estate. The proper procedure is for
the court to order the sale of the property of the deceased to satisfy the claim and in case of
refusal to comply with the order; the court may cite him in contempt.
 XPNs:
 a. To satisfy the distributive shares of the devisees, legatees, and heirs in possession of
the decedent’s assets;
 b. To enforce payment of the expenses of partition; and
 By whom expenses of partition paid - at the time of distribution the executor or
administrator has retained sufficient effects in his hands which may lawfully be
applied for the expenses of partition of the properties distributed, such expenses of
partition may be paid by such executor or administrator when it appears equitable
to the court and not inconsistent with the intention of the testator;
 they shall be paid by the parties in proportion to their respective shares or interest
in the premises, and the apportionment shall be settled and allowed by the court,
and, if any person interested in the partition does not pay his proportion or share,
the court may issue an execution in the name of the executor or administrator
against the party not paying the sum assessed.
 c. To satisfy the costs when a person is cited for examination in probate proceedings.
 When court loses jurisdiction - only after payment of all debts and remaining estate delivered
to heirs entitled to receive the same

B. Guardianship
1. Venue (Rule 92)
 Where to file: (Where the minor or incompetent person resides) (Resident of the
Philippines)
 a. RTC of the province;
 b. Justice of the peace court of municipality;
 c. Municipal court-chartered city,
 Where to file: (Where the property or the part thereof is situated) (Resident of Foreign
Country)
 a. RTC of the province;
 b. Justice of the peace of court of municipality or MTC;
 If the amount of the property exceeds the jurisdiction of the MTC, the proceedings shall be
instated in the RTC.
 Meaning of word "incompetent." – includes
 a. Persons suffering the penalty of civil interdiction;
 b. Hospitalized lepers;
 c. Prodigals;
 d. Deaf and dumb, who are unable to read and write;
 e. Unsound mind even if they have lucid intervals;
  f. Not unsound mind but by reason of AGE, DISEASE, WEAK MIND, and other similar
causes, cannot take care of themselves without aid
 Transfer of venue - court taking cognizance of a guardianship proceeding, may transfer the
same to the court of another province or municipality wherein the ward has acquired real
property, if he has transferred thereto his bonafide residence, and the latter court shall have
full jurisdiction to continue the proceedings, without requiring payment of additional court
fees.

2. Appointment of Guardians (Rule 93)

 Guardianship - protective authority given by law and imposed in an individual who is free
and in the enjoyment of his rights, over one whose weakness on account of his age or other
infirmity which renders him incapable to protect himself.
 Guardian - person in whom the law has entrusted the custody and control of the person or
estate or both of an infant, insane, or other person incapable of managing his own affairs.
 A trust relation in which one person called a “guardian” act for another called a “ward”
whom the law regards as incapable of managing his own affairs.
 Basis of Guardianship
 Parens patriae – The State has the duty of protecting the rights of persons or individuals
who because of age or incapacity, are in an unfavorable position vis-à-vis other person
 Purpose of this rule - safeguard the rights and interests of minors and incompetent persons.
Courts should be vigilant to see that the rights of such persons are properly protected.
 Kind of guardians
 1. According to scope:
 a. Guardian of the person – care of the person of the minor or incompetent;
 b. Guardian of the property – management of the estate of a minor or
incompetent; and
 c. General guardian – care and custody of the person and of all the property of the
ward.

 2. According to constitution:
 a. Legal guardian – without the need of judicial appointment, as in the case of
parents over the persons of their minor children, or the father, or in his absence
the mother (the parent shall only furnish the necessary bond if the property of
minor child exceeds P50,000); (Not less than 10%)
 b. Guardian ad litem – prosecute or defend a minor or incompetent in an action in
court;
 c. Judicial guardian – person or property of the ward to represent the latter in all
his civil acts and transactions.
 Ancillary Guardianship - authority of the guardian may extend only to the property of the
minor or incompetent within such State.
 Rule on Guardianship over Minor - Those who are below 18 years of age or those over
but are unable to fully take care of themselves from abuse, neglect, cruelty,
exploitation, or discrimination because of a physical or mental disability or condition.
 Who may petition for appointment of guardian for resident
 a. Any relative;
 b. Other person on behalf of the minors;
 c. The minor himself if 14 years of age or over;
 d. The secretary of DSWD; or
 e. The secretary of DOH in case of an insane minor who needs to be hospitalized.
 Non-resident Minors - only insofar as to the property of the non-resident minor found in
the Philippines is concerned.
 Any relative or friend of such minor, or anyone interested in his property, in expectancy or
otherwise, may petition the Family Court/RTC, for the appointment of a guardian over the
property
 Publication is required in case of a petition for guardianship over the property of a non-
resident minor unlike in the case of a resident minor where no publication is required
 Where to file
 a. FC/RTC of the province or city where the minor actually resides; or
 b. FC/RTC if non-resident minor - the province or city where the property or any part
thereof is situated.
 Grounds for the appointment of a guardian over the person or property, or both, of a
minor
 a. Death, continued absence, or incapacity of his parents;
 b. Suspension, deprivation or termination of parental authority;
 c. Remarriage of surviving parent, if the latter is found unsuitable to exercise parental
authority; or
 d. When the best interest of the minor so requires.
 Qualifications of guardians
 a. Moral character;
 b. Availability to exercise the powers and duties of a guardian for the full period of the
guardianship;
 c. Lack of conflict of interest with the minor;
 d. Financial status;
 e. Relationship of trust with the minor;
 f. Ability to manage the property of the minor; and
 g. Physical, mental, and psychological condition
 The court shall order a social worker to conduct a case study of the minor and all the
prospective guardians and submit his report and recommendation to the court for its
guidance before the scheduled hearing.
 Non-resident guardians not be appointed - court should not appoint persons as guardians
who are not within the jurisdiction of our courts for, they will find it difficult to protect the
wards.
 Substitute parental authority - Law vests on the father and mother joint parental authority
over the persons of their common children.
 In case of absence or death of either parent, the parent present shall continue exercising
parental authority
 Only in case of the parent’s death, absence, or unsuitability may substitute parental
authority be exercised by the surviving grandparent.
 Contents of petition - petition for the appointment of a general guardian must show, so far
as known to the petitioner:
 (a) The jurisdiction facts;
 (b) The minority or incompetency rendering the appointment necessary or convenient;
 (c) The names, ages, and residence of the relatives of the minor or incompetent, and of
the person having him in their care;
 (d) The probable value and character of his estate;
 (e) The name of the person for whom letters of guardianship.
 The petition shall be verified; but no defect in the petition or verification shall render void
the issuance of letters of guardianship.
 Court to set time for hearing. Notice thereof – court shall fix a time and place for hearing
the same, and shall cause reasonable notice thereof to be given to the persons mentioned
in the petition residing in the province, including the minor if above 14 years of age or the
incompetent himself, and may direct other general or special notice thereof to be given.
 Notice to a minor who is above 14 years old is jurisdictional. Non-compliance with this
renders the proceedings null and void.
 Grounds for opposition to petition of guardianship of minors
 a. Majority of the alleged minor; or
 b. Unsuitability of the person for whom letters are prayed for
 Any interested person who may contest the petition by filing a written opposition and pray
that the petition be denied, or that letters of guardianship issue to himself, or to any
suitable person named in the opposition.
 Interested person is a creditor and mortgagee of the estate of the minor - he cannot be
appointed guardian of the person and property
 Grounds for petition to sell or encumber:
 a. When the income of the estate is insufficient to maintain and educate ward when a
minor; or
 b. When it appears that it is for the benefit of the ward.
 Authority to sell or encumber shall not extend beyond 1 year, unless renewed by the court.
 Grounds for removal or resignation of guardian
 a. Becomes insane or otherwise incapable of discharging his trust;
 b. Is found thereafter to be unsuitable;
 c. He wasted or mismanaged the property of the ward; or
 d. Has failed to render an account or make a return 30 days after it was due.
 Before a motion for removal or resignation may be granted guardian must submit the
proper accounting of the property of the ward and the court has to approve the same.
 Grounds for termination of guardianship - motu proprio or by a verified motion by any
person allowed to file a petition for guardianship on the grounds of:
 a. Ward has come of age (emancipation);
 b. Ward has died.
 The guardian shall notify the court of such fact w/in 10 days of its occurrence.
 When and how guardian for non-resident appointed. Notice. — any relative or friend of
such person, or any one interested in his estate, in expectancy or otherwise, may petition a
court having jurisdiction for the appointment of a guardian for the estate, and if, after notice
given to such person and in such manner as the court deems proper, by publication or
otherwise, and hearing,
 court is satisfied that such non-resident is a minor or incompetent rendering a guardian
necessary or convenient, it may appoint a guardian for such estate.
 To whom notice served
 a. Persons mentioned in the petition residing in the Philippines; and
 b. The incompetent.
 GR: There is no requirement for publication, only notice.
 Notice of hearing of the petition is not intended as personal service process in the
sense necessary to give the court jurisdiction over the ward.
 XPN: In case of non-resident incompetent, service of notice upon the persons mentioned in
the petition is mandatory and jurisdictional. Without such notice, the court acquired no
jurisdiction to appoint a guardian.
 The rules do not necessitate that creditor of the minor or incompetent be likewise identified
and notified.
 Their presence is not essential to the proceedings for appointment of a guardian.
 Hearing and order for letters to issue
 At the hearing:
 a. The alleged incompetent must be present if able to attend;
 b. It must be shown that the required notice had been given;
 c. The court shall hear the evidence of the parties in support of their respective
allegations; and
 d. The court shall appoint a suitable guardian of his person or estate, or both, with the
respective powers and duties
 Opposition to petition - Any interested person may, by filing a written opposition, contest
the petition on the ground of majority of the alleged minor, competency of the alleged
incompetent, or the unsuitability of the person for whom letters are prayed, and may pray
that the petition be dismissed, or that letters of guardianship issue to himself, or to any
suitable person named in the opposition.
 Grounds for opposition to petition of guardianship of incompetent
 a. Competency of alleged incompetent;
 b. Unsuitability of the person for whom letters are prayed for.

3. General Powers and Duties of Guardians (Rule 96)

 To what guardianship shall extend - A guardian appointed shall have the
 Resident ward
 care and custody of the person of his ward and management of his estate
 management of the estate only
 Non-resident ward
 management of all the estate within
 no court other than that in which such guardian was appointed shall have jurisdiction over
the guardianship
 Guardian to pay debts of ward - if sufficient, out of his personal estate and the income of
his real estate;
 if not, then out of his real estate upon obtaining an order for the sale or encumbrance
thereof.
 Guardian to settle accounts, collect debts, and appear in actions for the ward – with the
approval of the court, compound for the same and give discharges to the debtor, on
receiving a fair and just dividend of the estate and effects; and he shall appear for and
represent his ward in all actions and special proceedings, unless another person be
appointed for that purpose.
 Estate to be managed frugally, and proceeds applied to maintenance of ward - if there be
any
 If insufficient for that purpose, the guardian may sell or encumber the real estate, upon
being authorized by order so to do, and apply to such of the proceeds as may be necessary
to such maintenance
 Jurisdictional requirements for guardian to sell property of the ward
 a. Petition must be verified;
  b. Notice must be given to the next of kin; and
 c. Hearing so that they may show cause why petition should not be granted
 Sale of the ward’s realty by the guardian without authority from the court is void. The
court may authorize and require the guardian to invest the proceeds of sales or
encumbrances, and any other of his ward’s money in his hands, in real estate or
otherwise, as shall be for the best interest of all concerned, and may make such other
orders for the management, investment, and disposition of the estate and effects, as
circumstances may require
 Next of Kin - Relatives who are entitled to share in the estate of the ward under the
Law on Intestate Succession including those who inherit per stirpes or by right of
representation
 Duration – 1 year unless renewed by court
 Prohibition against guardians - cannot acquire by purchase even at a public or judicial
action, either in person or through the mediation of another, the property of the
person or persons who may be under guardianship.
 Appeal is the proper remedy against an order of the court authorizing the sale of the
ward’s property
 Appeal is the proper remedy against an order of the court authorizing the sale of the
ward’s property
 Inventories and accounts of guardians, and appraisement of estates - render to the court
an inventory of the estate of his ward within three (3) months after his appointment, and
annually after such appointment an inventory and account, the rendition of any of which
may be compelled upon the application of an interested person
 Such inventories and accounts shall be sworn to by the guardian.
 All the estate of the ward described in the first inventory shall be appraised.
 In the appraisement, the court may request the assistance of one or more of the inheritance
tax appraisers.
 And whenever any property of the ward not included in an inventory already rendered is
discovered, or succeeded to, or acquired by the ward, like proceedings shall be had for
securing an inventory and appraisement thereof within three (3) months after such
discovery, succession, or acquisition.
 Guardian may be authorized to join in partition proceedings after hearing - join in an
assent to a partition of real or personal estate held by the ward jointly or in common with
others, notice to relatives of the ward as the court may direct, and a careful investigation as
to the necessity and propriety of the proposed action
 Proceedings when the person suspected of embezzling or concealing property of ward -
Upon complaint of the guardian or ward, or of any person having actual or prospective
interest in the estate of the ward as creditor, heir, or otherwise
 court may cite the suspected person to appear for examination touching such money, goods,
interest, or instrument, and make such orders as will secure the estate against such
embezzlement, concealment or conveyance.
 Guardianship court has no power to order the person suspected of embezzling or concealing
property of the ward to deliver the same to the court. A guardianship court only has the
power to cite such person to obtain information on the property.
 When guardian's accounts presented for settlement. Expenses and compensation allowed -
Upon the expiration of a year from the time of his appointment, and as often thereafter as
may be required
 In the settlement of the account, the guardian, other than a parent, shall be allowed the
amount of his reasonable expenses incurred in the execution of his trust and also such
 compensation for his services as the court deems just, not exceeding fifteen per centum of
the net income of the ward

4. Termination of Guardianship (Rule 97)

 Petition that competency of ward be adjudged, and proceedings thereupon - A person who
has been declared incompetent for any reason, or his guardian, relative, or friend, may
petition the court to have his present competency judicially determined
 petition shall be verified by oath, and shall state that such person is then competent
 court shall fix a time for hearing the questions raised thereby, and cause reasonable notice
thereof to be given to the guardian of the person so declared incompetent, and to the ward
 On the trial, the guardian or relatives of the ward, and, in the discretion of the court, any
other person, may contest the right to the relief demanded, and witnesses may be called and
examined by the parties or by the court on its own motion. If it be found that the person is no
longer incompetent, his competency shall be adjudged and the guardianship shall cease.
 Grounds of termination
 a. Death of the ward;
 b. Death of the guardian;
 c. Competency of the ward has been judicially declared;
 d. Guardianship is no longer necessary; or
 e. The ward has come of age. (Emancipation)
 Who may oppose
 a. Guardian;
 b. Relative of the ward; or
 c. Any other person, in the discretion of the court.
 When the guardian removed or allowed to resign. New appointment - guardian becomes
insane or otherwise incapable of discharging his trust or unsuitable therefor, or has wasted or
mismanaged the estate, or failed for thirty (30) days after it is due to render an account or
make a return
 court may, upon reasonable notice to the guardian, remove him, and compel him to
surrender the estate of the ward to the person found to be lawfully entitled thereto.
 A guardian may resign when it appears proper to allow the same; and upon his resignation or
removal the court may appoint another in his place
 Ground for removal of guardianship over minors and incompetents:
 a. Insanity;
 b. Incapability or unsuitability for discharging his trust;
 c. Wastage or mismanagement of the property of the ward; or
 d. Failure to render an account or make a return for 30 days after its due.
 Remedy of the guardian from the order of removal is to appeal.
 The guardian may file a petition before the guardianship court for permission to resign his
trust, stating the grounds therefore, and accompanied by a report of the state of his account
and an offer to settle the account and deliver the estate over the court.
 Special Disqualification:
 a. Non-resident of the guardian;
 b. Advance age of the guardian; and
 c. Judges, clerk of court and lawyers.
 Other termination of guardianship - marriage or voluntary emancipation of a minor
 but he cannot borrow the money or alienate or encumber real property without the consent
of his father or mother, or guardian
  can sue and be sued in court only with the assistance of his father, mother or guardian
 guardian of any person may be discharged by the court when it appears, upon the application
of the ward or otherwise, that the guardianship is no longer necessary

C. Writ of Habeas Corpus (Rule 102)

 Writ directed to the person detaining another and commanding him to produce the body of the
prisoner within 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.
 1. Writ of Habeas Corpus in Relation to Custody of Minors (A.M. No. 03-04-04- SC) - Child’s welfare
is the supreme consideration
 Child and Youth Welfare Code unequivocally provides that in all questions regarding the care and
custody, among others, of the child, his welfare shall be the paramount consideration.
 Petition for custody of minors; who may file - verified petition, filed by any person claiming such
right
 Where to file petition - Family Court of the province or city where the petitioner resides or where
the minor may be found.
 Writ shall be enforceable within the judicial region to which the Family Court belongs.
 Following courts also have jurisdiction to hear petitions for habeas corpus involving the rightful
custody of minors:
 A. RTC – Only in the absence of the Family Court judge and provided that the case shall be
referred by such RTC to the Family Court as soon as the presiding judge returns to duty;
 B. CA or SC – Enforceable anywhere in the Philippines
 Order of preference in the provisional awarding of the minor - court may issue a provisional order
awarding custody of the minor
 a. Both parents jointly;
 b. Either parent, the choice of the minor over seven years of age and of sufficient discernment
unless the parent chose is unfit;
 c. The grandparent, or if there are several grandparents, the grandparent chosen by the minor
over seven years of age and of sufficient discernment;
 d. The eldest brother or sister over 21-years of age, unless unfit or disqualified;
 e. The actual custodian of the minor over 21-years of age, unless unfit or disqualified; or
 f. Any other person or institution the court may deem suitable to provide proper care and
guidance.
 May the judgement of the court on the custody of a minor be appealed even without filing a
motion for reconsideration - No appeal from the decision shall be allowed unless the appellant has
filed a motion for reconsideration or new trial within 15 days from notice of judgement.
 File a notice of appeal within 48 hours from notice of the order of the Family Court denying his
client’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus
 Contents of the verified petition – allege the following - accompanied by a certificate against forum
shopping, which the petitioner must sign personally.
 personal circumstances of the petitioner and of the respondent;
 name, age and present whereabouts of the minor and his or her relationship to the petitioner and
the respondent;
 material operative facts constituting deprivation of custody; and
 other matters which are relevant to the custody of the minor.
 Requisites –
 petitioner has the right of custody over the minor;
 rightful custody of the minor is being withheld from the petitioner by the respondent; and
  it is to the best interest of the minor concerned to be in the custody of the petitioner and not
that of the respondent.
 Motion to dismiss - Not allowed except on the ground of lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter
or the parties.
 Filing of Answer - file a verified answer within 5 days
 Notice of mandatory pre-trial -Within fifteen days after the filing of the answer or the expiration of
the period to file answer, court shall issue an order:
 fixing a date for the pre-trial conference
 directing the parties to file and serve their respective pre-trial briefs in such manner as shall
ensure receipt thereof by the adverse party at least three days before the date of pre-trial
 requiring the respondent to present the minor before the court.
 notice of its order shall be served separately on both the parties and their respective counsels
 Issuance of Hold Departure Order - minor child cannot be brought out of the country without leave
from court while the petition is pending.
 court, motu proprio or upon application under oath, may issue ex parte a hold departure order,
addressed to the Bureau of Immigration and Deportation, directing it not to allow the departure of
the minor from the Philippines without the permission of the court.
 In case of legal separation of the parents - custody of the minor children shall be awarded to the
innocent spouse, unless otherwise directed by the court in interest of the minor children
 In case of separation de facto - the court shall award the care, custody and control of each child as
will be for his best interest,
 permitting the child to choose which parent he prefers to live with if he is over 7 years of age
 unless the parent so chosen to be unfit to take charge of the child by reason of moral depravity,
habitual drunkenness or poverty.
 Best interest of the minor - judgement awarding the custody of the minor to the proper party
considering the best interest of the minor. However, if it appears that both parties are unfit to have
the care and custody of the minor, the court may designate either:
 paternal or maternal grandparent of the minor;
 oldest brother or sister;
 Any reputable person
 Commit him to any suitable home for children.
 issue any order that is just and reasonable permitting the parent who is deprived of the care and
custody of the minor to visit or have temporary custody.
 Controversy does not involve the question of personal freedom, because an infant is presumed to
be in the custody of someone until he attains majority age - In passing on the writ in a child
custody case, the court deals with a matter of an equitable nature. Not bound by any mere legal
right of parent or guardian, the court gives his or her claim to the custody of the child due weight as
a claim founded on human nature and considered generally equitable and just.
 Therefore, cases are decided, not on the legal right of the petitioner to be relieved from unlawful
imprisonment or detention, as in the case of adults, but on the courts view of the best interests of
those whose welfare requires that they be in custody of one person or another. In short, the child’s
welfare is the supreme and paramount consideration.
 Husband files a motion to dismiss the petition for writ of habeas corpus on the ground of the
pendency of declaration of nullity of marriage - Motion to dismiss should be granted to avoid
multiplicity of suits. The question of who between the spouses should have custody over their minor
children could also be determined in the petition for declaration of nullity of their marriage, which is
already pending in the RTC of Pasig City.
 Parental authority over a non-marital child is vested solely in the mother and this is true
notwithstanding that the child has been recognized by the father as his offspring. At most, such
 recognition by the father would be a ground for ordering the latter to give support to, but not
custody of the child.
 Does an order directing the defendants to appear in court and produce the said child violate Art.
213 of the FC – No. Order did not grant custody of the minor to any of the parties but was merely a
procedural directive addressed to the petitioners for them to produce the minor in court and
explain why they are restraining his liberty
 Art. 213 of the Family Code deals with the adjudication of custody and serves a guideline for the
proper award of custody by the court.
 While the petitioners can raise it as a counter argument in the custody suit, it may not however be
invoked by them to prevent the father from seeing the child
 Habeas corpus may be resorted to in cases where rightful custody is withheld from a person entitled
thereto. Both parents in this case have joint parental authority over their child and consequently
joint custody over him. Further, although the couple has yet to be adjudicated by the court. In the
absence of a judicial grant of custody, both parents are still entitled to the custody of their child.

D. Change of Name (Rule 103)

 Purpose - No person can change his name or surname without juridical authority involving
substantial changes.
 Objective - prevention of fraud since the rule involves substantial changes in a person’s name.
 Nature - proceeding in rem to establish the status of a person involving his relations with others,
that is, his legal position in, or, with regard to the rest of the community
 Jurisdiction to hear and determine the petition for change of name is acquired after due publication
of the order containing certain data.
 Who may file petition – person (and Alien; Adopted Child) desiring to change his name shall present
the petition
 Venue - to the RTC of the province in which he resides (For 3 years prior to filing of the petition), or,
in the City of Manila, to the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court.
 Name that can be changed - is the name that appears in the civil register, and not in the baptismal
certificate or that by which the person is known in the community.
 Grounds to warrant change of name:
 ridiculous, dishonorable or extremely difficult to write or pronounce;
 change results as a legal consequence of legitimation or adoption
 avoid confusion;
 one has continuously used and been known since childhood by a Filipino name and was
unaware of alien parentage;
 based on a sincere desire to adopt a Filipino name to erase signs of former alienage, all in good
faith and without prejudice to anybody;
 Surname causes embarrassment and there is no showing that the desired change of name was
for a fraudulent purpose or that the change of name would prejudice public interest.
 Surname of his adoptive parents sounded offensive and was seriously affecting his business and
social life. The adoptive parents consented to the same - It was averred that his use of the surname
Wong embarrassed and isolated him from his relatives and friends, as the name suggests a Chinese
ancestry when in truth and in fact he is a Muslim Filipino residing in a Muslim community, and he
wants to erase any implication whatsoever of alien nationality; that he is being ridiculed for carrying
a Chinese surname, thus hampering business and social life; and that his adoptive mother does not
oppose his desire to revert to his former surname.
 Change of name is a privilege and not a matter of right - such that a proper and reasonable cause
must exist before it may be authorized.
 In granting or denying a petition for change of name under Rule 103, the question of proper and
reasonable cause is left to the sound discretion of the court through a judicious evaluation of the
sufficiency and propriety of the justification advanced in support thereof
 Contents of petition - signed and verified by the person desiring his name changed, or some other
person on his behalf, and shall set forth:
 Petitioner has been a bona fide resident of the province where the petition is filed for at least
three (3) years prior to the date of such filing;
 Cause for which the change of the petitioner's name is sought;
 Name asked for;
 All names and aliases of petitioner.
 Requirement of verification is a formal, and not a jurisdictional requisite. It is not a ground for
dismissing the petition.
 Jurisdictional facts - change of name is a matter of public interest.
 Publication of petition for three (3) consecutive weeks in newspaper of general circulation in
the province; and
 Both title or caption and body shall recite:
 Name/names or aliases of applicant;
 Cause for which change of name is sought; and
 New name asked for
 Jurisdictional defects –
 Failure to include the true name;
 Failure to include name sought to be adopted and
 incorrect spelling (did not correctly identify said party)
 In the title of the petition and of notices published in connection therewith precludes the court from
obtaining jurisdiction
 Order for hearing - If the petition filed is sufficient in form and substance,
 The court, by an order reciting the purpose of the petition, shall:
 Fix the date and place for the hearing thereof;
 Direct that copy of the order be published at least once a week for three (3) consecutive weeks
in a newspaper of general circulation; and
 Set the date for hearing which shall not be:
 Within 30 days prior to an election; nor
 Within four (4) months after the last publication of the notice
 Court shall grant the petition under Rule 103 only when satisfactory proof has been presented in
open court that the order had been published as directed, the allegations in the petition are true,
and proper and reasonable causes appear for changing the name of the petitioner.
 When petition is not granted - if it will give a false impression of family relationship to another
where none actually exists.
 Change of name is a matter of public interest - for purposes of identification.
 A change of name is a privilege and not a right, so that before a person can be authorized to change
his name, he must show proper or reasonable cause, or any compelling reason which may justify
such change.
 Non-marital child may now use father’s surname - if the latter expressly recognized filiation in a
record of birth.
 Rule is subject to the requirement that filiation has been expressly recognized by the father through:
 Record of birth appearing in the civil register;
 admission in a public document is made by the father; and
 admission in a private handwritten instrument is made by the father.
 Who has the choice of name - non-marital child the right to decide if they want to use the surname
of their father or not.
 SC voided, mandatory use by non-marital children of their father’s surname upon the latter’s
recognition of his paternity.
 Child was allowed to change name as he was never recognized by his father while his mother
has always recognized him as her child. A change of name will erase the impression that he was
never recognized by his father.
 Change of name under Rule 109 - Judicial precedence that substantial correction to the civil status
of persons recorded in the civil registry may be effected thru the filing of a petition under Rule 109.
 When all the procedural requirements under Rule 109 are thus followed, the appropriate adversary
proceeding necessary to effect substantial corrections to the entries of the civil register is satisfied.
 The cancellation or correction of entries involving changes of name falls under letter “O” of the
following provision of Sec. 2 of Rule 108: “Entries subject to cancellation or correction. – Upon good
and valid grounds, the following entries in the civil register may be cancelled or corrected: (o)
Changes of name.
 Hence, while the jurisdictional requirements of Rule 103 (which governs petitions for change of
name) were not complied with, observance of the provision of Rule 109 suffices to effect the
correction sought for
 In case of annulment of marriage there is no need to file a petition for resumption of maiden name
or surname. The true and real name of a person is that given to him and entered in the civil register
which a woman may continue to use despite her marriage or cessation of marriage for whatever
cause.
 The use of the husband’s name is merely permissive which the wife may continue except in case of
legal separation.
 A married woman may use:
 a. Her maiden first name and surname and add her husband’s surname;
 b. Her maiden first name and her husband’s surname; or
 c. Her husband’s full name, but prefixing a word indicating that she is his wife, such as “Mrs.”
 Middle names serve to identify the material lineage or filiation of a person as well as further
distinguish him from others who may have the same given name and surname as he has. In the case
at bar, the only reason advanced by the petitioner for dropping his middle name is convenience.
 The general rule is that a change of name should not be permitted if it will give a false impression
of family relationship to another where none actually exists - our laws do not authorize legitimate
children to adopt the surname of a person not their father, for to allow them to adopt the surname
of their mother’s husband, who is not their faither, can result in confusion of their paternity.
 our laws do not authorize legitimate children to adopt the surname of a person not their father, for
to allow them to adopt the surname of their mother’s husband, who is not their faither, can result in
confusion of their paternity
 A change of name is not a matter of right but of judicial discretion, to be exercised in the light of the
reasons adduced and the consequences that will follow. The trial court’s grant of respondent’s
change of name implies a change of a feminine name to masculine name. Considering the
consequence that respondent’s change of name merely recognizes his “preferred gender,” there is a
merit in respondent’s change of name. Here, it is noteworthy to emphasize that Jennifer has simply
let nature take its course and has not taken unnatural steps to arrest or interfere with what he was
born with. To him belongs the human right to the pursuit of happiness and of health.
 Notice to the Solicitor General - State has an interest in the nature borne by individuals for
purposes of identification, and that changing one’s name is a privilege and not a right.
 Accordingly, a person can be authorized to change his name appearing in either his certificate of
birth or civil registry upon showing not only of reasonable cause, or any compelling reason which
may justify such change, but also that he will be prejudiced by the use of his true and official name.
 Interest of the State which is represented by the Solicitor General is paramount over personal right
to choose a name. The State must identify its subjects.
 Who may oppose the petition – Hearing - Any interested person may appear at the hearing and
oppose the petition. The Solicitor General or the proper provincial or city fiscal shall appear on
behalf of the Government of the Republic
 a. Any interested person; or
 b. The Republic of the Philippines through the Solicitor General or the proper provincial or city
prosecutor
 Judgment - Upon satisfactory proof in open court on the date fixed in the order that such order has
been published as directed and that the allegations of the petition are true
 Court shall, if proper and reasonable cause appears for changing the name of the petitioner,
adjudge that such name be changed in accordance with the prayer of the petition.
 Decree of adoption grants the adoptee the right to use the adopter’s surname, if change of first
name is so desired, it must be prayed and alleged in the petition for adoption.
 Service of judgment - Judgments or orders rendered in connection with this rule shall be furnished
the civil registrar of the municipality or city where the court issuing the same is situated, who shall
forthwith enter the same in the civil register
 Effect of change of name - Does not define or effect a change of one’s existing family relations or in
the rights and duties flowing therefrom.
 Does not alter one’s legal capacity, civil status or citizenship; what is altered is only the name.
 Affects only the petitioner. A separate petition for change of name must be filed for his wife or
children.

E. Cancellation of Correction of Entries in the Civil Registry (Rule 108)

 Nature – GR: Summary in nature.
 Limited solely to the implementation of Art. 412 of the Civil Code. The said article
contemplates a summary hearing, involving correction of clerical errors of a harmless,
innocuous nature, not changes involving civil status, nationality, or citizenship, which are
substantial or controversial.
 XPN: Adversarial proceedings if:
 Parties - cancellation or correction of an entry in the civil register is sought, the civil registrar
and all persons who have or claim any interest which would be affected thereby shall be
made parties to the proceeding
 Notice and publication - court shall, by an order, fix the time and place for the hearing of the
same, and cause reasonable notice thereof to be given to the persons named in the petition.
The court shall also cause the order to be published once a week for three (3) consecutive
weeks in a newspaper of general circulation in the province.
 Opposition - civil registrar and any person having or claiming any interest under the entry whose
cancellation or correction is sought may, within fifteen (15) days from notice of the petition, or
from the last date of publication of such notice, file his opposition thereto.
 a. The procedural requisites under Sections 3, 4, and 5 of Rule 108 are followed; or
 b. When the civil registrar or any person having or claiming interest in entries sought to be
cancelled and/or corrected files an opposition and it is actively prosecuted.
 Who may file petition - Any person interested in any act, event, order or decree concerning the
civil status of persons which has been recorded in the civil register
 file a verified petition for the cancellation or correction of any entry relating thereto, with the
Court of First Instance of the province where the corresponding civil registry is located.
 Where to file - Regional Trial Court of the province where the corresponding civil registrar is
located.
 Adversarial proceedings - One having opposing parties, contested
 one of which the party seeking relief has given legal warning to the other party, and afforded the
latter an opportunity to contest it.
 No substantial change or correction in an entry in a civil register can be made without judicial
order and, under the law, a change in citizenship status is a substantial change.
 Reason for adversarial proceedings - non-clerical mistakes cannot be corrected under the
summary proceeding
 lies in the fact that books making up the civil register and all documents relating thereto shall be
considered as public documents and shall be prima facie evidence of facts contained therein
 and if the entries in the civil register could be corrected or changed through a mere summary
proceeding, and not through the appropriate action
 wherein all parties who may be affected by the entries are notified or represented would set wide
open the door to fraud or other mischief the consequences of which might be detrimental and far
reaching
 Requisites
 a. Proper petition is filed where the Civil Registrar and all parties interested are impleaded;
 b. order of hearing must be published once a week for three (3) consecutive weeks;
 c. Notice must be given to the Civil Registrar and all parties affected thereby;
 d. The civil registrar and any person interested, may within 15 days from notice or from the
last date of publication, files his opposition thereto; and
 e. Full blown trial.
 Reckoning period - Such petition may be filed within 5 years from the time the petitioner
discovered the error or mistake in the civil registry, and not from the date the birth certificate was
registered in the civil registry.
 Correction of entry under Rule 108 proceeding in rem - Substantial corrections or cancellation of
entries in civil registry records affecting the status or legitimacy of a person may be effected
through the institution of a petition under Rule 109 of the Revised Rules of Court, with the proper
RTC
 Being a proceeding in rem, acquisition of jurisdiction over the person of petitioner is therefore not
required in the present case. It is enough that the trial court is vested with jurisdiction over the
subject matter.
 Substantial corrections - citizenship, legitimacy of paternity or filiation, or legitimacy of marriage,
a strict compliance with the requirement of Rule 108 is mandated.
 Indispensable parties must be notified – Parties –
 a. Civil Registrar; and
 b. All persons who may have a claim or interest which would be affected thereby.
 Summons must still be served, not for the purpose of vesting the courts with jurisdiction, but to
comply with the requirements of fair play and due process. This is but proper, to afford the person
concerned the opportunity to protect her interest if she so chooses.
 Upon the filing of the petition, it becomes the duty of the court to:
 a. Issue an order fixing the time and place for the hearing of the petition; and
 b. Cause the order for hearing to be published once a week for three (3) consecutive weeks in
a newspaper of general circulation in the province.
 In a special proceeding for correction of entry under Rule 108, the trial court has no jurisdiction
to nullify marriages and rule on legitimacy and filiation. - Their cause of action is actually to seek
 the declaration of Pablo and Lucille’s marriage as void for being bigamous and impugn Patrick’s
legitimacy, which causes of action are governed not by Rule 108
 Circumstances Rule 108 applicable - applies only to substantial changes and correction in entries
in the civil register
 Reason of sex change - No. Under the Civil Register Law, a birth certificate is a historical record of
the facts as they existed at the time of birth.
 Sex of a person is determined at birth, visually done by the birth attendant by examining the
genitals of the infant
 Considering that there is no law legally recognizing sex reassignment, the determination of a
person’s sex made at the time of his or her birth, if not attended by error, is immutable.
 Steps for foreigners to re-marry in the Philippines
 File a petition for recognition of a foreign divorce decree, and upon recognition file an action for
cancellation or correction of entries in the civil registry under
 Filed in the RTC of Makati City, where the corresponding Local Civil Registry is located
 Satisfy the following procedural requirements:
 Filing a verified petition;
 Naming as parties all persons who have or claim any interest which would be affected;
 Issuance of an order fixing the time and place of hearing;
 Giving reasonable notice to the parties named in the petition; and
 Publication of the order once a week for 3 consecutive weeks in a newspaper of general
circulation.

F. Clerical Error Law (RA No. 9048, as amended by RA 10172)

 governs the change of first name
 vests the power and authority to entertain petitions for change of first name to the city or
municipal civil registrar or consul general concerned
 jurisdiction over applications for change of first name is now primarily lodge with the
aforementioned administrative officers
 Nature - administrative in nature
 Coverage
 Change of first name or nickname;
 Correction of clerical or typographical errors;
 Change of the day and month in the date of birth; and
 Change of sex of a person.
 Effect - merely to make possible the administrative correction of clerical and typographical errors
or change of first name or nickname in entries in the civil register
 leaving to Rule 108 the correction of substantial changes in the civil registry in appropriate
adversarial proceedings.
 R.A. 10172, now allows the administrative correction of:
 a. Day and month of date of birth;
 b. Sex of a person provide that it is patently clear that there was a clerical or typographical
error or mistake in the entry.
 Grounds enumerated are subject to qualification that the error or mistake to be corrected must be
patently clear and it must be within the competence of the local civil registrar or consul general
 Clerical or typographical error
 GR: refers to a mistake committed in the performance of clerical work in writing, copying,
transcribing or typing an entry in the civil register that is harmless and innocuous
 misspelled name or misspelled place of birth,
 mistake in the entry of day and month in the date of birth or
  the sex of the person or the like
 Which is visible to the eyes or obvious to the understanding, and can be corrected or changed only
by reference to other existing record or records.
 XPN: No correction must involve the change of nationality, age (correction on year of birth), or
status of the petitioner.
 Substantial corrections to the nationality or citizenship of persons recorded in the CR should,
therefore, be effected thru a petition filed in court under Rule 108.
 Grounds for change of first name or nickname
 petitioner finds the first name or nickname to be ridiculous, tainted with dishonor or
extremely difficult to write or pronounce;
 new first name or nickname has been habitually and continuously used by the petitioner and
he has been publicly known by that first name or nickname in the community; or
 change will avoid confusion.
 Where to file the petition for correction of entry or change of name under R.A. 10172
 Resident of the PH – Local Civil Registry Office (City or Municipality) where the record being
sought to be corrected or changed is kept;
 Resident of PH who migrated to another region and that it would not be practical for such
party, in terms of transportation expenses, time and effort to appear before the LCR of the
place of birth - LCR of the place where the petitioner is residing or domiciled;
 Person is any person whose birth record was reported abroad and presently residing in the PH
- LCR of the place of residence following the procedures of migrant petition.
 Domicile is not appropriate for it is evident that the person’s domicile is in abroad.
 Citizens of PH who are presently residing or domiciled in foreign countries – Nearest
Philippine Consulate.
 Form and contents of the Petition –
 a. In the form of an affidavit;
 b. Subscribed and sworn to before any person authorized by law to administer oaths.
 Set forth facts necessary to establish the merits of the petition and shall show affirmatively that
the petitioner is competent to testify to the matters stated. The petitioner shall state the particular
erroneous entry or entries, which are sought to be corrected and/or the change sought to be
made

 Supporting documents which must be attached in the petition for correction of a clerical or
typographical error
 A certified true machine copy of the certificate or of the page of the registry book containing
the entry or entries sought to be corrected or changed;
 At least two (2) public or private documents showing the correct entry or entries upon which
the correction or change shall be based; and
 Other documents which the petitioner or the city or municipal civil registrar or the consul
general may consider relevant and necessary for the approval of the petition.
 Requirements for correction of date of birth (day or month) or sex of the person
 Petition is accompanied by earliest school record or earliest school documents such as, but
not limited to, medical records, baptismal certificate and other documents issued by religious
authorities; nor shall any entry involving change of gender or corrected except if the petition
is accompanied by a certification issued by an accredited government physician attesting to
the fact that the petitioner has not undergone sex exchange or sex transplant;
 published at least once a week for two (2) consecutive weeks in a newspaper of general
circulation;
  submit a certification from the appropriate law enforcement agencies that he has no pending
case or no criminal record; and
 filed in three (3) copies to be distributed as follows:
 i. First copy to the concerned city or municipal LCR, or consul general; ii. Second copy to
the Office of the Civil Registrar General; and iii. Third copy to the petitioner.
 ii. Second copy to the Office of the Civil Registrar General; and
 iii. Third copy to the petitioner.
 Rule 103 vs. Rule 108 vs. R.A. 10172
 Coverage/Scope
 Rule 103 - Change of full name or surname.
 Rule 108 - Correction of substantial errors or cancellation of entries in the civil registry
 RA 10172 –
 a. Correction of clerical or typographical error; or
 b. Change of first name or nickname; or
 c. The day and month in the date of birth; or
 d. Sex of a person where it is patently clear that there was clerical or typographical error
or mistake in the entry
 Who may file
 Rule 103 - person desiring to change one’s name
 Rule 108 - Any person interested in any act, event, order or decree concerning the civil status
of persons which has been recorded in the LCR
 RA 10172 - Any person interest in any act, event, order or decree concerning the civil status of
persons which has been recorded in the LCR
 Jurisdiction/Venue
 Rule 103 – RTC (Province in which the petitioner resided for three (3) years prior to the filing)
 Rule 108 - RTC where the corresponding LCR is located.
 RA 10172 –
 a. LCR where the record being sought to be corrected or changed is kept;
 b. LCR of place where the interested party is presently residing or domiciled if petitioner has
already migrated to another place in the country; or
 c. place where the interested party is presently residing or domiciled if petitioner has already
migrated to another place in the country; or residing or domiciled in foreign countries.
 Contents
 Rule 103 –
 petitioner has been a bona fide resident of the province where the petition is filed for at
least 3 years prior to the date of such filing;
 cause for which the change of petitioner’s name is sought; and
 cause for which the change of petitioner’s name is sought; and
 Rule 108 –
 particular erroneous entry or entries permitted under the law which is/are sought to be
corrected and/or cancelled;
 good and valid grounds for the change or correction sought.
 RA 10172 –
 Facts necessary to establish the merits of the petition and shall show affirmatively that
the petitioner is competent to testify on the matters stated;
 particular erroneous entry or entries which are sought to be corrected and/or the change
sought to be made.
 Notice and Publication
  Rule 103 - once a week for 3 consecutive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation in the
province.
 Rule 108 - once a week for 3 consecutive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation in the
province.
 RA 10172 - once a week for 2 consecutive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation

G. Writ of Amparo (A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC)

 Petition - remedy available to any person whose right to life, liberty and security
 Violated or threatened with violation by an unlawful act or omission of a public official or
employee, or of a private individual or entity
 Cover extralegal killings and enforced disappearances or threats thereof.
 Extralegal killings - killings committed without due process of law, legal safeguards or judicial
proceedings.
 Enforced disappearance – Elements - (1) arrest, detention, or abduction of persons by, or (2) 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 faith or
whereabouts of those persons, (4) with the intention of removing from the protection of law for a
prolonged period of time.
 Purpose - serves both preventive and curative roles in addressing the problem of extralegal killings
and enforced disappearances
 Preventive in that it breaks the expectation of impunity in the commission of these offenses
 Curative in that it facilitates the subsequent punishment of perpetrators as it will inevitably yield
leads to subsequent investigation and action.
 One of the ultimate objectives of the writ of amparo as a curative remedy is to facilitate the
subsequent punishment of perpetrators. On the other hand, if there is no actual criminal case
lodged before the courts, then the denial of the petition is without prejudice to the filing of the
appropriate administrative, civil or criminal case, if applicable, against those individuals whom
petitioner deems to have unduly restrained his liberty.
 Fundamental function - to cause the disclosure of details concerning the extrajudicial killing or the
enforced disappearance of an aggrieved party.
 Nature - summary proceeding that requires only substantial evidence to make the appropriate
reliefs available to the petitioner;
 does not include the determination of guilt requiring proof beyond reasonable doubt
 Partakes of the nature of a prerogative writ that does not determine guilt nor pinpoint criminal
culpability for the disappearance; rather, it determines responsibility, or at least accountability, for
the enforced disappearance for purposes of imposing the appropriate remedies to address the
disappearance.
 State Participation - indispensable element for the issuance of writ of amparo
 Proof of disappearance alone is not sufficient
 It is indispensable that the petitioner establishes that such disappearance was carried out with the
direct or indirect authorization, support, or acquiescence of the government
 While the writ may lie if the person sought to be held accountable or responsible in an amparo
petition is a private individual or entity, still, government involvement in the disappearance
remains an indispensable element.
 Hallmark of State participation differentiates an enforced disappearance case from an ordinary
case of missing person.
 Who may file - petition may be filed by the aggrieved party or by any 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 consanguinity or affinity, in default of those mentioned in the preceding
paragraph; or
 c. Any concerned citizen, organization, association or institution, if there is no known member
of the immediate family or relative of the aggrieved party.
 Effect if the aggrieved party himself/herself files a petition for a writ of amparo - suspends the
right of all other parties to file similar petitions
 Filing of the petition by an authorized party on behalf of the aggrieved party suspends the right of
all others, observing the order established therein
 Contents of Petition - signed and verified and shall allege the following:
 personal circumstances of the petitioner;
 name and personal circumstances of the respondent responsible for the threat, act or
omission, or, if the name is unknown or uncertain, the respondent may be described by an
assumed appellation;
 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;
 investigation conducted, if any, specifying the names, personal circumstances, and addresses
of the investigating authority or individuals, as well as the manner and conduct of the
investigation, together with any report;
 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 threat, act or omission; and
 relief prayed for.
 Petition may include a general prayer for other just and equitable reliefs
 Sufficiency of the petition in form and substance - pleader must state the ultimate facts
constituting the cause of action, omitting the evidentiary details
 However, in an amparo petition, this requirement must be read in light of the nature and purpose
of the proceedings, which addresses a situation of uncertainty – the petitioner may not be able to
describe with certainty how the victim exactly disappeared, or who actually acted to kidnap,
abduct or arrest him or her, or where the victim is detained, because this information may
purposely be hidden or covered up by those who caused the disappearance. In this type of
situation, to require the level of specificity, detail and precision is to make the Rule a token of
gesture of judicial concern for violation of the constitutional rights to life, liberty, and security.
 Test in reading the petition should be to determine whether it contains the details available to the
petitioner under the circumstances, while presenting a cause of action showing a violation of the
victim’s rights to life, liberty, and security thru State or party action
 In cases where the violation of the right to life, liberty or security has already ceased, it is
necessary for the petitioner in an amparo action to prove the existence of a continuing threat.
 Where to File - filed on any day and at any time with the Regional Trial Court of the place where
the threat, act or omission was committed or any of its elements occurred, or with the
Sandiganbayan, the Court of Appeals, the Supreme Court, or any justice of such courts.
 The writ shall be enforceable anywhere in the Philippines.
 Issued by a Regional Trial Court or any judge thereof, the writ shall be returnable before such court
or judge.
 Issued by the Sandiganbayan or the Court of Appeals or any of their justices, it may be returnable
before such court or any justice thereof, or to any Regional Trial Court of the place where the
threat, act or omission was committed or any of its elements occurred.
 Issued by the Supreme Court or any of its justices, it may be returnable before such Court or any
justice thereof, or before the Sandiganbayan or the Court of Appeals or any of their justices, or to
any Regional Trial Court of the place where the threat, act or omission was committed or any of its
elements occurred.
 Rule allowing the filing of the petition before the RTC does not require that the RTC have
jurisdiction over the offense complained of jurisdiction can only be conferred by Congress. The
rule merely establishes a procedure to enforce the right to life, liberty, or security of a person
which requires the filing of the petition before the RTC of the place where the threat, act or
omission was committed or any of its elements
 Intent is to prevent the filing of the petition in some far-flung area to harass the respondent.
Moreover, allowing the amparo petition to be filed in any RTC may prejudice the effective
dispensation of justice, as in most cases, the witnesses and the evidence are located within the
jurisdiction of the RTC where the act or omission was committed.
 No Docket Fees - petitioner shall be exempted from the payment of the docket and other lawful
fees when filing the petition. The court, justice or judge shall docket the petition and act upon it
immediately.
 Return; Contents - Within seventy-two (72) hours after service of the writ, the respondent shall
file a verified written return together with supporting affidavits which shall, among other things,
contain the following:
 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 omission;
 steps or actions taken by the respondent to determine the fate or whereabouts of the
aggrieved party and the person or persons responsible for the threat, act or omission;
 All relevant information in the possession of the respondent pertaining to the threat, act or
omission against the aggrieved party; and
 respondent is a public official or employee, the return shall further state the actions that have
been or will still be taken:
 verify the identity of the aggrieved party;
 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;
 identify witnesses and obtain statements from them concerning the death or
disappearance;
 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 disappearance;
 identify and apprehend the person or persons involved in the death or disappearance;
and
 bring the suspected offenders before a competent court.
 The return shall also state other matters relevant to the investigation, its resolution and the
prosecution of the case.
 A general denial of the allegations in the petition shall not be allowed.
 Effect of Failure to File Return - justice or judge shall proceed to hear the petition ex parte
 respondent waives any defense he/she may have had;
 court shall proceed to hear the petition ex parte
 GR: The failure to file a return cannot be extended.
 XPN: Except on highly meritorious grounds. Thus, a motion for extension of time to file a return
upon showing a highly meritorious ground is no longer a prohibited pleading.
 Interim reliefs available to the petitioner upon filing a petition for the issuance of a writ of
amparo - Upon filing the petition or at any time before final judgement, the court, justice or judge
may grant any of the following reliefs:
 Temporary Protection Order - order that the petitioner or the aggrieved party and any
member of the immediate family be protected in a government agency or by an accredited
persons or private institution capable of keeping and securing their safety. If the petitioner is
an organization, association or institution referred to in Sec. 3(c) of this Rule, the protection
may be extended to the officers involved;
 Inspection Order - order any person in possession or control of a designated land or other
property, to permit entry for the purpose of inspecting, measuring, surveying, or
photographing the property or any relevant object or operation thereto;
 Production Order - order any person in possession, custody or control of any designated
documents, papers, books, accounts, letters, photographs, objects or tangible things, or
objects in digitized or electronic form, which constitute or contain evidence relevant to the
petition or the return, to produce and permit their inspection, copying, or photographing by
or on behalf of the movant. This is different from a search warrant, and instead may be
likened to the production of documents or things
 Witness Protection Order - refer the witnesses to the Department of Justice for admission to
the Witness Protection, Security, and Benefit Program, pursuant to R.A. No. 6981. The court,
justice or judge may also refer the witnesses to other government agencies, or to accredited
persons or private institutions capable of keeping and securing their safety.
 An interim relief cannot be granted independently when a writ of amparo has already been issued.
Provisional reliefs are intended to assist the court before it arrives at a judicious determination of
the amparo petition. The privilege of the writ of amparo, once granted, necessarily entails the
protection of the aggrieved party.
 The issuance of a writ of amparo is not proper in this case. The remedy of amparo is confined
merely to instances of “extralegal killings” or “enforced disappearances” and to threats thereof. In
this case, there is no actual or threatened enforced disappearance or extralegal killing. Moreover,
A’s whereabouts appears to be determinable, i.e., in the officer of Anakbayan. Hence, the writ of
amparo is inapplicable.
 The filing of a petition for the issuance of a writ of amparo shall not preclude the filing of a
separate criminal, civil or administrative action.
 Effect of Filing of a Criminal Action - No separate petition for the writ shall be filed. The reliefs
under the writ shall be available by motion in the criminal case
 The procedure under this Rule shall govern the disposition of the reliefs available under the writ of
amparo
 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.
 After consolidation, the procedure under this Rule shall continue to apply to the disposition of the
reliefs in the petition.
 Not agents of the State - writ of amparo is available in cases where the enforced or involuntary
disappearance of a person is with the authorization, support or acquiescence of the State
 Mapusok and APKA may be considered as acting with the support or at least the acquiescence of
the State since APKA serves as an auxiliary force of the police and the police refused to assist in
the search of Masigasig.
 Filing of a petition by an authorized party on behalf of the aggrieved party suspends the right of
all others - petition for writ of amparo had earlier been filed by the spouse of the aggrieved party
Masigasig. Thus, it suspends the right of all others, including ALMA, to file the petition.
 When writ is not available:
  Protection of a property right; intended to address violations of or threats to the rights to life,
liberty or security, as an extraordinary and independent remedy
 What is not, is a writ to protect concerns that are purely property or commercial.
 rule is the same with respect to habeas data
 In labor dispute; Employment constitutes a property right
 does not constitute an unlawful violation of the right to life, liberty, or security
 rule is the same with respect to habeas data.
 protection of right to travel; right to travel refers to the right to move from one place to
another
 right to travel is subject to the usual constrains imposed by the very necessity of
safeguarding the system of justice
 permission to leave the jurisdiction for humanitarian reasons is a matter of the court’s
sound discretion.
 Inclusion of name in the order of battle; Mere inclusion in the military’s order of battle which
is not supported by independent and credible evidence stands on nebulous grounds
 liberality accorded to amparo cases does not mean that a claimant is dispensed with the
onus of proving his case.
 rule is the same with respect to habeas data.
 Responsibility and Accountability - not the same as accountability under an amparo proceeding.
 Responsibility - refers to the extent the actors have been established by substantial evidence to
have participated in whatever way, by action or omission, in an enforced disappearance
 Accountability - refers to the measure of remedies that should be addressed to those who:
 exhibited involvement in the enforced disappearance without bringing the level of their
complicity to the level of responsibility defined above;
 imputed with knowledge relating to the enforced disappearance and who carry the burden of
disclosure; or
 carries, but have failed to discharge, the burden of extraordinary diligence in the investigation
of the enforced disappearance
 Doctrine Command and Responsibility - a rule of substantive law that establishes liability and, by
this account, cannot be a proper legal basis to implead a party-respondent (President) in an
amparo petition
 Application of command responsibility presupposes an imputation of an individual liability; it is
more aptly invoked in a full-blown criminal or administrative case rather than in a summary
amparo proceeding
 Obvious reason lies in the nature of the writ itself.
 Doctrine does not, by any measure, preclude impleading military or police commanders on the
ground that the complained acts in the petition were committed with their direct or indirect
acquiescence. They may be impleaded- not actually on the basis of command responsibility- but
rather on the ground of their responsibility, or at least accountability
 If command responsibility were to be invoked and applied to these proceedings, it should, at most,
be only determine the author who, at the first instance, is accountable for, and has the duty to
address, the disappearance and harassments complained of, so as to enable the Court to devise
remedial measures that may be appropriate under the premises to protect rights covered by the
writ of amparo. Thus, the doctrine of command responsibility does not determine criminal, civil, or
administrative liabilities but is to be applied merely to ascertain responsibility and accountability of
the persons involved.
 The same rule applies with respect to habeas data.
 Motion to dismiss - prohibited pleading under of the Rule on the Writ of Amparo
 Rule does not require the petition therefor to allege a complete detail of the actual or threatened
violation of the victim’s rights. It is sufficient that there be an allegation of real threat against
petitioner’s life, liberty, and/or security.
 Omnibus Waiver Rule - All defenses shall be raised in the return, otherwise, they shall be deemed
waived.
 Summary Hearing - However, the court, justice or judge may call for a preliminary conference to
simplify the issues and determine the possibility of obtaining stipulations and admissions from the
parties.
 Hearing shall be from day to day until completed and given the same priority as petitions for
habeas corpus.
 Archiving and Revival of Cases - upon its determination it cannot proceed for a valid cause such as
the failure of petitioner or witnesses to appear due to threats on their lives.
 Periodic review of the archived cases shall be made by the amparo court that shall, motu proprio
or upon motion by any party, order their revival when ready for further proceedings. The petition
shall be dismissed with prejudice upon failure to prosecute the case after the lapse of two (2)
years from notice to the petitioner of the order archiving the case.
 Clerks of court shall submit to the Office of the Court Administrator a consolidated list of archived
cases under this Rule not later than the first week of January of every year.
 Due to the extraordinary nature if the writ, which protects the mother of all rights – the right to
life – the petition may be filed on any day, including Saturdays, Sundays, and Holidays; and at any
time from morning until evening.
 Issuance of the writ - Upon the filing of the petition, the court, justice or judge shall immediately
order the issuance if the writ if on its face it ought to issue. The writ shall be served immediately.
 Privilege of the writ of amparo different from the actual order of the writ of amparo - privilege of
the Writ of Amparo should be distinguished from the actual order called the Writ of Amparo
 Privilege includes availment of the entire procedure
 After examining the petition and its attached affidavits, the Return and the evidence presented in
the summary hearing, the judgement should detail the required acts from the respondents that
will mitigate, if not totally eradicate, the violation of or the threat to the petitioner’s life, liberty, or
security.
 judgement 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 succor to the petitioner. Petitions filed to avail
of the privilege of the Writ of Amparo arise out very real and concrete circumstances, judicial
responses cannot be as tragically symbolic of ritualistic as “granting the privilege of the Writ of
Amparo.”
 writ should set the date and time for a summary hearing of the petition which shall not be later
than seven (7) days from the date of its issuance
 Burden of Proof and Standard of Diligence Required - substantial evidence.
 respondent who is a private individual or entity must prove that ordinary diligence in the
performance of duty
 respondent who is a public official or employee must prove that extraordinary diligence in the
performance of duty
 Respondent public official or employee cannot invoke the presumption that official duty has been
regularly performed to evade responsibility or liability.
 Judgement subject to appeal via Rule 45 - allegations are proven with substantial evidence, the
court shall grant the privilege of the writ and such reliefs as may be proper and appropriate. The
judgement should contain measures, which the judge views as essential for the continued
protection of the petitioner in the Amparo case.
  Measures must be detailed enough so that the judge may be able to verify and monitor the
actions taken by the respondents. It is this judgement that could be subject to appeal to the SC via
Rule 45
 Appeal - to the SC under Rule 45 within five (5) days.
 Appeal may raise not only questions of law but also questions of fact or both because its subject is
extralegal killings or enforced disappearances, which might necessitate a review of errors of fact.
 Doctrine of totality of evidence - court must consider all the pieces of evidence adduced in their
totality, not in isolation with each other, and to consider any evidence otherwise inadmissible
under our usual rules to be admissible if it is consistent with the admissible evidence adduced.
 Reduced our rules to the most basic test of reason – i.e., to the relevance of the evidence to the
issue at hand and its consistency with all other pieces of adduced evidence.
 Hearsay evidence can be admitted if it satisfies this basic minimum test.

H. Writ of Habeas Data (A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC)

 Remedy available to any person whose right to privacy in life, liberty or security is violated or
threatened by an unlawful act or omission of a public official or employee, or 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
 Courts only determine the respondent’s accountability in the gathering, collecting, or storing of
data or information regarding the person, family, home, and correspondence of the aggrieved
party.
 Any civil, criminal, or administrative liability may only be imposed in a separate action.
 Nature – summary
 However, the court, justice or judge may call for a preliminary conference to simplify the issues
and determine the possibility of obtaining stipulations and admissions from the parties
 Reliefs granted by the court - allegations in the petition are proven thru substantial evidence, then
the Court may:
 a. Grant access to the database or information;
 b. Enjoin the act complained of; or
 c. In case the database or information contains erroneous data or information, order its
deletion, destruction or rectification.
 Where the writ of habeas data is not applicable - state interest in dismantling private armed
groups outweighed the alleged intrusion of a person’s private life
 Related jurisprudence - As public officials, they enjoy the presumption of regularity, which she
failed to overcome. The state interest of dismantling PAGs far outweighs the alleged intrusion on
the private life of Gamboa, especially when the collection and forwarding by the PNP of
information against her was pursuant to a lawful mandate. Therefore, the privilege of the writ of
habeas data must be denied.
 Until such time that any of the respondents were found to be actually responsible for the
abduction and torture of the petitioner, any inference regarding the existence of reports being
kept in violation of the petitioners right to privacy becomes farfetched, and premature.
 Incumbent Chief Executive cannot be hauled to court even for the limited purpose under the Rule
on the Writ of Habeas Data on the basis of presidential immunity from suit
 Availability of writ:
 a. To any person;
 b. Whose right to privacy in life, liberty and security is violated or threatened;
 c. With violation by an unlawful act or omission of a public official or employee, or of a private
individual or entity engaged in:
 i. Gathering;
  ii. Collecting;
 iii. Storing of data or information regarding the person, family, home, and
correspondence of the aggrieved party
 Writ however will not issue on the basis merely of an alleged unauthorized access to information
about a person. Availment of the writ requires the existence of a nexus between the right to
privacy on the one hand, and the right to life, liberty, or security on the other
 The existence of a person’s right to informational privacy and a showing, at least by substantial
evidence, of an actual or threatened violation of right to privacy in life, liberty, or security of the
victim are indispensable before the privilege of the writ may be extended.
 Right to informational privacy is defined as the right of individuals to control information about
themselves. And such right depends on the existence of “expectational privacy” a person has
toward particular information. Before one can have expectational privacy, it must be shown the
person intended such information to be private.
 Who may file - aggrieved party whose right to privacy in life, liberty or security is violated or
threatened may file a petition.
 Unlike in amparo, human rights organizations or institution are no longer allowed to file the
petition.
 Quantum of proof in application for issuance of writ of habeas data - substantial evidence
 Court shall enjoin the act complained of, or order the deletion, destruction, or rectification of the
erroneous data or information and grant other relevant reliefs as may be just and equitable;
otherwise, the privilege of the writ shall be denied.
 Court has ruled that in view of the recognition of the evidentiary difficulties’ attendant in the filing
of a petition for the privilege of the writs of amparo and habeas data, not only direct evidence, but
circumstantial evidence, indicia, and presumptions may be considered, so long as they lead to
conclusions consistent with the admissible evidence adduced.
 Instances when petition may be heard in chambers - Hearing in chambers may be conducted
where respondent invokes the defense that the release of the data or information shall
compromise
 a. National security;
 b. State secrets; and
 c. When the data or information cannot be divulged to the public due to its nature or
privileged character
 Issuance of the Writ - Upon the filing of the petition, the court, justice or judge shall immediately
order the issuance of the writ if on its face it ought to issue.
 Clerk of court shall issue the writ under the seal of the court and cause it to be served within three
(3) days from the issuance; or, in case of urgent necessity, the justice or judge may issue the writ
under his or her own hand, and may deputize any officer or person serve it.
 Writ shall also set the date and time for summary hearing of the petition which shall not be later
than ten (10) work days from the date of its issuance.
 Where Writ of Habeas Data returnable and enforceable –
 Issued by the RTC or any judge thereof, it shall be returnable before such court or judge
 Issued by CA or the SB or any of its justices - returnable before such court or any justice
thereof, or to any RTC of the place where the petitioner or respondents resides, or that which
has jurisdiction over the place where the data or information is gathered, collected, or stored;
 Issued by the SC or any of its justices - returnable before such Court or any justice thereof, or
before the CA or the Sandiganbayan or any of its justices, or to any RTC of the place where the
petitioner or respondent resides, or that which has jurisdiction over the place where the data
or information is gathered, collected, or stored.
 The writ of habeas data shall be enforceable anywhere in the Philippines.
 When is the respondent served with a writ of habeas data required to file a return - respondent
shall file a verified written return together with supporting affidavits within 5 working days from
service of the writ, which period may be reasonably extended by the court for justifiable reasons.
 Return; Contents - respondent shall file a verified written return together with supporting
affidavits within five (5) working days from service of the writ, which period may be reasonably
extended by the Court for justifiable reasons. The return shall, among other things, contain the
following:
 (a) The lawful defenses such as national security, state secrets, privileged communications,
confidentiality of the source of information of media and others;
 (b) In case of respondent in charge, in possession or in control of the data or information
subject of the petition;
 (i) a disclosure of the data or information about the petitioner, the nature of such data or
information, and the purpose for its collection;
 (ii) the steps or actions taken by the respondent to ensure the security and
confidentiality of the data or information; and,
 (iii) the currency and accuracy of the data or information held; and
 (c) Other allegations relevant to the resolution of the proceeding.
 A general denial of the allegations in the petition shall not be allowed.
 Appeal - to the Supreme Court under Rule 45
 May raise questions of fact or law or both.
 Period of appeal shall be five (5) working days from the date of notice of the judgment or final
order
 Appeal shall be given the same priority as in habeas corpus and amparo cases.
 Institution of Separate Actions - filing of a petition for the writ of habeas data shall not preclude
the filing of separate criminal, civil or administrative actions.
 Effect of Filing of a Criminal Action – No separate petition for the writ shall be filed. The relief
under the writ shall be available to an aggrieved party by motion in the criminal case
 Procedure under this Rule shall govern the disposition of the reliefs available under the writ of
habeas data.
 Issuance of the writ vs. Privilege of the writ
 Issuance of the Writ - issued upon the filing of the petition if on its fact it ought to issue
 clerk of court shall issue the writ under the seal of the court and cause it to be served within
three (3) days from the issuance; or, in case of urgent necessity, the justice or judge may issue
the writ under his or her own hand, and may deputize any officer or person serve it.
 writ shall also set the date and time for summary hearing of the petition which shall not be
later than ten (10) work days from the date of its issuance
 Privilege of the Writ - issued after hearing, in the form of a judgement.
 Court shall render judgement within 10 days from the time the petition is submitted for
decision
 Allegations in the petition are proven by substantial evidence, the court shall enjoin the act
complained of, or order the deletion, destruction, or rectification of the erroneous data or
information and grant other relevant reliefs as may be just and equitable; otherwise, the
privilege of the writ shall be denied
 Azenith’s petition for the issuance of a writ of habeas data must be dismissed. Under the facts,
there is no showing that her right to privacy in life, liberty or security is violated or threatened by
an unlawful act or omission. Neither was the company shown to be engaged in the gathering,
collecting nor, storing of data or information regarding the person, family, home and
correspondence of the aggrieved party
I. Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases (A.M. No. 09-6-8-SC)
 Scope - Rules shall govern the procedure in civil, criminal and special civil actions before the RTCs,
MeTCs, MTCCs, and MCTCs involving enforcement or violations of environmental and other
related laws, rules and regulations
 rules remain consistent with prevailing jurisprudence regarding the doctrine of exhaustion of
administrative remedies and primary jurisdiction.
 apply to environmental cases arising from laws that relate to conservation, development,
preservation, protection and utilization of the environment and natural resources
 include environmental laws and those laws that may contain provisions that relate to the
environment but are not environmental laws per se
 While this section includes a list of such applicable laws, it is not meant to be exhaustive
 Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP) - legal action filed to harass, vex, exert
undue pressure or stifle any legal recourse that any person, institution or the government has
taken or may take in the enforcement of environmental laws, protection of the environment or
assertion of environmental rights.
 Under the Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases, the allegation of SLAPP is set up as a
defense in cases claimed to have been filed merely as harassment suit against environmental
actions. The Court finds no occasion to apply the rules on SLAPP as the petition has no relation at
all to “the enforcement of environmental laws, protection of the environment or assertion of
environmental rights.
 R.A. No. 9262, which involves cases of violence against women and their children, is not among
those laws included under the scope of SLAPP.
 Prohibition against Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) and Preliminary Injunction - Only the SC
can issue a TRO or writ of preliminary injunction against lawful actions of government agencies
that enforce environmental laws or prevent violations thereof.
 Judge shall report any action taken on a TEPO, EPO, TRO or a preliminary injunction, including its
modification and dissolution within 10 days from the action taken to the SC, through the Office of
the Court Administrator
 Difference between a TEPO and the prohibition against issuance of TRO - TEPO is premised on
the violation of an environmental law or a threatened damage or injury to the environment by any
person, even the government and its agencies while the prohibition against the issuance of a TRO
or preliminary injunction is premised on the presumption of regularity on the government and its
agencies in enforcing environmental laws and protecting the environment.

1. Temporary Environmental Protection Order (TEPO)

 Issuance - appears from the verified complaint with prayer for the issuance of an
Environmental Protection Order (EPO) that the matter is of extreme urgency and the
applicant will suffer grave injustice and irreparable injury
 executive judge of the multiple-sala court before raffle or the presiding judge of a single-sala
court as the case may be, may issue ex parte a TEPO effective for only seventy-two (72)
hours from date of the receipt of the court where the case is assigned,
 shall conduct a summary hearing to determine whether the TEPO may be extended until the
termination of the case
 court where the case is assigned, shall periodically monitor the existence of acts that are the
subject matter of the TEPO even if issued by the executive judge, and may lift the same at
any time as circumstances may warrant.
 The applicant shall be exempted from posting a bond for the issuance of a TEPO.
 Action on motion for dissolution of TEPO - grounds for motion to dissolve a TEPO shall be
supported by affidavits of the party or person enjoined which the applicant may oppose,
also by affidavits.
 TEPO may be dissolved if it appears after hearing that its issuance or continuance would
cause irreparable damage to the party or person enjoined while the applicant may be fully
compensated for such damages as he may suffer and subject to the posting of a sufficient
bond by the party or person enjoined.
 Convert a TEPO into Permanent EPO; writ of continuing mandamus - Court may convert
the TEPO to a permanent EPO or issue a writ of continuing mandamus directing the
performance of acts which shall be effective until the judgment is fully satisfied.
 Court may, by itself or thru the appropriate government agency, monitor the execution of
the judgement and require the party concerned to submit written reports on a quarterly
basis or sooner as may be necessary, detailing the progress of the execution and satisfaction
of the judgement. The other party may, at its option, submit its comments or observations
on the execution of the judgement.
 Expediting proceedings; TEPO - court in which the petition is filed may issue:
 (1) such orders to expedite the proceedings, and it may also
 (2) grant a TEPO for the preservation of the rights of the parties pending such
proceedings.

2. Writ of Continuing Mandamus

 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
 As a special civil action that may be availed of to compel the performance of an act specially
enjoined by law. The petition should mainly involve an environmental and other related law,
rule or regulation or a right therein
 A writ of continuing mandamus is, in essence, a command of continuing compliance with a
final judgment as it “permits the court to retain jurisdiction after judgment in order to
ensure the successful implementation of the reliefs mandated under the court’s decision.”
 When Availed of - person may file a verified petition for a writ of continuing mandamus
when any of the following instances are present:
 1. respondent either:
 a. Unlawfully neglects to perform a duty specifically enjoined by law, arising from
an office, trust or station, in relation to the enforcement or violation of an
environmental law, rule or regulation or a right; or
 b. Unlawfully excludes another from the use or enjoyment of such right; and
 2. There is no other plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law
 Petition for a Writ of Continuing Mandamus may be filed - any agency or instrumentality of
the government or officer thereof unlawfully neglects the performance of an act which the
law specifically enjoins as a duty resulting from an office, trust or station in connection with
the enforcement or violation of an environmental law rule or regulation or a right therein, or
unlawfully excludes another any agency or instrumentality of the government or officer
thereof unlawfully neglects the performance of an act which the law specifically enjoins as a
duty resulting from an office, trust or station in connection with the enforcement or
violation of an environmental law rule or regulation or a right therein, or unlawfully excludes
another
 person aggrieved thereby may file a verified petition in the proper court, alleging the facts
with certainty, attaching thereto supporting evidence, specifying that the petition concerns
 an environmental law, rule or regulation, and praying that judgment be rendered
commanding the respondent to do an act or series of acts until the judgment is fully
satisfied, and to pay damages sustained by the petitioner by reason of the malicious neglect
to perform the duties of the respondent, under the law, rules or regulations
 The petition shall also contain a sworn certification of non-forum shopping
 SC held that the cleaning or rehabilitation of Manila Bay can be compelled by mandamus.
The ruling in MMDA may be applied by analogy to the clean-up of the Laguna de Bay. While
the term issued by the RTC of Laguna is a permanent writ of mandamus, this should be
considered only as a semantic error and that what the RTC really intended to issue is a writ
of continuing mandamus. 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.
 Petitioners failed to establish the requisites for the issuance of the writs prayed for. A party
claiming the privilege for the issuance of a writ of kalikasan has to show that a law, rule or
regulation was violated or would be violated. In this case, apart from repeated invocation of
the constitutional right to health and to a balanced and healthful ecology and bare
allegations that their right was violated, the petitioners failed to show that public
respondents are guilty of any unlawful act or omission that constitutes a violation of the
petitioners' right to a balanced and healthful ecology
 Writ of continuing mandamus cannot issue. First, the petitioners failed to prove direct or
personal injury arising from acts attributable to the respondents to be entitled to the writ.
Second, the Road Sharing Principle is precisely as it is denominated – a principle. Mandamus
lies to compel the performance of duties that are purely ministerial in nature, not those that
are discretionary, and the official can only be directed by mandamus to act but not to act
one way or the other. The duty being enjoined in mandamus must be one according to the
terms provided in the law itself.
 There is no showing of unlawful neglect on the part of the respondents to perform any act
that the law specifically enjoins as a duty - there being nothing in the executive issuances
relied upon by the petitioners that specifically enjoins the bifurcation of roads to implement
the Road Sharing Principle. Clearly, the determination of the means to be taken by the
executive in implementing or actualizing any stated legislative or executive policy relating to
the environment requires the use of discretion.
 Where to file the Petition - a. RTC which has territorial jurisdiction over the unlawful act or
omission; b. CA; or c. SC.
 Contents of a Verified Petition:
 1. Allegation of facts;
 2. Specific allegation that the petition concerns an environmental law, rule or
regulation;
 3. Prayer that judgment be rendered commanding the respondent to do an act or series
of acts until the judgment is fully satisfied;
 4. Prayer for payment of damages sustained by the plaintiff due to malicious neglect to
perform legal duties; and
 5. Sworn certification of non-forum shopping
 Resolution of the Petition - resolved without delay within 60 days from the date of the
submission of the petition for resolution
 Supreme Court held that the requirement that the petition be filed in the area where the
actionable neglect or omission took place relates to venue and not to subject-matter
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
 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
 Judgment - If granted:
 a. The court shall require the respondent to perform an act or series of acts until
judgment is fully satisfied and to grant such other reliefs as may be warranted resulting
from the wrongful or illegal acts of the respondent;
 b. The court shall require the respondent to submit periodic reports detailing the
progress and execution of the judgment;
 c. The court may by itself or through a commissioner or appropriate government
agency, evaluate and monitor compliance
 d. Periodic reports submitted by respondent detailing compliance with the judgment
shall be contained in partial returns of the writ.
 The petitioner may submit its comments or observations on the execution of the judgment
 Final Return of the Writ - Upon full satisfaction of judgment, a final return of the writ shall
be made by the respondent
 Court finds that judgment has been fully implemented, the satisfaction of judgment shall be
entered in the court docket.

3. Writ of Kalikasan
 an extraordinary remedy which may be issued depending on the magnitude of
environmental damage
 environmental damage must be of such magnitude as to prejudice the life, health or
property of inhabitants in two or more cities or provinces.
 Court which has Jurisdiction - verified petition should be filed with the SC or with the CA.
 Magnitude of Environmental Damage - involve environmental damage of such magnitude
as to prejudice the life, health or property of inhabitants in two or more cities or provinces
 Persons who may File a Petition for a Writ of Kalikasan
 a. Natural or juridical person;
 b.Entity authorized by law; or
 c. People’s organization, non-governmental organization, or any public interest group
accredited by or registered with any government agency.
 petition must be on behalf of persons whose constitutional right to a balanced and healthful
ecology is violated or threatened with violation by an unlawful act or omission of a public
official or employee, or private individual or entity, involving environmental damage of such
magnitude as to prejudice the life, health or property of inhabitants in two or more cities or
provinces
 Persons against whom a Petition for a Writ of Kalikasan is Filed –
 a. The government, as represented by a public official or employee; or
 b. A private individual or entity.
 Contents of a Verified Petition
 a. Personal circumstances of the petitioner;
 b. Name and personal circumstances of the respondent or if the name and personal
circumstances are unknown and uncertain, the respondent may be described by an
assumed appellation;
 c. The environment law, rule or regulation violated or threatened to be violated;
  d. The act or omission complained of;
 e. The environmental damage of such magnitude as to prejudice the life, health or
property of inhabitants in two or more cities or provinces;
 f. All relevant and material evidence consisting of affidavit of witnesses, documentary
evidence, scientific or other expert studies, and if possible, object evidence;
 g. Should be accompanied by certification against forum shopping; and
 h. The reliefs prayed for which may include a prayer for the issuance of a TEPO
 A verified petition is jurisdictional.
 Requisites for the issuance of Writ of Kalikasan
 Actual or threatened violation of the constitutional right to a balanced and healthful
ecology;
 arises from an unlawful act or omission of a public official or employee, or private
individual or entity; and
 involves or will lead to a damage of such magnitude as to prejudice the life, health, or
property of inhabitants in “TWO or MORE CITIES OR PRONVINCES.”
 Exemption from Payment of Docket Fees - petitioner is exempt from payment of docket
fees
 Encourages public participation of availing the remedy
 Issuance of the Writ of Kalikasan Within 3 days from the date of filing of the petition, if the
petition is sufficient in form and substance, the court shall give an order:
 a. Issuing the writ; and
 b. Requiring the respondent to file a verified return
 Return - non-extendible period of 10 days after service of the writ, the respondent shall file
a verified return which shall contain all defenses of the respondent
 All defenses not raised in the return shall be deemed waived.
 Failure to File a Verified Return - court to proceed to hear the petition ex parte
 Indirect Contempt - After hearing, respondent who refuses or unduly delays the filing of a
return or who makes a false return or any person who disobeys or resists a lawful process or
order of the court
 Preliminary Conference - After receipt of the return
 court may call for a preliminary conference; the hearing including the preliminary
conference shall not extend beyond 60 days and shall be given the same priority as petitions
for the writs of habeas corpus, amparo and habeas data
 After hearing, the court shall issue an order submitting the case for decision and may
require the filing of memoranda
 Discovery Measures under the Petition for Writ of Kalikasan - party may file a verified
motion for the following reliefs:
 a. Ocular Inspection Order – The motion must show that an ocular inspection order is
necessary to establish the magnitude of the violation or the threat as to prejudice the
life, health, or property of inhabitants in two or more cities or provinces. It shall state in
detail the place or places to be inspected. It shall be supported by affidavits of
witnesses having personal knowledge of the violation or threatened violation of
environmental law.
 After hearing, the court may order any person in possession or control of a designated land
or other property to permit entry for the purpose of inspecting or photographing the
property or any relevant object or operation therein.
 order shall specify the person or persons authorized to make the inspection and the date,
time, place, and manner of making the inspection and may prescribed other conditions to
protect the constitutional rights of all parties
  b. Production or inspection of documents or things order – The motion must show
that a production order is necessary to establish the magnitude of the violation or the
threat as to prejudice the life, health, or property of inhabitants in two or more cities
or provinces.
 After hearing, the court may order any person in possession, custody or control of any
designated documents, papers, books, accounts, letters, photographs, objects or tangible
things, or objects in digitized or electronic form, which constitute or contain evidence
relevant to the petition or the return, to produce and permit their inspection, copying or
photographing by or on behalf of the movant.
 Production order shall specify the person or person authorized to make the production and
the date, time, place, and manner of making the inspection or production and may
prescribe other conditions to protect the constitutional rights of all parties
 Reliefs that May be Granted under the Writ – Direct respondent to
 a. permanently cease and desist from committing acts or neglecting the performance of
a duty in violation of environmental laws resulting in environmental destruction and
damage;
 b. protect, preserve, rehabilitate or restore the environment;
 c. monitor strict compliance with the decision and orders of the court;
 d. make periodic reports on the execution of the final judgment; and
 e. Such other reliefs which relate to the right of the people to a balanced and healthful
ecology or to the protection, preservation, rehabilitation or restoration of the
environment, except the award of damages to individual petitioners
 Judgment - Within 60 days from the time the petition is submitted for decision, the court
shall render judgment granting or denying the privilege of the writ of kalikasan
 Appeal - Within 15 days from the date of notice of the adverse judgment or denial of
motion for reconsideration, any party may appeal to the SC under Rule 45 (May raise
questions of facts)
 Institution of Separate Actions - shall not preclude the filing of separate civil, criminal or
administrative actions
 Advantages of such a petition over a civil complaint for damages.
 Firstly, there will be no issue regarding the legal standing or legal capacity of the Ang
Kapaligiran ay Alagaan Inc.” (AKAI) to file the action. 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
 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.
 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, action shall be taken to avoid or diminish that 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.
 Finally, the judgment in a writ of kalikasan case is immediately executory 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.
 Writ of Kalikasan vs. Writ of Continuing Mandamus
 Subject Matter
 Writ of Kalikasan - unlawful act or omission of a public official or employee, or private
individual or, entity, of such magnitude as to prejudice the life, health, or property of
inhabitants in two or more cities or provinces
 Writ of Continuing Mandamus - Unlawful neglect in the performance of an act which
the law specifically enjoins as a duty resulting from an office, trust or station in
connection with the enforcement or violation of an environmental law rule or
regulation, or a right therein. The unlawful exclusion of another from the use or
enjoyment of such right and both instances, there is no other plain, speedy and
adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law
 Who May File
 Writ of Kalikasan - One who is personally aggrieved.
 Writ of Continuing Mandamus - One who is personally aggrieved by the unlawful act or
omission.
 Respondent
 Writ of Kalikasan - Public or private entity or individual
 Writ of Continuing Mandamus - Government and its officers.
 Exemption of docket fees – Both exempted
 Venue
 Writ of Kalikasan - SC and CA
 Writ of Continuing Mandamus - SC, CA, & RTC that has jurisdiction over the territory
where the actionable neglect or omission occurred

 Discovery measures
 Writ of Kalikasan - Ocular inspection order and Production order
 Writ of Continuing Mandamus - None
 Damages for Personal Injury
 Writ of Kalikasan - None; the party must institute a separate action for the recovery of
damages
 Writ of Continuing Mandamus - Allow damages for malicious neglect of the
performance of the legal duty of the respondent

VII. Criminal Procedure

 Series of processes by which criminal laws are enforced and by which the State prosecutes person who
violate the penal laws.
 Regulates the steps by which one who committed a crime is to be punished

A. General Concepts
1. Criminal Jurisdiction; Concept and Requisites for Exercise
 Mandatory and indispensable
 “a law which hears before it condemns as well as proceeds upon inquiry and renders
judgement only after trial”
 Requirements of due process
 1. Court/tribunal is properly clothed with judicial power to hear and determine the
matter
 2. Lawful jurisdiction over the person of the accused
  3. Accused given opportunity to be heard
 4. Judgement only upon lawful hearing
 Principle of Adherence of Jurisdiction
 GR: Once acquired; not affected by subsequent legislation vesting jurisdiction over such
proceeding in another tribunal
 XPN: 1. Statute expressly provides; 2. Statute clearly intended to apply to pending actions
 Dismissal on jurisdictional grounds
 GR: Raised at any stage of the proceeding or appeal
 XPN: Estoppel by reason of laches TIJAM v. Sibonghanoy
 1. Active participation in the proceeding
 2. Seeking affirmative relief
 3. Submitted case for adjudication on the merits
 4. Took 15 years to question lack of jurisdiction
 Requisites for exercise of criminal jurisdiction (S-T-P)
 1. Jurisdiction over the subject matter;
 Jurisdiction over the offense charged
 Power to hear and determine cases of general class to which the proceedings in
question belong.
 Power to deal with the general subject involved in the action; class of cases to which
the particular case belongs.
 Conferred by LAW; not fixed by the will of the parties; not conferred by a mere
administrative policy of any trial court.
 Determined by the allegations in the complaint or information
 Determined by the PENALTY which may be IMPOSED not the actual penalty imposed
after trial
 2. Jurisdiction over the territory; and
 Venue is jurisdictional
 Offense should have been committed or any essential ingredients taken place within
the territorial jurisdiction of the court
 3. Jurisdiction over the person of the accused
 Arrest or apprehension With or without a warrant
 Voluntary appearance; XPN: Special appearance questioning jurisdiction of the court
 Custody of law
 Required before court can act upon the application for bail
 Arrest or voluntary surrender
 Under custody of law but subject to jurisdiction of the court (such as arrested filed
motion to quash warrant before arraignment)
 Jurisdiction over the person
 Required for the adjudication of reliefs
 Arrest or voluntary appearance
 Subjected to jurisdiction of the court and not yet under custody of law (accused escapes
custody after trial commenced)

2. When Injunction May be Filed

 Prevent use of the strong arm of the law in an oppressive and vindictive manner.
 Afford adequate protection to constitutional rights
 Orderly administration of justice
 Avoid multiplicity of actions
  Statute is unconstitutional or was held invalid
 Acts of officer are without or in excess of authority
 Court has no jurisdiction over the case
 Prejudicial question
 Prosecution is under an invalid law, ordinance or regulation
 Double jeopardy
 Case of persecution rather than prosecution
 Charges manifestly false and motivated by lust for vengeance
 Clearly no prima facie case against the accused and a motion to quash on the ground has
been denied
 Mandamus – Against Prosecutor
 GR: Not available to control discretion neither issued to compel exercise of discretion
 XPN: Abuse of discretion – despite sufficiency of the evidence, he still refuses to
prosecute

B. Prosecution of Offenses (Rule 110)

 Criminal Action – State prosecutes a person for an act or omission punishable by law.
 Preliminary Investigation – filing of the complaint with the proper officer for the purpose of
conducting the requisite preliminary investigation; (Prosecutors Office)
 Cases under RTC and Metro Manila and other Chartered Cities; unless provided by the
Charter
 All other offenses – direct filing with the MTC or MCTC, or with office of the prosecutor
 Filing of complaint or information Interrupts running of the period of prescription, BOTH in RPC
and special laws
 Any kind of investigative proceeding which may ultimately led to his prosecution tolls running of
prescriptive period.
 GR: All criminal actions are filed by the prosecutor.
 XPN: Private crimes –
 1. Adultery/Concubinage – offended spouse, against both offenders, no consent or pardoned
offenders, not divorced
 2. Seduction, Abduction, Acts of Lasciviousness – Offended party, Ascendants or Guardian
 If minor, can file independently UNLESS incompetent or Incapable of Doing so
 State, death or incapacitated offended party before complaint is filed or no ascendant or
guardian
 Under RA 7610,
 1. Offended party
 2. Ascendants, collateral within 3rd degree of consanguinity
 3. Officer, social worker or representative licensed child-caring institution
 4. DWSD – officer or social worker
 5. Barangay Chairman
 6. At least 3 concerned, responsible citizen
 Cannot be prosecuted if offender has been expressly pardoned by any authorized to file
the complaint.
 In case of minor, both parents must pardon offender
 Pardon must be given before filing of criminal complaint in court.
 Subsequent marriage of the accused and offended party extinguishes criminal liability
even after the filing of the complaint
  Except: Invalid or contracted in bad faith; private libel; multiple rape (RE: other
offenders)
 3. Criminal action for Defamation of Adultery & Concubinage, Seduction, Abduction, Acts of
Lasciviousness – Filed by offended party
 Death prior to filing in court but complaint was filed before the prosecutor – not
extinguished
 Death during pendency – not extinguished
 Control of prosecution - Public prosecutor shall prosecute, direct, and control all criminal actions
commenced by a complaint or information.
 XPN: Private prosecutor; Provided; public prosecutor has heavy work schedule; or lack of public
prosecutor
 Authorized in writing by Chief Prosecution Office or Regional State prosecution and subject to
courts approval
 Authorized to continue until end of trial unless earlier revoked
 Within control and supervision of the prosecutor
 1. Suspension of arraignment
 2. Reinvestigation
 3. Prosecution by the fiscal
 4. Dismissal of the case
 5. Downgrading of offense or dropping of accused even before plea
 Limitations of courts power of control
 1. Prosecution is entitled to notice and hearing
 2. Prosecutions stand to maintain prosecution should be respected by the court
 3. Court must make its own independent assessment of evidence in granting or dismissing
motion to dismiss.
 4. Court has authority to review the SOJ recommendation and reject it if there is grave abuse
of discretion.
 Information
 Accusation in writing charging a person
 Subscribed by the prosecutor and filed by him in court
 No oath required – prosecutor acting under oath of office
 Subscribed by prosecutor
 Complaint
 Sworn statement charging a person
 Subscribed by offended party, peace officer or public officer charged with enforcement of the
law
 Must be under oath
 Valid form
 In writing
 In the name of the PP
 Against all persons responsible for the offense involved
 Sufficiency of complaint or information – (NA-DO-AO-D-NO-V)
 1. NAME OF ACCUSED, if more than one person, all shall be included
 Complete
 If not known, describe in a fictitious name stating name is unknown
 True name inserted once known
 Mistake in name not equivalent to mistake in identity – sufficient evidence is adduced
 2. DESIGNATION of the offense
  State in the complaint with averment of acts or omission constituting the offense and
attendant qualifying circumstance
 If no designation, reference shall be made to the section/sub-section of the statute punishing
it
 Nature and character of the crime are determined by the facts alleged in the information
 Title or designation is not controlling, actual facts recited in the information determines the
nature of the crime
 Failure, does not vitiate the information if the facts alleged clearly recite the facts constituting
the crime charged
 GR: Accused may be convicted of a crime more serious than that named in the title if such
crime is covered by the facts alleged in the information and its commission is established by
evidence.
 XPN:
 1. Involves change of theory of the trial
 2. Requires a different defense
 3. Surprises the accused in any way
 3. ACTS OR OMISSION complained of constituting the offense and qualifying/aggravating
circumstances
 Must be stated in ordinary and concise language to enable a person of common
understanding to know what the offense is being charged,
 Enable court to pronounce the proper judgement
 Furnish accused with such description to enable hm to make a defense
 Protection against further prosecution for the same cause
 Accused cannot be convicted, even if the missing element have been proved during the trial
 Guilty plea to such defective information will not cure defect
 Negative Averments – GR: Statute prohibiting general acts and is intended to apply to all, no need
to negate the exception
 XPN: Statute applies only to specific classes of persons; indictment must show the accused does
not fall within the exemption
 Committed in relation to office - Mere allegation that offense was committed in relation to office
is not sufficient, it is merely a conclusion of law. What is controlling is specific actual allegation in
the information.
 Test is whether the offense cannot exist without the office
 Duplicity of the offense - Must charge only one offense
 XPN: Law prescribes a single punishment for various offenses
 1. Complex crimes
 2. Special complex crimes
 3. Continuous crimes or delito continuado
 4. Crimes susceptible of being committed in various modes;
 5. Crimes of which another is an ingredient
 Must move for quashal of the same before arraignment, otherwise waived and may be found
guilty of as many offenses as those charged and proved during the trial.
 Amendment - Valid information only
 Information filed before effectivity of the law punishing an offense may not be amended after law
came into effect
 Formal Amendment - No need for another preliminary investigation and retaking of plea
 1. Allegations which relate only to range of penalty that court might impose in event of
conviction
  2. Does not charge another offense different from original
 3. Does not alter prosecution theory to cause surprise to the accused and affect the form of
defense he has or will assume
 4. Does not adversely affect any substantial right
 5. Merely adds specifications to eliminate vagueness and does not introduce new material
facts, merely states additional precision which is already contained in the original
 Substantial Amendment – Involves recital of facts constituting the offense charged and
determinative of the jurisdiction of the court.
 Prohibited after arraignment, except, beneficial to the accused. Accused can invoke DJ if taken.
 Test to determine propriety of amendment after plea
 1. W/N original defense would still be available
 2. Evidence would be equally applicable (amendment which doesn’t change nature of the
offense)
 Substitution – Effects: Entails another preliminary investigation and plea to the new information.
 When: Before arraignment, mistake has been made in charging proper offense, dismiss original
complaint upon filing of a new one charging the offense, provided, no DJ.
 No judgement yet rendered
 Accused cannot be convicted of the offense charged or of any other offense necessarily included
therein; and
 Accused would not be placed in DJ
 The amendment is merely a formal amendment and not a substantial amendment or a
substitution. There was no change in the recital of facts constituting the offense charged or in the
determination of the jurisdiction of the court. Since the fact under the accusatory portion are
identical with the original information for Homicide, there could not be any effect on the
prosecution theory of the case; neither would there be any possible prejudice to the rights or the
defense of petitioner
 KIND OF AMENDMENT TO BE MADE vs HOW AMENDMENT IS MADE
 BEFORE PLEA
 1. Formal amendment - Without leave of court
 2. Substantial Amendment IF: - Without leave of court
 a. Downgrades nature of the offense - Motion by prosecutor & Notice to the accused
 b. Excludes any accused - With leave of court
 AFTER PLEA AND DURING TRIAL
 Formal - With leave of court; Without causing prejudice to the rights of the accused
 Substantial - GR: Not allowed; XPN: Beneficial to the accused
 AFTER PLEA
 GR: Can no longer amend as it would prejudice the substantial right of the accused
 XPN: A fact supervenes which changes the nature of the crime charged in the information or
upgrades it to a higher crime, with leave of court, may amend information to allege such
supervening fact and upgrade the crime charged to the higher crime brought by such
supervening fact.
 EXAMPLE: Victim of FRUSTRATED HOMICIDE DIES, amend to HOMICIDE
 AMENDMENT
 Formal or Substantial Changes
 Before plea, without leave of court
 Will not require another PI and retaking of plea
 Refers to the same offense originally charged, or to an offense which necessarily include or
included in the original charge, hence substantial amendment to the information, cannot be
 made over the objection of the accused, for if the original would be withdrawn, accused can
invoke DJ
 SUBSTITUTION
 Substantial Change
 With leave of court, original will be dismissed
 Entails another PI and plea to new information
 Requires/presupposes that the new information involves a different offense which does not
include or is not necessarily included in the original charge, accused cannot claim DJ
 4. Approximate DATE of commission
 GR: Particularity not required
 Fatal if discrepancy is so great that it induces the perception that the informations are no longer
the one and the same – struck down for being violative of the right of accused to be informed of
the offense
 XPN: Essential – bigamy, infanticide, abortion
 Remedy: Motion for bill of particulars
 5. Name of offended Party
 In crimes against property, if unknown, property described with such particularity to properly
identify offense charged
 Once known, insert true name in the record
 Juridical person, sufficient to state its name, designation by which it is known without averring it is
a juridical person
 6. Place (VENUE) where offense was committed
 GR: sufficient if can be understood from allegation that offense was committed or some essential
ingredients occurred at some place within jurisdiction of the court
 Subject to existing laws, instituted and tried in the court of the municipality or territory where
offense was committed or any of its essential ingredients occurred
 Venue is jurisdictional. Court cannot exercise jurisdiction over a person charged with an offense
committed outside its territory
 XPN: place constitutes essential element – trespassing, destructive arson, robbery in an inhabited
place
 Committed on a railroad train, aircraft, public or private vehicle in the course of trip – institute
action where it passed during trip, place and arrival or departure
 On board a vessel on its voyage – First port of entry, territory passed during trip, subject to IL
 Felonies under Art. 2 of the RPC (Territoriality Principle) – court where action was first filed
 Continuous or transitory crime – where offender was found, allege offense was committed
within jurisdiction of the court
 Piracy – triable anywhere
 Libel – election of the offended party (Printed/Published; Residence; Office(official))
 BP 22 – Drawn, Issued, Delivered, Dishonored – [Crosscheck (depository or collecting bank)]
 Perjury – Testimony given or where submitted
 Sec 9 of Migrant Worker and Overseas Filipino Act – RTC, where committed or residence
 Art 315(2)(d) RPC (Estafa) – deceit or damage arise
 SC orders change of venue
 Sandiganbayan – depends on nature of offense/position of accused – QC
 Failure to allege in the information that the offended party is a resident of the place over which
the court where information was filed has jurisdiction and the fact that the articles were first
published and printed in said place is a substantial defect that can be a proper ground for a motion
 to quash on the ground of lack of jurisdiction. Such defect is not merely as to form which can be
properly amended.
 Intervention of offended party – Rule 111
 GR: Offended party has the right to intervene by counsel in the prosecution of the criminal action
where the civil action for the recovery of civil liability is instituted in the criminal action
(Reservation of the right to institute civil action – before presentation of evidence)
 XPN:
 No civil liability arises in favor of offended party (e.g. Crimes against national security)
 Waived rights to civil indemnity
 Already instituted separate action
 Reserved right to institute it separately
 Prosecution of public offenses is under the direct supervision and control of the public prosecutor
– private prosecutor is not allowed if offended party is the government.

C. Prosecution of Civil Action (Rule 111)

 Person criminally liable is also civilly liable
 Criminal action is to punish offender and deter others from committing the same or similar offense
 Civil action is for the resolution, reparation or indemnification of the private offended party for damage or
injury he sustained by reason of delict
 GR: Institution of criminal action includes institution of civil action for recovery of civil liability arising from
the offense charged
 XPN: Offended party
 1. Waives civil action
 2. Reserves right to file a separate civil action
 May be express or implied, inferred not only from the acts of the offended party but also from acts
other than those of the latter.
 Failure of the court to pronounce judgement as to the civil liability amounts to the reservation of
the right to a separate civil action
 Made before prosecution presents their evidence, affording offended party a reasonable
opportunity to make the reservation
 Prescription period will be tolled
 Real party in interest of civil aspect of decision are the offended party and the accused
 Offended party may appeal civil aspect of the judgement
 Public prosecutor has no interest in appealing civil aspect of the decision acquitting the accused
 BP 22 – no reservation
 MR should be denied. Demurrer to evidence applying only to criminal aspect in BP 22 cases is
not correct. BP 22 cases action deems to include institution of civil liability and no need for
reservation.
 Cases under SB – no reservation
 Tax cases- not allowed
 ONLY civil liability arising from the crime charged (delict) as a felony is now deemed instituted
 Civil aspect may be compromised, provided, it is entered before or during the litigation and not after
final judgement.
 Employer not held civilly liable for quasi-delict in a criminal action against his employee. Quasi-delict
is not deemed instituted in criminal action. Employer is only subsidiarily liable
 Failure to reserve does not amount to waiver.
 Institutes a civil action prior to the criminal action
 GR: SUSPENDS CIVIL ACTION, until final judgment of the criminal action
 XPNs:
 1. Independent civil actions (Arts 32, 33, 34 and 2176 of NCC)
 2. Prejudicial questions
 3. Not one intended to enforce civil liability arising from the offense
 CONSOLIDATION of CIVIL and CRIMINAL action
 Upon motion of offended party
 Before judgement on the merit
 Evidence presented and admitted in civil case automatically admitted in criminal action without
prejudice to admission of additional evidence and right to cross examine
 INSTANCES WHEN CIVIL ACTION PROCEEDS INDEPENDENTLY – (PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE)
 No double recovery for the same act or charged in the criminal action.
 No need for reservation on the following:
 1. Arising from breach of contract; and
 2. Independent civil actions or based on Arts. 32, 33, 34 and Art 2176 (Quasi-delicts)
 Civil action for physical injury is entirely separate and distinct from criminal action.
 EFFECT OF DEATH OF ACCUSED ON CIVIL ACTION
 1. After arraignment and during pendency of criminal action
 GR: Civil liability based on the crime (civil liability ex delicto) = extinguished
 XPN: Independent civil actions (Arts 32, 33, 34 and 2176)
 Civil liability predicated on other sources of obligations (law, contract, quasi-contract, which
are subsequently instituted) source (SURVIVES against the estate or legal representative after
proper substitution)
 2. Before arraignment = file against the estate of deceased
 3. Pending appeal – Civil liability ex delicto (extinguished); Predicated from another source (SURVIVES
against the estate or legal representative after proper substitution)
 Criminal and civil liability arising SOLELY on the crime committed is extinguished upon DEATH during
pendency of case
 Extinction of penal action does not extinguish civil action; unless; criminal action which civil liability might
arise did not exist.
 Does not include: Based on quasi-delict; Independent Civil Actions; not based on criminal offense
 EFFECT OF ACQUITTAL ON HIS CIVIL LIABILITY
 1. Not author of the crime – extinguish civil liability which may arise from the offense
 2. Reasonable doubt – civil liability may be proved by preponderance of evidence.
 Court could make a pronouncement on the civil liability of the accused
 Court may be compelled to include in the judgement of acquittal the civil liability through a
petition for mandamus
 ACUITTAL DOES NOT BAR CONTINUATION OF CIVIL CASE
 Reasonable doubt
 Accused is not criminally liable but ONLY civilly liable
 Civil liability is not derived from or based on the offense which accused was acquitted
 Statute declares (Art. 332 of RPC) (Theft, malicious mischief, swindling against family members)
 Art 11(4) of RPC (Avoidance of greater evil)
 Art 12 (1-6) of RPC (Exempting circumstances)
 Final judgement rendered in a civil action absolving defendant from liability is not bar to criminal action for
the same act or omission; unless PREJUDICIAL QUESTION
 Elements of prejudicial question –
 Civil action first instituted prior to the criminal action
 Involves similar issue or intimately related to the issue raised in a criminal action
  Resolution of such issue determines W/N criminal action may proceed
 An independent civil action based on fraud initiated by the defrauded party does not raise a prejudicial
question to stop the proceedings in a pending criminal action for estafa through falsification. This is
because, the result of the independent civil action, the civil case for damages and attachment, is irrelevant
to the issue of guilt or innocence of the accused. As far as the Pasig civil case is concerned, the issue of R
being a mere agent of his mother, poses no prejudicial question, and even if respondent is declared merely
an agent of his mother, he cannot be adjudged free from criminal liability. Hence, the determination of the
issue involved in the civil case for injunctive relief is irrelevant in the criminal case for estafa through
falsification of public document.
 Administrative case against lawyers are sui generis. They are distinct from and may proceed independently
of criminal cases. The burden of proof in a criminal case is proof beyond reasonable doubt while in
administrative case only substantial evidence is required. Thus, a criminal prosecution will not constitute a
prejudicial question if the same facts and circumstances are attendant in the administrative proceedings
 ACTION if there is PREJUDICIAL QUESTION - Petition for suspension of the criminal action by the defendant.
 Filed to office of the prosecutor or Court where criminal action is filed at any time before prosecution rests
 FILING FEES IN CIVIL ACTION DEEMED INSTITUTED WITH THE CRIMINAL ACTION - Filing fees shall be paid
when damages are being claimed by the offended party
 1. Actual Damages, NONE; except BP 22 cases, equivalent to amount of check involved
 2. Liquidated, moral, nominal, temperate or exemplary damages – based on alleged amount; if not alleged,
based on the amount awarded shall constitute a first lien on the judgement

D. Preliminary Investigation (Rule 112)

 Inquiry or proceeding to determine whether there is sufficient ground to engender a well-founded belief
that a crime has been committed and respondent is probably guilty thereof and should be held for trial.’
 NOT A TRIAL – does not involve examination of witness by way of cross-examinations’
 NOT to declare the respondent guilty beyond reasonable doubt
 ONLY questions whether respondent is probably guilty and therefore, should go to trial
 GR: RECORDS Not a part of the trial of criminal action in court.
 XPNs:
 1. Court considers it necessary in the resolution of the case or any incident therein
 2. Introduced as evidence in the case by the requesting party
 Dismissal by investigator does not bar re-filing, entitles respondent to another PI
 COMPONENT PART OF DUE PROCESS IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE
 NOT A MERE TECHINCAL OR FORMAL RIGHT; IT IS A SUBSTANTIVE RIGHT
 RIGHT TO PI IS WAIVABLE
 Express waiver or silence (MUST BE CLEAR AND UNEQUIVOCAL MANNER)
 Failure to invoke during arraignment
 Consenting to be arraigned and entering a plea of not guilty without invoking right to PI
 Failure to request PI within 5 days from time he learns of the filing (WARRANTLESS ARREST)
 WHEN REQUIRED (4-2-1)
 GR: Before filing of information or complaint for an offense with penalty of imprisonment of at least 4 years,
2 months and 1 day without regard to the imposable fine.
 XPN: Complaint or information is directly filed in court
 INQUEST was made (LAWFUL WARRANTLESS ARREST) – Request PI within 5 days
 RIGHTS OF RESPONDENT (E-C-C)
 1. Examine evidence submitted by complainant at his own expense
  Object evidence – need not be furnished, but is available for examination (PHOTOCOPYING at his
expense)
 NO right over evidence submitted by his or her co-respondents.
 2. Submit counter-affidavit
 Prosecutor not mandated to require submission of counter-affidavits
 Probable cause may be determined alone on the basis of affidavits and supporting documents (does
not infringe constitutional right of the petitioners)
 3. To be present during the clarificatory hearing
 NOT ALLOWED to cross-examine
 ALLOWED to submit to investigating prosecutor questions which may be asked to the party or witness
concerned.
 Clarificatory hearing – not mandatory.
 Set only when there are facts and issues to be clarified from either a party or a witness
 Conducted within 10 days from submission of counter-affidavits, other affidavits and documents
 Mere failure of accused and his counsel to appear is not a waiver to the right to PI.
 Purposes of PI
 1. Determine if crime has been committed
 2. Protect the accused from inconvenience, expense and burden of defending himself, unless,
probability of his guilt is first ascertained by a competent officer
 3. Secure innocent against hasty, malicious, and oppressive prosecution and from open and public
accusation of a crime and anxiety of a trial
 4. Protect the state from having to conduct useless and expensive trial
 5. Determine amount of bail, if offense is bailable
 WHO ARE AUTHORIZED TO CONDUCT PI?
 1. Provincial or city prosecutors and assistants;
 2. National and Regional State prosecutors
 3. Others authorized by law:
 A. OMBUDSMAN – PRIMARY authority to investigate and EXCLUSIVE authority to file and
prosecute SANDIGANBAYAN CASES, plenary and unqualified – pertains to any act or omission of
any public officer or employee, when it is illegal, unjust, improper or inefficient. Law does not
make a distinction between cases cognizable by SB or regular courts.
 REMEDY AGAINST RESOLUTION:
 Petition for review via Rule 43 before CA
 Special civil action for certiorari via Rule 65 before SC
 B. COMELEC, - EXCLUSIVE power to conduct PI of all election offenses and prosecute the same
 C. PCGG w/ OSG,
 D. Other govt agencies empowered to investigate, file and prosecute cases investigated by it.
 Not limited in its review by the action or inaction of complainants
 May motu proprio conduct reinvestigation to assure that the guilty do not go unpunished.
 Not precluded from ordering another review of a complaint, for he or she may revoke,
repeal or abrogate the acts or previous rulings of a predecessor in office
 Includes all crimes cognizable by the proper court of their respective territorial jurisdiction.
 Judges of first level courts are NO LONGER AUTHORIZED to conduct PI - Courts cannot interfere in conduct
of PI, unless, there is grave abuse of discretion on the part of the investigating officer.

1. Executive vs. Judicial Determination of Probable Cause

 Made by
 EXECUTIVE (PROSECUTOR) - during preliminary investigation
  Pertains to public prosecutor who is given broad discretion to determine whether
probable cause exists and to charge those whom he believes to have committed the
crime as defined by law and thus should be held for trial
 JUDICIAL (JUDGE) - ascertain whether arrest warrant should be issued against the
accused.
 Judge must satisfy himself that based on evidence, there is necessity for placing the
accused under custody in order not to frustrate ends of justice, if the judge finds no
probable cause, the judge cannot be forced to issue the warrant
 Purpose
 EXECUTIVE (PROSECUTOR) - Filing of information in court
 determining whether there is a reasonable ground to believe that the accused is
probably guilty of the offense charged and should be held for trial.
 JUDICIAL (JUDGE) - 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.
 Within 10 days, judge to personally evaluate the resolution of the prosecutor by looking
into supporting evidence.
 Basis
 EXECUTIVE (PROSECUTOR) - Reasonable ground to believe that a crime has been
committed.
 JUDICIAL (JUDGE) - report and supporting documents submitted by the fiscal during
the PI and the supporting affidavits that may be required to be submitted.
 Complaint/Information – filed with MTC or MCTC not requiring PI nor covered by Rule on
summary procedure
 Judge is required to determine probable cause not only for issuance of a warrant of arrest
but also for commitment order if the accused had already been arrested, and hold him for
trial.
 RESOLUTION OF INVESTIGATING PROSECUTOR - Initial: Filing of the complaint with the
investigating prosecutor starts the preliminary investigation.
 Documents accompanying complaint
 1. Affidavits of the complainant
 Subscribed and sworn to before:
 a. Any prosecutor;
 b. Any government official authorized to administer oath; or
 c. Absence of above, a notary public (Certify that he personally examined the
affiants and he is satisfied that they voluntarily executed and understood their
affidavits)
 2. Affidavits of his witnesses; and
 3. Other supporting documents that would establish probable cause
 Duty of Investigating Officer - From filing of the complaint, officer has within 10 days to
decide on which of the following options to take:
 1. Dismiss the complaint if he finds no ground to conduct investigation
 2. Issue a subpoena in case he finds the need to continue with the investigation, in
which case subpoena shall be accompanied with the complaint and its supporting
affidavits and documents.
 Within 10 days from receipt of subpoena, the respondent is required to submit
his counter-affidavit, the affidavit of his witnesses and the supporting documents
relied upon for his defense.
  Despite subpoena, but no counter-affidavit within 10 days, officer shall resolve
the case based on the evidence presented by complainant. The same rule shall
apply in case the respondent cannot be subpoenaed.
 Information shall contain a certification by the investigating officer UNDER OATH
in which he shall certify the following:
 1. Personally examined complainant and his witnesses
 2. There is reasonable ground to believe that a crime has been committed
and that the accused is probably guilty thereof;
 3. Accused was informed of the complaint and of the evidence submitted
against him; and
 4. Accused was given an opportunity to submit controverting evidence
 Within 5 days from issuance of resolution, forward the record of the case to the
provincial or city prosecutor or chief prosecutor, or to the ombudsman or his deputy by
the Sandiganbayan in the exercise of its original jurisdiction. They shall act on the
resolution within 10 days from their receipt thereof and shall immediately inform the
parties of such action
 Resolution of the investigating prosecutor is merely recommendatory.
 IMPORTANT: Lack of authority of an officer to file an information, while a ground for
quashal, is not a jurisdictional defect - It does not affect a trial court’s acquisition of
jurisdiction over the subject matter or the person of the accused. Such handling
prosecutor who filed an unauthorized information but without bad faith or criminal
intent is considered as a de facto officer coated with a color of authority to exercise acts
that remain valid and official.
 If the unauthorized filing was done with malice, the erring officer may be held
criminally or administratively liable for usurpation of official functions at most.
Intentional or not, this deficiency remains formal, non-jurisdictional, and curable at any
stage of the criminal proceedings
 Different findings between the investigating prosecutor and superior prosecutor -
Superior prosecutor may by himself, file the information against the respondent, or
direct another assistant prosecutor to do so without conducting another preliminary
investigation.
 FILING OF MOTION TO DISMISS – GR: In PI, a motion to dismiss is not an accepted pleading
for it merely alleges the innocence of the respondent without rebutting or repudiating the
evidence of the complainant.
 XPN: When it contains countervailing evidence or defenses and evidence which rebuts or
repudiates the charges; in which case it will be treated as a counteraffidavit.
 If one files a motion to dismiss and he only asserts that the case should be dismissed, then
the motion to dismiss is a mere scrap of paper. If the respondent does not later on submit a
counter-affidavit, it will constitute a waiver on his part to file a counter-affidavit.
 REMEDY OF AGGRIEVED PARTY FROM THE RESOLUTION OF INVESTIGATING PROSECUTOR
AS APPROVED BY HIS SUPERIOR
 Motion for reconsideration (AVAILED ONLY ONCE)
 Petition for review with SOJ
 within 15 days from receipt of resolution
 denial of MR
 denial of reinvestigation
 Decision of prosecutor may be reviewed by the courts (grave abuse of discretion)
 Cannot compel through mandamus
 REMEDY AGAINST RESOLUTION OF SOJ
 Motion for reconsideration within 10 days
 Appealable administratively before OP
 OP decision appealable to CA through Rule 43
 GROUNDS
 Offense is punishable by reclusion perpetua to death
 New and material issues are raised which were not previously presented before DOJ
and were not ruled upon
 Prescription of offense is not due to lapse within 6 months from notice of questioned
resolution
 Petition for review is filed within 30 days from notice
 Rule 65, if there is grave abuse of discretion
 Petition for review before the DOJ if the information was already filed in court - Court is
bound to suspend the arraignment of the accused for a period not exceeding 60 days
 Suspension shall be made upon motion of the proper party
 SC and CA have the power to review findings of prosecutors in preliminary
investigations when circumstances warrant, to determine whether the prosecutor’s
findings are supported by facts, or by law. In so doing, courts do not act as prosecutors
but as organs of the judiciary, exercising their mandate under the Constitution, relevant
statutes, and remedial rules to settle cases and controversies. The exercise of this
Court’s review power ensures that, probable criminals are prosecuted and the innocent
are spared from baseless prosecution.
 RTC can also make its own determination, upon proper motion, whether probable
cause exists to hold the accused for trial.
 Even before the filing of the petition questioning the review resolution, an information for
serious illegal detention has been filed against JLN. Therefore, with the filing of the
information before the trial court, this petition has become moot and academic. The trial
court has then acquired jurisdiction over the case, and the determination of the accused’s
guilt or innocence rests within the sole and sound discretion of the trial court.
 Complaint filed pursuant to a lawful warrantless arrest - Court shall issue a commitment
order instead of a warrant of arrest.
 In case of doubt of existence of probable cause, the judge may order the prosecution to
submit additional evidence within 5 days from notice.
 Issue must be resolved within 30 days from filing of the complaint or resolution.
 REMEDY for NO PI pursuant to a lawful warrantless arrest –
 1. Before information is filed, ask for PI but waive Art 125 of RPC, in the presence of his
counsel
 Petition for certiorari if PI is refused
 Waiver of Art 125 of RPC does not preclude from applying for bail
 2. After filing, ask for PI within 5 days – same right to adduce evidence
 3. Refuse to enter a plea upon arraignment and object to further proceedings
 4. Raise lack of PI as error on appeal
 5. File for prohibition
 Instances when no warrant of arrest is necessary –
 1.Accused already under detention
 2. Accused is lawfully arrested without a warrant - If offense requires PI, inquest shall
be conducted
 3. Penalized by fine only
  4. No need for PI and not governed by rules on summary procedure - Judge to issue
summons, except, fails to appear when required
 5. Case is subject to Rules on Summary procedure - except fails to appear when
required
 Cases not requiring a PI –
 1. Penalty is less than 4 years, 2 months and 1 day
 2. Lawfully arrested without a warrant involving an offense which requires PI
 INQUEST shall be conducted
 If no INQUEST prosecutor – filed directly to court
 Cases where PI is not required but may be instituted –
 1. Filing complaint directly with the prosecutor - prosecutor act within 10 days from its
filing
 2.Filing complaint with MTC
 Amendment does not need new PI –
 1. Amendment not substantial
 2. Court orders filing of correct information involving a cognate offense
 3. Crime originally charged is related to the amended charge such that an inquiry into
one elicit substantially the same facts that an inquiry to another would reveal

 New preliminary investigation is required in order to accord the accused the right to
submit counter-affidavit and evidence only in the following instances:
 1. Original witness of the prosecution or some of them may have recanted their
testimonies or may have died or may no longer be available and new witnesses for the
state have emerged.
 2. Aside from the original accused, other persons are charged under a new criminal
complaint for the same offense or necessarily included therein
 3. Under a new criminal complaint, Original charged has been upgraded
 4. Under a new criminal complaint, criminal liability of the accused upgraded from
accessory to that of a principal.
 REMEDIES FOR LACK OF PI –
 Question lack of PI before he enters a plea
 Application/admission to bail does not bar question
 Failure to invoke right before entering a plea will amount to waiver
 EFFECTS OF LACK OF PI
 1. Not a ground for quashal of complaint or information
 2. it does not impair validity or render it defective
 3. Does not affect jurisdiction of court but merely the regularity of the proceedings.
 4. Justifies the release of the respondent or nullifies the warrant of arrest against him.
 If question is raised, court remands to prosecutor to conduct PI
 Right to PI cannot be raised for the first time on appeal
 If raised in a proceeding before SB, proceeding will be held in abeyance and case remanded
to the Office of the OMB or special prosecutor to conduct PI
 Ruling: Records show that soon after the report of the incident. SPO2 J was immediately
dispatched to render personal assistance to the victim. This alone negates the petitioner’s
argument that police did not have personal knowledge that a crime had been committed.
Personal knowledge of a crime just committed does not require actual presence at the
scene while the crime was being committed; it is enough that evidence of recent
commission of the crime is patent and the police has probable cause to believe based on
 personal knowledge of facts and circumstances, that the person to be arrested has recently
committed the crime.
 INQUEST PROCEEDING – VALID ONLY WHEN THERE IS LAWFUL WARRANTLESS ARREST
 Informal and summary investigation
 Conducted by public prosecutor
 involving persons arrested and detained without a warrant of arrest
 purpose of determining whether or not said persons should remain in custody and charged
 DUTIES OF AN INQUEST OFFICER –
 Determine if arrest was valid
 Finding of probable cause, prepare information or complaint
 Ask detained person if he desires to avail of PI
 If he does, execute waiver of Art 125 of RPC w/ assistance of counsel
 If arrest was invalid
 recommend release
 note down disposition on referral document (contents below)
 affidavit of arrest (subscribed and sworn to before him)
 investigation report
 statement of complainant and witnesses (subscribed and sworn to before him)
 supporting evidence gathered by police in course of investigation
 prepare brief memorandum indication for the actions taken
 forward record of case to the City/Provincial prosecutor for action
 PI = determine probable cause; Inquest = determine w/n accused should remain under
custody and be charged in court
 Presence of accused is dispensed with
 1. confined in a hospital
 2. detained under maximum security
 3. involves security risks
 4. not feasible by reason of age, health, sex and other similar factors
 Ruling: Inquest proceedings are proper only when the accused has been lawfully arrested
without a warrant. The join affidavit of L’s arresting officer’s states that the officers arrested
L, without a warrant, for inciting to sedition and not for rebellion. Thus, an inquest
prosecutor could only have conducted an inquest for inciting to sedition and no other.
Consequently, when another group of prosecutors subjected to L to a second inquest
proceeding for rebellion, they overstepped their authority rendering the second inquest
void.

E. Arrest (Rule 113) - taking of person into custody in order that he may be bound to answer for the commission
of an offense.
1. Arrest Without Warrant, When Lawful
 1. In flagrante delicto arrest; - when, in his presence, the person to be arrested has committed, is
actually committing, or is attempting to commit an offense.
 a. Person arrested must execute an overt act indicating that he has just committed, is
actually committing, or is attempting to commit a crime; and
 b. Overt act is done in the presence or within the view of the arresting officer.
 Reliable information provided by asset is not sufficient
 There must be independent circumstances perceivable by the AO suggesting that a criminal
offense is being committed
  Accused must perform overt acts within plain view of the AO indicating that a crime is
committed, actually committing or is attempting to commit.
 Buy-bust operation is a form of entrapment (VALID)
 Illegality of arrest must be raised before arraignment
 Waiver of illegal arrest is not a waiver of an illegal search
 In arrest in flagrante delicto, the officer himself must witness the crime
 It is not enough that the arresting officer had reasonable ground to believe that accused had
just committed a crime, a crime must, in fact, have been committed first.
 Illegal arrest may not be ratified by the subsequent filing of information in court
 Once charged in court, petition for habeas corpus will not lie
 Voluntary submission of accused jurisdiction to court or active participation during trial cures
defect of arrest.
 Legality of an arrest affects only the jurisdiction of the court over the person of the accused
 2. Doctrine of hot pursuit; - offense has been committed and he has probable cause to believe
based on personal knowledge of facts and circumstances that the person to be arrested has
committed it
 a. Offense has been committed and there is close proximity between the arrest and the
time of commission of crime
 b. Offense has just been committed
 c. Probable cause based on personal knowledge on the part of the person making the
arrest, of facts, or circumstances that the person/s to be arrested committed it.
 Compliance with element of immediacy between the time and the commission of the crime
and the arrest
 Personal knowledge of facts and circumstances which would lead to the conclusion that the
person to be arrested has probably committed the crime. Arises from reasonably worthy
information in the arresting person’s possession coupled with his own observation and fair
inferences therefrom that the person arrested has probably committed the offense
 Arrest immediately follows the commission of the offense
 Arrest must be made within 24 hours after commission of the crime.
 Act of running does not show any reasonable ground that a crime has been committed or is
about to be committed for police officers to apprehend him and conduct body search.
 3. Evasion of service of sentence by prisoner –
 a. serving final judgement
 b. temporarily confined while case is pending
 c. while being transferred
 4. Other lawful warrantless arrests:
 a. Previously arrested, escapes or is rescued or retake him at any time within the PH
 b. On bail – attempts to depart from PH without permission from court where case is pending
 c. Purposes of surrendering accused, bondsmen may arrest him or upon written authority
endorsed on a certified copy of the undertaking, cause him to be arrested by police or any
other person of suitable age and discretion
 Obligation of arresting officer after warrantless arrest –
 Comply with the provisions of Art. 125, person arrested must be transferred to judicial
authorities.
 Art 125 is a procedural requirement
 File a case in court
 12 hours – Light penalties (arresto menor, public censure or a fine less than P200)
  18 hours – Correctional penalties (prision correctional, arresto mayor, suspension, destierro or
a fine not exceeding P6K but not less than P200)
 36 hours – Afflictive or capital penalties (death, reclusion perpetua, reclusion temporal,
perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification, perpetual or temporary special
disqualification, prision mayor or fine exceeding P6K)
 Consequences of illegal Arrests –
 1. Court does not acquire jurisdiction over the person
 2. LEA incurs criminal liability
 3. Search incident to the arrest becomes invalid and inadmissible
 4. Documents or articles or evidence not admissible
 5. AO may be held civilly liable for damages under Art 32 of NCC
 6. AO may be held administratively liable
 When private person may make an arrest –
 1. In his presence, accused has committed, actually committing or attempting to commit an offense
– In flagrante delicto
 2. Offense has just been committed and he has probable cause to believe based on personal
knowledge of facts or circumstances that accused has committed it – hot pursuit
 3. Person to be arrested is an escaped prisoner

2. Requisites of a Valid Warrant of Arrest

 WA – Legal process issued by a competent authority, directing the arrest of a person or persons
upon grounds stated therein
 Issued by judges of all level
 GR: Determination of probable cause to issue WA lies in the judge alone
 XPN: Deportation of illegal and undesirable aliens – President or BOI
 REQUISITES: (ISSUED BY THE JUDGE)
 1. Issued upon probable cause;
 2. Determined personally by the judge after examination under oath of the complainant and
the witnesses he may produce
 3. Personally evaluate the report of the prosecutor and the evidence adduced during the
preliminary examination
 4. WA must partially describe the person to be arrested
 5. Must be in connection with specific crime or offense
 No time limit. Remains valid until arrest is effected or it is lifted
 Improper warrant issued – REMEDY: Petition to quash
 Objection over a WA must be raised before entry of plea

3. Determination of Probable Cause for Issuance of Warrant of Arrest

 Personally determined by the judge after examination under oath or affirmation of the complainant
and the witnesses he may produce – NOT MANDATORY
 JUDGE MAY OPT TO PERSONALLY EVALUATE THE REPORT AND SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS
SUBMITTED BY THE PROSECUTOR OR HE OR SHE MAY DISREGARD THE PROSECUTOR’S REPORT AND
REQUIRE THE SUBMISSION OF SUPPORTING AFFIDAVITS OF WITNESSES.
 Refers to facts and circumstances which would lead a reasonably discreet and prudent man to
believe that an offense has been committed by the person ought to be arrested
 Requires neither absolute certainty nor clear and convincing evidence of guilt
  As long as the evidence shows PRIMA FACIE case against the accused, the trial court has sufficient
ground to issue a warrant of arrest
 Simply implies probability of guilt and requires more than bare suspicion but less than evidence
which would justify a conviction.
 No requirement of a prior order by the judge finding probable cause. Judge may rely upon the
resolution of the investigating prosecutor provided he personally evaluates the same and the
affidavits and supporting documents.

F. Bail (Rule 114) - security given for the release of a person in custody of the law, furnished by him or a
bondsman, to guarantee his appearance before any court as required under the conditions prescribed under the
rules.
1. Nature - Summary in nature
 Right to bail is a constitutional right which flows from presumption of innocence in favor of every
accused who should not be subjected to the loss of freedom.
 Accrues only when a person is arrested or deprived of liberty. (UNDER LEGAL CUSTODY)
 GR: APPLIES TO ALL PERSON
 XPN: RECLUSION PERPETUA WHEN EVIDENCE OF GUILT IS STRONG
 Maximum penalty provided by the offense has bearing and not the possibility of mitigating
circumstances being appreciated in the accused’s favor
 Bail Hearing is Summary in nature – brief and speedy method of receiving and considering evidence
of guilt as is practicable and consistent with the purpose of the hearing which is merely to
determine the weight of the evidence
 Recognizance must be accompanied with a court order for the release of the court.
 Motion to quash may be filed while a petition for bail is pending
 Constitutional Principles
 1. ALL person, shall before conviction be bailable by: -sufficient sureties; released on
recognizance
 2. Suspension of habeas corpus does not impair right to bail
 3. Excessive bail is not to be required
 Conditions
 1. Undertaking shall be effective upon approval, and unless cancelled, shall remain in force at
all stages of the case until promulgation of the judgement of the RTC, irrespective of whether
the case was originally filed in or appealed to it;
 2. Appear before the proper court whenever required by the court or the rules
 3. Failure to appear without justification and despite notice shall be deemed a waiver of his
right to be present thereat. Trial may proceed in absentia
 4. Bondsman shall surrender the accused to the court for execution of the final execution
 Other conditions may be imposed by the court if there is likelihood of the accused jumping bail or
committing other harm to the citizenry.
 Where to file
 1. Court where the case is pending
 2. In the absence or unavailability of judge thereof, Any RTC, MTC, MCTC or judge in the
province, city or municipality
 Judge who entertains a bail application without absence of the judge and despite
knowledge of pendency of the case in another court is clearly an error.
 3. If arrested in a province, city, or municipality other than where the case is pending, bail may
also be filed with any RTC of said place, or if no judge thereof is available, with any MTC or
MCTC judge, therein;
  if filed with a court other than where case is pending, the judge who accepted the bail
shall forward it, together with the order of release and other supporting papers, to the
court where the case is pending
 4. Any person in custody who is not yet charged in court may apply for bail with any court in the
province, city or municipality where he is held.
 Arraignment is not required before the court grants bail
 Court martial offenses are not bailable
 No bail after final judgement
 Bail a matter of right after conviction by the MTC
 Accused applies for probation, allowed temporary liberty under his bail.
 No bail allowed after accused commenced service of sentence.
 Law on juveniles in conflict with the law with respect to bail of non-capital offenses –
 1. Privileged mitigating circumstances of minority shall be considered.
 2. Child is detained, court shall order the:
 a. Release of the minor on recognizance of parents and other suitable person;
 b. Release of child in conflict with law on bail; -If unable to bail, commit to care of DSWD/local
rehabilitation center or upon recommendation of DSWD or other agencies authorized by the
court, in its discretion be released on recognizance.
 c. Transfer of the minor to a youth detention home or youth rehabilitation center.
 Forms of bail
 1. Corporate surety/Bail Bond - Obligation under seal given by the accused with sureties made
payable to the proper officer with the condition to be void upon performance by the accused of
such acts as he may be legally required to perform;
 Accused goes to an authorized bonding company, pay premium for the service which is a percentage
of the total amount of bail. Bonding company will then go to court execute an undertaking or
security bond in the amount of the bail bond in behalf of the accused, that if accused is needed, the
bonding company will bring him before the court.
 If accused jumps bail, bond will be cancelled and the bonding company will be given sufficient time
to locate the whereabouts of the accused. Notice to bonding company is notice to the accused in
order to produce the body of the accused.
 2. Property bond - Title of property will be used as security, constitutes a lien over the property
 Accused to cause annotation within 10 days after approval of bond before:
 IF REGISTERED - Registry of deeds
 IF NOT REGISTERED - Registration book in the registry deeds of the place where land lies and
before the provincial, city or municipal assessor on the corresponding tax declaration
 Person who undertakes the conditions of a regular bond will be the custodian of the accused during
the time that he is under provisional liberty
 3. Cash deposit or Cash bond - Deposited by accused himself or any person acting in his behalf;
 Amount fixed by court or recommended by prosecutor
 Deposited before the:
 Nearest collector of internal revenue
 Provincial, city or municipal treasurer
 Clerk of court where case is pending
 No further order necessary to release of accused
 Failure to appear, whole amount forfeited in favor of govt, accused arrested
 4. Recognizance - Obligation of record, entered into before the court duly authorized to take it with
the condition to do some particular act.
 Undertaking of disinterested person with high credibility wherein he will execute an affidavit of
recognizance to the effect that when the presence of the accused is required in court, the custodian
will bring him to court;
 FOR LIGHT FELONIES ONLY
 Cited for contempt if unable to produce accused despite notice
 NO MONEY IS INVOLVED
 Liability of the surety or bondsmen - Inherently civil in nature
 Violation emerges from a contract, the bond subscribed jointly by the accused and the surety or
bondsmen.
 Accused criminally penalized for failure to comply
 Surety/bondsmen civil in character.
 Court may not impose additional obligations upon the bondsmen other than those provided by law.
CANNOT be greater nor different in character than those imposed upon the accused.
 Effect of filing forged bail bonds - Considered to have escaped from detention
 Pending appeal should be dismissed, subject to proper filing of criminal cases

2. When a Matter of Right; Exceptions

 1. Before or after conviction by the MeTC, MTC, MTCC or MCTC - All criminal cases under this
jurisdiction
 2. Before conviction by the RTC of an offense not punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or life
imprisonment
 3. Before final conviction by all children in conflict with the law for an offense not punishable by
reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment
 EXCEPTION - Charged with a capital offense and evidence of GUILT is STRONG
 Matter of right - reasonable hearing is required to be given to fiscal or asked for his
recommendation
 Recommendation necessary for fixing amount of bail, judge take into account accused
character and reputation, forfeiture of other bonds or whether he is a fugitive from justice

3. When a Matter of Discretion

 1. Upon conviction by the RTC of an offense not punishable by death, RP or LI
 Application may be filed and acted upon despite notice of appeal
 Provided, it has not transmitted the original record to appellate court
 If nature changed from non-bailable to bailable, application can only be filed and
resolved by the appellate court.
 2. Regardless of the stage of criminal prosecution, a person charged with a capital offense, or
an offense punishable by RP or LI, when evidence of guilt is not strong
 3. A child in conflict with the law charged with an offense punishable by death, RP or LI, when
evidence of guilt is not strong.
 Prosecution cannot adduce evidence for the denial of bail where it is matter of right
 Matter of discretion – fiscal may show proof to deny the bail
 REMEDY: Discretionary, petition for bail. Once filed, court is mandated to set a hearing to give
opportunity to the prosecution to prove that the evidence of guilt is strong. If strong, bail denied. If
weak, bail granted.
 GROUNDS FOR DENIAL IF THE PENALTY IMPOSED EXCEEDS 6 YEARS –
 1. Recidivist, quasi-recidivist or habitual delinquent or has committed a crime aggravated by
circumstance of reiteration;
  2. Previously escaped legal confinement, evaded sentence, or violated conditions of bail
without valid justification;
 3. Committed an offense while under probation, parole or conditional pardon
 4. Probability of flight
 5. Undue risk of committing another crime during appeal
 Ruling - No. In an application for bail pending appeal by an appellant sentenced for more than 6
years, the discretionary nature of the grant of bail pending appeal does not mean that bail should
automatically be granted absent any of the circumstances mentioned in the third para of Sec 5, Rule
114 of the ROC.
 Third para of Sec 5 of Rule 114 applies to two scenarios where the penalty imposed on the appellant
applying for bail is imprisonment exceeding 6 years. The first scenario involves the absence of any of
the circumstances enumerated in the said paragraph. The second scenario contemplates the
existence of at least of the said circumstances.
 On the second situation, the appellate court exercise a more stringent discretion, that is, to carefully
ascertain whether any of the enumerated circumstances in fact exists. If it so determines, it has no
other option except to deny or revoke bail pending appeal. Thus, a finding that none of the said
circumstances is present will not automatically result in the grant of bail. Such finding will simply
authorize the court the less stringent sound discretion approach.
 Ruling - The SB arbitrarily ignored the objective of bail to ensure appearance of the accused during
the trial and unwarrantedly disregarded a clear showing of the fragile health and advance age of E.
As such, the SB gravely abused its discretion in denying E’s motion to fix bail. The court is further
mindful of the Philippine’s responsibility in the international community arising from 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 having immediately surrendered to the authorities upon his being charged
in court indicate that the risk of his flight or escape from this jurisdiction is highly unlikely.
 BAIL MAY BE AVAILED UNDER ANY OF THE FOLLOWING INSTANCES
 1. Lawfully arrested without warrant, asks for PI before complaint is filed in court
 2. Material witness and bail is needed to secure his appearance. Refusal to post bail, court shall
commit him to prison until he complies or is legally discharged after testimony is taken
 BAIL IN EXTRADITION CASES
 No provision prohibiting for motion for bail, right of due process under the Constitution
 Not criminal proceeding but entails deprivation of liberty.
 Universal Declaration of Human Rights applies
 Main purpose of arrest and temporary detention is to ensure potential extradite will not
abscond
 Under pacta sunt servanda
 Proof of evidence required is “clear and convincing and lies with extradite -Proceeding is
discretionary
 EFFECTIVITY OF BAIL - Charged with lesser than RP, or convicted lesser offense than charged,
allowed released on the same bail posted, pending appeal, provided, does not fall under any
conditions of bail
 If convicted of charged, bail is cancelled and placed in confinement
 HEARING OF APPLICATION FOR BAIL IN CAPITAL OFFENSES - Conducted if charged with death, RP/LI
 Judge under legal obligation to receive evidence w/n guilt is strong for denial
 Give opportunity for the prosecution to present evidence that guilt is strong
 Fact that prosecutor did not object, does not relieve judge of the duty to set motion for bail for
hearing
 Summary in nature, prosecution burden to show evidence of guilt is strong
 Accused at his option, submit affidavits of witnesses attesting to his innocence
 Prosecution to present witnesses with option of examining them on direct or adopting affidavits
executed during PI as direct testimonies
 Court to examine witnesses on their direct testimonies or affidavits to ascertain evidence of guilt is
strong
 Courts question need not follow any order and may shift between witnesses
 Court shall allow both counsels to examine witnesses
 Within 48 hours, court issue a brief summary of evidence adduced, followed by its conclusion w/n
guilt is strong. Conclusion not a pre-judgement on the merits of the case
 Mandatory duty to conduct a hearing even if prosecution just file a comment or leave application of
bail to discretion of the court to determine w/n evidence of guilt is strong.
 DUTIES OF JUDGES IN APPLICATION FOR BAIL IN CAPITAL OFFENSES
 Reasonably notify prosecutor of the hearing or require him to submit recommendation
 Conduct hearing regardless prosecution refuses to present evidence
 Decide w/n evidence of guilt is strong based on evidence of prosecution
 Grant if not strong; deny if guilt is strong.
 Prosecution has burden of proof to show evidence of guilt is strong
 Accused shall be released upon approval

 REMEDY if Denied: Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65 (Apply hierarchy of courts)
 Accused not released while pending
 Evidence in bail hearing automatically reproduced in trial, witnesses may be recalled upon
motion
 Excessive bail shall not be required
 Bail should be high enough to assure presence of accused, but not higher than what is
reasonably calculated to fulfill the purpose
 Pending raffle of case, accused may move to fix amount of bail, executive judge cause
immediate raffle of the case and hearing of the motion
 Court shall fix amount of bail for accused provisional release taking into accounts prosecutor’s
recommendation and any relevant data that court may find
 Financial ability
 Nature and circumstances of offense
 Penalty of offense
 Character and reputation of accused
 Age and health
 Weight of evidence against accused
 Probability of appearing
 Forfeiture of other bonds
 Fact accused was a fugitive when arrested
 Pendency of case which accused is under the bond
 BAIL WHEN NOT REQUIRED –
 1. Violation of ordinance, a light, or a criminal offense does not exceed 6 months imprisonment
or fine under P2K
 2. In custody equal to or more than minimum of imposable principal penalty w/o ISLAW or any
modifying circumstances – Court may allow reduced bail or own recognizance
 3. In custody equal to or more than maximum of imprisonment of charged – released
immediately w/o prejudice to continuation of trial or on appeal. – If destierro, released after 30
days of preventive imprisonment
  4. Detained at least equal to minimum penalty of offense charged – ordered release either
motu proprio or upon motion and after notice and hearing, on own recognizance without
prejudice to continuation of trial
 5. Applied for probation, pending resolution but no bail was filed
 6. Youthful offender held for physical and mental examination, trial or appeal, unable to furnish
bail and under circumstances envisaged in PD 603 (Child and Youth Welfare Code)
 7. All juveniles before final conviction falling under Revised Rule on summary procedure –
recognizance of parents or suitable person
 BAIL IS NOT ALLOWED
 Capital offense when evidence of guilt is strong
 After conviction has become final
 Accused commenced to serve sentence
 Each act of sexual intercourse with a minor is a separate and distinct offense – single larceny rule is
not applicable.
 Court may upon good cause increase or reduce bail amount
 Unable to pay within reasonable period = committed to custody
 Reduce amount = requires hearing before granted to afford prosecution to oppose
 Excessive amount may not be imposed = tantamount to denying bail -Accused may move for
reduction if he does not have financial capacity to post initially fixed by the court
 Motion for reduction = Priority in the hearing of cases
 Order of fixing amount of bail not subject to appeal
 Failure of accused to appear when required
 Bail is Forfeited
 Bondsmen given 30 (CANNOT BE SHORTENED) days to
 Produce body of accused or give reason for non-production
 Explain why accused did not appear when so required
 LIABILITY: Jointly and severally liable for amount of bail
 Court shall not reduce or mitigate liability unless accused has been surrendered or acquitted
 Issue bench warrant for accused arrest
 Cancellation of bail (Without prejudice on the part of the surety)
 1. Application of bondsmen, with due notice to prosecutor
 Surrender of accused (Must be voluntary)
 Proof of death
 2. Automatically cancelled
 Acquittal
 Dismissal of case
 Execution of judgement of conviction
 Order of forfeiture – Conditional and interlocutory – not appealable
 Order of Cancellation – Not independent of order of forfeiture
 Judgement ultimately determining liability of surety, therefore final
 Execution may issue at once
 Bail not a bar to question illegality of arrest, lack of or irregularity of PI - Provided raised before plea
 No inconsistency in filing for bail and filing of a motion to quash.
 Accused released on bail may be re-arrested without warrant if he attempts to flee PH without
permission from the court where his case is pending
 Proper court may issue and HDO or direct DFA to cancel passport of accused - Valid restriction on a
person’s right to travel so that he may be dealt with in accordance with the law.
 HDO issued by RTC - DOJ power to issue HDO – unconstitutional
  HDO issued only in criminal cases within EJ of RTC upon proper motion of the party
 HDO cancelled upon acquittal or dismissal of case
 REMEDY: HDO or WLO: Motion for cancellation or Motion to Lift HDO
 ADO – allows the traveler to leave PH; issue upon application to the BOI and appropriate govt
agency
 REMEDY: Not same person who name appears in HDO or WLO - Application under oath obtain a
certification to the effect that said person is not the same person whose name appears in the issued
HDO or WLO upon submission of:
 Affidavit of denial
 Photocopy of Passport bearing personal details
 Latest NBI clearance
 Court or appropriate agency clearance

G. Arraignment and Plea (Rule 116)

 Formal mode of implementing the constitutional right of the accused to be informed of the nature of the
accusation against him
 Fix the identity of the accused, inform him of his charge and give him opportunity to plead.
 Indispensable requirement of due process
 Made in open court by judge or clerk furnishing accused of complaint/information, reading, the same
in the language or dialect known to him, and asking him whether he pleads guilty or not guilty.
 Accused cannot waive reading of information
 Accused is presumed to have been validly arraigned in the absence of proof to the contrary
 Constitutes waiver of right to PI or reinvestigation
 Accused cannot be tried in absentia absence of arraignment
 Accused must be present and enter plea personally
 Absence of offended party, despite due notice, court may allow accused to enter a plea of guilty to a
lesser offense which is necessarily included in the offense charged with conformity of the trial
prosecutor alone
 PERIOD OF ARRAIGNMENT – GR: Made within 30 days from date court acquires jurisdiction over the person
 Pendency of motion to quash, bill of particulars or other justified suspension of arraignment is excluded in
computing the period
 XPNs
 Under preventive detention – 3 days from filing and accused shall be arraigned within 10 days
 Complainant about to depart PH with no definite date of return; without delay
 Cases under RA 7610 – trial to commence within 3 days from arraignment
 RA 9165
 Henious crimes, IPR, continuously tried until terminated within 60 days from commencement and to be
decided within 30 days from submission of case
 PROCEDURE OF ARRAIGNMENT –
 In open court where complaint/information has been filed or assigned for trial
 Judge or clerk of court
 Furnishing accused with a copy of complaint/information
 Reading it in a language or dialect known to accused
 Asking accused whether he pleads guilty or not guilty
 Both arraignment and plea shall be made of record but failure to enter of record shall not affect validity of
the proceedings
 OPTION OF ACCUSED BEFORE ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA –
 Bill of particulars;
 Suspension of arraignment;
 Motion to quash; or
 Challenge validity of arrest and legality of the warrant issued or assail the regularity or question of absence
of PI of the charge
 ABSENCE OF ARRAIGNMENT – GR: Void judgement
 XPN: Active participation in hearing is a clear indication that the accused is fully aware of the charges
against him. In such case, arraignment may be made after the case has been submitted for decision.
 Right to be represented by counsel is immutable, option to secure services of counsel de parte is not
 Insists on an attorney he cannot afford
 Not a member of the bar
 Attorney refuses for valid reasons
 Persons allowed to be appointed as counsel de officio
 Member of the bar in good standing
 Has ability, experience and competence to defend accused
 Localities where members of the bar are not available, any person who is a resident of such province
with good repute for probity and ability to defend the accused
 Counsel de officio given reasonable time to consult with accused as to his plea before arraignment

 A plea of not guilty shall not be entered

 Accused so pleaded;
 Refuses to plea;
 Conditional plea of guilty - A plea subject to proviso that a certain penalty be imposed is equivalent to a plea
of not guilty and would require a full-blown trial
 Plea of guilty but presents exculpatory circumstances, plea shall be deemed withdrawn and a plea of not
guilty shall be entered
 Plea is indefinite or ambiguous
 Plea of guilty - unconditional plea of guilt which admits the truth of the material facts and all the attendant
circumstances alleged in the information
 Reduces penalty imposed at its minimum period.
 Not considered mitigating in culpable felonies and crimes punishable by penal laws
 Effects - Submission to court’s jurisdiction & Cures defect in his arrest
 Requisites –
 Spontaneous confession of guilt
 Made in open court
 Prior to the presentation of evidence of prosecution
 Confession of guilt was to the offense charged in the information
 RECEPTION OF EVIDENCE - Does not dispense with the presentation of evidence; merely a secondary basis
of the guilt of the accused
 1. Non-capital offenses – reception of evidence is merely discretionary on the part of the court. If
information or complaint is sufficient for the judge to render judgement on a non-capital offense, he
may do so.
 2. Capital offenses – reception of evidence to prove the guilt and degree of culpability of the accused is
mandatory, accused may present evidence in his behalf and the court shall conduct a searching inquiry
and full comprehension of the consequences of his plea
 Accused, with the consent of the offended party and the prosecutor, may plead guilty to a lesser offense
which is necessarily included in the offense charged. (SAME AS PLEA BARGAIN)
 REQUISITES:
 During arraignment
  1. Lesser offense necessarily included in the offense charged -Some of the essential elements or
ingredients of the crime charge constitutes the lesser offense and vice versa
 2. With consent of both offended party and the prosecutor -Consent of offended party is not required
if, despite notice, failed to appear
 EFFECT WITHOUT CONSENT OF OFFENDED PARTY AND PROSECUTOR - If accused was convicted,
subsequent conviction of the crime charged would not place him in DJ
 After arraignment but before trial; provided the following requisites are present:
 1. Plea of guilty is withdrawn
 2. Plea of not guilty and the withdrawal of the previous guilty plea shall be made before trial
 3. Lesser offense is necessarily included in the offense charged; and
 4. With consent of prosecutor and offended party
 No amendment of complaint or information is necessary. A conviction of the offense charged for
purposes of double jeopardy.
 During pre-trial - Plea-bargaining is one of the matters to be considered
 XPN: Allows accused to change his plea thereafter provided that the prosecution does not have sufficient
evidence to establish guilt of the crime charged
 Plea bargain – a process whereby the accused and the prosecution work a mutually satisfactory
disposition of the case subject to court approval. Usually involves the defendant pleading guilty to a
lesser offense or to only one or some of the counts of a multi-count indictment in return for a lighter
sentence than that for the graver charge.
 After prosecution rests - Allowed only when the prosecution does not have sufficient evidence to establish
guilt for the crime charged
 Ruling: A plea of guilty to a lesser offense may be allowed if the lesser offense is necessarily included in the
offense charged. Estafa involving P5K is not necessarily included in theft of an article worth P15K.

1. Searching Inquiry (See People v. Pagal, G.R. No. 241257, September 29, 2020)
 1. Conduct searching inquiry into the voluntariness and full comprehension of the
consequences of the plea of guilty
 2. Require prosecution to still prove guilt of the accused and the precise degree of his
culpability
 To preclude any room for reasonable doubt in the mind of either court or SC, on review, as
to the possibility that there might have been misunderstanding on the part of the accused
as to the nature of the charges to which he pleaded guilty; and to ascertain the
circumstances attendant to the commission of the crime which justify or require the
exercise of greater or lesser degree of severity in the imposition of prescribed penalties.
 3. Inquire w/n accused wishes to present evidence in his behalf and allow him to do so if he
desires
 Accused may no longer be convicted for a capital offense on the sole basis of his plea of guilty
 Defendant after pleading guilty may not present evidence as would exonerate him completely from
criminal liability such as proof of self-defense.
 MANDATORY – a judge who fails to observe it commits grave abuse of discretion. Assures that the
State makes no mistake in taking life except the life of the guilty
 A plea of guilty entered by one who is fully aware of the direct consequences, including the actual
value of any commitments made to him by court, the prosecutor or his own counsel, must stand
 It is only when the consensual character of the plea is called into question that the validity of a
guilty plea may be impaired.

2. Improvident Plea
  A plea without information as to all the circumstances affecting it. It is based upon a mistaken
assumption or misleading information or advice.
 INSTANCES
 Compelled by violence or intimidation
 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
 Court has no jurisdiction
 May be withdrawn at any time before the judgement of conviction becomes final and be substituted
by a plea of not guilty (Sound discretion of the trial court)
 Effect of withdrawal – set aside judgement of conviction and re-open for new trial. (IF SOLE BASIS of
judgement)
 GROUNDS FOR SUSPENSION OF ARRAIGNMENT – (does not exceed 60 days; discretionary)
 Accused suffering from an unsound mental condition renders him unable to fully understand the
charge and to plead intelligently thereto;
 Valid prejudicial question
 Petition for review of the resolution of the prosecutor is pending at the DOJ or OP
 Pending incidents such as: Motion/s to Quash/Inhibition/Bill of Particulars
H. Motion to Quash (Rule 117)
 Assail the validity of the criminal information for defects or defenses apparent on the face of the
information
 A MQ based on double jeopardy or extinction of the criminal action or liability, may, by their nature, be
based on matters outside the allegations of the information or complaint.
 GR: File at any time before entering his plea, deemed waiver for failure
 XPNs: Filed after entering plea:
 Facts do not constitute an offense;
 Lack of jurisdiction over offense charged;
 Criminal action or liability has been extinguished; and
 Double Jeopardy
 Right belongs to the accused
 Court has discretion to dismiss the case if the information is not sufficient or any ground provided by law, or
to dismiss information for a different one.
 Forms
 In writing
 Signed by accused/counsel
 Specify distinctly the factual and legal grounds on which it is based.
 GR: Denial not subject to appeal/certiorari (Interlocutory order)
 XPNs: Subject to Certiorari
 Court issued order without or in excess of jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion
 Patently erroneous and the remedy of appeal would not afford adequate and expeditious relief;
 in the interest of a more enlightened and substantial justice;
 promote public welfare and public policy;
 cases have attracted nationwide attention, making it essential to proceed with dispatch in the
consideration thereof.

1. Grounds (F-Lopa-CME-LeDJ)
 1. The facts charged do not constitute an offense
  Fundamental that the complaint or information must state every fact necessary to make out an
offense for the Constitution guarantees that in all criminal prosecutions the accused should be
informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him
 Amendment of complaint or information – prosecution shall be given by the court and
opportunity to correct the defect by amendment. However, if the prosecution fails to make the
amendment, or still suffers from the same defect despite the amendment, the motion shall be
granted.
 GR: Should be resolved on the basis alone of said allegations whose truth and veracity are
hypothetically admitted.
 XPN: Additional facts not alleged in the information but admitted or not denied by the
prosecution may be invoked in support of the motion to quash.
 Fundamental Test: W/N the facts alleged therein, which are hypothetically admitted, would
establish the essential elements of the crime defined by law. Evidence aliunde are not to be
considered. Should be based on a defect in the information evident on its fact.
 2. Lack of jurisdiction over the Offense Charged
 Court had no jurisdiction, but the case was tried and decided upon the theory that it had
jurisdiction – parties are not barred, on appeal, from assailing such jurisdiction, for the same
must exist as a matter of law, and may not be conferred by consent of the parties or by
estoppel.
 Also considered as jurisdiction over the subject matter, power to adjudge concerning the
general question involved.
 3. Lack of jurisdiction over the person of the accused
 XPNs:
 Voluntary appearance
 Arrest
 May be waived by express or implication
 To object jurisdiction over his person, must appear in court for that purpose only.
 Test of court’s jurisdiction - Extent of the penalty which the law imposes on the misdemeanor,
crime or violation of law charged.
 XPNs:
 SB – based on salary grade of public official;
 Libel – EJ of the RTC although penalty does not exceed 6 years;
 Family Courts – minority of any of the parties; and
 Slight physical injuries – municipal courts; except minor victim = RTC
 4. Lack of authority of the officer to file information
 Not a jurisdictional defect
 Officer is considered de facto; can be cured by resolution of superior
 5. Complaint or information does not conform substantially to the prescribed from
 Lack of substantial compliance with the requirements for a good complaint or information
required
 Mere defects of form may be cured by amendment
 Not all defects in an information are curable by amendment prior to entry of plea.
 A void ab initio information cannot be amended to obviate a ground for quashal.
 Amendment which operates to vest jurisdiction upon the court is likewise impermissible
 6. Multiplicity of offenses charged
 Complaint or information must charge only one offense, except when law prescribes a single
punishment for various offenses
 7. Extinction of criminal action or liability
  1. Death
 2. Service of sentence
 3. Amnesty
 4. Absolute pardon
 5. Prescription of the crime
 6. Prescription of penalty
 7. Marriage of the offended woman
 8. Pardon or express consent of offended party in private crimes
 8. Complaint or information contains averments which if true, would constitute a legal excuse or
justification
 Only exempting circumstances constitute a legal excuse or justification.
 Justifying circumstances such as self-defense must be proven.
 9. Double Jeopardy - Prohibits the prosecution for a crime of which he has been previously
convicted or acquitted.
 INVALID GROUNDS
 Execution of affidavit of desistance;
 Absence of probable cause – Ground for dismissal of case;
 Matters of defense – XPN: DJ or Extinction
 Absence of PI – Ground for petition for reinvestigation
 Ruling - The information charges more than one offense. The information charges two offenses, that
is, rape and sexual abuse. Worse, the charges are stated in the alternative, making it unclear to the
accused as to what offense exactly he is being charged with.
 The information does not conform substantially to the required form. The information merely states
that the accused committed acts of lasciviousness upon the victim without specifying what those
acts of lasciviousness were.
 PROCEDURE WHEN MOTION TO QUASH IS DENIED
 Plead
 Go to trial without prejudice to the special defenses he invoked in the motion; and
 Appeal from judgement of conviction, if any, and interpose the denial of the motion as an error.
 EFFECTS OF SUSTAINING THE MOTION TO QUASH
 1. Court may order that another complaint or information be filed except when the motion was
based on the extinction of criminal action or liability or when it is based on double jeopardy
 If the order is made, the accused, if in custody, shall not be discharged unless admitted to bail.
 If no order is made, or if having been made, no new information is filed within the time
specified in the order or within such further time as the court may allow for good cause, the
accused, if in custody, shall be discharged unless he is also in custody for another charge.
 2. Court must state, in its order granting the motion, the release of the accused if he is in custody, or
the cancellation of his bond if he is out on bail:
 That a criminal action or liability has been extinguished;
 That it contains averments which, if true, would constitute a legal excuse or justification; or
 Accused has been previously convicted or acquitted of the offense charged
 3. Court has no jurisdiction over the offense charged, the better practice is for the court to remand
or forward the case to the proper court, not to quash the complaint or information.
 4. Court should order the prosecution to file another information or an amendment thereof, as the
case may be, with a definite period, the order further stating that in case of failure to comply
therewith, the accused if he is in custody shall be discharged, or his bond cancelled if he is bonded.
If based on any of the following:
 Facts do no constitute any offense;
  Officer who filed information had no authority;
 Does not conform substantially to the prescribed form; or
 More than one offense is charged.

2. Double Jeopardy (DJ)

 Refers to jeopardy of punishment for the same offense, suggesting that double jeopardy
presupposes two criminal prosecutions.
 person who has been convicted, acquitted or the case against him is dismissed or otherwise
terminated without his express consent cannot again be charged with the same or identical offense.
 Purpose of right is to set the effects of the first prosecution forever at rest, assuring the accused that
he shall not thereafter be subjected to the danger and anxiety of a second charge against him for
the same offense.
 Protects the accused not against the peril of second punishment but against being tried again.
 GR: Finality of acquittal doctrine – judgement after trial on the merits is immediately final and
cannot be appealed.
 XPN: Rigged proceedings, and a sham and a mock trial held with pre-determined judgement of
acquittal, the proceedings are unlawful and void ab initio. Prosecution was denied of due process.

 KINDS
 1. DJ for same offense - no person shall be put twice in jeopardy for the same offense
 2. DJ of punishment for same act - act punished by law and an ordinance, conviction or acquittal
under either shall be a bar to another prosecution for the same act
 Ruling - The immediate physical effect of the unauthorized installation was the inward flow of
electric current to M’s ice plant without the corresponding recording thereof in his electric
meter. In other words, the taking of electric current was integral with the unauthorized
installation of electric wiring and devices. The dismissal of the information for violation of the
local ordinance amounts to an acquittal of the accused of that offense.
 ELEMENTS OF DJ
 Conviction or acquittal, or dismissal was made without consent of the accused;
 Made by a court with competent jurisdiction
 Valid information sufficient in form and substance to sustain a conviction of the crime charged;
 Accused enters a valid plea; and
 Subsequent prosecution is for an offense which is:
 same as in the former complaint or information;
 frustration of; or
 for any offense which is necessarily included in the offense charged in the former
complaint or information
 Prohibition against DJ 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.
 A dismissal to be a bar under DJ, must have the effect of an acquittal
 Person convicted by a court-martial cannot be prosecuted again in the civil court.
 There is no double jeopardy when the complaint or information was dismissed before the defendant
has been arraigned and had pleaded guilty.
 Ruling - A plea of guilty is an “unconditional admission of guilt” with respect to the offense charged.
It forecloses the right to defend oneself from said charge and leaves the court with no alternative
but to impose the penalty fixed by law under the circumstances. Since the accused was only allowed
to testify in order to establish mitigating circumstances, for the purpose of fixing the penalty, the
 testimony could not be taken as a trial on the merits to determine the guilt or innocence of the
accused. Since the accused asserted self-defense in his testimony, said assertion had the effect of
vacating his plea of guilty. The trial court should have required him to plead a new to the charge, or
at least direct that a new plea of not guilty be entered for him and conducted trial on the merits.
This was not done. It follows that, in effect, there having been no standing plea at the time the court
a quo rendered its judgement of acquittal’ there can be no double jeopardy with respect to the
appeal of the prosecution
 Same offense test - W/N offense charged in the first information is the same offense in the second
charge, or W/N second offense necessarily includes or is necessarily included in the first offense in
the former complaint or information
 Same evidence test - W/N the facts alleged in the second information, if proved, would have been
sufficient to sustain the former information, or from which the accused may have been acquitted or
convicted.
 GR: There is identity between two offenses not only when the second offense is exactly the same as
the first, but also when the second offense includes or is necessarily included in the first offense or
an attempt or frustration thereof, or when it necessarily or is necessarily included in the offense
charged in the first information.

 XPNs:
 Graver offense developed due to supervening facts from the same act or omission constituting the
former charged.
 Facts constituting the graver offense became known or were discovered only after a plea was
entered in the former complaint or information.
 Plea of guilty to a lesser offense was made without the consent of the prosecutor and the offended
party
 XPN to XPNs - Plea of guilty to a lesser offense was made with the conformity of the prosecutor
alone because of the failure of the offended party to appear at the arraignment despite due notice.
 Accused satisfies or serves in whole or in part the judgement, he shall be credited with the same in
the event of conviction for the graver offense
 Rule of identity does not also apply when second offense was not in existence at the time of the first
prosecution for the simple reason that in such case, there is no possibility for the accused, during
the first prosecution, to be convicted for an offense that was then inexistent
 INSTANCES WHERE DJ WILL NOT ATTACH –
 Dismissal of a case during preliminary investigation
 Criminal trial was a sham, prosecution was denied due process
 Void judgement for having been issued without jurisdiction
 Dismissal is with express consent of the accused - Except: Based in insufficiency of evidence or
violation of right to speedy trial
 Dismissal by court motu proprio of a valid information, after accused has pleaded not guilty –
without prejudice to refiling of the case
 Administrative case and other is criminal in nature
 Dismissal has the effect of such judgement, and if given verbally, is incomplete and does not
have the effect of acquitting the accused before it is withdrawn. Hence, prosecution of the case
after such verbal order of dismissal has been withdrawn by the court, does not place accused in
double jeopardy.
 VARIANCE DOCTRINE –
 GR: Accused may be convicted only of the crime with which he is charged.
  A minor variance between the information and the evidence does not alter the nature of the
offense, nor does it determine or qualify the crime or penalty, so that even if a discrepancy
exists, this cannot be pleaded as a ground for acquittal.
 XPNs: When there is variance between the offense charge in the complaint or information and that
proved, and the offense is included or necessarily includes the offense proved, the accused shall be
convicted of the offense proved which is included in the offense charged, or of the offense charged
which is included in the offense proved.
 Accused can be convicted of an offense only when it is both charged and proven;
 Mere fact that evidence presented would indicate that a lesser offense outside the court’s
jurisdiction was committed does not deprive the court of its jurisdiction which had vested in it
under the allegations in the information.
 XPN to XPN: There are facts that supervened after the filing of the information which change the
nature of the offense
 DOCTRINE OF SUPERVENING FACT – After first prosecution a new fact supervenes for which the
defendant is responsible, which changes the character of the offense and, together with the facts
existing at the time, constitutes a new and distinct offense, the accused cannot be said to be in
second jeopardy, if indicted for the new offense.
 Ruling – Double jeopardy does not attach if after the prosecution for a lesser crime, new facts have
supervened which, together with those already in existence at the time of the first prosecution,
have made the offense graver and the penalty first imposed legally inadequate.
 Accused may appeal the civil aspect of the case because the concept of DJ evidently has reference
only to the criminal case and has no effect on the civil liability of the accused
 Ruling - The two charges arose from the facts and were prosecuted under the same provision of
RPC, namely, Art. 365. The doctrine is that reckless imprudence under Art. 365 is a single quasi-
offense by itself and not merely a means to commit other crimes. Hence, conviction or acquittal of
such quasi-offense bars subsequent prosecution of the same quasi offense, regardless of its various
resulting acts.
 ACQUITTAL - Always based on merits. Defendant is acquitted because guilt was not proven beyond
reasonable doubt.
 Double jeopardy always attaches.
 DISMISSAL - Does not decide on the merits, does not determine the defendant’s guilt or innocence
 Double jeopardy does not always attach.
 INSTANCES WHERE DISMISSAL OF THE CASE IS TANTAMOUNT TO AN ACQUITTAL
 Based on insufficiency of evidence of the prosecution (Demurrer to evidence)
 Due to violation of right to speedy trial (even if dismissal was upon motion of the accused or
with his express consent)
 An order discharging an accused as a State witness amounts to an acquittal, hence double jeopardy
will apply. However, if he fails or refuses to testify against his coaccused in accordance with his
sworn statement, he may be prosecuted again.

3. Provisional Dismissal
 Contemplates that the dismissal of the action is not permanent and can be revived within the period
set by the Rules of Court
 Becomes permanent when:
 Offenses punishable by imprisonment not exceeding 6 years or a fine of any amount, or both
– shall become permanent 1 year after issuance of the order without the case having been
revived.
 Offenses punishable by imprisonment of more than 6 years – shall become permanent in 2
years after issuance of the order without the case having been revived
 Time-bar-Rule - no revival of the case is made within the prescribed period; the dismissal shall be
removed from being provisional and shall become permanent
 State may revive a criminal case beyond the one-year or two-year periods, provided there is
justifiable necessity for the delay, and subject to the right of the accused to oppose the same on the
ground of double jeopardy, or that such revival or refiling is barred by the statute of limitations.
 Case may be revived by the State within the time-bar rule either by the refilling of the information
or by filing of new information for the same offense or offense necessarily included therein. There
would be no need for a new preliminary investigation
 Requisites
 Prosecution with the express conformity of the accused, or the accused, moves for a
provisional (sin perjuicio) dismissal of the case; or both the prosecution and the accused move
for a provisional dismissal of the case;
 Offended party is notified of the motion for a provisional dismissal of the case;
 Court issues an order granting the motion and dismissing the case provisionally; and
 Prosecutor is served with a copy of the order of provisional dismissal of the case.
 GR: Where the case was dismissed provisionally with the consent of the accused, he cannot invoke
DJ in another prosecution therefor or where the case was reinstated on a motion for
reconsideration by the prosecution.
 XPNs: Dismissal amounts to an acquittal even if the dismissal was ordered at the instance of the
defendant if:
 Based on lack or insufficiency of evidence of the prosecution
 Due to violation of right to speedy trial (even if dismissal was upon motion of the accused or
with his express consent)
 There is variance between the proof and the allegations in the complaint or information
 Express consent is given either orally or in writing. Positive, direct and unequivocal consent requiring
no inference or implication to supplying its meaning.
 Mere inaction or silence of the accused or his failure to object to a provisional dismissal of the case
does not amount to express consent
 PROVISIONAL DISMISSAL UNDER A.M. NO. 12-11-12-SC (GUIDELINES FOR DECONGESTING
HOLDING JAILS BY ENFORCING RIGHTS OF ACCUSED PERSONS TO BAIL AND TO SPEEDY TRIAL)
 Delays due to the absence of an essential witness whose whereabouts are unknown or cannot
be determined and, therefore, are subject to exclusion in determining compliance with the
prescribed time limits which caused the trial to exceed 180 days, the court shall provisionally
dismiss the action with the express consent of the detained accused.
 Delays are due to the absence of an essential witness whose presence cannot be obtained by
due diligence though his whereabouts are known, the court shall provisionally dismiss the
action with the express consent of the detained accused provided:
 The hearing in the case has been previously twice postponed due to the non-appearance
of the essential witness and both the witness and the offended party, if they are two
different persons, have been given notice of the setting of the case for third hearing, which
notice contains a warning that the case would be dismissed if the essential witness
continues to be absent; and
 There is proof of service of pertinent notices of hearings or subpoenas upon the essential
witness and the offended party at their last known postal or e-mail addresses or mobile
phone numbers.
 For the above purpose, the public or private prosecutor shall first present during the trial the
essential witness or witnesses to the case before anyone else. An essential witness is one
whose testimony dwells on the presence of some or all of the elements of the crime and whose
testimony is indispensable to the conviction of the accused.
  The one-year or two-year period allowed for reviving a criminal case that has been provisionally
dismissed shall be reckoned from the issuance of the order of dismissal. The dismissal shall become
automatically permanent if the case is not revied within the required period. Such permanent
dismissal shall amount to an adjudication of the case on the merits

I. Pre-Trial (Rule 118)

 Procedural device intended to clarify and limit the basic issues between the parties and to take the trial of
cases out of the realm of surprise and maneuvering. It thus paves the way for a less cluttered trial and
resolution of the case.
 Within 30 days after arraignment, unless shorter period is provided
 Within 10 days after arraignment, if accused is under preventive detention, unless provided otherwise
 MANDATORY: SB, RTC, Municipal courts
 Pretrial brief is not specifically required
 Arraignment and preliminary conference shall be simultaneously held in mediatable cases
 DUTY OF THE JUDGE BEFORE PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCE – Study:
 1. Plea bargaining;
 Process whereby accused and offended party and prosecution work out a mutually satisfactory
disposition of the case subject to court’s approval
 Involves the defendant’s pleading guilty to a lesser offense or to only one or some of the counts of
a multi-count indictment in return for a lighter sentence than that for the graver charge.
 Trial judge shall consider plea-bargaining arrangement,
 DUTY OF JUDGE when Plea bargaining fails –
 Adopt the minutes of preliminary conference as part of the pre-trial proceedings, confirm
markings of exhibits or substituted photocopies and admissions on the genuineness and due
execution of documents and list object and testimonial evidence;
 Scrutinize every allegation of the information and the statements in the affidavits and other
documents which form part of the record of the preliminary investigation and other documents
identified and marked as exhibits in determining further admissions of facts, documents and in
particular as to the following:
 Identity of the accused;
 Court’s territorial jurisdiction relative to the offense charged;
 Qualifications of expert witness;
 Amount of damages;
 Genuineness and due execution of documents;
 The cause of death or injury, in proper cases;
 Adoption of any evidence presented during the preliminary investigation;
 Disclosure of self-defense, exercise of public authority and justifying or exempting
circumstances; and
 Such other matters that would limit the facts in issue.
 Define factual legal issues
 Ask parties to agree on the specific trial dates and adhere to the flow chart determined by the
court which shall contain the time frames for the different stages of the proceeding up to
promulgation of decision and use the time frame for each stage in setting the trial dates;
 Require the parties to submit to the Branch COC the names, addresses and contact numbers of
witnesses that need to be summoned by subpoena; and
 Consider modification of order of trial if the accused admits the charge but interposes a lawful
defense
 2. Stipulation of facts; Signed by accused, to bind him
  3. Marking for identification of evidence of parties; No evidence allowed unless identified and marked
except under good cause
 4. Waiver of objections to admissibility of evidence;
 5. Modification of the order of the trial if one of the accused admits the charges but interposes a
lawful defense (reverse trial); and
 6. Such matters as will promote fair and expeditious trial of the criminal and civil aspects of the case
 If accused pleaded not guilty, 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
 An affirmative defense may modify the order of trial and requires the accused to prove such defense by
clear and convincing evidence – NOT MANDATORY

 DUTY OF BRANCH CLERK OF COURT DURING PRELIMINARY CONFERENCE

 Assist the parties in reaching a settlement of the civil aspect of the case;
 Mark the documents to be presented as exhibits and copies thereof attached to the records after
comparison;
 Ascertain from the parties the undisputed facts and admissions on the genuineness and due execution
of documents marked as exhibits; and
 Consider such other matters as may aid in the prompt disposition of the case
 Proceedings shall be recorded in the minutes of preliminary conference to be signed by both parties and
counsel
 ORDER OF PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCE –
 Requiring the private offended party to appear thereat for purposes of pleabargaining and for other
matters requiring his presence;
 Referring the case to the branch clerk of court, if warranted, for a preliminary conference to be set at
least 3 days prior to the pre-trial to mark the documents or exhibits to be presented by the parties and
copies thereof to be attached to the records after comparison and to consider other matters as may aid
in its prompt disposition; and
 Informing the parties that no evidence shall be allowed to be presented and offered during trial other
than those identified and marked during the pre-trial except when allowed by the court for good cause
shown. In mediatable cases, the judge shall refer the parties to the PMC unit for purposes of mediation
if available.
 What court should do when Prosecution and offended party agree to the plea offered by the accused
 Issue and order which contains the plea bargaining arrived at;
 Proceed to receive evidence on the civil aspect of the case; and
 Render and promulgate judgement of conviction, including civil liability or damages duly established by
the evidence.

1. Pre-Trial Agreement
 Agreements or admissions made or entered into during the pre-trial conference shall be reduced in
writing and signed by the accused and counsel; otherwise, the same cannot be used against the
accused.
 Court shall approve the agreements covering the matters in the pre-trial conference
 PRE-TRIAL AGREEMENT AS EVIDENCE –
 1. Reduced in writing; and
 2. Signed by the accused and his counsel
  Subject to approval of the court, provided, plea to a lesser offense may only be revised, modified or
annulled by the court when the same is contrary to law.
 Intended to further safeguard the rights of the accused against improvident plea or unauthorized
agreements or admissions which his counsel may have entered into, or by any person without his
knowledge as he may have waived his presence at the pre-trial conference
 Stipulations may be admitted even if accused did not sign if counsel failed to object its admission.
 Pre-trial may be amended on the grounds of Agreement or Palpable mistake

2. Non-Appearance During Pre-Trial

 EFFECT: Non-appearance of Counsel - Court may impose proper sanction or penalties in the form of
reprimand, fines or imprisonment, if the counsel does not offer an acceptable excuse for his lack of
cooperation
 Accused presence not mandatory – to not violate his constitutional right to remain silent.
 Petitioner’s repeated failure to appear at the pre-trial amounted to a failure to comply with the ROC
and their non-presentation of evidence before the trial court was essentially due to their fault.

3. Pre-Trial Order
 Order issued by the court reciting the actions taken, facts stipulated, and the evidence marked
during the pre-trial conference.
 Issued by the court and no motion required from either prosecution or defense.
 Issued within 10 days after termination of the pre-trial, setting forth the following:
 1. Actions taken during the pre-trial conference;
 2. Facts stipulated;
 3. Admissions made;
 4. Evidence marked; and
 5. Number of witnesses to be presented and the schedule of trial
 EFFECT
 Bind the parties’
 Limit the trial to those matters not disposed of; and
 Control the course of the action during the trial, unless modified by the court to prevent
manifest injustice.

J. Trial (Rule 119)

 Examination before a competent tribunal according to the laws of the land, of facts put in issue in a case for
the purpose of determining such issue.
 Commences within 30 days from receipt of pre-trial order
 If accused is to be tried again pursuant to a new trial, trial shall commence within 30 days from notice of the
order granting a new trial.
 May be extended to one not exceeding 180 days from notice of order if period becomes impractical due to
unavailability of witness and other factors.
 Summary of Periods
 Arraignment – Within 30 days, when court acquires jurisdiction over the person, unless shorter period
is provided
 Within 10 days from date of raffle, if under preventive
 Pre-Trial – Within 30 days after arraignment
 Within 10 days after arraignment, if under preventive detention
 Trial – 30 days from receipt of pre-trial order
 HEARING - Hearing is not confined to trial, but embraces several stages of litigation including the pre-trial
stage. Hearing does not necessarily imply the presentation of oral or documentary evidence in open court
but that the parties are afforded an opportunity to be heard.
 CONTINUOUS TRIAL - Once commenced, shall continue from day to day as far as practicable until
terminated.
 May be postponed for a reasonable period of time for good cause
 Conducted with utmost dispatch, with judicial exercise of the court’s power to control the trial to avoid
delay and for each party to complete the presentation of evidence with the trial dates assigned to him.
 Granting or refusal of postponement of trial lies within the sound discretion of the court and the
discretion will not be interfered with by mandamus or by appeal, unless there is grave abuse of
discretion.
 To expedite the decision or resolution of cases in the trial courts – judge required with utmost dispatch,
with judicious exercise of the court’s power to control the trial to avoid delay and a strict policy on
postponements shall be observed
 A mode of judicial fact-finding and adjudication conducted with speed and dispatch so that trials are
held on the scheduled dates without postponement, the factual issues for trial well defined at pre-trial
and the whole proceedings terminated and ready for judgment within 90 days from the date of initial
hearing, unless for meritorious an extension is permitted.
 DUTIES OF PRESIDING JUDGE
 Adhere faithfully to the session hours prescribed by laws;
 Maintain full control of the proceedings;
 Effectively allocate and use time and court resources to avoid court delays; and
 Continuous trial on a weekly or other short-term trial calendar at earliest possible time
 FACTORS TO BE CONSIDERED FOR GRANTING CONTINUANCE – W/N
 The failure to grant a continuance would likely make a continuation of such proceeding impossible or
result in a miscarriage of justice; and
 The case, as a while, is so novel, unusual and complex, due to the number of accused or the nature of
the prosecution, or that it is unreasonable to expect adequate preparation within the periods of time
established therein
 PROHIBITED GROUNDS FOR A CONTINUANCE
 Congestion of the court’s calendar;
 Lack of diligence preparation;
 Failure to obtain available witnesses on the part of the prosecutor.
 Time limit for the trial of criminal cases
 GR: Not to exceed 180 days from the first day of trial
 XPNs:
 Those governed by the rules on summary procedure;
 Those where the penalty prescribed by law does not exceed 6 months imprisonment or a fine of P1K or
both;
 Those authorized by the Chief of Justice of SC
 Commencement of trial may be extended based on the following conditions
 For the 180 days, for the first 12 calendar month period from the effectivity of the law;
 120 days for the second 12-month period
 80 days for the third 12-month period
 EXCLUSIONS IN COMPUTATION OF TIME WITHIN WHICH TRIAL MUST COMMENCE –
 1. Any periods of delay resulting from other proceedings concerning the accused, including but not
limited to:
 Physical and mental examination of the accused;
  Other criminal proceedings
 Extraordinary remedies against interlocutory orders;
 Pre-trial proceedings; provided, does not exceed 30 days;
 Orders of inhibition, proceedings relating to change of venue of cases or transfer from other
courts;
 Prejudicial questions;
 Delays attributable to any period, not to exceed 30 days, during which any proceeding concerning
the accused is actually under advisement
 2. Any period of delay resulting from the absence or unavailability of an essential witness;
 an essential witness shall be considered absent when his whereabouts are unknown or
undetermined by due diligence. He shall be considered unavailable whenever his whereabouts are
known but his presence for trial cannot be obtained by due diligence
 3. Delay resulting from mental incompetence or physical inability of the accused to stand trial;
 4. Information is dismissed upon motion of the prosecution and thereafter a charged is filed against the
accused for the same offense, any period of delay from the date the charge was dismissed to the date
of the time limitation would commence to run as to the subsequent charge had there been no previous
charge;
 5. Reasonable period of delay when the accused is joined for trial with a co-accused over whom the
court has not acquired jurisdiction, or as to whom the time for trial has not run and no motion for
separate trial has been granted; and
 6. Any period of delay resulting from a continuance granted by any court motu proprio, or on motion of
either the accused or his counsel, or the prosecution, if the court granted the continuance on the basis
of its findings set forth in the order that the ends of justice served by taking such action outweigh the
best interest of the public and the accused in a speedy trial
 Ruling - The delays that may be excluded from the time limit in Sec. 3 Rule 119 within which trial must
commence are those resulting from proceedings concerning the accused. The time involved in the
proceedings in a petition for transfer of venue can only be excluded from said time limit if it was the accused
who instituted the same. Further, the petition for transfer of venue cannot interrupt proceedings unless a
TRO or writ of preliminary injunction has been issued.
 REMEDIES OF THE ACCUSED WHEN A PROSECUTING OFFICER WITHOUT JUST CAUSE SECURES
POSTPONEMENTS OF THE TRIAL AGAINST HIS PROTEST BEYOND A REASONABLE PERIOD OF TIME:
 1. Mandamus to compel a dismissal of the information; or
 2. If he is restrained of his liberty, by habeas corpus to obtain his freedom
 SANCTIONABLE ACTS OF COUNSEL
 1. Knowingly allowing the case to be set for trial without disclosing that a necessary witness would be
unavailable for trial;
 2. Files a motion solely for delay, knowing it to be frivolous and without merit;
 3. Makes a statement in order to obtain a continuance which he knows to be false and which is material
to the granting of a continuance; and
 4. Willfully fails to proceed to trial without justification.
 ORDER OF TRIAL IN CRIMINAL CASES
 1. Prosecution shall present evidence to prove the charge and, in the proper case, the civil liability
 In RA 9165 cases, duty of the prosecution to present a complete picture detailing the buy-bust
operation – from the initial contact between the poseur-buyer and the pusher, the offer to
purchase, the promise or payment of the consideration, until the consummation of the sale by the
delivery of the illegal subject of sale.
 2. Accused may present evidence to prove his defense, and damages, if any, arising from the issuance
of a provisional remedy in the case.
  3. Prosecution may present rebuttal evidence unless the court, in furtherance of justice, permits them
to present additional evidence bearing upon the main issue.
 Rebuttal evidence is any competent evidence to explain, repel, counteract or disprove the
adversary’s proof. It is receivable only where new matters have been developed by the evidence of
one of the parties and its generally limited to a reply to new points.
 4. Accused may present rebuttal evidence unless the court permits them to present additional evidence
bearing upon the main issue
 5. Upon admission of the evidence of the parties, the case shall be deemed submitted for decision
unless the court directs them to argue orally or to submit written memoranda
 Order of the trial may be modified when the accused admits the act or omission charged in the complaint or
information but interposes a lawful defense
 Reversed trial is resorted when accused admits of the act or omission charged but interposes a lawful
defense, court allows accused to present evidence first and thereafter allow prosecution to present 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.
 MISTAKE IN CHARGING THE PROPER OFFENSE
 GR: When it becomes manifest at any time before judgment that a mistake has been made in charging the
proper offense, the accused cannot be convicted of the offense charged or any other offense necessarily
included therein.
 XPN: Accused shall not be discharged if there appears to be a good cause to detain him. In such case, court
shall commit the accused to answer for the proper offense and dismiss the case upon filing of the proper
information.
 This rule is predicated on the fact that an accused has the right to be informed of the nature and cause of
the accusation against him
 REOPENING OF THE PROCEEDINGS – Any time before finality of judgment of conviction, the judge may
motu proprio or upon motion, with hearing in either case, reopen the proceedings to avoid miscarriage of
justice. The proceedings shall be terminated within 30 days from the order granting it.
 Requirements
 Before finality of judgment of conviction
 Issued by judge motu proprio or upon motion
 Issued only after the hearing is conducted
 To prevent miscarriage of justice
 Presentation of additional and/or further evidence should be terminated within 30 days from the
issuance of the order
 INSTANCES WHEN PRESENCE OF ACCUSED IS REQUIRED BY LAW
 Arraignment and plea, whether of innocence or of guilt
 During trial whenever necessary for identification purposes
 Promulgation of sentence, unless it is for light offense, by counsel or representative
 GR: Accused may waive his presence at the trial pursuant to the stipulations set forth in his bail
 XPNs: Unless presence is specifically ordered by the court for purposes of identification
 DUTY OF COUNSEL WHEN ACCUSED IS IMPRISONED –
 Promptly undertake to obtain the presence of the prisoner for trial or cause a notice on the person
having custody of the prisoner requiring such person to so advice the prisoner of his right to demand
trial.
 Upon receipt of notice, custodian shall promptly advice the prisoner charge and of his right to demand
trial. If prisoner informs custodian, custodian shall cause notice to that effect to be sent promptly to
public attorney
 Upon receipt of notice, public atty shall promptly seek to obtain the presence of prisoner for trial
  Custodian receives from public atty a properly supported request for availability of the prisoner for
purposes of trial, prisoner shall be made available accordingly.
 Conduct of trial for several accused
 GR: 2 or more persons are jointly charged with an offense; they shall be tried jointly. Designed as to
preclude a wasteful expenditure of judicial resources and to promote an orderly and expeditious disposition
of criminal prosecution.
 XPN: Court, in its discretion and upon motion of the prosecutor or any of the defendants may order a
separate trial for one or more accused
 Separate trial may be granted in the interest of justice even after the prosecution has finished presenting its
evidence in chief. If granted, testimony of one accused imputing the crime to his co-accused is not
admissible against the latter. In joint trial, it would be admissible if the latter had an opportunity for cross-
examination.
 REQUISITES BEFORE A TRIAL CAN BE SUSPENDED ON ACCOUNT OF ABSENCE OF WITNESS
 1. Witness is essential and appears to the court to be so;
 Indispensable, necessary or important in the highest degree
 2. Absence is brought by:
 a. Unknown whereabouts;
 b. Whereabouts cannot be determined by due diligence;
 Witness considered unavailable even if his whereabouts are known but his presence for the trial cannot be
obtained by due diligence.
 EFFECT of ABSENCE: Any period of delay from the absence or unavailability of an essential witness shall be
excluded in computing the time within which the trial must commence.
 APPEARANCE OF MATERIAL WITNESS: Either party, upon motion, secure an order from the court for a
material witness to post bail for such sum as maybe deemed proper, if the court is satisfied upon either
proof or oath that a material witness will not testify when required.
 Refuses to post bail, the court shall commit him to prison until he complies or is legally discharged after
his testimony has been taken.
 RULES ON WITNESS CREDIBILITY:
 1. Affidavits, which are usually taken ex parte, are often incomplete and inaccurate.
 2. Truth is established not by their number of witnesses but the quality of their testimonies

1. Trial in Absentia
 Trial may proceed notwithstanding the absence of the accused provided that he has been duly
notified and his failure to appear is unjustifiable.
 Requisites
 Accused already arraigned;
 Duly notified of trial; and
 Failure to appear is unjustified.
 Effects - Accused waives right to present evidence and cross-examine witnesses against him. Waiver
does not mean that the prosecution is deprived of the right to require the presence of the accused
for purposes of identification by the witnesses which is vital for conviction of the accused, except
where he unqualifiedly admits in open court after his arraignment that he is the person named as
defendant in the case on trial
 If the accused is not brought to trial within the same limit required, the information may be
dismissed on motion of the accused on the ground of denial of his right to speedy trial.
 Accused has the burden of proving the motion but the prosecution shall have the burden of going
forward with the evidence to establish the exclusion of time.
 Failure of the accused to move for dismissal prior to trial constitute a waiver of the right to dismiss
2. Examination of Witness for the Prosecution (See People v. Sergio, G.R. No. 240053, October 9, 2019)
 Conducted in the presence of the accused unless he waived his right after reasonable notice.
 When it satisfactorily appears that a witness for the prosecution, he may forthwith be conditionally
examined before the court where the case is pending.
 1. Witness too sick to appear at trial
 2. He has to leave the Philippines with no definite date of return
 Conducted only before the judge or the court where the case is pending.
 Right to cross-examine. Hence such statements of the prosecution witnesses may thereafter be
admissible in behalf of or against the accused.
3. Requisites for Discharge of Accused to Become a State Witness
 One of two or more persons jointly charged with the commission of a crime but who is discharged
with his consent as such accused so that he may be a witness for the state.
 Requisites
 Two or more accused are jointly charged with the commission of an offense;
 Motion for discharge is filed by the prosecution before it rests its case;
 Prosecution is required to present evidence and the sworn statement of each proposed state
witness at a hearing in support of the discharged;
 Accused gives his consent to be a state witness; and
 Trial court is satisfied that:
 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 the said accused can be substantially corroborated in its material points;
 Accused does not appear to be the most guilty; and
 Accused has not at any time been convicted of any offense involving moral turpitude
 Accused can be discharge at any time, from filing to the time the defense starts to offer any
evidence
 An accused who has pleaded guilty to an offense can still be a state witness, provided he has not yet
been sentenced.
 Discharge of an accuse is a matter of discretion
 Discharge of an accused under RA 6981 is separate and distinct from Sec 17 Rule 119.
 Rule 119 does not support the proposition that the power to choose who shall be a state witness is
an inherent judicial prerogative. The Rules of Court have never been interpreted to be beyond
change by legislation designed to improve the administration of our justice system.
 RA 6981 is one of the much-sought penal reform laws to help government in its uphill fight against
crime. What is only required is compliance with Sec 14 of Rule 110 requiring that the exclusion of
the accused be made only upon motion by the prosecutor, with notice to the offended party and
with leave of court.
 Deposition through written interrogatories in a criminal case may be allowed.
 Ruling - denied her and the People of their right to due process by presenting their case against the
said accused. By not allowing Mary Jane to testify through written interrogatories, the Court of
Appeals deprived her of the opportunity to prove her innocence before the Indonesian authorities
and for the Philippine Government the chance to comply with the conditions set for the grant of
reprieve to Mary Jane

4. Effects of Discharge of Accused as State Witness

 GR:
 Operates as an acquittal and bar to further prosecution for the same offense
  Evidence adduced in support of the discharged shall automatically form part of the trial.
 If the court denies the motion to discharge the accused as State witness, his sworn statement
shall be inadmissible in evidence.
 XPN
 Accused fails or refuses to testify against his co-accused in accordance with his sworn
statement constituting the basis of his discharge
 Failure to testify refers exclusively to defendants will or fault; and
 Later retracts and fails to keep his part of the agreement, his confession

 Other modes to be a State witness:

 Witness Protection Program of RA 6981
 Power of OMB to grant immunity under Sec 17, RA 6770
 Immunity under PD 749 or granting immunity to givers of bribes and other gifts and to their
accomplices in bribery and other graft cases against public officers;
 Immunity under EO 14-A or granting immunity from criminal prosecution to any person who
provides information or testifies in any investigation conducted by the PCGG;
 Immunity under RA 9165
 Immunity and Protection under Human Security Act of 2007, RA 9372
 There is nothing in the rule that requires that the accused be discharged first as a state witness
before prosecution can present him as a prosecution witness.
 The witness remains an accused and can be made liable should he be found guilty of the criminal
offense.
 As an exception to the general rule requiring corroboration, the uncorroborated testimony of a state
witness may be sufficient when it is shown to be sincere in itself because it is given unhesitatingly
and in a straightforward manner and full of details which, by their nature, could not have been the
result of deliberate afterthought. This exception, however, applies only if the state witness is an
eyewitness since the testimony would then be direct evidence.
 A principal by inducement is not automatically the most guilty in a conspiracy. As a rule, for
purposes of resolving a motion to discharge an accused as a state witness, what is controlling are
the specific acts of the accused in relation to the crime committed.
 A state witness does not need to be found to be the least guilty; he or she should not only “appear
to be the most guilty.”
 The testimony of a state witness during the discharge proceedings, wherein he was cross-examined
by the defense counsel, is admissible against the accused if the state witness dies before he could
testify during the trial. S17 R119 is explicit that the testimony of the witness during the discharge
proceeding will only be inadmissible if the court denies the motion to discharge the accused as a
state witness.
 WITNESS PROTECTION PROGRAM vs RULES OF COURT
 WITNESS PROTECTION PROGRAM
 offense in which the testimony is to be used is limited only to grave felony under the RPC or its
equivalent under special law.
 family within 2nd degree of consanguinity or affinity is subjected to threat of his life or bodily
injury or likelihood that he will be killed to prevent him from testifying or to testify falsely or
evasively on account of his testimony
 Not a law enforcement officer
 Granted by DOJ
 Automatically entitled to certain rights and benefits
 Need not be charged elsewhere
 No information may be filed against witness
 RULES OF COURT
 Applies to all felonies.
 Not required
 No limitation
 Granted by Court
 Must still apply for the enjoyment of said rights and benefits in the DOJ
 Charged in court as one of the accused
 Charges shall be dropped and operates as an acquittal
 Both require absolute necessity for the testimony and that there is no other direct evidence
available for the prosecution of the offense committed

5. Demurrer to Evidence
 An objection by one of the parties in an action to the effect that the evidence which his adversary
produced is insufficient in point of law to make out a case or sustain the issue.
 A motion to dismiss that is filed by the accused after the prosecution rested its case
 To be considered sufficient, the evidence must prove:
 1. Commission of the crime; and
 2. Precise degree of participation therein by the accused.
 Made by the court motu proprio or upon filing of the accused with or without leave of court after
prosecution rested its case due to insufficiency of evidence, if granted dismiss the case.
 Tantamount to an acquittal if granted
 Order may not be appealed – places accused in DJ
 Reviewable only through certiorari under Rule 65
 1. Prosecution was denied opportunity to present its case
 2. Trial was a sham rendering judgment void
 Burden rests on petitioner to clearly demonstrate that the trial court blatantly abused its authority
to a point so grave as to deprive it of its very power to dispense justice.
 WITH LEAVE OF COURT vs. WITHOUT LEAVE OF COURT
 Denial
 W/Leave - may proceed with presentation of evidence
 W/O - Waiver to present evidence, case submitted for judgment based on evidence of the
prosecution
 Grant - Case is dismissed and the effect is an acquittal
 Purpose - determine w/n defendant in a criminal case has filed the demurrer merely to stall the
proceedings.
 W/Leave - Specifically state its grounds and shall be filed within a non-extendible period of 5 days
after prosecution rests its case. Prosecution may oppose within non-extendible period of 5 days
from its receipt
 If granted, file demurrer to evidence within 10 days. Prosecution may oppose within a non-
extendible period of 10 days from receipt.

6. Revised Guidelines on Continuous Trial (A.M. No. 15-06-10-SC)

 Applies to:
 1. All newly-filed criminal cases in the first and second level courts, SB and CTA, as of effectivity
date;
 2. All new-filed criminal cases governed by SPL and Rules,
 3. Pending criminal cases with respect to the remainder of the proceedings
 Unless otherwise specifically provided herein, RRCT shall not apply to criminal cases filed under the
Rule on Summary Procedure
 Procedure –
 Trial – Monday – Thursday – 8:30AM/2PM
 Motions/Arraignment/Pre-trial/Judgements – Friday AM
 Posted outside courtrooms 1 day before hearings
 Motions
 1. Motion for inhibition – 2 calendar days from filing
 Judge has conflict of interest
 Within 4th degree
 Self-inhibition based on valid grounds
 NO APPEAL or STAY for denial
 2. Prohibited Motions – denied outright BEFORE scheduled arraignment without need of
comment/opposition. (JuDePre-ReQua-BiSu-SuPo)
 a. Judicial Determination of probable cause
 b. PI filed beyond 5 days or allowed in inquest but failed to participate despite notice
 c. Reinvestigation of the prosecutor recommending the filing of information once the
information has been filed in court
 W/O leave of court
 PI not required
 PI required and conducted, grounds are not meritorious
 d. Quash Information – ground not one of those stated in Sec. 3 Rule 117
 e. Bill of particulars that does not conform to Sec 9, Rule 116 (Before arraignment)
 f. Suspend the arraignment not based under Sec. 11, Rule 116
 XPNs: Physical/mental examination; Prejudicial question; Petition for review of
resolution of prosecutor is pending; Postponement, except acts of God, force
majeure or physical inability of witness to appear/testify
 3. Meritorious motions – alleges plausible grounds supported by relevant documents and/or
competent evidence, except those that are already covered by the Revised Guidelines, are
meritorious motions, such as:
 a. Withdraw information or downgrade the charge or exclude an accused, filed by
prosecution as a result of reinvestigation, reconsideration and review;
 b. Quash warrant of arrest;
 c. suspend arraignment on ground of unsound mental condition
 d. suspend proceedings – prejudicial question
 e. Quash information – facts do not constitute an offense, lack of jurisdiction, extinction or
DJ
 f. Discharge accused as state witness
 g. Quash search warrant or suppress evidence
 h. Dismiss on ground that criminal case is a Strategic Lawsuit against Public Participation
(SLAPP) under Rule 6 of the Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases.
 Rules on motion of postponement
 1. Written or oral
 2. Accompanied by the original receipt from office of clerk of court evidencing payment of
postponement fee
 3. Submit OR of payment either at time of filing or not later than next hearing
 4. COC shall not accept motion unless accompanied by OR
 GR: Motion for postponement is prohibited.
 XPN: Acts of God, force majeure or physical inability to appear and testify
 If granted, moving party shall be warned that the presentation of its evidence must still be finished
on the dates previously agreed upon.
 Free legal Assistance - If party fails to qualify to avail of services of the PAO’s office;
 1. IBP to provide free legal assistance to said party;
 2. IBP to submit to executive judges a list of IBP-local lawyers who may be appointed by the
courts to act as counsel de officio in such cases (IBP DUTY BOUND)
 3. Lists shall be disseminated among all trial courts in the station

 Private prosecutor
 Cases where only civil liability only is being prosecuted by private prosecutor, head of the
prosecution office must issue in favor of the private prosecutor a written authority to try the case
even in the absence of the public prosecutor.
 Authority must be submitted to the court prior to presentation of evidence by private prosecutor
 With authority on record, court may set the trial in the case and in other cases tried by private
prosecutors with delegated authority on separate days when the presence of the public prosecutor
may be dispensed with.
 Prosecution of crimes lies with the executive department whose principal power and responsibility
is to see that the laws of the land are faithfully executed. A necessary component of this power to
execute the laws is the right to prosecute their violators
 Founded on the theory that a crime is a breach of the security and peace of the people at large, an
outrage against the very sovereignty of the state. It follows that a representative of the state shall
direct and control the prosecution of the offense.
 Consolidations
 1. Newly-filed Cases – criminal cases involving offenses based on the same facts or forming part of a
series of offenses of similar character, are accompanied by a motion for consolidation filed by the
Office of the Prosecutor, the Executive Judge shall cause the raffle to only one court which shall then
resolve said motion for consolidation, preferably on the date of the arraignment
 2. Pending Cases with Multiple Accused – where a subsequent information is filed involving an
accused who has been subjected to further investigation by the Prosecutor over an incident which
has the same subject matter as a prior information/s against different accused, said subsequent case
when filed accompanied by a motion for consolidation shall no longer be raffled.
 Subsequent case shall be assigned directly by the Executive Judge to the court where the
earlier case is pending. If earlier case is already at trial stage and witnesses have been
presented, the parties may be allowed to adopt the evidence so far presented, without
prejudice to additional direct examination questions and cross-examination questions.
 Archiving of Cases
 A criminal case shall be archived only if, after the issuance of the warrant of arrest, the accused
remains at large for 6 months from the delivery of the warrant to the proper peace officer.
 Such case shall likewise be archived when proceedings therein are ordered suspended for an
indefinite period because:
 1. Accused appears to be suffering from an unsound mental condition which effectively renders
him unable to fully understand the charge against him and to plead intelligently, or to undergo
trial and he has to be committed to a mental hospital
 2. Valid prejudicial question is invoked, unless the civil and criminal cases are consolidated
 3. Interlocutory order or incident in the criminal case is elevated to, and is pending
resolution/decision for an indefinite period before a higher court which has issued a TRO or WP
 4. Accused jumped bail before arraignment and cannot be arrested by the bondsman
 Arraignment and Pre-trial –
 1. Schedule – Set within 10 calendar days from the date of the courts receipt of the case for a
detained accused; within 30 calendar days from date court acquires jurisdiction over a non-detained
accused; unless a shorter period is provided by Special law or SC circular
 2. Notice – Sent to accused/counsel, private complainant or complaining law enforcement agent,
public prosecutor, and witnesses whose names appear in the information for purposes of plea-
bargaining, arraignment and pre-trial

 3. Waiver of Reading of the Information

 In multiple cases, upon personal examination of the accused, court may allow a waiver of the
reading of the information upon the full understanding and express consent of the
accused/counsel
 Consent shall be expressly stated in both minutes/certificate of arraignment and order of
arraignment
 Court to explain the waiver to the accused in the language or dialect known to him
 Ensure the accused full understanding of the consequences of the waiver before approving the
same
 4. Arraignment Proper
 a. Plea Bargaining Except in Drug Cases – shall immediately proceed if:
 1. Accused desired to enter a plea of guilty to a lesser offense;
 2. Private offended party in private crimes, or the arresting officer in victimless crimes, is
present to give consent with the conformity of the public prosecutor to the plea bargaining.
 b. Plea of guilty to the Crime Charged in the information – judgement shall be immediately
rendered, except those cases involving capital punishment.
 c. Where No Plea Bargaining or Plea of Guilty Takes Place – court shall immediately proceed with the
arraignment and the pre-trial, in accordance with the succeeding provisions on pre-trial.
 Schedule of the trial dates, for both prosecution and accused, shall be continuous within the
periods provided in the Regular Rules/Special Rules.
 Trial dates may be shortened depending on the number of witnesses to be presented.
 Flowchart shall be prepared by the court which shall serve as the final schedule of hearings.
 5. Arraignment and Preliminary Conference of Mediatable Cases subject to the Rule on Summary
Procedure – simultaneously held, court shall take up all matters required under Sec 14, Rule on
Summary Procedure during the Preliminary Conference.
 a. Accused pleads guilty to the crime charged – subheading of Plea of guilty to the crime
charged in the information shall be followed
 b. Pleads guilty to a lesser offense – subheading III, Plea Bargaining except drug cases shall be
followed
 c. Does not enter plea of guilty – court immediately proceed with arraignment and
preliminary conference, thereafter refer to mediation
 6. Conduct of Pre-trial
 a. Absence of parties – court shall proceed with the pre-trial despite absence of
accused/counsel provided they were duly notified and counsel for accused and prosecutor are
present
 b. Stipulations – proposal shall be done with the active participation of the court itself and
shall not be left alone to the counsels
 c. Marking of evidence – documentary evidence of accused and prosecution shall be marked
 d. Pre-trial Order – immediately served upon the parties on the same day after termination of
pre-trial
  e. Compliance with Rules – courts must strictly comply with the Guidelines to be observed in
the conduct of pre-trial
 MEDIATION
 1. Cases shall be referred to mediation on civil liability unless a settlement is reached earlier in the
pre-trial/preliminary conference:
 a. Crimes where payment may prevent criminal prosecution or may extinguish criminal
liability:
 (1) BP 22; (2) SSS Law; and (3) Pag-ibig Law
 b. Crimes against property under Title 10 of RPC, where the obligation may be civil in nature:
 Theft under Art 308 of RPC, cognizable by MTCs; and
 Estafa under Art. 315(1) (Abuse of confidence), except estafa under Art. 315(2) (Fraud)
and (3) (Deceit)
 Other forms of swindling under Art. 316 of RPC
 Swindling of a minor under Art 317 of RPC
 Other deceits under Art 318 of RPC
 Malicious mischief under Art 327 of RPC
 c. Crimes against honor under Title 13, RPC, where liability may be civil in nature:
 Libel by means of writings or similar means under Art 355, RPC
 Threatening to publish and offer to present such publication for a compensation under
Art. 356, RPC
 Prohibited publication of acts referred to in the course of official proceedings under Art.
357, RPC
 Grave Slander (Grave Oral Defamation) of serious and insulting nature under Art 358(1),
RPC
 Simple Slander (Oral Defamation) not of serious and insulting nature under Art. 358(2),
RPC
 Grave Slander by Deed – of a serious nature under Art. 359(2)
 Simple Slander by Deed – not of a serious nature under Art 359(2)
 Incriminating innocent person under Art 363
 Intriguing against honor under Art 364
 d. Cyber Libel where liability may be civil in nature
 e. Criminal negligence under Title 14, RPC, liability may be civil in nature
 f. IPR cases, liability civil in nature
 2. Referral shall be made only after the conduct of the arraignment and pretrial/preliminary
conference
 Court shall serve the Order of Referral immediately after arraignment and pretrial/PC to PMC
unit
 Terminated within a non-extendible period of 30 days from date of referral, after lapse or
failure -trial to proceed
 Except in cases mentioned above, criminal cases subject to the Rule on Summary procedure
shall not be referred to mediation
 Bail
 a. Petition for bail
 after the filing of the information shall be set for summary hearing after arraignment and pre-
trial. Testimony of a witness in petition for bail may be in the form allowed, provided the
demeanor of the witness is not essential in determining credibility.
  heard and resolved within a non-extendible period of 30 calendar days from date of first
hearing, except in drug cases which shall be heard within 20 calendar days, without need of
oral argument
 MR on the resolution shall be resolved within a non-extendible period of 10 calendar days
 b. Evidence in petition for bail
 Resolution shall be based only on the evidence presented during the bail proceedings by the
prosecution
 Shall present only pieces of evidence that are essential in establishing that the evidence of
guilt is strong.
 Accused need not present evidence to contradict or rebut the prosecution’s evidence.
 c. Non-suspension of the presentation of evidence
 Court shall not suspend the presentation of evidence in chief while awaiting resolution of the
petition for bail or the motion for reconsideration
 Form of testimony –
 a. First Level Courts – All criminal cases, including those covered by the Rule on Summary
Procedure, shall consist of the duly subscribed written statements given to law enforcement or
peace officers or the affidavits or counter-affidavits submitted before the investigating prosecutor,
and if not available, testimonies shall be in the form of judicial affidavits, subject to additional direct
and cross-examination questions.
 prosecutor may dispense with the sworn written statements submitted to the law enforcement or
peace officers and prepare the judicial affidavits of the affiants or modify or revise the said sworn
statements before presenting it as evidence.
 b. Second Level Courts, SB and CTA - Demeanor of witness is not essential in determining the
credibility of said witness, such as forensic chemist, accountants, expert witness and other similar
witnesses, who will testify on the authenticity, due execution and the contents of public documents
and reports,
 in criminal cases that are transactional in character such as falsification, estafa, malversation or
other crimes where culpability or innocence of the accused can be established through documents,
the testimonies shall be the duly subscribed written statements, if not available, in the form of
judicial affidavits subject to additional direct and cross-examination questions.
 All other cases where culpability or innocence of accused is based on the testimonies of the alleged
eyewitnesses, the testimonies of these witnesses shall be in oral form.
 Stipulations
 During pre-trial/preliminary conference, court shall require the parties to enter into stipulations on
the subject of both direct and cross-examinations of witnesses who have no personal knowledge of
the material facts constituting the crimes, such as chemists, investigators, medico-legal,
accountants, expert witness and other similar witness and those who will testify on the civil liability.
 Without prejudice to allowing additional direct and cross-examination questions.
 If stipulations cannot be had in full, where adverse party does not waive the right to cross-
examination, the subject of the direct testimony should be stipulated upon, without prejudice to
additional direct and cross examination questions.
 TRIAL
 a. Court shall encourage the accused and the prosecution to avail of:
 1. For the accused – application for examination of witness for accused before trial and how it
is made; and
 Application for examination of witness for accused before trial. — When the accused has
been held to answer for an offense, he may, upon motion with notice to the other parties,
have witnesses conditionally examined in his behalf. The motion shall state:
 (a) the name and residence of the witness;
  (b) the substance of his testimony; and
 (c) that the witness is sick or infirm as to afford reasonable ground for believing that he
will not be able to attend the trial, or resides more than one hundred (100) kilometers
from the place of trial and has no means to attend the same, or that other similar
circumstances exist that would make him unavailable or prevent him from attending
the trial.
 Motion shall be supported by an affidavit of the accused and such other evidence as the court
may require
 Examination of defense witness; how made - court is satisfied that the examination of a
witness for the accused is necessary, an order will be made directing that the witness be
examined at a specified date, time and place and that a copy of the order be served on the
prosecutor at least three (3) days before the scheduled examination
 Examination shall be taken before a judge, or, if not practicable, a member of the Bar in good
standing so designated by the judge in the order, or if the order be made by a court of
superior jurisdiction, before an inferior court to be designated therein. The examination shall
proceed notwithstanding the absence of the prosecutor provided he was duly notified of the
hearing. A written record of the testimony shall be taken.
 2. For the prosecution – Sec. 15, Rule 119 on the conditional examination of witness for the
prosecution.
 Examination of witness for the prosecution - satisfactorily appears that a witness for the
prosecution is:
 too sick or infirm to appear at the trial as directed by the order of the court, o
 has to leave the Philippines with no definite date of returning,
 He may forthwith be conditionally examined before the court where the case is pending. Such
examination, in the presence of the accused, or in his absence after reasonable notice to
attend the examination has been served on him, shall be conducted in the same manner as an
examination at the trial.
 Failure or refusal of the accused to attend the examination after notice shall be considered a
waiver. The statement taken may be admitted in behalf of or against the accused.

 b. Absence of counsel de parte – the hearing shall proceed upon appointment by the court of a
counsel de officio.
 c. Offer of evidence – offer of evidence, comment/objection thereto, and the court ruling thereto
shall be made orally
 Made on the same day after the presentation of his/her last witness and opposing party is
required to immediately interpose his oral comment/objection thereto.
 Court shall make a ruling on the offer of evidence in open court.
 Counsel shall cite the specific page numbers of the court record where the exhibits being
offered are found if attached thereto
 Court shall ensure that all exhibits offered are submitted to it on the same day of offer
 If exhibits are not attached, party making offer must submit the same during the offer of
evidence in open court.
 d. demurrer to evidence – after prosecution rested its case
 court shall inquire from the accused if he desires to move for leave of court to file a demurrer
to evidence or to proceed with the presentation of his evidence
 If orally moves for leave of court to file, court shall orally resolve the same
 If motion for leave of court is denied, court shall issue an order for the accused to present and
terminate his evidence on the dates previously scheduled and to orally offer and rest his case
on the day his last witness is presented.
  If despite denial, accused insists on filing demurrer to evidence, the previously scheduled
dates for the accused to present evidence shall be cancelled.
 Demurrer to evidence shall be filed within 10 days from date of leave of court is granted
 Corresponding comment shall be filed within 10 days from receipt
 Resolved by the court within 30 calendar days from date of filing of comment or lapse of 10-
day period to file the same
 If motion for leave is granted but demurrer to evidence is denied, accused shall likewise
present and terminate his evidence (one day apart, morning and afternoon) and shall orally
offer and rest his case on the day his last witness is presented.
 Court shall rule on the oral offer of evidence of the accused and the comment/objection of
the prosecution on the same day of the offer.
 If court denies the motion to present rebuttal evidence because it is no longer necessary, it
shall consider the case submitted for decision
 e. Presentation of Rebuttal and Sur-rebuttal Evidence – If court grants motion to present rebuttal
evidence
 prosecution shall immediately proceed with its presentation after the accused has rested its
case and orally rest its case in rebuttal after the presentation of its last rebuttal witness
 thereafter, accused shall immediately present sur-rebuttal evidence, if there is any, and orally
rest its case in sur-rebuttal after presentation of its last witness
 thereafter, the court shall submit the case for decision.
 f. One-day examination of witness rule – court shall strictly adhere that a witness has to be fully
examined in one day
 MEMORANDA - Submission is discretionary on the part of the court, which in no case shall exceed
25 pages in length, single-spaced, legal size paper using size 14 font. Period shall be non-extendible
and shall not suspend the running of the period of promulgation of the decision; thus, with or
without memoranda, the promulgation shall push through as scheduled.
 LACK OF STENOGRAPHIC NOTES – Judges who conducted the trial and heard the testimonies of
some or all of the witnesses shall not defer the submission of the case for decision on the ground of
incomplete or missing transcript of stenographic notes. If the case was heard completely by another
judge, not the judge tasked to write the decision, the latter shall direct the stenographers concerned
to submit the complete transcript within a period of 30 calendar days from date of his assumption
to office.
 PROMULGATION
 a. Schedule of promulgation – court shall announce in open court and include in the order
submitting the case for decision, the date of the promulgation of its decision which shall not be
more than 90 calendar days from the date the case is submitted for decision, except when the case
is covered by Special Rules and other laws which provide for a shorter period.
 b. Resolution of motion for reconsideration of judgement of conviction or motion for new trial –
Under Rule 121 filed within the reglementary period of 15 days from promulgation shall be resolved
within a non-extendible period of 10 calendar days from submission of the comment of the
prosecution. With or without comment, the court shall resolve the motion within 10-day period
 EFFECT OF NON-COMPLIANCE – ground for disciplinary action.

K. Judgment (Rule 120)

 Adjudication by the court that the accused is guilty or not guilty of the offense charged and the imposition
of the proper penalty and civil liability, if any.
 Requisites of a judgement
 Formal requisites
 1. Written in official language;
  If given verbally it is incomplete
 Oral dismissal of a case does not attain effect of judgement of acquittal, still in the power of the
judge to set aside and enter another order.
 2. Personally and directly prepared by the judge;
 3. Signed by the judge; and
 4. Contains clearly and distinctly a statement of the facts and the law upon which it is based.
 Jurisdictional requirements before a judgement may be rendered
 1. Jurisdiction over the subject matter;
 2. Jurisdiction over the territory; and
 3. Jurisdiction over the person of the accused.
 Contents of judgement – Must state:
 1. If of conviction:
 a. Legal qualification of the offense constituted by the acts committed by the accused, and the
aggravating or mitigating circumstances attending its commission;
 b. Participation of the accused whether as principal, accomplice or accessory;
 c. Penalty imposed upon the accused;
 d. Civil liability or damages caused by the wrongful act or omission unless a separate civil action has
been reserved or waived
 2. If of acquittal:
 a. Whether the evidence of the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused or merely failed to
prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt; and
 b. In either case, the judgement shall determine if the act or omission from which the civil liability
might arise did exist.
 Courts cannot impose penalties in the alternative
 Judgement must be fixed positively and with certainty the particular penalty
 In case of acquittal, the judgement must make a finding on the civil liability of the accused in favor of the
offended party, unless there is a clear showing that the act from which the civil liability might arise did not
exist
 Remedies if failed to award civil liability: Appeal; Certiorari; and Mandamus
 Duplicitous complaint or information – two or more offenses charged in a single complaint or information
 but accused failed to object to it before trial,
 the court may convict him of as many offenses as are charged and proved,
 and impose on him the penalty of each offense,
 setting out separately the findings of the fact and law in each offense.
 Failure to object is tantamount to waiver
 Judgement rendered by the judge who did not hear the case does not render the judgement erroneous,
especially where the evidence on record is sufficient to support is conclusions.
 Judge who presided over the entire trial would be in a better position to ascertain the truth or falsity of
the testimonies but the judge who only took over can render a valid decision by relying on the
transcript. It does not violate due process.
 Acquittal is immediately final and unappealable and may not be recalled for correction - In criminal cases,
no rule is more settled than that a judgment of acquittal is immediately final and unappealable. Such rule
proceeds from the accused’s constitutionally-enshrined right against prosecution if the same would place
him under double jeopardy. Thus, a judgment in such cases, once rendered, may no longer be recalled for
correction or amendment — regardless of any claim of error or incorrectness. In some situations, the Court
had allowed a review from a judgment of acquittal through the extraordinary remedy of a Rule 65 petition
for certiorari. A survey of these exceptional instances would, however, show that such review was only
allowed where the prosecution was denied due process or where the trial was a sham
 Variance Doctrine
 GR: An accused can be convicted of an offense only when it is both charged and proven
 XPN: When offense charged is included in or necessarily includes the offense proved, the accused shall be
convicted of the offense proved which is included in the offense charged, or of the offense charged which is
included in the offense proved.
 Mere fact that the evidence presented would indicate that a lesser offense outside the court’s jurisdiction
was committed does not deprive the court of its jurisdiction, which had vested in it under the allegations in
the information
 An offense charged necessarily includes that which is proved when some of the essential elements or
ingredients of the former, as this is alleged in the complaint or information, constitutes the latter.
 An offense is charged necessarily included in the offense proved, when the essential ingredients of the
former constitute or form a part of those constituting the latter.
 Accused employee charged with estafa through misappropriation may not be convicted thereof because of
absence of juridical possession. Accused however may be convicted of theft where information sufficiently
alleged it. Since information did not allege grave abuse of confidence, accused could be convicted of simple
and not qualified theft.
 Mayor charged with violation of Sec. 3(e) of RA 3019 (causing undue injury to the govt in the discharge of
official functions through evident bad faith) cannot be convicted of violation Sec3(e) through gross
inexcusable negligence.
 Rape by sexual assault is not necessarily included or subsumed in rape through sexual intercourse. The
accused may however be convicted of lascivious conduct against a child under Sec. 5(b) of R.A. No. 7610,
which offense is necessarily included in the offense charged.
 When the accused on bail fail to present themselves at the promulgation of a judgment of conviction, they
are considered to have lost their standing in court. Without any standing in court, the accused cannot invoke
its jurisdiction to seek relief
 Variance doctrine does not apply to conviction of a higher or more serious offense - Anent the charge for
Acts of Lasciviousness, the Court affirms the CA’s conclusion that subsequent proof of suggested rape is
immaterial where the allegations of the Information only describe lascivious conduct. To convict an accused
of a higher or more serious offense than that specifically charged in the information on which he is tried
(e.g., Rape versus Acts of Lasciviousness) would be an outright violation of his basic rights. It is well-settled
that a conviction for a crime not sufficiently alleged in the Information is proscribed by the fundamental
requirement of due process and other rights granted to an accused by the Constitution, particularly the right
to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him
 Effect of the judgment of conviction upon a minor
 GR: Courts shall promulgate the sentence and ascertain any civil liability which the accused may have
incurred. The sentence, however, shall be SUSPENDED without need of application pursuant to PD 603 or
the Child and Youth Welfare Code. In which case, child shall have been committed under the care of the
DSWD or any other accredited government institution until he reaches the age of 21 or until the court so
determines
 XPN: There is no suspension of sentence when:
 1. Has enjoyed previous suspension of sentence;
 2. Is convicted of a crime punishable by death or life imprisonment;
 3. Convicted by a military tribunal; or
 4. Already of age at the time of sentencing even if he was a minor at the time of the commission of the
crime.
 Time spent during period of his confinement shall be credited to his actual service of sentence.
Furthermore, he shall be entitled to the privilege mitigating circumstance of minority.
 Difference between a judgment and a ratio decidendi – Judgement pronounces the disposition of the case;
while a ratio decidendi provides the basic reason for such determination.
 Final Order v. Interlocutory Order – Final order disposes of the whole subject matter or terminates a
particular issue leaving nothing to be done but to enforce by execution what has been determined.
Interlocutory order is issued when the proceeding is not yet terminated because not all matters of the
proceedings have been finished.

1. Promulgation of Judgment
 Judgment is promulgated by reading it in the presence of the accused and any judge of the court in
which it was rendered. However, if the conviction is for a light offense, the judgment may be
pronounced in the presence of his counsel or representative. When the judge is absent or outside of
the province or city, the judgment may be promulgated by the clerk of court.
 If the accused is confined or detained in another province or city, the judgment may be promulgated
by the executive judge of the Regional Trial Court having jurisdiction over the place of confinement
or detention upon request of the court which rendered the judgment. The court promulgating the
judgment shall have authority to accept the notice of appeal and to approve the bail bond pending
appeal; provided, that if the decision of the trial court convicting the accused changed the nature of
the offense from non-bailable to bailable, the application for bail can only be filed and resolved by
the appellate court
 Proper clerk of court shall give notice to the accused personally or through his bondsman or warden
and counsel, requiring him to be present at the promulgation of the decision. If the accused tried in
absentia because he jumped bail or escaped from prison, the notice to him shall be served at his last
known address.
 In case the accused fails to appear at the scheduled date of promulgation of judgment despite
notice, the promulgation shall be made by recording the judgment in the criminal docket and
serving him a copy thereof at his last known address or thru his counsel.
 If the judgment is for conviction and the failure of the accused to appear was without justifiable
cause, he shall lose the remedies available in these rules against the judgment and the court shall
order his arrest. Within fifteen (15) days from promulgation of judgment, however, the accused may
surrender and file a motion for leave of court to avail of these remedies. He shall state the reasons
for his absence at the scheduled promulgation and if he proves that his absence was for a justifiable
cause, he shall be allowed to avail of said remedies within fifteen (15) days from notice
 INSTANCES WHEN JUDGMENT MAY BE PROMULGATED EVEN IF THE ACCUSED IS NOT PRESENT
 1. A judgment of acquittal; and
 2. For light offense; may be promulgated in the presence of counsel for the accused or
representative
 MODIFICATIONS OF JUDGEMENT –
 Upon motion, be modified or set aside before it becomes final or before appeal is perfected
 Must be based upon the motion of the accused. It cannot be done by the court motu proprio
 Judgment of acquittal becomes final immediately after promulgation and cannot be recalled for
correction or amendment
 INSTANCES WHEN JUDGMENT BECOMES FINAL
 1. After lapse of time for perfecting an appeal
 In case of death penalty is imposed, CA shall automatically review the judgment before it
becomes final.
 2. When sentence has been partially or totally satisfied;
 3. When accused has expressly waived in writing his right to appeal; and
 4. When the accused has applied for probation
 Applying for probation is necessarily deemed a waiver of ones right to appeal. Appeal and
probation are mutually exclusive remedies. Implicit in an application for probation is an
admission of guilt.
  ENTRY OF JUDGEMENT –
 Recording of judgment in the book of entries of judgments shall constitute its entry
 Record shall contain the dispositive part of the judgment order and shall be signed by the clerk of
court with a certificate that such judgment has become final and executory
 FINALITY OF JUDGMENT – is entirely distinct from its entry and the delay in the latter does not
affect the effectivity of the former, which is counted from the expiration of the period to appeal.
 REMEDIES BEFORE CONVICTION BECOMES FINAL –
 a. Modification of judgment (Sec 7, Rule 120) - A judgment of conviction may, upon motion of the
accused, be modified or set aside before it becomes final or before appeal is perfected. Except
where the death penalty is imposed, a judgment becomes final after the lapse of the period for
perfecting an appeal, or when the sentence has been partially or totally satisfied or served, or when
the accused has waived in writing his right to appeal, or has applied for probation
 b. Reopening of the proceedings (Sec 24, Rule 119) - At any time before finality of the judgment of
conviction, the judge may, motu proprio or upon motion, with hearing in either case, reopen the
proceedings to avoid a miscarriage of justice. The proceedings shall be terminated within thirty (30)
days from the order grating it.
 c. Motion for new trial/Reconsideration - At any time before a judgment of conviction becomes final,
the court may, on motion of the accused or at its own instance but with the consent of the accused,
grant a new trial or reconsideration
 d. Appeal from judgment

L. New Trial or Reconsideration (Rule 121)

 Any time before a judgment of conviction becomes final, the court may, on motion of the accused or at its
own instance but with the consent of the accused.
 Filed within 15 days from the promulgation of judgment
 If appeal has already been perfected, a motion for new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence
may be filed in the appellate court
 Forms of a motion for new trial or reconsideration
 1. In writing
 2. Be filed in court;
 3. State grounds on which it is based; and
 4. If based on newly discovered evidence, it must be supported by the affidavits of the witness by
whom such evidence is expected to be given or duly authenticated copies of documents which it is
proposed to introduce in evidence.
 While the rule requires affidavit of merit be attached to support a motion for new trial based on newly
discovered evidence, the rule also allows that the defect of lack of affidavit of merit may be cured by the
testimony under oath of the defendant at the hearing of the motion.
 Notice of motion for new trial or reconsideration shall be given to the prosecutor
 GROUNDS FOR NEW TRIAL – NT - 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.
 Hearing shall be conducted when the MNT calls for a resolution of a question of fact. The court may hear
evidence on the motion by affidavits or otherwise
 Errors of law have been committed during trial
 Irregularities prejudicial to the substantial rights of the accused have been committed during trial
 New and material evidence has been discovered which the accused could not, with reasonable
diligence, have discovered and produced at the trial and which if introduced and admitted would
probably change the judgment
 GROUNDS FOR RECONSIDERATION – filed in order to correct errors of law or fact in the judgment. It does
not require any further proceedings
 Errors of law in the judgment which requires no further proceedings; or
 Errors of fact in the judgment which requires no further proceedings
 Principle is to afford the trial court the opportunity to correct its own mistakes and to avoid unnecessary
appeals from being taken
 REQUISITES BEFORE A NEW TRIAL MAY BE GRANTED ON GROUND OF NEWLY-DISCOVERED EVIDENCE
(BERRY RULE)
 Evidence was discovered after trial;
 Could not have been discovered and produced at the trial even with the exercise of reasonable
diligence;
 New and material; and
 Evidence is of such weight that it would probably change the judgment if admitted.
 The most important requisite is that the evidence could not have been discovered and produced at the trial
even with reasonable diligence, hence the term “newly discovered evidence”.
 It must be of weighty influence and will affect the result of the trial.
 ERRORS OR IGNORANCE OF COUNSEL –
 GR: Not grounds for new trial. This rule is the same whether the mistakes are the result of ignorance,
inexperience, or incompetence.
 XPN: If it is so great and the error committed as a result thereof is so serious that the client, who otherwise
has a good cause, is prejudiced and denied his day in court, the litigation may be reopened to give the client
another chance to present his case.
 MNT may be granted on a ground not specifically provided in the rules provided that it sought in the interest
of justice. The relief of a new trial may be granted to client who has suffered by reason of his counsel’s gross
mistake and negligence.
 RECANTATION vs. AFFIDAVIT OF DESISTANCE
 RECANTATION - Witness who previously gave a testimony subsequently declares that his statements
were untrue publicly.
 GR: Not a ground for granting a new trial and hardly given weight.
 XPN: There is no evidence sustaining the judgment of conviction other than the testimony of the
recanting witness.
 AFFIDAVIT OF DESISTANCE - complainant states that he did not really intend to institute the case and
he is no longer interested in testifying or prosecuting.
 Not by itself a ground for dismissal of the action. Merely an additional ground to buttress the defense
and not a sole consideration for acquittal
 NEW TRIAL vs. RE-OPENING OF THE CASE
 NEW TRIAL - Filed after judgment is rendered but before the finality thereof.
 Made by court on motion of the accused or at its own instance but with consent of the accused
 RE-OPENING OF THE CASE - Made by the court before judgment is rendered in the exercise of sound
discretion.
 Does not require the consent of the accused; may be at the instance of either party who can thereafter
present additional evidence.
 EFFECTS OF GRANTING A NEW TRIAL OR RECONSIDERATION
 In all cases, the original judgment shall be set aside or vacated and a new judgment rendered accordingly.
 The effect is not to acquit the accused of the crime of which the judgment finds him guilty but precisely to
set aside said judgment so that the case may be tried de novo as if no trial had been had before.
 Other effects would depend upon the ground availed of in granting the new trial or reconsideration:
 ERRORS OF LAW OR IRREGULARITIES COMMITTED DURING THE TRIAL
  1. All proceedings and evidence not affected by such errors and irregularities shall stand;
 2. Those affected shall be set aside and taken anew; and
 3. In the interest of justice, the court may allow the introduction of additional evidence.

 NEWLY DISCOVERED EVIDENCE

 1. Evidence already take shall stand; and
 2. Newly discovered evidence and other evidence as the court may, in the interest of justice, allow to
be introduced, shall be taken and considered together with the evidence already in the record.
 APPLICATION OF NEYPES DOCTRINE IN CRIMINAL CASES –
 Period for appeal is not only within 15 days from notice of the judgment but also within 15 days from notice
of final order appealed from.
 A fresh period of 15 days to appeal is counted from the denial of the motion for reconsideration or new trial
 Reason is to standardize the appeal period provided in the Rules and to do away with the confusion as to
when the 15-day appeal period should be counted
 New rule also aims to regiment or make the appeal period uniform, to be counted from the receipt or the
order denying the motion for new trial, motion for reconsideration (whether full or partial) or any final order
of resolution
 Second MR - While a second motion for reconsideration is, as a general rule, a prohibited pleading, it is
within the sound discretion of the Court to admit the same, provided it is filed with prior leave whenever
substantive justice may be better served thereby

M. Appeal (Rule 122)

 A proceeding for review by which the whole case is transferred to the higher court for a final determination
 A mere statutory privilege
 Only final judgments and orders are appealable.
 In all criminal cases, the accused shall have the right to appeal in the manner prescribed by law.
 An essential part in our judicial system and trial courts are advised to proceed with caution so as not to
deprive a party of the right to appeal and instructed that every party-litigant should be afforded the amplest
opportunity for the proper and just disposition of his cause, freed from the constraints of technicalities.
 Once granted, its suppression would be a violation of due process, a right guaranteed by the Constitution.
 Taken within 15 days from promulgation of judgment or notice of final order appealed from.
 Any party may appeal, unless accused will be placed in double jeopardy
 Solicitor General has sole authority to represent the State in appeals
 When accused appeals his conviction, he waives the protection on the prohibition against DJ and runs the
risk of being sentenced to a penalty higher than imposed by the trial court.
 GR: Prosecution may not appeal a judgment of acquittal, accused would be subject to DJ.
 XPNs:
 1. If dismissal is made upon motion or with the express consent of the accused;
 XPN to the XPN:
 a. Insufficiency of the prosecution evidence
 b. Violation of the accused’s right to speedy trial.
 2. If the dismissal is not an acquittal or based upon consideration of the evidence on the merits;
 3. If the question is purely legal so that should the dismissal be found incorrect, the case shall be
remanded for further proceedings to determine the guilt or innocence of the accused; and
 4. If there is a showing of grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction, certiorari
under Rule 65 may be available.
 MODES OF APPEAL –
 1. Accused may seek a review of said judgment as regards to both criminal and civil actions; or
  2. Private offended party may appeal only with respect to the civil action either because the lower
court has refused or failed to award damages or because the award made is unsatisfactory to him

 Modes of review recognized by the Rules of court:

 1. Ordinary appeal - appeal to the Regional Trial Court, or to the Court of Appeals in cases decided by
the Regional Trial Court in the exercise of its original jurisdiction, shall be by notice of appeal filed with
the court which rendered the judgment or
 2. Petition for review - appeal to the Court of Appeals in cases decided by the Regional Trial Court in
the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction shall be by petition for review under Rule 42
 3. Petition for review on certiorari; - appeal in cases where the penalty imposed by the Regional Trial
Court is reclusion perpetua, life imprisonment or where a lesser penalty is imposed for offenses
committed on the same occasion or which arose out of the same occurrence that gave rise to the more
serious offense for which the penalty of death, reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment is imposed,
shall be by notice of appeal to the Court of Appeals in accordance with paragraph (a) of this Rule
 4. Automatic appeal - No notice of appeal is necessary in cases where the Regional Trial Court imposed
the death penalty. The Court of Appeals shall automatically review the judgment
 5. Petition for review on certiorari - Except as provided in the last paragraph of section 13, Rule 124, all
other appeals to the Supreme Court shall be by petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45
 EFFECT OF AN APPEAL – Opens the whole case for review and this includes the review of penalty, indemnity
and the damages involved.
 Appellate court may increase the penalty and indemnity of damages awarded by the trial court although the
offended party had not appealed from said award, and the party who sought a review of the decision was
the accused.
 EFFECT OF PERFECTION OF APPEAL WITH REGARDS TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE COURT – court a quo
loses jurisdiction over the case both over the record and over the subject of the case
 Failure to serve a copy to the prosecutor is not a defect which can nullify the appeal or prejudice the
unquestionable rights of the accused.
 EFFECT OF FAILURE TO PROSECUTE AN APPEAL –
 1. Judgment of the court becomes final
 2. Accused cannot be afforded the right to appeal unless;
 a. He voluntarily submits to the jurisdiction of the court; or
 b. He is otherwise arrested within 15 days from notice of judgment against him
 Appeal not mooted by the accused’s release on parole
 Parole is not one of the modes of totally extinguishing criminal liability
 Parole refers to the conditional release of an offender from a correctional institution after he serves the
minimum term of his prison sentence.
 APPEAL FROM THE CIVIL ASPECT –
 1. Appeal of the offended party from the civil aspect shall not affect the criminal aspect of the
judgment or order appealed from.
 2. Appeal period accorded to the accused should also be available to the offended party who seeks to
redress of the civil aspect of the decision. The period to appeal granted to the offended party is the
same as that granted to the accused.
 -Upon death of the accused pending appeal of his conviction, the criminal action is extinguished inasmuch
as there is no longer a defendant to stand as the accused; the civil action instituted therein for the recovery
of the civil liability ex delicto is ipso facto extinguished, grounded as it is on the criminal action.
 FACTUAL FINDINGS OF THE TRIAL COURT –
 GR: Accorded great respect and even conclusive effect if duly supported by evidence.
 XPN: When facts or circumstances of weight and substance have been:
  1. Overlooked;
 2. Misapprehended;
 3. Misinterpreted; or
 4. Court gravely abused its discretion
 WHERE TO APPEAL –
 1. TO THE RTC, in cases decided by the first level courts;
 2. TO THE CA or SC in the proper cases provided by law, in cases decided by the RTC
 3. TO THE SC,
 in cases decided by the CA
 in cases decided by the CTA En Banc;
 in cases decided by the Sandiganbayan
 Service of notice of appeal –
 GR: Served upon the adverse party or his counsel by personal service.
 XPN: If personal service cannot be made, through:
 1. Registered mail; or
 2. Substituted service;
 3. By publication, made in a newspaper of general circulation in the vicinity once a week for a period
not exceeding 30 days
 Appellee may waive his right to notice of appeal. However, the appellate court may, in its discretion,
entertain an appeal notwithstanding failure to give such notice in the interest of justice so requires.
 PERIOD TO WITHDRAW AN APPEAL –
 1. Before the record has been forwarded by the clerk of court to the proper appellate court, in which
case the judgment shall become final.
 2. Court, in its discretion, allow the appellant to withdraw his appeal, provided a motion to that effect is
filed before the rendition of the judgment in the case on appeal.
 PROBATION
 Court may, after it shall have convicted and sentenced a defendant within the period for perfecting an
appeal, suspend the execution of the sentence and place the defendant on probation for such period and
conditions it may deem best.
 No application for probation shall be entertained or granted if the defendant has perfected an appeal from
the judgment of conviction.
 An appeal should not bar the accused from applying for probation if the appeal is taken solely to reduce the
penalty is contrary to express mandate of the law
 Appeal and probation are mutually exclusive remedies. Implicit in an application for probation is an
admission of guilt.
 Upon perfection of the appeal, the execution of the judgment or final order appealed from shall be stayed
as to the appealing part
 The benefit of the stay of execution afforded to a co-accused, who timely files an appeal, cannot be
extended to those who failed to file the same. Thus, the period to appeal continued to run against the
accused who did not appeal even if his coaccused appealed
 EFFECT OF APPEAL BY ANY OF SEVERAL ACCUSED –
 1. It shall not affect those who did not appeal, except insofar as the judgment of the appellate court is
favorable and applicable to the latter.
 2. The appeal of the offended party from the civil aspect shall not affect the criminal aspect of the
judgment or order appealed from.
 3. Upon perfection, the execution of judgment or final order appealed from shall be stayed as to the
appealing party.
 GROUNDS FOR DISMISSAL OF APPEAL –
 1. Failure of the appellant to serve and file the required number of copies of his brief of memorandum
within the time period provided by these Rules;
 2. Appellant escapes from prison or confinement, jumps bail or flees to a foreign country during the
pendency of the appeal;
 3. Failure of the record on appeal to show on its face that the appeal was taken within the period fixed
by these Rules;
 4. Failure to file notice of appeal or the record on appeal within the period prescribed by these Rules;
 5. Failure of the appellant to pay the docket and other lawful fees
 6. Unauthorized alterations, omissions or additions in the approved record on appeal
 7. Absence of specific assignment of errors in the appellant’s brief, or of page reference to the record
 8. Failure of the appellant to take the necessary steps for the correction or completion of the record
within the time limited by the court in its order
 ERRONEOUS MODE OF APPEAL – In cases where the contention of the adverse party that the ordinary
appeal filed by appellant be dismissed because the proper remedy is petition for review on certiorari was
rejected
 Supreme court said that in cases similarly situated, and as long as the steps formally required for the
perfection of an appeal were taken in due time, appeal may be given due course, without prejudice to
requiring the appellant to file the necessary petition for review on certiorari which is also a form of appeal.
 When the SC En Banc is equally divided in opinion or the necessary majority cannot be had on whether to
acquit the appellant, the case shall again be deliberated upon and if no decision is reached after re-
deliberation, the judgment of conviction of the lower court shall be reversed and the accused acquitted.

 FROM DECISIONS OF MTC APPEAL TO RTC

 HOW TAKEN
 1. File a notice of appeal with the MTC;
 2. Serve a copy of the notice to the adverse party.
 FROM DECISIONS OF RTC APPEAL TO CA
 1. Original jurisdiction for offenses with imposable penalties less than RP or LI
 How Taken
 1. File a notice of appeal with the RTC;
 2. Serve a copy of notice to the adverse party. File a petition for review under Rule 42;
 2. Appellate jurisdiction
 How Taken - File a petition for review under Rule 42
 3. Where imposable penalty is:
 a. RP or LI
 b. a lesser penalty for offenses committed on the same occasion or which arose from the same
occurrence that gave rise to the offense punishable by RP or LI
 How Taken
 1. File a notice of appeal with the RTC;
 2. Serve a copy of notice to the adverse party.
 4. Where imposable penalty is death
 How Taken - Automatic review to CA.
 APPEAL TO SC
 1. All other appeals except: (Petition for review on certiorari via Rule 45)
  a. Decision of RTC where the imposable penalty is LI or RP a lesser penalty for offenses on the same
occasion or which arose from the same occurrence gave rise to the offense punishable by RP or LI; or
 b. Decisions of RTC imposing penalty of death
 2. CA
 a. When it finds that death penalty should be imposed (Automatic Review)
 b. Where it imposes RP, LP or a lesser penalty (Notice of appeal)
 3. Sandiganbayan
 a. Exercising its appellate jurisdiction for offenses where the imposable penalty is RP or LI ( Notice of
appeal)
 b. Exercising its original jurisdiction for offenses where the imposable penalty is LI or RP (Notice of
appeal)
 b. Exercising its original jurisdiction for offenses where the imposable penalty is LI or RP (Petition for
review on certiorari via Rule 45)

N. Search and Seizure (Rule 126)

 NATURE OF SEARCH WARRANT - Nature of criminal process and may be invoked only in furtherance of
public prosecutions.
 Have no relation to civil process or trials and are not available to individuals in the course of civil
proceedings, nor for the maintenance of a mere private right.
 Interlocutory in character because it leaves something more to be done, which is the determination of the
guilt of the accused.
 Not a proceeding against a person but is solely for the discovery and to get possession of personal property.
 A special and peculiar remedy, drastic in nature, and made necessary because of public necessity.
 Resembles in some respects with what is commonly known as John Doe proceedings.
 An application for a search warrant is not a criminal action. Hence, any aggrieved party may question an
order quashing the same without need for the conformity of the public prosecutor
 Search Warrant
 1. An order in writing issued in the name of the PP
 2. Signed by a judge; and
 3. Directed to a peace officer, commanding him to:
 a. search for personal property described therein; and
 b. bring it before the court
 Power to issue such search warrant is exclusively vested with the trial judges in the exercise of their judicial
functions.
 Warrant must name the person upon whom it is to be served except in those cases where it contains only a
description personae such as will enable the officer to identify the person. The description must be
sufficient to indicate clearly a proper person upon whom it is to be served.
 General Warrant - A search warrant which vaguely describes and does not particularize the personal
properties to be seized 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.
 Not valid as it infringes on the constitutional mandate requiring particular description of the things to be
seized.
 Scatter-shot search warrant - A warrant issued for more than one offense.
 Invalid, violates what the law requires in a warrant of arrest
 Strict compliance with the constitutional and statutory requirements. Otherwise, it is void.
 No presumption of regularity are to be invoked in aid of the process when an officer undertakes to justify it.
 Always construed strictly without going the full length of requiring technical accuracy.
 Form of search warrant
 In writing
 Contain such particulars as the
 name of the person against whom it is directed
 offense for which it was issued
 place to be searched
 specific things to be seized
 Duration - 10 days from date of issue
 Used only once, thereafter becomes functus officio, except when search was conducted on one day
was interrupted, in which case the same may be continued under the same warrant the following day if
not beyond the 10-day period.
 Requirements for the issuance of a search warrant are more stringent than that of a warrant of arrest. The
violation of the right to privacy produces a humiliating effect which cannot be rectified anymore.
 No other justification for a search, except for a warrant.
 Search is an examination of a man’s house or other buildings or premises or of his person for the discovery
of contraband or illicit or stolen property or some evidence of guilt to be used in the prosecution of a
criminal action for some offense with which he is charged.
 Seizure is the physical taking of a thing into custody.
 APPLICATION FOR SEARCH WARRANT, WHERE FILED –
 GR: Filed with a court within whose territorial jurisdiction the crime was committed.
 XPNs:
 1. For compelling reasons, any court within the judicial region where the crime was committed if the place
of the commission of the crime is known, or any court within the judicial region where the warrant shall be
enforced.
 Filing in such courts requires compelling reasons stated in the application. The rule is of a mandatory
nature.
 2. However, if the criminal case has been filed, the application shall only be made in the court where the
criminal action is pending.
 3. In cases of search warrant involving heinous crimes, illegal gambling, illegal possession of firearms and
ammunitions as well as violation of RA 9165, IPR and AMLA, the executive judges and whenever they are on
official leave of absence or are not physically present in the station, the Vice-judges of RTCs of Manila and
Quezon City shall have the authority to act on the application filed the NBI, PNP, ACTAF, PAOC-TF and REACT-
TF
 Application shall be personally endorsed by the heads of such agencies and shall particularly describe
therein the places to be seized and/or the property or things to be seized. The executive judge and the
vice-executive judges concerned shall issue the warrants if justified, which may be served outside the
territorial jurisdiction of said courts.
 Ruling - Power to issue search warrant is inherent in all courts, such that the power of courts to issue it
where the place to be searched is within the jurisdiction is not intended to exclude other courts from
exercising the same power.
 Generally, the search warrant application must be filed within the court which has territorial jurisdiction
over the place where the offense was alleged to be committed. However, for compelling reasons, which
must be expressly stated in the application, it can be filed in a court other than the one having jurisdiction.
 An application for search warrant is heard ex parte. It is neither a trial nor a part of the trial. Action must be
expedited for time is of the essence. Great reliance has to be accorded by the judge to the testimonies
under oath of the complainant and the witnesses.
 REQUISITES OF A VALID SEARCH WARRANT –
 1. Issued upon probable cause - Existence of such facts and circumstances which would lead a
reasonably discreet and prudent man to believe that an offense has been committed and that the
objects sought in connection with the offense are in the place to be searched.
 Must be based on the personal knowledge of the complainant or witnesses he may produce and not
mere hearsay. Test of sufficiency of a deposition or affidavit is w/n it has been drawn in a manner that
perjury could be charged thereon and the affiant be held liable for damages.
 Mere affidavits of the applicant are not sufficient. Judge has to take the depositions of the applicants in
writing and attach them to the record,
 2. Probable cause must be determined by the issuing judge personally;
 3. Judge must have personally examined, in the form of searching questions and answers, the applicant
and his witnesses;
 Personally conducted
 in the form of search questions and answers
 complainant and witnesses examined on the facts personally known to them
 statements must be in writing and under oath; and
 sworn statements and affidavits must be attached to the record
 4. Warrant must particularly describe or identify the property to be seized as far as the circumstances
will ordinarily allow;
 5. Must particularly describe the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized;
 Test to determine particularity of the place to be searched:
 1. When description therein is as specific as the ordinary circumstance will allow
 2. When description expresses a conclusion of fact, not of law which the warrant officer may be
guided in making the search warrant
 3. When things described therein are limited to those which bear direct relation to the offense for
which the warrant is being issued.
 Importance: To leave the officers of the law with no discretion regarding what articles they shall
seize, to the end that “unreasonable searches and seizures” may not be made that abuses may not
be committed.
 Standard for determining the legality of a warrant against a person - Whether the person has
been sufficiently described with particularity sufficient to identify him with reasonable certainty.
Even if the name is unknown or erroneously written, the description of the person with certainty
to identify him and set him apart from others is enough to lend validity to a warrant
 Requirement of particularity is satisfied if it is as specific as the circumstances will allow -
Requirement of particularity as to the things to be seized does not require technical accuracy in
the description of the property to be seized, and that a search warrant may be said to particularly
describe the things to be seized when the description therein is as specific as the circumstances
will ordinarily allow it to be described. The same principle should be applied in the case at bench.
It would be unreasonable to expect PO2 Avila, or an outsider such as Labrador for that matter, to
have extensive knowledge of the interior set-up or floor plan of petitioner's house without,
however, having apparent authority or opportunity to access the premises prior to the search. In
this regard, the Court holds that the validity of the warrant must be assessed on the basis of the
pieces of information made available to Judge Morga at the time PO2 Avila applied for the
issuance of the search warrant which, in this case, were sufficiently supported by the sketches of
Labrador, and the testimonies of PO2 Avila and Labrador, who were, in fact, personally examined
by Judge Morga in the form of searching questions and answers
 6. Must be in connection with one specific offense; and
  7. Sworn statements together with the affidavits submitted by witnesses must be attached to the
record.
 Ruling - A warrant is required to be issued by a judge before a search can be validly effected. While there are
exceptions to this rule, warrantless searches can only be carried out when founded on probable cause, or a
“reasonable ground of suspicion supported by circumstances sufficiently strong in themselves to warrant a
cautious man to believe that the person accused is guilty of the offense with which he is charged.” There
must be a confluence of several suspicious circumstances. A solitary tip hardly suffices as probable cause;
items seized during warrantless searches based on solitary tips are inadmissible as evidence.
 Ruling - Facts discovered during surveillance conducted on the basis of information and evidence provided
by petitioners – constitute personal knowledge, which could form the basis for the issuance of a search
warrant. The surveillance and investigation conducted by an agent of the NBI obtained from confidential
information supplied to him enabled him to gain personal knowledge of the illegal activities complained of.
The validity of the search warrant is sustained.
 Absence of probable cause on a particular article invalidate the entire search warrant? - Such particular
article may be severed from the rest of the search warrant, provided that the remaining parts meet the
requirements of probable cause and particularity.
 FACTORS TO CONSIDER FOR THE DETERMINATION OF PROBABLE CAUSE –
 1. Time of the application in relation to the alleged offense committed. The nearer the time at which
the observation of the offense is alleged to have been made, the more reasonable the conclusion of
establishment of probable cause.
 2. There must be competent proof of particular acts or specific omissions but only the best evidence
under the circumstances is required.
 Probable cause to arrest – judge must have sufficient facts in hands that would tend to show that a crime
has been committed and that a particular person has committed it.
 Probable cause to search – requires facts to show that particular things connected with a crime are found in
a specific location.
 Multi-factor balancing test – requires the officer to weigh the manner and intensity of the interference on
the right of the people, the gravity of the crime committed, and the circumstances attending the incident.
 RULE WITH RESPECT TO THE TIME OF MAKING A SEARCH –
 GR: Must be served at day time
 XPNs: May be made at night
 When it is positively asserted in the affidavit that the property is on the person or in the place ordered to be
searched.
 Assertion must be itself sufficient as to the fact so asserted, for if the same is based on hearsay, the general
rule shall apply.
 Unlawful if conducted without direction to that effect.
 Same rule applies if warrant left blank the time for making the search.
 Implementation of the search warrant be done on different days - Yes. It could be served at any time
within its 10-day lifetime, and if its object or purpose cannot be accomplished in one day, the same may not
be used for a different purpose on each day. After the articles for which the warrant was issued have been
seized, the same warrant cannot be utilized as authority to make another search. The time must not be one
which is intrusive or violative of one’s privacy, like at the middle of the night. Then, too, depending on the
locality, what may be reasonable time in one place would not be so in some other cases

 SERVICE OF THE SEARCH WARRANT –

 1. Announce their presence;
 Knock and announce principle
 An officer should knock, introduce himself and announce his purpose and only in exceptional
cases may he forego the same, like when his safety is in danger of being jeopardized or when
evidence is about to be destroyed.
 A lawful entry is the indispensable predicate of a reasonable search. A search would violate the
constitutional guarantee against unreasonable search and seizure if the entry was illegal, whether
accomplished by for or by threat or show of force or obtained by stealth or coercion
 The officer, if refused admittance to the place of directed search after giving notice of his purpose and
authority, may break open any outer or inner door or window of a house or any part of a house or
anything therein to execute the warrant to liberate himself or any person lawfully aiding him when
unlawfully detained therein.
 Instances when an unannounced intrusion is permissible
 1. A party whose premise or is entitled to the possession thereof refuses, upon demand to open
it;
 2. Such person in the premises already know the identity of the officers and of their authority
and persons;
 3. Officers are justified in the honest belief that there is an imminent peril to life or limb; or
 4. Those in the premises, aware of the presence of someone outside, are then engaged in activity
which justifies the officers to believe that an escape or the destruction of evidence is being
attempted.
 Not exclusive or inclusive. There is no formula for the determination of reasonableness. Each case is
to be decided on its own facts and circumstances.
 2. Identify themselves to the accused and to the persons who rightfully have possession of the premises to
be searched;
 3. Show to them the search warrant; and
 4. Explain the warrant in a language or dialect known and understood by them.
 RULES TO BE OBSERVED IN CASE OF SEARCH OF A HOUSE OR ROOM - It is required that the search be
conducted in the presence of:
 1. Lawful occupant of the place to be searched;
 2. Any member of his family; or
 3. In their absence, in the presence of 2 witnesses of sufficient age and discretion residing in the same
locality
 Only upon absence of lawful occupant may two persons be made as witnesses of a search - Rules of Court
clearly and explicitly establishes a hierarchy among the witnesses in whose presence the search of the
premises must be conducted. Thus, a search under the strength of a warrant is required to be witnessed by
the lawful occupant of the premises sought to be searched. Only upon their absence may two (2) persons of
sufficient age and discretion residing in the same locality be made to stand as their replacements. This is the
rule notwithstanding that the PNP New Rules on Engagement makes it mandatory the presence of at least
two witnesses during the conduct of the search. As between the Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure and
the PNP New Rules on Engagement, the former shall prevail. The power of the Court to promulgate rules
emanates from Section 5, paragraph 5 of Article VIII of the 1987 Constitution, which cannot be encroached
upon by the executive department, more specifically, by the PNP New Rules of Engagement.

 PERSONAL PROPERTY TO BE SEIZED – Subject of a search warrant is personal property. A search warrant
may be issued for search and seizure of the following:
 1. Personal property subject of the offense;
  2. Personal property stolen or embezzled or other proceeds, or fruits of the offense;
 3. Personal property used or intended to be used as a means of committing an offense.
 It is not required that the property to be seized should be owned by the person against whom the search
warrant is directed. It is sufficient that the person against whom the warrant is directed has control or
possession of the property sought to be seized
 Human remains can be a subject of a search warrant, since “personal property” refers to the thing’s
mobility; and not its capacity to be owned or alienated by a particular person. Considering that human
remains can generally be transported from place to place, considering further that they qualify under the
phrase “subject of the offense” give that they prove the crime’s corpus delicti, it follows that they may be
valid subjects of a search warrant.
 EXCEPTIONS TO SEARCH WARRANT REQUIREMENT –
 GR: The procurement of a warrant is required before a law enforcer can validly conduct a search and
seizure.
 XPNs: InCoMo-ChAir-PvSf-Cu-Im-Ee-Ins
 1. Search incident to a lawful arrest;
 Includes searching 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.
 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.
 Parameters: immediate reach and control rule –
 Search incident to lawful arrest - A person lawfully arrested may be searched for dangerous weapons
or anything which may have been used or constitute proof in the commission of an offense without a
search warrant
 Purpose
 1. Insure the officer’s safety;
 2. prevent the frustration of the arrest itself; and
 3. prevent concealment or destruction of the evidence
 2. Consented search (waiver of right);
 Consent cannot be presumed simply because the accused failed to object to the search. To constitute a
waiver, the following requisites must concur:
 1. The right exists;
 2. Persons involved had knowledge, actual or constructive, of the existence of such rights; and
 3. Actual intention to relinquish such rights.
 A peaceful submission to a search or seizure is not a consent or an invitation thereto, but is merely a
demonstration of regard for the supremacy of the law.
 Canine/Dog sniff test - Applied by the SC of US differently depending on the place where the sniff was
done as when the same was conducted in a private resident, airport, highway or in routing traffic stops.
 Government’s use of trained dogs to investigate the house and its surroundings is a “search” within the
meaning of the 4th amendment.
 Use of thermal imaging device - Where the government uses a device that is not in general public use,
to explore details of a private home that would previously have been unknowable without physical
intrusion, the surveillance is a 4th amendment “search” and is presumptively unreasonable without a
warrant.

 3. Search of moving vehicle (Caroll doctrine);

 Can be validly made without a search warrant. A search warrant may be readily obtained when the
search is made in a store, dwelling house or other immobile structure. But it is impracticable to obtain a
 warrant when the search is conducted on a mobile ship, on an aircraft, or in other motor vehicle since
they can quickly be moved out of the locality or jurisdiction where the warrant must be sought.
 Peace officers in such cases, however, are limited to routine checks where the examination of the
vehicle is limited to visual inspection. When a vehicle is stopped and subjected to an extensive search,
such would be constitutionally permissible only if the officers made it upon probable cause, i.e., upon a
belief, reasonably arising out of circumstances known to the seizing officer, that an automobile or other
vehicle contains as item, article or object which by law is subject to seizure and destruction
 4. Checkpoint; body checks in airports;
 Search on checkpoints are valid for as long as they are warranted by the exigencies of public order and
are conducted in a way least intrusive to motorists. For as long as the vehicle is neither searched nor its
occupants subjected to a body search, and the inspection of the vehicle is limited to a visual search,
said routine checks cannot be regarded as violative of an individual’s right against unreasonable search.
 Body checks in airports, passengers attempting to board an aircraft routinely pass through a metal
detector; their carry-on baggage’s as well as checked luggage are routinely subjected to x-ray scans.
Should these procedures suggest the presence of suspicious objects, physical searches are conducted
to determine what the objects are.
 There is little question that such searches are reasonable, given their minimal intrusiveness, the gravity of
the safety interests involved, and the reduced privacy expectations associated with airline travel. Indeed,
travelers are often notified through airport public address systems, signs, and notices in their airline tickets
that they are subject to search and, if any prohibited materials or substances are found, such would be to
seizure. These announcements place passengers on notice that ordinary constitutional protections against
warrantless searches and seizures do not apply to routine airport procedures.
 5. Plain view doctrine;
 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
 1. There must have been a legal presence in the place where the search was made;
 2. The evidence was discovered inadvertently by an officer with a right to be where he is;
 3. Evidence is immediately apparently illegal; and
 4. There is no need for any further search to obtain the evidence.
 Inadvertence, 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
 Does not apply where officers did not just accidentally discover the evidence but actually searched for
it. 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
 In the course of the lawful intrusion, the officer came inadvertently across a piece of evidence
incriminating the accused. The object must be open to the eye and hand and its discovery inadvertent.
 6. Stop and frisk situations (Terry doctrine);
 A limited protective search of the outer clothing of a person to determine the presence of weapons.
Probable cause is not required, but a genuine reason (not mere suspicion) must exist, in the light of the
officer’s experience and surrounding circumstances, to warrant the belief that the persons has
concealed weapons.
 Its object is either to:
 1. Determine the identity of a suspicious individual; or
 2. Maintain the status quo momentarily while the police officer seeks to obtain more information

 Terry Doctrine - A valid “stop” by an officer requires that he has reasonable and articulable 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 others. The “frisk” must be a mere pat down outside the person’s outer
garment and not unreasonably intrusive
 Officer may search the outer clothing of the person in an attempt to discover weapons which might be
used to assault him.
 7. Enforcement of custom laws;
 The collector of Customs is authorized to effect searches and seizures for the enforcement of customs
duties and tariff laws.
 The RTCs are devoid of any competence to pass upon the validity or regularity of seizure and forfeiture
proceedings conducted by the BOC and to enjoin otherwise interfere with these proceedings.
 It is the collector of customs, sitting in seizure and forfeiture proceedings who has exclusive jurisdiction
to hear and determine all questions touching on the seizure and forfeiture of dutiable goods
 8. Immediate control test;
 Search incidental to a lawful warrantless arrest may extend beyond the person where the exigencies of
the situation justify a warrantless search for dangerous weapons and to prevent the arrestee from
destroying evidence of the crime within reach.
 9. Exigent and emergency circumstances; and
 A prevailing general chaos and disorder because of an ongoing coup, and the raid of the office/building
was precipitated by an intelligence report that said office was being used as headquarters by the RAM.
Also, the surveillance team, before the raid, was fired upon by the people inside. The raiding team had
no opportunity to apply for warrant as the court then was closed
 10. Inspection of buildings and other premises for the enforcement of fire, sanitary and building
regulations.
 11. Other exceptions
 Buy-bust operation – a form of entrapment legally employed by peace officers as an effective way of
apprehending drug dealers in committing an offense. There is no need for a search warrant because the
accused is caught in flagrante delicto
 Private searches – a case where the evidence was obtained by a private person acting in a private
capacity, while performing company standard operating procedures and without state participation and
intervention. It was held that the constitutional rights cannot be invoked when there is no government
interference
 EFFECT OF AN ILLEGL SEARCH AND SEIZURE (FRUIT OF THE POISONOUS TREE DOCTRINE) - Any evidence
obtained in violation of this or the preceding section shall be inadmissible for any purpose in any
proceeding.
 Exclusion of evidence obtained from being used against the person whose rights were violated by the
search.
 Exclusionary rule prevents, upon proper motion or objection, the admission of evidence illegally obtained.
Thus, most important effect of an illegal search and seizure is the exclusion of the evidence from being used
against the person whose rights were violated by the search, the evidence being the proverbial and
jurisprudential “fruit of the poisonous tree.”
 Violation of the individual’s rights also inevitably results into civil, criminal, and administrative charges
against the officer responsible for the violation.

 REMEDIES FROM UNLAWFUL SEARCH AND SEIZURE – Can only be contested by the party whose rights have
been impaired thereby, and that the objection to an unlawful search and seizure is purely personal and
cannot be availed by third parties.
 1. Motion to quash the search warrant;
 2. Motion to suppress as evidence the objects illegally taken; and
 3. Certiorari, where the search warrant is a patent nullity.
 VENUE OF FILING A MOTION TO QUASH SEARCH WARRANT –
 1. It may be filed and acted upon only by the court where the action has been instituted; or
 2. If no criminal action has been instituted, it may be filed in and resolved by the court that issued the
search warrant. However, if such court failed to resolve the motion and a criminal case is subsequently
filed in another court, the motion shall be resolved by the latter court.
 RULE WITH RESPECT TO WAIVER OF LEGALITY AND ADMISSIBILITY OF SEARCH WARRANT – Objection to
the legality of the search warrant, or as to the admissibility of the evidence obtained is deemed waived
where no objection of the search warrant was raised during the trial of the case nor to the admissibility of
the evidence obtained through said warrant.
 Remedies are alternative. If a motion to quash is denied, a motion to suppress cannot be availed
consequently. The illegality of the search warrant does not call for the return of the things seized, the
possession of which is prohibited by law. However, those personalties seized in violation of the
constitutional immunity whose possession is not illegal or unlawful per se ought to be returned to their
rightful owner or possessor.
 Ruling - Denial of Motion to dismiss on ground of illegal arrest is proper. Accused failed to file a motion to
quash before entry of plea and was tantamount to a waiver of the objection to lack of personal jurisdiction
or of the objection to an illegal arrest
 However, Denial of motion to suppress evidence is not proper. SC held that a waiver of an illegal warrantless
arrest does not carry with it a waiver of the inadmissibility of evidence seized during an illegal warrantless
arrest. A waiver of an illegal arrest is not a waiver of an illegal search. The constitution provides that
evidence seized in violation of the right against illegal search is inadmissible in evidence.

O. Provisional Remedies in Criminal Cases (Rule 127)

 Availability of provisional remedies. — 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.
 They are those to which parties may resort for the preservation or protection of their rights or interests and
for no other purposes during the pendency of the action.
 They are applied to a pending litigation for the purpose of securing the judgment or preserving the status
quo; and in some cases, after judgment, for the purpose of preserving or disposing of the subject matter
 KINDS OF PROVISIONAL REMEDIES
 1. Attachment - Afforded to offended party to have the property of the accused attached as security for
satisfaction of any judgment that may be recovered from the accused.
 A provisional remedy by which the property of an adverse property is taken into legal custody, either at
the commencement of an action or at any time thereafter, as a security for the satisfaction of any
judgment that may be recovered by the plaintiff or any proper party
 Plaintiff or any proper party may have the property of the of the adverse party attached. Hence, the
aggrieved party in whose behalf the civil aspect of the criminal action is prosecuted may apply for the
issuance of a writ of preliminary attachment, he being the person primarily and directly interested
thereby. The prosecutor in the criminal action may make such an application in behalf of or for the
protection of the interest of the offended party.

 Cases wherein attachment is made available

 1. Accused is about to abscond from the PH
 2. Criminal action is based on a claim for money or property embezzled or fraudulently misapplied or
converted to the use of the accused who is a public officer, or any other officer of a corporation, or an
attorney, factor, broker, agent, or clerk, in the course of his employment as such, or by any other person
in a fiduciary capacity, or for a willful violation of a duty;
 3. Accused has concealed, removed or disposed of his property or is about to do so;
  4. Accused resides outside the PH.
 2. Preliminary injunction - An order of the court to perform or refrain from performing a particular act or
acts.
 3. Receivership - Requires the appointment of a receiver aimed at the preservation of and securing the
property or fund subject of the litigation.
 4. Replevin - A procedure whereby seized goods may be provisionally restored to their owner pending the
outcome of an action
 5. Support pendente lite - An order against the accused to provide support pendente lite to the child born
to the offended party allegedly because of the crime. The application therefore may be filed successively by
the offended party, her parents, grandparents or guardian and the state in the corresponding criminal case
during its pendency

P. The Rule on Cybercrime Warrants (Section 2 of A.M. No. 17-11-03-SC only)

 Involves the preservation, disclosure, interception, search, seizure, and/or examination, as well as the
custody, and destruction of computer data
 Venue of Criminal Actions - violation of Section 4 (Cybercrime offenses) and/or Section 5 (Other offenses)
 filed before the designated cybercrime court of the province or city where the offense or any of its
elements is committed, or
 where any part of the computer system used is situated, or
 where any of the damage caused to a natural or juridical person took place:
 Provided, that the court where the criminal action is first filed shall acquire jurisdiction to the exclusion of
the other courts.
 All other crimes defined and penalized by the Revised Penal Code - committed by, through, and with the
use of ICT – Sec.6
 Filed before the regular or other specialized regional trial courts, as the case may be
 Where to File an Application for a Warrant - any of the designated cybercrime courts of the province or the
city
 where the offense or any of its elements has been committed, is being committed, or is about to be
committed
 where any part of the computer system used is situated
 where any of the damage caused to a natural or juridical person took place
 Cybercrime courts in Quezon City, the City of Manila, Makati City, Pasig City, Cebu City, Iloilo City, Davao
City and Cagayan De Oro City shall have the special authority to act on applications and issue warrants
which shall be enforceable nationwide and outside the Philippines.
 An application for a warrant under this Rule for violation of Section 6, Chapter II of RA 10175 (all crimes
defined and penalized by the Revised Penal Code, as amended, and other special laws, if committed by,
through, and with the use of ICT) shall be filed by the law enforcement authorities with the regular or other
specialized regional trial courts, as the case may be, within its territorial jurisdiction in the places
abovedescribed.
 Incidents Related to the Warrant When a Criminal Action is Instituted - Once a criminal action is instituted,
a motion to quash and other incidents that relate to the warrant shall be heard and resolved by the court
that subsequently acquired jurisdiction over the criminal action.
 The prosecution has the duty to move for the transmittal of the records, as well as the transfer of the items’
custody to the latter court
 Examination of Applicant and Record - Before issuing a warrant, the judge must personally examine in the
form of searching questions and answers, in writing and under oath, the applicant and the witnesses he may
produce, on facts personally known to them and attach to the record their sworn statements, together with
the judicial affidavits submitted
 Effective Period of Warrants - shall not exceed a period of ten (10) days from its issuance
  Court issuing the warrant may, upon motion, extend its effectivity based only on justifiable reasons for a
period not exceeding ten (10) days from the expiration of the original period.
 Contempt - Failure to timely file the returns for any of the issued warrants under this Rule or to duly turn-
over to the court’s custody any of the items disclosed, intercepted, searched, seized, and/or examined as
prescribed hereunder
 Obstruction of Justice for Non-Compliance; Where to File - punished as a violation of Presidential Decree
No. 1829, entitled “Penalizing Obstruction of Apprehension And Prosecution Of Criminal Offenders.”
 Criminal charge for obstruction of justice shall be filed before the designated cybercrime court that has
jurisdiction over the place where the non-compliance was committed
 Extraterritorial Service of Warrants and Other Court Processes - service of warrants and/or other court
processes shall be coursed through the Department of Justice – Office of Cybercrime, in line with all relevant
international instruments and/or agreements on the matter.
 Disclosure of computer data - Warrant to Disclose Computer Data (WDCD). — an order authorizing the LEAs
to issue an order to disclose and accordingly, require any person or service provider to disclose or submit
subscriber's information, traffic data, or relevant data in his/her or its possession or control
 Interception of computer data. — Warrant to Intercept Computer Data (WICD) - an order authorizing the
LEAs to carry out any or all of the following activities:
 i. listening to,
 ii. recording,
 iii. monitoring, or
 iv. surveillance of the content of communications,
 v. including procuring the content of computer data
 Search, seizure, and examination of computer data. — Warrant to Search, Seize and Examine Computer
Data (WSSECD) - an order authorizing the LEAs to search the particular place for items to be seized and/or
examined
 Examination Where Lawful Possession of Device is Obtained; Warrant to Examine Computer Data (WECD) -
Upon acquiring possession of a computer device or computer system via a lawful warrantless arrest, or by
any other lawful method
 Jurisdiction of special cybercrime court is limited to offenses under Sections 4 and 5 of the law - The
criminal actions for violation of Section 4 (Cybercrime offenses) and/or Section 5 (Other offenses), Chapter II
of RA 10175, shall be filed before the designated cybercrime court of the province or city where the offense
or any of its elements is committed, or where any part of the computer system used is situated, or where
any of the damage caused to a natural or juridical person took place: Provided, that the court where the
criminal action is first filed shall acquire jurisdiction to the exclusion of the other courts. All other crimes
defined and penalized by the Revised Penal Code, as amended, and other special laws, committed by,
through, and with the use of ICT, as provided under Section 6, Chapter II of RA 10175, shall be filed before
the regular or other specialized regional trial courts, as the case may be.”
 Law enforcers must obtain a warrant to examine computers even in warrantless arrest - Under the
Cybercrime Prevention Act, a law enforcer may conduct interception, provided there is a prior search and
seizure warrant. The Rule on Cybercrime Warrants provides that the warrant shall issue based on probable
cause, established through facts within the personal knowledge of the applicant or witness, that an offense
has been committed, being committed, or about to be committed. Unlike the Anti-Wiretapping Act and HSA,
the Cybercrime Prevention Act does not penalize interception without a warrant; it merely declares the
evidence obtained inadmissible. Nonetheless, under the Rule on Cybercrime Warrants, a warrantless
interception is not countenanced, for even in the event of a valid warrantless arrest, law enforcers must
obtain a warrant before computers at the scene of the crime or arrest can be seized (and their data
examined)

VIII. Evidence (A.M. No. 19-08-15-SC)

 Evidence is the means, sanctioned by these rules, of ascertaining in a judicial proceeding the truth respecting a
matter of fact.

A. General Concepts
 “Truth” is not necessarily the actual truth, but one referred to as the judicial or legal truth.
 Scope - rules of evidence shall be the same in all courts and in all trials and hearings, except as otherwise
provided by law or these rules (Principle of Uniformity)
 The rules of evidence, being part of the Rules of Court, apply only to judicial proceedings.
 1. Civil action – ordinary and special civil actions
 2. Criminal action
 3. Special proceedings
 Rules of court shall not apply to the follow: (NICOLE)
 1. Naturalization proceedings
 2. Insolvency proceedings
 3. Cadastral proceedings
 4. Other cases not provided in the Rules of Court
 5. Land registration proceedings
 6. Election cases
 Rules may apply to the abovementioned proceedings and cases by analogy or in a suppletory character
and whenever practicable and convenient
 Any evidence inadmissible according to the laws in force at the time the action accrued, but admissible
according to the laws in force at the time of trial, is receivable
 There are rules in evidence established merely for the protection of the parties, if, according to the well-
established doctrine, the parties may waive such rules during the trial of a case, there is no reason why
they cannot make the waiver in a contract (e.g. a contract of insurance requiring the testimony of
eyewitness as the only evidence admissible concerning the death of the insured person.) However, if the
rule of evidence waived by the parties has been established on grounds of public policy, the waiver is void
(e.g. waiver of the privilege against the disclosure of state secrets)
 The Rules of Court, including the Revised Rules on Evidence, shall be LIBERALLY CONSTRUED in order to
promote their objective of securing a just, speedy and inexpensive disposition of every action and
proceeding
 Rules on electronic evidence shall likewise be liberally construed.

 EVIDENCE IN CIVIL CASES- Party having the burden of proof must prove his claim by a preponderance of
evidence.
 GR: An offer of compromise is not an implied admission of any liability, and is not admissible in evidence
against the offeror
 Neither is evidence of conduct nor statements made in compromise negotiations admissible
 XPN: Evidence otherwise discoverable or offered for another purpose, such as proving bias, or prejudice of
a witness, negativing a contention of undue effort to obstruct a criminal investigation or prosecution
 Presumption of innocence does not apply and generally there is no presumption for or against a party
except in cases provided for by law.
 Confession does not apply
 EVIDENCE IN CRIMINAL CASES - Guilt of the accused must be proved beyond reasonable doubt.
 GR: An offer of compromise by the accused may be received as evidence as an implied admission of guilt.
 XPNs:
  1. Criminal negligence
 2. Criminal cases allowed to be compromised. (sec 28, rule 130) - Section 28. Admission by third party.
— The rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by an act, declaration, or omission of another, except as
hereinafter provided
 Accused enjoys presumption of innocence
 Confession is a declaration of an accused acknowledging his guilt.

1. Proof vs. Evidence

 PROOF
 Merely the probative effect of evidence and is the conviction or persuasion of the mind
resulting from consideration of the evidence
 Effect or result of evidence.
 Evidence
 Mode or manner of proving competent facts in judicial proceedings. Without evidence there
is no, proof.
 Medium of proof.
 FACTUM PROBANDUM
 Fact or proposition to be established
 Fact to be proved, the fact to which is in issue and to which the evidence is directed.
 Ultimate facts
 Hypothetical
 FACTUM PROBANS
 Facts or material evidencing the fact or proposition to be established
 Probative or evidentiary fact tending to prove the fact in issue
 Intermediate or evidentiary facts
 Existent
 Illustration: If P claims to have been injured by the negligence of D, while D denies having been
negligent, the negligence is the fact to be established. It is the factum probandum. The evidence
offered by P constitutes the material to prove the liability of D. The totality of the evidence to
prove the liability of is the factum probans.
 In civil cases, the party having the burden of proof must establish its cause of action by a
preponderance of evidence, or that "evidence which is of greater weight or is more convincing
than that which is in opposition to it."
 Preponderance of evidence "does not mean absolute truth; rather, it means that the testimony of
one side is more believable than that of the other side, and that the probability of truth is on one
side than on the other." The guidelines in the determination of preponderance of evidence are
provided under Section 1, Rule 133 of the Rules of Court. xxx Thus, the determination of
preponderance of evidence depends greatly on the credibility of the witnesses. Hence, in the
evaluation of their testimonies. We must be guided by the well-settled doctrine that "[w]hen it
comes to [the witnesses'] credibility, the trial court's assessment deserves great weight, and is
even conclusive and binding, unless the same is tainted with arbitrariness or oversight of some fact
or circumstance of weight and influence."

2. Burden of Proof vs. Burden of Evidence

 Burden of proof is the duty of a party to present evidence on the facts in issue necessary to
establish his or her claim or defense by the amount of evidence required by law. Burden of proof
never shifts.
  Burden of evidence is the duty of a party to present evidence sufficient to establish or rebut a fact
in issue to establish a prima facie case. Burden of evidence may shift from one party to the other
in the course of the proceedings, depending on the exigencies of the case.
 BURDEN OF PROOF
 Duty of a party to present evidence on the facts necessary to establish his or her claim or
defense by the amount of evidence required by law
 Onus probandi refers to the obligation of a party to the litigation to persuade the court that
he is entitled to relief
 NEVER SHIFTS. It remains throughout the entire case exactly where the pleadings originally
placed it or with the party upon whom it is imposed.
 Generally determined by the pleadings filed by the party.
 BURDEN OF EVIDENCE
 Duty of a party to present evidence sufficient to establish or rebut a fact in issue to establish a
prima facie case.
 Logical necessity which rests upon a party at any particular time during the trial to create a
prima facie case in his favor or to overthrow one created against him.
 May shift from party to the other in the course of the proceedings, depending on the
exigencies of the case
 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 of the facts
alleged
 Test for determining where the burden of proof lies – ask which party to an action or suit will fail
if he offers no evidence to show the facts averred as the basis for the relief he seeks to obtain.
 Party who alleges the fact has the burden of proving it. In the course of trial in a civil case, once
plaintiff makes out a prima facie case in his favor, the duty or the burden of evidence shifts to
defendant to controvert plaintiffs’ prima facie case, otherwise, a verdict must be returned in favor
of plaintiff. Hence, the plaintiff must establish the failure to pay on the part of the defendant, the
latter, on the other hand, has to prove their defense that the obligation was extinguished.
 The burden of evidence, not the burden of proof, is shifted when there is a prima facie case -
burden of proof as the duty of a party to present evidence on the facts in issue necessary to
establish his claim or defenses by the amount of evidence required by law. Burden of evidence is
that logical necessity which rests on a party at any particular time during the trial to create a prima
facie case in his favor or to overthrow one when created against him. Burden of evidence shifts
from party to party depending upon the exigencies of the case. Only the burden of evidence is
shifted, which requires him to present evidence that weighs in his favor to counteract the findings
of SDT. This, nevertheless, does not require him to prove his innocence, i.e., that he did not do the
infractions charged. In other words, Ante may adduce defenses or exculpatory evidence on his
behalf; and if sufficient, would defeat the case against him. However, does this automatically mean
that he did not commit the acts and omissions charged against him? Certainly not. Needless to say,
Ante need not prove his innocence, for he has in his favor such presumption
 CONSTRUCTION OF THE RULES OF EVIDENCE – liberally construed.
 Rules of procedure are mere tools intended to facilitate rather than to frustrate the attainment of
justice. A strict and rigid application of the rules must always be avoided if it would subvert their
primary objective of enhancing substantial justice.
 However, to justify relaxation of the rules, a satisfactory explanation and a subsequent fulfillment
of the requirements have always been required.

3. Equipoise Rule
  The doctrine refers to the situation where the evidence of the parties are evenly balanced or there
is doubt on which side the evidence preponderates. In this case, the decision should be against the
party with the burden of proof.
 In criminal cases, the equipoise rule provides that where the evidence is evenly balanced, the
constitutional presumption of innocence tilts the scales in favor of the accused.
 Equipoise rule does not apply when the scales of evidence tilted heavily against the defense -
There being a conflict between the versions of the prosecution and the defense, Arriola insists that
the courts should have favored that of the latter, citing the equipoise rule. The equipoise rule finds
application if the inculpatory facts and circumstances are capable of two or more explanations,
one of which is consistent with the innocence of the accused and the other consistent with his
guilt, for then the evidence does not fulfill the test of moral certainty, and does not suffice to
produce a conviction. Briefly stated, the needed quantum of proof to convict the accused of the
crime charged is found lacking. Conviction rests not on the frailty of the defense but on the
strength and sufficiency of the evidence of the prosecution. The Court perceives no conflicting
versions, as Arriola technically failed to set forth his own version in the first place. His guilt was
finely established with the required quantum of proof, which is proof beyond reasonable doubt.

B. Admissibility of Evidence (Rule 128)

 Evidence is admissible when it is relevant to the issue and not excluded by the Constitution, the law or
these Rules.
 Admissibility of evidence should not be equated with weight of evidence - Depends on its relevance and
competence, while the weight of evidence pertains to evidence already admitted and its tendency to
convince and persuade.
 Thus, a particular item of evidence may be admissible, but its evidentiary weight depends on judicial
evaluation
 Admissibility of evidence refers to the question of whether or not the circumstance (or evidence) is to be
considered at all. On the other hand, the probative value of evidence refers to the question of whether or
not it proves an issue.
 A preliminary investigation is merely preparatory to a trial; it is not a trial on the merits.” Since “it cannot
be expected that upon the filing of the information in court the prosecutor would have already presented
all the evidence necessary to secure a conviction of the accused; admissibility or inadmissibility of
evidence cannot be ruled upon in a preliminary investigation
 When our rules speak of relevancy as requisite of admissibility, it necessarily includes materiality.
Materiality is subsumed in the broader concept of relevancy
 The Importance of Offer in Relation to Admissibility - Parties are required to inform the courts of the
purpose of introducing their respective exhibits to assist the latter in ruling on their admissibility in case an
objection thereto is made.
 Court shall consider no evidence which has not been formally offered. The purpose for which the evidence
is offered must be specified.
 All evidence must be offered orally
 Offer of testimonial evidence — made at the time the witness is called to testify
 Offer of documentary and object evidence — made after the presentation of a party’s testimonial
evidence
 Objection to offer of evidence must be made orally immediately after the offer is made
 Objection to the testimony of a witness for lack of formal offer must be made as soon as the witness
begins to testify.
 Objection as to a question propounded in the course of the oral examination of a witness must be made as
soon as the grounds therefor become reasonably apparent.
 The grounds for objections must be specified
 Admissibility of evidence should not be confused with its probative value - Admissibility refers to the
question of whether certain pieces of evidence are to be considered at all, while probative value refers to
the question of whether the admitted evidence proves an issue. Thus, particular evidence may be
admissible, but its evidentiary weight depends on judicial evaluation. Evidence is admissible when it is
relevant to the issue and is not excluded by the law or the rules on evidence. Before any private document
offered as authentic, is received in evidence, its due execution and authenticity must be proved by anyone
who saw the document executed or written, or by evidence of the genuineness of the signature or
handwriting of the maker.

1. Requisites for Admissibility of Evidence (RC)

 1. The evidence is RELEVANT to the issue; and
 If it has such a relation to the fact in issue as to induce belief in its existence or non-existence
 Example: evidence as to the age of a person who has been raped is relevant in a situation
where the age would qualify the offense to statutory rape
 Determinable by the rules of logic and human experience
 2. The evidence is COMPETENT
 It is not excluded by the Constitution, the law or these rules
 Determined by the prevailing exclusionary rules of evidence
 Exclusionary rules – rules of exception to the general admissibility of all that is rational and
probative
 A. Constitutional exclusionary rules
 1. Unreasonable searches and seizures
 2. Privacy of communication and correspondence
 3. Right to counsel, prohibition on torture, force, violence, threat, intimidation or other means
which will vitiate the free will; prohibition on secret detention places, solitary,
incommunicado
 4. Right against self-incrimination

 B. Statutory exclusionary rules

 1. Lack of documentary stamp tax in documents, instruments or papers required by law to be
stamped makes such documents inadmissible as evidence in court until the requisite stamp
shall have been affixed thereto and cancelled.
 2. Any communication obtained by a person, not being authorized by all the parties to any
private communication, by tapping any wire/arrangement to secretly
overhear/intercept/record such information by using any device, shall not be admissible in
evidence in any judicial/quasi-judicial/legislative/administrative hearing or investigation.
 3. Any confession, admission or statement obtained as a result of torture shall be inadmissible
in evidence in any proceedings, except if the same is used as evidence against a person
accused committing torture.
 C. Under the Rules of Court, Rule 130 is the applicable rule in determining the admissibility of
evidence
 D. Court issuances, such as:
 1. Rules on Electronic Evidence, e.g., compliance with authentication requirements for
electronic evidence;
 2. Rule on Examination of Child Witness, e.g. sexual abuse shield rule; and
 3. Judicial affidavit Rule.
 ADMISSIBILITY - Refers to the question whether or not the evidence is to be considered at all
 Depends on relevance and competence.
 WEIGHT (PROBATIVE VALUE) - whether or not the evidence proves an issue.
 Pertains to tendency to convince or persuade

2. Relevance of Evidence and Collateral Matters

 Relevancy of Evidence - Evidence must have such a relation to the fact in issue as to induce belief in
its existence or non-existence.
 Court will admit only evidence which is relevant to the issue
 Collateral Matters - matters other than the fact in issue
 GR: Evidence on collateral matters is NOT ALLOWED.
 E.G. Motive of a person or his reputation is a matter that may be considered collateral to the
subject of controversy.
 XPN: It is allowed when it tends in any reasonable degree to establish the probability or
improbability of fact in issue.
 What the Rules prohibit is evidence of irrelevant collateral facts

3. Multiple Admissibility - court shall consider no evidence unless it is offered; and its purpose must be
specified. This is so because evidence may be admissible for one purpose, but inadmissible for another
 Where the evidence is relevant and competent for two or more purposes, such evidence should be
admitted for any or all the purposes for which it is offered, provided it satisfies all the requisites of
law for its admissibility therefor.
 When a fact is offered for one purpose, and is admissible insofar as it satisfies all rules applicable to
it when offered for that purpose, its failure to satisfy some other rule which would be applicable to
it if offered for another purpose does not exclude it.
 Illustration: Depending upon circumstances, the declaration of a dying person may be admissible for
two or more purposes. It may be offered as dying declaration and as part of res gestae. The
statement by a bus driver immediately after the collision that he dozed off in the wheel while driving
may be admissible as an admission and/or as part of res gestae.
 Ruling - During the trial, the project engineer was presented and testified that the project was
eventually completed at a certain date, which was later that the stipulated date. So the project
owner invoked the testimony of the engineer to the effect that the completion of the project was
delayed. This was not sustained because the testimony of the engineer was offered for the purpose
of establishing completion of the project and not to prove delay.

4. Conditional Admissibility
 Where the evidence at the time of its offer appears to be immaterial or irrelevant unless it is
connected with the other facts to be subsequently proved, such evidence may be received on
condition that the other facts will be proved thereafter; otherwise, the evidence already given shall
be stricken out.
 An instance wherein the independent evidence of conspiracy is unavailable for the time being. The
principle of conditional admissibility may then be invoked asking permission that the extrajudicial
confession be admitted with the undertaking that in due time, evidence to establish conspiracy will
be presented. Failure to fulfill such undertaking will result in the conditionally admitted evidence
being stricken out from the records.
 Example: a copy of a writing may not be considered competent evidence until the original is proven
to be lost or destroyed. Conditional admissibility requires no bad faith on the part of the proponent

5. Curative Admissibility
 Instances when the court erroneously admits otherwise inadmissible evidence to the prejudice of
the party against whom it is offered.
 Right of a party to introduce incompetent evidence in his behalf where the court has admitted
incompetent evidence adduced by the adverse party
 Principle offers a procedural mechanism to the aggrieved by allowing him to introduce equally
inadmissible evidence in order to cure the defect or damage of the erroneously admitted
inadmissible evidence.
 Illustration: In action for damages arising from car accident, the plaintiff, despite objection by the
defendant, was allowed to introduce evidence to show that, on several occasions, the defendant, in
the past, had injured pedestrians because of negligence. Thus, a party who first introduces either
irrelevant or incompetent evidence into the trial cannot complain of the subsequent admission of
similar evidence from the adverse party relating to the subject matter.
 In gist, if relevant and competent evidence may be CONDITIONAL, which connotes tentative or
temporary evidence, MULTIPLE, where it is legally permissible for different aspects; or CURATIVE,
when it is intended to receive inadmissible evidence from a party to neutralize previously accepted
inadmissible evidence from the other party

6. Direct and Circumstantial Evidence

 DIRECT EVIDENCE - Proves the fact in dispute without any aid of any inference or presumption.
 CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE - Proof of facts from which, taken collectively, the existence of a
particular fact in dispute may be necessarily inferred as a necessary or probable consequence
 Proves a fact in issue indirectly through an inference which the fact finder draws from the evidence
established.
 May happen that no prosecution witness has actually seen the commission of the crime.
However, jurisprudence tells us that direct evidence is not the only matrix from which a trial
court may draw its conclusion and finding of guilt. The rules of evidence allow a trial court to
rely on circumstantial evidence to support its conclusion of guilt.
 The difference involves a relationship of the fact inferred to the facts that constitute the offense.
Their difference does not relate to the probative value of the evidence. Direct evidence proves a
challenged fact without drawing any inference. Circumstantial evidence, on the other hand,
indirectly proves a fact in issue, such that the fact-finder must draw an inference or reason from
circumstantial evidence.
 Illustration: The prosecution presented corroborating evidence which constitute an unbroken chain
leading to the inevitable conclusion that accused is guilty of killing the victim. For instance, the
presence of gunpowder nitrates on accused after a paraffin test; the firearm used in the killing
details with the testimony of a witness that he saw accused carrying a short firearm which was later
found to have been recently fired, and the absence of gunpowder nitrates on the hands of the
victim after a paraffin test which belies accused’s claim that he was shot by the victim or that the
latter exchanged fire with a police officer.
 Requisites to Warrant a Conviction based on circumstantial evidence
 1. There is more than one circumstance;
 2. The facts from which the inferences are derived are proven; and
 3. The combination of all the circumstances is such as to produce conviction beyond reasonable
doubt.
 Inferences cannot be based on other inferences
 Totality of the evidence must constitute an unbroken chain showing the guilt of the accused beyond
reasonable doubt.
 Circumstantial evidence is not a weaker form of evidence vis-à-vis direct evidence.
 Ruling - The lack or absence of direct evidence does not necessarily mean that the guilt of the
accused cannot be proved by evidence other than direct evidence. Direct evidence is not the sole
means of establishing the guilt beyond reasonable doubt, because circumstantial evidence, if
 sufficient, can supplant the absence of direct evidence. The crime charged may also be proved by
circumstantial evidence, sometimes referred to as indirect or presumptive evidence.
 Cumulative evidence refers to evidence of the same kind and character as that already given and
that tends to prove the same proposition.
 Corroborative evidence is one that is supplementary to that already given tending to strengthen or
confirm it. It is additional evidence of a different character to the same point.
 An extrajudicial Confession made by an accused shall not be sufficient ground for conviction, unless
corroborated by evidence of corpus delicti.
 Corroborative testimony is not always required. Witnesses are to be weighed, not numbered.
 Circumstantial evidence may be presented to convict the accused - also known as indirect or
presumptive evidence, refers to proof of collateral facts and circumstances whence the existence of
the main fact may be inferred according to reason and common experience. Circumstantial evidence
is sufficient to sustain conviction if (a) there is more than one circumstance; (b) the facts from which
the inferences are derived are proven; (c) the combination of all circumstances is such as to produce
a conviction beyond reasonable doubt. A judgment of conviction based on circumstantial evidence
can be sustained when the circumstances proved form an unbroken chain that results in a fair and
reasonable conclusion pointing to the accused, to the exclusion of all others, as the perpetrator.

7. Positive and Negative Evidence

 POSITIVE EVIDENCE - Witness affirms that a certain state of facts did exist or that a certain event
happened.
 Greater probative value is given
 When witness declares of his personal knowledge that a fact did not take place that is actually
positive testimony since it is an affirmation of the truth of a negative fact
 NEGATIVE EVIDENCE - Witness states he/she did not see or does not know of the occurrence of a
fact. Common example is alibi or denial.
 Lesser probative value
 Denial is considered by the Court a very weak form of defense and can never overcome an
affirmative or positive testimony particularly when the latter comes from the mouth of a credible
witness.
 Defense is viewed with disfavor for being inherently weak. To be worthy of consideration at all,
denials should be substantiated by clear and convincing evidence.

8. Competent and Credible Evidence

 COMPETENT EVIDENCE - Not excluded by the Constitution, law, or Rules.
 refers to eligibility of an evidence to be received as such. The test of competence is the Constitution,
laws or the rules.
 Determined by the prevailing exclusionary rules of evidence.
 Exclusionary rules may affect due process. To the extent that they might prejudice substantive
rights, therefore, they cannot be made to apply retroactively.
 CREDIBLE EVIDENCE - Probative value or convincing weight.
 Weight involves the effect of evidence admitted, its tendency to convince and persuade. It is not
determined mathematically by the numerical superiority of the witnesses testifying to a given fact,
but depends upon its practical effect in inducing belief on the part of the judge trying the case
 Worthiness of belief, that quality which renders a witness worthy of belief.
 Evidence that is not necessarily true but that is worthy of belief.
 Admissible evidence is not necessarily credible evidence. Admissibility does not guarantee
credibility.
  Findings and conclusions of the trial court on the credibility of the witnesses are entitled great
respect because they have the advantage of observing the demeanor of witnesses as they testify.
 When affirmed by the appellate court, it is accorded full weight and credit as well as great respect, if
not conclusive effect, except when facts and circumstances of weight and influence were overlooked
or the significance of which was misappreciated or misinterpreted.

C. Judicial Notice and Judicial Admissions (Rule 129)

 Function – Dispenses the presentation of evidence and fulfills the purpose for which the evidence is
designed to fulfill. Its function is to abbreviate litigation by admission of matters that needs no evidence
because judicial notice is a substitute for formal proof of a matter by evidence.
 Judicial admissions. — An admission, verbal or written, made by the party in the course of the proceedings
in the same case, does not require proof. The admission may be contradicted only by showing that it was
made through palpable mistake or that no such admission was made.
 Judicial notice, when mandatory - Court is compelled to take judicial notice
 Takes place at court’s initiative
 No motion or hearing
 matter is subject to a mandatory judicial notice; no motion or hearing is necessary for the court may take
judicial notice of a fact.
 1. Existence and territorial extent of states
 2. Political history, forms of government and symbols of nationality
 3. Law of nations
 4. Admiralty and maritime courts of the world and their seals
 5. Political constitution and history of the Philippines
 6. Official acts of legislative, executive and judicial departments of the national government of the PH
 7. Laws of nature
 8. Measure of time
 9. Geographical divisions
 WHAT NEED NOT BE PROVED –
 1. Those of which the courts may take judicial notice
 2. Those that are judicially admitted
 3. Those that are conclusively presumed
 4. Those that are disputably presumed but uncontradicted
 5. Immaterial allegations
 6. Facts admitted or not denied provided they have been sufficiently alleged
 7. Res ipsa loquitor
 8. Admission by adverse party
 MATTERS OF JUDICIAL NOTICE – 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.
 Judicial notice, when discretionary - Court is not compelled to take judicial notice
 May be at court’s own initiative or on request of a party
 Needs hearing
 When judicial notice of fact may be taken with necessity of hearing
 During the pre-trial and trial, the court may, motu proprio or upon motion, shall hear the parties on
the property of taking judicial notice of any matter
 Before judgement or appeal, the court, may motu proprio or upon motion, may take judicial notice of
any matter and shall hear the parties thereon if such matter is decisive of a material issue in the case
 1. Matters which are of public knowledge;
  Those matters coming to the knowledge of men generally in the course of ordinary experiences of life,
or they may be matters which are generally accepted by mankind as true and are capable of ready and
unquestioned demonstration
 2. Capable of unquestionable demonstration
 matters which are capable of unquestionable demonstration are facts, theories and conclusions which
have come to be established and accepted by the specialists in the areas of natural science, natural
phenomena, chronology, technology, geography, statistical facts and other fields of professional and
scientific knowledge.
 3. Ought to be known to judges because of their judicial functions
 judicial notice is not judicial knowledge. The mere personal knowledge of the judge is not the judicial
knowledge of the court, and he is not authorized to make his individual knowledge of a fact, not
generally or professionally known, the basis of his action. Judicial cognizance is taken only of those
matters which are commonly known
 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;
 3. It must be known to be within the limits of the jurisdiction of the court
 a. Generally known within the territorial jurisdiction of the trial court; or
 b. Capable and accurate and ready determination by resorting to sources whose accuracy cannot
reasonably be questionable
 The principal guide in determining what facts may be assumed to be judicially known is that of notoriety.
 Test of notoriety, whether the fact involved is so notoriously known as to make it proper to assume its
existence without proof.
 Instances when the court takes judicial notice:
 1. Existence and location within the territory which they exercise jurisdiction of great rivers and lakes, and
their relation to provincial boundaries, of navigability of streams, constituting highway commerce and
notorious facts concerning the same.
 2. The financial problem is a factor that beset the sugar industry; that there is crisis in the sugar industry
 3. The great increase in rentals of real estate especially of business establishments
 4. The reality that, especially in local elections, political rivals or operators benefited from the usually
belated decisions by COMELEC on petitions to cancel or deny due course to CoCs of potential nuisance
candidates.
 5. How rapist are not deterred by the presence of people nearby, such as the members of their own family
inside the same room, with the likelihood of being discovered, since lust respects no time, locale or
circumstance.
 6. The government is and has for many years been financially strapped, to the point that even the most
essential services have suffered serious curtailment.
 7. The oakwood standoff was widely known and was extensively covered by the media made it a proper
subject of judicial notice.
 8. Senate report on Maysilo estate being an official act of the legislative department.
 9. Moral damages and death indemnity require neither pleading nor evidence simply because death
through crime always occasions moral sufferings on the part of the victim’s heirs.
 MATTERS NOT PROPER SUBJECT OF JUDICIAL NOTICE –
 1. GR: Courts are not mandated to take judicial notice of the practice of banks in conducting backgrounds
checks on borrowers and sureties.
 XPN: They nevertheless may do so under the rule on discretionary judicial notice.
 2. That a registered letter when posted is immediately stamped with the date of its receipt, indicating
therein the number of the registry, both on the covering envelope itself and on the receipt delivered to the
person who delivered the letter to the office.
  GR: Courts are not authorized to take judicial notice of contents of the records of other cases or are
pending in the same court or before the same judge.
 XPN: They may, however, take judicial notice of a decision or the facts prevailing in another case sitting
in the same court if: (1) the parties present them in evidence, absent any opposition from the other
party; or (2) the court, in its discretion, resolves to do so.
 3. Proprietary acts of GOCCs, e.g., management contract entered into by GOCC
 4. The assessed value of realty
 5. Administrative regulation or of a statute that is not yet effective.
 6. No judicial notice is taken of whiplash injury since it is not capable of unquestionable demonstration and
the courts lack the proper medical knowledge to assume this fact.
 7. Criminal activities such as robbery and kidnappings are becoming daily fares in the society.
 8. Actual damages.
 JUDICIAL NOTICE OF FOREIGN LAWS, LAW OF NATIONS AND MUNICIPAL ORDINANCE –
 GR: Courts cannot take judicial notice of foreign laws. They must be alleged and proved.
 XPN: When said laws are within the actual knowledge of the court and such laws are:
 1. Well and generally known;
 2. Actually ruled upon in other cases before it; and none of the parties claim otherwise
 Doctrine of Processual Presumption – In international law, the party who wants to have a foreign law
applied to a dispute or a case has the burden of proving the foreign law. Where a foreign law is not pleaded
or even if pleaded, it is not proved, the presumption is that the foreign law is same as ours.
 When the foreign law is part of a published treatise, periodical or pamphlet and the writer is recognized in
his profession or calling as expert in the subject, the court, may take judicial notice of the treatise containing
the foreign law.
 RULES REGARDING JUDICIAL NOTICE OF MUNICIPAL OR CITY ORDINANCES
 1. MTCs are required to take judicial notice of the ordinances of the municipality or city wherein they sit;
 2. RTCs must take judicial notice of ordinances in force in the municipalities within their jurisdiction only:
 a. When expressly authorized to so by statute; and
 b. In case on appeal before them and wherein the inferior court took judicial notice of an ordinance
involved in the same case.
 3. Appellate courts may also take judicial notice of ordinances not only because the lower courts took
judicial notice thereof but because these are facts capable of unquestionable demonstration.
 RULES OF JUDICIAL NOTICE OF RECORDS OF ANOTHER CASE PREVIOUSLY TRIED
 GR: Courts are not authorized to take judicial notice of the contents of the records of other cases, even
when such cases have been tried or are pending in the same court, and notwithstanding the fact that both
cases may have been heard or are actually pending before the same judge.
 XPNs:
 1. When in the absence of any objection, with the knowledge of the opposing party, the contents of
said other cases are clearly referred to by title and number in a pending action and adopted or read
into the record of the latter;
 2. When the original record of the other case or any part of it is actually withdrawn from the archives at
the court’s discretion upon the request, or with the consent, of the parties, and admitted as part of the
record of the pending case.
 3. When the action is closely interrelated to another case pending between the same parties;
 4. Where the interest of the public in ascertaining the truth are paramount importance;
 5. In cases seeking to determine what is reasonable exercise of discretion or whether the previous
ruling is applicable in case under consideration; or
 6. Where there is finality of judgment in another case that was previously pending determination and
therefore, res judicata.
 The appreciation of one judge of the testimony of a certain witness is not binding on another judge who
heard the testimony of the same witness on the same matter. Each magistrate who hears the testimony of a
witness is called upon to make his own interpretation of the evidence.
 JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS – oral or written, made by a party in the course of the proceedings in the same case,
which do not require proof.
 Requisites
 1. It must be made by a party to the case or his counsel;
 2. It must be made in the course of the proceedings in the same case; and
 3. It can be oral or written
 JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS - made in the course of the proceeding in the same case
 Do not require proof and may be contradicted only by showing that it was made through palpable
mistake or that it was not, in fact, made.
 Need not be offered in evidence since it is not evidence. It is superior to evidence and shall be
considered by the court as established
 Conclusive upon the admitter
 Admissible even if self-serving
 Subject to cross-examination
 EXTRAJUDICIAL ADMISSIONS - 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.
 Requires formal offer for it to be considered.
 Rebuttable
 Not admissible if self-serving
 Not subject to cross-examination
 DIFFERENT FORMS OF JUDICIAL ADMISSION:
 1. Oral – Verbal waiver of proof made in open court, a withdrawal of contention, or disclosure made before
the court, or admission made by witness in his testimony or deposition;
 2. Writing – Pleading, bill of particulars, stipulation of facts, request for admission, or a judicial admission
contained in an affidavit used in the case.

 Judicial admissions may be made in:

 1. The pleadings filed by the parties;
 a. Actual admission – when a party categorically admits a material allegation made by the adverse party
 b. Implied admission – when the admission is inferred from the failure to specifically deny the material
allegations in the other party’s pleadings.
 2. The course of the trial either verbal or written manifestations or stipulations, including depositions,
written interrogatories and requests for admissions; or
 3. Other stages of the judicial proceedings
 EFFECT OF JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS
 1. They do not require proof; and
 2. They cannot be contradicted because they are conclusive upon the party making it
 ADMISSIONS MADE IN PLEADINGS WHICH WERE NOT FILED WITH THE COURT - Admissions made therein
are not judicial admissions:
 1. If signed by the party litigant himself or herself – Considered as extrajudicial admission
 2. If signed by the counsel – Not admissible because a counsel only binds his or her client with respect
to admissions in open court and in pleadings actually filed with the court.
 AVERMENTS IN PLEADINGS WHICH ARE NOT DEEMED ADMISSIONS
  1. Immaterial allegations
 2. Conclusions, non-ultimate facts in the pleadings
 3. Amount of unliquidated damages
 When an action or defense is founded upon an actionable document, the genuineness and due execution of
the same instrument shall be deemed admitted unless it is specifically denied under oath
 Failure to deny the genuineness and due execution of said document amounts to a judicial admission
 But the failure to deny the genuineness and due execution of an actionable document does not preclude a
party from arguing against the document by evidence of fraud, mistake, compromise, payment, statute of
limitations, estoppel and want of consideration. However, he is precluded from arguing that the document is
a forgery because the genuineness of document is impliedly admitted.
 Admissions in a pleading which had been withdrawn or superseded by an amended pleading, although filed
in the same case, are considered as extrajudicial admissions.
 Pleadings that have been amended disappear from the record, lose their status as pleadings and cease to be
judicial admissions and to be utilized as extrajudicial admission, they must, in order to have such effect, be
formally offered in evidence.
 Self-serving rule is not applicable to judicial admissions. If the declaration is made in open court, it is
admissible because the witness may be cross-examined on that matter.
 A plea of guilty entered by the accused may be later withdrawn at any time before the judgment of
conviction becomes final. Such plea is not admissible in evidence against the accused and is not even
considered as an extrajudicial admission.
 Ground for contradicting judicial admissions:
 1. Upon showing that the admission was made through palpable mistake; or
 2. When it is shown that the imputed admission was not, in fact, made.
 This argument may be invoked when the statement of a party is taken out of context or that his
statement was made not in the sense it is made to appear by the other party.
 Remedy of party who made a judicial admission:
 1. In case of written admission – file a motion to withdraw such pleading, or any other written instrument
containing such admission; and
 2. In case of oral admission – the counsel may move for the exclusion of such admission

 ADMISSIONS IN THE PRE-TRIAL OF CIVIL CASES - A pre-trial is mandatory. One of the purposes of pre-trial in
civil cases is for the court to consider the possibility of obtaining stipulations or admissions of facts.
Admissions therefore, in the pre-trial, as well as those made during depositions, interrogatories or requests
for admissions, are all deemed judicial admissions because they are made in the course of the proceedings
of the case.
 ADMISSIONS IN THE PRE-TRIAL OF CRIMINAL CASES - Admissions made by the accused of a criminal case is
not necessarily admissible against him. To be admissible, conditions must be complied with.
 All the agreements or admissions made or entered during the pre-trial conference shall be.
 1. Reduced in writing; and
 2. Signed by the accused and counsel
 The theory of adoptive admission - is a party’s reaction to a statement or action by another person when it
is reasonable to treat the party’s reaction as an admission of something stated or implied by the other
person. The basis for admissibility of admissions made vicariously is that arising from the ratification or
adoption by the party of the statements which the other person had made.
 In the Angara Diary, Estrada’s options started to dwindle when the armed forces withdrew its support. Thus,
Executive Secretary Angara had to ask Senate President Pimentel to advise the petitioner to consider the
option of dignified exit or resignation. Estrada did not object to the suggested option but simply said he
could never leave the country
 Examples of statements made that are not judicial admissions
  a. Statements made during preliminary investigation
 b. Statements during Court-Annexed Mediation
 Execution of judgment is part of a judicial proceeding. The Court retains control over the case until the full
satisfaction of the final judgment
 As a rule, courts are not authorized to take judicial notice of other cases in the same court - even when
such cases have been tried or are pending in the same court, and notwithstanding the fact that both cases
may have been heard or are actually pending before the same judge.
 Rule admits of exceptions, namely:
 (a) In the absence of objection, and as a matter of convenience to all parties, a court may properly treat all
or any part of the original record of a case filed in its archives as read into the record of a case pending
before it, when, with the knowledge of the opposing party, reference is made to it for that purpose, by
name and number or in some other manner by which it is sufficiently designated; or
 (b) when the original record of the former case or any part of it, is actually withdrawn from the archives by
the court’s direction, at the request or with the consent of the parties, and admitted as a part of the record
of the case then pending
 Guidelines in Appreciating Age as an Element of the Crime or as a Qualifying Circumstance –
 The best evidence to prove the age of the offended party is an (1) original or certified true copy of the
certificate of live birth of such party;
 In the absence of a certificate of live birth, (2) similar authentic documents such as baptismal certificate and
school records which show the date of birth of the victim would suffice to prove age;
 If the certificate of live birth or authentic document is shown to have been lost or destroyed or otherwise
unavailable, (3) the testimony, if clear and credible, of the victim's mother or a member of the family either
by affinity or consanguinity who is qualified to testify on matters respecting pedigree such as the exact age
or date of birth of the offended party
 Evidence shall be sufficient under the following circumstances: a) If the victim is alleged to be below 3 years
of age and what is sought to be proved is that she is less than 7 years old; b) If the victim is alleged to be
below 7 years of age and what is sought to be proved is that she is less than 12 years old ; c) If the victim is
alleged to be below 12 years of age and what is sought to be proved is that she is less than 18 years old;
(4) In the absence of a certificate of live birth, authentic document, or the testimony of the victim's mother
or relatives concerning the victim's age, the complainant's testimony will suffice provided that it is
expressly and clearly admitted by the accused; (5) It is the prosecution that has the burden of proving the
age of the offended party. The failure of the accused to object to the testimonial evidence regarding age
shall not be taken against him and; (6) The trial court should always make a categorical finding as to the
age of the victim.
 Admission of Age in the stipulation of facts is a judicial admission and considered a waiver. - Granting that
the prosecution failed to offer the original or certified true copy of AAA's birth certificate, the latter's
testimony as to her age, i.e., 14 years old at the time of the incident, and XXX's express and clear admission
of her age during the pre-trial in the stipulation of facts, sufficiently established AAA's minority. These
stipulations are binding on the court because they are considered judicial admissions and her counsel, as
well as the prosecutor, signed the stipulation of facts which is therefore recognized as a declaration
constituting judicial admission, a waiver of her right to present evidence to the contrary and binding upon
the parties. Although the right to present evidence is guaranteed by the Constitution, such right may be
waived expressly or impliedly.

D. Object (Real) Evidence (Rule 130, A)

 Those addressed to the senses of the court. When an object is relevant to the fact in issue, it may be
exhibited to, examined or viewed by the court.
 Physical evidence is a mute but eloquent manifestation of truth, and it ranks high in our hierarchy of
trustworthy evidence. Where the physical evidence on record runs counter to the testimonial evidence of
the prosecution witnesses, we consistently rule that the physical evidence should prevail
 A person’s appearance, where relevant, is admissible as object evidence, the same being addressed to the
senses of the court.
 The inspection or view outside the courtroom should be made in the presence of the parties or at least with
previous notice to them in order that they may show the object to be viewed. Such inspection or view is a
part of the trial, inasmuch as evidence is thereby being received, which is expressly authorized by law
 In criminal cases such as murder/homicide or rape, in which the accused stand to lose their liberty if found
guilty, the SC has, on may occasions, relied principally upon physical evidence on record runs counter to the
testimonies of witnesses, the primacy of the physical evidence must be upheld.
 Documents are object (real) evidence if the purpose is to prove their existence or condition, or the nature of
the handwriting thereon, or to determine the age of the paper used, or the blemishes or alterations
thereon, as where falsification is alleged.
 While the paraffin test was negative, such fact alone did not ipso facto prove that R is innocent. A negative
paraffin result is not conclusive proof that a person has not fired a gun. It is possible to fire a gun and yet be
negative for nitrates, as when the culprit is wearing gloves or he washes his hands afterwards. Here, since R
submitted himself for paraffin testing only 2 days after the shooting, it was likely he had already washed his
hands thoroughly, thus removing all traces of nitrates therefrom.

1. Requisites
 1. It must be relevant and competent;
 2. It must be authenticated;
 shown that the object is the very thing that is either the subject matter of the lawsuit or the
very one involved to prove an issue in the case
 3. The authentication must be made by a competent witness who should identify the object to be
the actual thing involved;
 4. The object must be formally offered in evidence.
 Purposes of authentication of object evidence
 1. Prevent the introduction of an object different from the one testified about; and
 2. Ensure that there have been no significant changes in the object’s condition.
 Circumstances when the court may refuse the introduction of object or real evidence and rely on
testimonial evidence alone
 1. Its exhibition is contrary to public morals or decency;
 XPN: If necessary, in the interest of justice, it may still be exhibited, and the court may
exclude the public from such view. Such exhibition may not be refused if the indecent or
immoral objects constitute the very basis of the criminal or civil action
 2. Would result in delays, inconvenience, or unnecessary expenses which are out of proportion
to the evidentiary value of such object;
 3. Would be confusing or misleading, as when the purpose is to prove the former condition of
the object and there is no preliminary showing that there has been no substantial change in
said condition; or
 4. The testimonial or documentary evidence already presented clearly portrays the object in
question as to render a view thereof unnecessary.
 Ruling - Photographs, when presented in evidence, must be identified by the photographer as to its
production and testified as to the circumstances under which they were produced. The value of this
kind of evidence lies in its being a correct representative or reproduction of the original, and its
admissibility is determined by its accuracy in portraying the scene at the time of the crime.
 Photographer, however, is not the only witness who can identify the pictures he has taken. The
correctness of the photographs as a faithful representation of the object portrayed can be proved
prima facie, either by the testimony of the person who made it or by other competent witnesses
who can testify to its exactness and accuracy, after which the court can admit is subject to
impeachment as to its accuracy
 Ruling - Right against self-incrimination does not apply to the instant case where the evidence
sought to be excluded is not an incriminating statement but object evidence. Infractions on the so-
called “Miranda Rights” render inadmissible only to the extrajudicial confession or admission made
during custodial investigation. The admissibility of other evidence is not affected even if obtained or
taken in the course of custodial investigation
 Evidence Must Be Authenticated - To authenticate the object is to show that the object is the very
thing that is either the subject matter of the lawsuit or the very one involved to prove an issue in the
case.
 Authentication Must Be Made by a Competent Witness - The witness must have the capacity to
identify the object as the very thing involved in the litigation. A witness can testify only to those
facts which he/she knows of his/her personal knowledge; that is, which are derived from his/her
own perception
 Requisites for the Admissibility of Tape Recording
 1. A showing that the recording was capable of taking testimony
 2. A showing that the operator of the recording device is competent
 3. Establishment of the authenticity and correctness of recording
 4. A showing that no changes, deletions, or additions have been made on the recordings
 5. A showing of the manner of preservation of the recording
 6. Identification of speakers
 7. A showing that the testimony elicited was voluntarily made without any kind of inducement

 CATEGORIES OF OBJECT EVIDENCE –

 1. Actual physical or “autopic” evidence –those which have a direct relation or part in the fact or
incident sought to be proven and those brought to the court for personal examination by the
presiding magistrate;
 UNIQUE OBJECTS - have readily identifiable marks; or Exhibit identifiable visual or physical
peculiarities
 E.g. Gun with a serial number
 OBJECTS MADE UNIQUE - no unique characteristic but are made readily identifiable by law
enforcers upon retrieval or confiscation
 E.g. Sachet of shabu with initials of the police officers who retrieved it
 NON-UNIQUE OBJECTS - no identifying marks and cannot be marked
 E.g. Narcotic substances, bodily fluids
 2. Demonstrative Evidence - Those which represent the actual or physical object (or event in case of
pictures or videos) being offered to support or draw an inference or to aid in comprehending the
verbal testimony of a witness
 Audio, photographic and video evidence of events, acts or transactions shall be admissible provided
it shall be:
 a. Shown, presented or displayed to the court, and
  b. Identified, explained or authenticated
 by the person who made the recording, or
 by some other person competent to testify on the accuracy thereof
 Reenactments are object evidence because they are exhibited, examined and viewed by the court.
E.g., a person who hears a man cat-call a woman, and mimics the cat-call in court is reenacting the
event. He is not testifying because he was not declaring anything nor making a statement
 Chain Of Custody in Relation to Sec. 21 Of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act Of 2002
 Means the duly recorded authorized movements and custody of seized contrabands of each stage,
from the time of seizure/confiscation to receipt in the forensic laboratory to safekeeping to
presentation in court for destruction.
 As a method of authenticating evidence, the chain of custody rule requires that the admission of an
exhibit be preceded by evidence sufficient to support a finding that the matter in question is what
the proponent claims it to be
 It would include testimony about every link in the chain, from the moment the item was picked up
to the time it is offered into evidence, in such a way that every person who touched the exhibit
would describe how and from whom it was received, where it was and what happened to it while in
the witness' possession, the condition in which it was received and the condition in which it was
delivered to the next link in the chain.
 These witnesses would then describe the precautions taken to ensure that there had been no
change in the condition of the item and no opportunity for someone not in the chain to have
possession of the same.
 As a general rule, four links in the chain of custody of the confiscated item must be established:
 1. First, the seizure and marking, if practicable, of the illegal drug recovered from the accused by the
apprehending officer;
 2. Second, the turnover of the illegal drug seized by the apprehending officer to the investigating
officer;
 3. Third, the turnover by the investigating officer of the illegal drug to the forensic chemist for
laboratory examination; and
 4. Fourth, the turnover and submission of the marked illegal drug seized from the forensic chemist
to the court
 If the proffered evidence is unique, readily identifiable, and relatively resistant to change, that
foundation need only consist of testimony by a witness with knowledge that the evidence is what
the proponent claims; otherwise, the chain of custody rule has to be resorted to and complied with
by the proponent to satisfy the evidentiary requirement of relevancy. And at all times, the source of
amorphous as well as firmly structured objects being offered as evidence must be tethered to and
supported by a testimony
 The mandate to conduct inventory take photographs “immediately after seizure and confiscation”
necessarily means that these shall be accomplished at the place of arrest. When this is
impracticable, the implementing rules and regulations of RA 9165 allows for 2 other options; at the
nearest police station or at the nearest office of the apprehending officer/team, whichever is
practicable, in case of warrantless seizures. To sanction non-compliance, the prosecution must prove
that the inventory was conducted in either practicable place.
 The physical inventory and photography of the drugs seized was not done in the place of arrest, but
was done in Camp Karingal, which was impractical since it was 17 km car ride away from the place of
arrest. The clerical errors and discrepancies in the inventory receipt and the chemistry report cannot
be dismissed since they cast doubt as to the origin of the drug seized.
 INTEGRITY AND EVIDENTIARY VALUE OF THE SEIZED ITEMS – prosecution is not required to elicit
testimony from every custodian or from every person who had an opportunity to come in contact
with the evidence sought to be admitted. As long as one of the chains testifies and his testimony
 negates the possibility of tampering and that the integrity of the evidence is preserved, his
testimony alone is adequate to prove the chain of custody.
 Failure to strictly comply with rules of procedure, however, does not ipso facto invalidate or render
void the seizure and custody over the items. Minor deviations from the chain of custody rule are
justified when the prosecution is able to show that:
 1. There is justifiable ground for non-compliance; and
 2. The integrity of evidentiary value of the seized items are properly preserved.
 Ruling - The prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the transaction actually took
place by establishing the following elements: (1) identity of the buyer and the seller, the object and
consideration; (2) the delivery of the thing sold and the payment. Aside from this, the corpus
delicti must be presented as evidence in court. In cases involving dangerous drugs, the corpus
delicti is the dangerous drugs itself. Although strict compliance with the chain of custody rule may
be excused provided that the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized items are preserved, a
more exacting standard is required of law enforcers when only a miniscule amount of dangerous
drugs are alleged to have been seized.
 Such a miniscule amount of drugs is highly susceptible to tampering and contamination. A careful
review of the factual findings of the lower court shows that the prosecution failed to discharge its
burden of preserving the identity and integrity of the dangerous drugs allegedly seized from
accused-appellant. The prosecution failed to established who held the seized items from the
moment they were taken from accused-appellant until they were brought to the police station. The
designated poseur-buyer, PO2 M, did not mention who took custody of the seized items for
safekeeping.
 Marking after seizure is the starting point in the custodial link, thus it is vital that the seized
contrabands are immediately marked because succeeding handlers of the specimen will use the
markings as reference.
 Presumption of regularity in the performance of duties cannot be applied - Given the flagrant
procedural lapses the police committed in handling the seized shabu and the obvious evidentiary
gaps in the chain of its custody, a presumption of regularity in the performance of duties cannot be
made in this case. The presumption applies when nothing in the record suggests that the law
enforcers deviated from the standard conduct of official duty required by law; where the official act
is irregular on its face, the presumption cannot arise.
 DNA EVIDENCE – When a crime is committed, material is collected from the scene of the crime or
from the victim’s body for the suspect’s DNA. This is the evidence sample. The evidence sample is
then matched with the reference sample taken from the suspect and the victim. The purpose of
DNA testing is to ascertain whether an association exists between the evidence sample and the
reference sample. The samples collected are subjected to various chemical processes to establish
their profile. The test may yield three possible results:
 a. Exclusion – The samples are different and therefore must have originated from different
sources. This conclusion is absolute and requires no further analysis or discussion;
 b. Inconclusive – It is not possible to be sure, based on the results of the test, whether the
samples have similar DNA types. This might occur for a variety of reasons including
degradation, contamination, or failure of some aspect of the protocol. Various parts of the
analysis might then be repeated with the same or a different sample, to obtain a more
conclusive result; or
 c. Inclusion – The samples are similar, and could have originated from the same source. In
such a case, the samples are found to be similar, the analyst proceeds to determine the
statistical significance of the similarity
 Obtaining DNA samples from an accused in a criminal case or from the respondent in a paternity
case, contrary to the belief of respondent in this action, will not violate the right against self-
incrimination
 DNA evidence” constitutes the totality of the DNA profiles, results and other genetic information
directly generated from DNA testing of biological samples.
 DNA testing” means verified and credible scientific methods which include the extraction of DNA
from biological samples, the generation of DNA profiles and the comparison of the information
obtained from the DNA testing of biological samples for the purpose of determining, with
reasonable certainty, whether or not the DNA obtained from two or more distinct biological samples
originates from the same person (direct identification) or if the biological samples originate from
related persons (kinship analysis)
 Rule on DNA evidence - It shall apply whenever the DNA evidence is offered, used, or proposed to
be offered or used as evidence in all criminal and civil actions as well as special proceedings
 Application for DNA testing order - court may, at any time, either motu proprio or on application of
any person who has a legal interest in the matter in litigation, order a DNA testing.
 Order shall issue after due hearing and notice to the parties upon a showing of the following:
 a. A biological sample exists that is relevant to the case;
 b. The biological sample:
 (i) was not previously subjected to the type of DNA testing now requested; or
 (ii) was previously subjected to DNA testing, but the results may require confirmation for
good reasons;
 c. The DNA testing uses a scientifically valid technique;
 d. The DNA testing has the scientific potential to produce new information that is relevant to
the proper resolution of the case; and
 e. The existence of other factors, if any, which the court may consider as potentially affecting
the accuracy of integrity of the DNA testing
 Exception: DNA testing may be done without a prior court order, at the behest of any party
(including LEAs), before a suit or proceeding is commenced
 The death of the petitioner (putative father) does not ipso facto negate the application of DNA
testing for as long as there exist appropriate biological samples of his DNA. The term “biological
sample” means any organic material originating from a person’s body, even if found in inanimate
objects, that is susceptible to DNA testing. This includes blood, saliva, and other body fluids, tissues,
hairs and bones
 Post-conviction DNA Testing; Remedy - available, without need of prior court order, to the
prosecution or any person convicted by final and executory judgment provided that:
 1. A biological sample exists;
 2. Such sample is relevant to the case; and
 3. The testing would probably result in the reversal or modification of the judgment of
conviction
 Remedy if the Results Are Favorable to the Convict - convict or the prosecution may file a petition
for a writ of habeas corpus in the court of origin if the results of the post-conviction DNA testing are
favorable to the convict
 Court, after due hearing finds the petition to be meritorious, if shall reverse or modify the judgment
of conviction and order the release of the convict, unless continued detention is justified for a lawful
cause.
 A similar petition may be filed either in the Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court, or with any
member of said courts, which may conduct a hearing thereon or remand the petition to the court of
origin and issue the appropriate orders
 Assessment of Probative Value of DNA Evidence and Admissibility - In assessing the probative
value of the DNA evidence presented, the court shall consider the following:
 1. The chain of custody, including how the biological samples were collected, how they were
handled, and the possibility of contamination of the samples;
 2. The DNA testing methodology, including the procedure followed in analyzing the samples,
the advantages and disadvantages of the procedure, and compliance with the scientifically valid
standards in conducting the tests;
 3. The forensic DNA laboratory, including accreditation by any reputable standard setting
institution and the qualification of the analyst who conducted the tests. If the laboratory is not
accredited, the relevant experience of the laboratory in forensic casework and credibility shall
be properly established; and
 4. The reliability of the testing result
 The provisions of the Rules of Court concerning the appreciation of evidence shall apply suppletorily
 DNA is admissible evidence of paternity - DNA analysis that excludes the putative father from
paternity should be conclusive proof of non-paternity. If the minimum value of the probability of
paternity is less than 99.99% the results of the DNA analysis should be considered as corroborative
evidence. If the value of minimum value is 99.9% or higher, then there is refutable presumption of
paternity.
 It is not enough to state that the child’s DNA profile matches that of the putative father. A complete
match between the DNA profile of the child and the DNA profile of the putative father does not
necessarily establish paternity.
 For this reason, following the highest standard adopted in an American jurisdiction, trial courts
should require at least 99.9% as a minimum value of the Probability of Paternity (“W”) prior to a
paternity inclusion. W is a numerical estimate for the likelihood of paternity of a putative father
compared to the probability of a random match of two unrelated individuals. Due to the
probabilistic nature of paternity inclusions, W will never equal to 100%

2. Exclusionary Rules
 Under the 1987 Constitution
 1. Right Against Unreasonable Searches and Seizure and the Right to Privacy
 GR: Any search and seizure is invalid
 XPN: Unless made pursuant to a search warrant or falls among the recognized exceptions.
 Seizure of Evidence in Plain View - rationale behind this is the impracticability of authorities
procuring search warrant in the face of an incriminating object observed directly by the seizing
officer. For this to prosper, 3 requisites must be met:
 a) Prior Valid Intrusion - The seizing officer must have the right where he is when he
stumbled upon the incriminating object.
 People v. Salanguit - purpose of the search warrant is already accomplished, any further
search is no longer justified
 Case involves a search warrant commanding the police to search and determine a quantity of
shabu and paraphernalia. While implementing the warrant, police further found dried
marijuana leaves wrapped in newspaper.
 The seized marijuana leaves were disregarded for having been a fruit of a further search.
Given that the police officers already knew where to find the shabu subject of the warrant, it’s
logical to assume that the police first found the shabu and paraphernalia. And after finding
 the items subject of warrant, police conducted further search. And in the process, seized
other items not indicated in the warrant
 Thus, the further search cannot be deemed a valid intrusion since the purpose of the search
has already been accomplished.
 b) Inadvertent Discovery - The seizing officer should not specifically look for the incriminating
object.
 People v. Musa - A buy-bust operation was conducted outside the house of Musa. The
poseur-buyer handed Musa the marked money. Musa went back to his house to get the illegal
drugs. Indeed, he returned, and then Musa delivered the shabu to the poseur-buyer.
 When they conducted a body search on Musa, they could not find the marked money. The
officers thus barged in the house to look for the marked money. Lo and behold, they found a
plastic container hanging over the kitchen which eventually yielded dried marijuana leaves.
 SC ruled that the police went inside for the purpose of looking for incriminating evidence. For
the plain view doctrine to operate, the discovery must be inadvertent such that it should not
be specifically sought for. The dried marijuana leaves were therefore inadmissible.
 c) Apparent Illegality of Object. The incriminating nature of the object must be apparent to
the observation of the seizing officer. Its illegality must be obvious.
 Incriminating nature can be determined by any of the senses. Take the case of Pp v. Claudio
where a plastic woven bag appearing to contain camote tops on the top had a big bundle of
plastic of marijuana at the bottom since the officer recognized its smell.
 2. Search incident to a lawful arrest
 Contemplates a situation where a search takes place after a VALID arrest. It cannot be the reverse
 An arrest is valid if done pursuant to a warrant of arrest or under the recognized exceptions. There are
3 instances of valid warrantless arrests
 a. In flagrante delicto. Requires compliance with 2 requisites:
 i) Overt acts on the part of the person to be arrested indicating that a crime has just
been, is being or about to be committed;
 People v. Amminudin - Arrest was illegal and cannot be justified under in flagrante
delicto because there is nothing illegal about a person disembarking from the vessel
walking on the gangplank.
 People v. Mengote - Police obtained a report of 3 persons acting suspiciously in an
alley. Mengote was arrested after being observed to be looking side-to-side, with his
hand holding his abdomen. There is nothing criminal about this.
 People v. Sy-Chua - An arrested drug-peddler divulged that his source of illegal drugs
was Mr. Chua. Police then conducted surveillance on Chua and found the latter on his
way to a hotel. Police saw Chua disembarking from his car, carrying with him a Zest-o
juice box. Police arrested him then searched the box and his car, yielding contraband.
There is nothing illegal about this.
 Pp v. Quebral - Police received a tip-off that 2 men and a woman would meet at a
certain place for a drug deal. Police dispatched a team to surveil and true enough found
a jeepney passing by in the vicinity identified by the informant.
 Moments later, another vehicle arrived. The woman then handed to the man a white
envelope, prompting police to swoop down on the suspects, seize the envelope which
yielded marijuana.
 SC saw it differently. What happened here is the opposite of Amminudin. Here, search
first, arrest later. The search was predicated from a valid tip-off, sufficient ground for
probable cause to conduct search. The tip-off was validated by the police on the ground
when the transaction actually took place.
  Thus, for purposes of warrantless search, probable cause, which may be derived from a
telephone call, is sufficient, if of course validated by the observation of the arresting
officers on the ground.
 b. Hot pursuit.
 c. Arrest of an escaped prisoner.
 Terry Search - stopped and frisked. If the search of his body yields positive, that person may now be
arrested, under in flagrante delicto.
 Posadas v. CA - extensive bodily search on the person who suddenly ran away upon being approached
by the police. This yielded contraband inadmissible
 People v. Manalili - search conducted in a cemetery. When police saw the suspect walking wobbly,
with his eyes red shut, characteristic of a person high on drugs, they approached him and the suspect
then acted suspiciously. Police then extensively searched the suspect. Valid.
 Consented Search - based on the principle of waiver. A search is an intrusion into the privacy of the
individual. This is a personal right available to the person concerned, and may be waived only by the
person concerned. He who invokes it, waives it
 People v. Damaso - apartment rented by the accused was raided by the authorities. Accused was not
there when the raid took place. Police were allowed entry by the house help. This consent is not valid.
The search was thus invalid.
 Checkpoint Search - Valid as long as to meet the exigencies of public order and for as long as the
search is not extensive or intrusive. It should not involve the search of the occupants of the vehicle,
nor it should allow the search of the vehicle itself
 allowed search is a visual one, done outside the vehicle. It does not authorize the officers to demand
the lowering of the windows, nor to demand that occupants alight from the vehicle.
 Exceptions - would be when there is probable cause that the occupants are committing a crime or
that the vehicle contains incriminating objects
 People v. Vinecario - COMELEC Gun Ban. In a checkpoint, a motorcycle with 3 men on board sped
past it prompting an officer to whistle them to return.
 One of them misrepresented himself to be a military officer but failed to present an ID. Police noticed
a military backpack and when asked by the police to hand it over, they took turns in passing it to each
other. They were restless and fidgety. Acting on their suspicious actuations, police conducted the
search that yielded some contraband
 SC upheld the search ruling that if there is probable cause, a more extensive search is allowed
although done in a checkpoint
 3. Right of Persons under Custodial Investigation or the Miranda Rights
 When are these rights available? Only in custodial investigations
 A stage wherein the investigation ceases to be a general inquiry in an unsolved crime and now focuses
on a particular suspect placed or taken under custody, and otherwise deprived of his freedom of
action in a significant way by the officer who carries out the process of investigation aimed at eliciting
admission from the suspect. Thus, there are 4 requisites:
 1) Investigation should no longer be a general inquiry, and is already accusatory;
 Police line-up is not a custodial investigation
 2) Suspect must be taken into custody of law.
 People v. Guting - son stabbed his father to death. He approached two policemen standing
across the police station and voluntarily confessed to them.
 Miranda rights are not available here
 Custodial investigation" shall include the practice of issuing an "invitation" to a person who
is investigated in connection with an offense he is suspected to have committed, without
prejudice to the liability of the “inviting” officer for any violation of law.
  People v. Lauga - The mother sought the assistance of a bantay-bayan. The bantay-bayan
invited the father to the house of the barangay captain. The father confessed to the crime.
 The extrajudicial confession was then impugned for violating the Miranda doctrine. SC
sustained. He was under custodial investigation (Color of state function)
 People v. Del Rosario - case for murder. A witness positively identified the driver of the
getaway motorcycle. The driver was invited by police where he confessed
 SC sustained the inadmissibility of the confession since the practice of the police in inviting
him amounted to custodial investigation where his Miranda rights should have been
observed and enforced.
 3) The confession made must be in response to police interrogation.
 Spontaneous statements proffered not through interrogation are not covered by the
Miranda doctrine
 People v. Andan - Murder and rape of a minor girl. Andan was arrested and detained.
When he learned that the mayor was in the police station, he sought an audience with the
mayor. Without being interrogated by the mayor, Andan broke down and confessed to the
mayor.
 This is not covered as his confession was a spontaneous statement done in an ordinary
manner. The Miranda rights were never intended to prevent the suspect from being
truthful. Instead, it was intended to avoid the slightest coercion that may compel the
suspect to admit to something that he never did
 4) The one questioning must be a law enforcement agent.
 Who may be regarded as law enforcement agents? - Police, Mayor, Barangay Captains.
Also includes public prosecutors conducting the preliminary investigation, as well as judges
 People v. Guillermo - Guillermo was arrested, he was visited by reporters. He was
interviewed, wherein he confessed to the killing. Not covered because the one asking the
question were not law enforcement officers.
 People v. Edna Malngan - Malngan was a house help who burnt down the house of her
employer. She was identified by the neighbors and was picked up by the barangay captain
 In the course of the interrogation by the barangay captain, Edna confessed. SC rejected the
confession as it was not done via the assistance of a counsel. Barangay captain is
considered as a law enforcement agent.
 People v. Baloloy - Rape-slay of a minor girl where the suspect took the liberty of
reporting the crime but not him as the culpable one. During the wake, the barangay
captain went in front and raised a black rope and asked who its owner was. To Baloloy’s
credit, he admitted having owned the rope. So, he eventually confessed.
 Witnesses and Baloloy were brought to the judge for them to subscribe to their affidavit.
During that proceeding, the judge asked Baloloy certain questions prompting Baloloy to
confess. Such confession was deemed inadmissible.
 Questioning conducted by employers to their employees NOT COVERED
 De Castro v. People - accused of estafa thru falsification. She was made to undergo disciplinary
proceedings. She executed an extrajudicial confession admitting culpability.
 De Castro cannot invoke Miranda rights. The proceedings were not initiated by the State but by
private individuals. ADMISSIBLE
 People v. Bongcarawan - Security employed by a private employer is not a law enforcement agent. A
passenger of a vessel whose bag was searched by the security guard employed by the shipping.
Passenger argued that the search was illegal because it was not done with a search warrant.
 SC disagreed on the ground that the constitutional right against unreasonable search and seizure does
not apply
 Confession made before news reporters without undue influence is admissible - sufficient to sustain
a conviction for the crime confessed to by the accused. The fact that the extrajudicial confession was
made by Antonio while inside a detention cell does not by itself render such confession inadmissible,
contrary to what Antonio would like this Court to believe.
 In People v. Domantay, where the accused was also interviewed while inside a jail cell, this Court held
that such circumstance alone does not taint the extrajudicial confession of the accused, especially
since the same was given freely and spontaneously
 What types of evidence are covered under the Miranda warnings?
 GR: Testimonial evidence, only
 People v. Baylon - Killing of a teacher witnessed by the pupil. The pupil described the assailant as
wearing a hat, maong pants, white shirt, green handkerchief wrapped around his neck. Acting on the
description given, police arrested the suspect. Suspect was stripped of his clothing and presented to
court to corroborate the testimony of the pupil. Accused sought the exclusion of these evidence for
having been obtained without the assistance of counsel.
 SC rejected this contention ruling that the Miranda rights only cover testimonial evidence and not
object evidence.
 People v. Malimit - suspect for robbery and while under custody, he confessed and pointed to the
location where they hid the stolen goods.
 Malimit sought the exclusion of the goods as evidence contending that these were procured in
violation of his rights under Sec 12 Art III. SC rejected such an argument, applying the rule that object
evidence is not covered under the Miranda warnings
 Right Against Self-incrimination - No person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself
 Admission of a party - act, declaration or omission of a party as to a relevant fact may be given in
evidence against him or her.
 Admission by third party - rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by an act, declaration, or omission
of another
 Admission by conspirator - act or declaration of a conspirator in furtherance of the conspiracy and
during its existence, may be given in evidence against the co-conspirator after the conspiracy is shown
by evidence other than such act of declaration

 The kernel of the privilege is testimonial compulsion. Thus, it covers generally testimonial evidence.
Object evidence or those that are purely mechanical are not covered - right against self-
incrimination is simply against the legal process of extracting from the lips of the accused an
admission of guilt. It does not apply where the evidence sought to be excluded is not an incrimination
but as part of object evidence. Over the years, the Court has expressly excluded several kinds of
object evidence taken from the person of the accused from the realm of selfincrimination. These
include photographs, hair, and other bodily substances. The Court has also declared as constitutional
several procedures performed on the accused such as pregnancy tests for women accused of
adultery, expulsion of morphine from one’s mouth and the tracing of one’s foot to determine its
identity with bloody footprints. The Court even authorized the examination of a woman’s genitalia, in
an action for annulment filed by her husband, to verify his claim that she was impotent, her orifice
being too small for his penis. Some of these procedures were, to be sure, rather invasive and
involuntary, but all of them were constitutionally sound. DNA testing and its results are now similarly
acceptable.
 US v. Ong Siu Hong - involves compelling a suspect to discharge morphine from his mouth. He
invoked his right against self-incrimination. SC rebuffed him, ruling that the right applies only to
testimonial compulsion.
 US v. Tan Teng - involves a suspect compelled to submit to physical tests where substances emitted by
his body were subjected to laboratory tests to determine if he is afflicted with gonorrhea. The victim
of the acts of lasciviousness was also afflicted with gonorrhea.
 objection was rejected since this is not covered by the privilege of self-incrimination
 Villaflor v. Summers - an accused of adultery may be compelled to submit to a pregnancy test to
prove that the baby she is carrying is sired by a man other than her husband
 People v. Vallejo - DNA test was conducted on the vaginal swab taken from the victim. This was
compared to the DNA profile of Vallejo which yielded a positive match. This again is not covered by
the right against self-incrimination.
 The same principle applies as when accused is subjected to: a) Fingerprinting; b) Paraffin test; c)
Photographing; d) Forcing accused to strip naked to show conditions of his body; e) Forcing accused
to measure parts of his body for comparison.
 These are purely mechanical, and not protected by the right against self-incrimination
 The principle no longer applies if the process of examination would require the intervention of the
mind or the mental faculty of the subject. This piece of evidence is now protected
 Beltran v. Samson - charged with falsification of documents was forced to produce a sample of his
handwriting to compare it with the alleged falsified document.
 SC sustained Samson’s objection holding that this is not purely mechanical since producing one’s
handwriting involves the intervention of the mind.
 Jaime dela Cruz v. People - evidence was taken by a purely mechanical act but it has absolutely no
relation to the principal cause of the arrest of the suspect, it is still subject to the protection of the
right against self-incrimination
 Here, the suspect was arrested for alleged extortion but was subjected to a urine test that yielded
positive results of drug use
 In the prior cases discussed, the evidence was related to the principal cause of arrest, unlike in this
case. Urine has nothing to do with extortion. Unless you use urine to extort.
 When is the right invocable? What kind of proceeding is this invocable? - ANY, as long as the
proceeding is initiated by the State
 People v. Marti - When the question calls for an answer that may establish criminal liability or expose
the witness to criminal prosecution. If it only tends to establish civil or administrative liability, the
question is NOT incriminating.
 Although the right may be invoked in any proceeding, the nature of the question propounded is an
entirely different matter. The right may only be invoked against those questions that are incriminating.
 If the question seeks an admission for a crime that has prescribed or that the person has already been
granted immunity, this is no longer covered. This is no longer incriminating since the person would no
longer be exposed to possible criminal liability or prosecution.
 How do you invoke the right against self-incrimination?
 Criminal – Refuse to taken witness stand & answers questions
 Civil/Administrative – Cannot refuse to take witness stand & only incriminating questions
 The moment an incriminating question is propounded, the right may then be invoked and defendant
may refuse to answer the question.
 An exception in Civil and Admin cases is when the proceeding is PENAL IN NATURE. The manner of
invoking the right is similar to that of criminal proceedings.
 Pascual v. Board of Examiners - administratively charged for gross misconduct that could strip him Off
of his license. The proceeding is penal in nature since it could possibly forfeit his license which is a
property right. Pascual may then refuse to take the witness stand.
 Rosete v. Lim - action for violation of BP 22. In the civil case, the plaintiff sought the deposition of the
respondents who were the accused in the criminal case. Respondents refused to participate in the
 deposition contending that any testimony that may be taken from him may surely be used in the
criminal case.
 SC reiterated the rule that the manner of invoking the right is different from on the one hand, and
civil and admin on the other. Respondents cannot refuse to participate in the deposition taking in the
civil case but have the right to not answer incriminating questions.
 If the one invoking is a witness, he cannot altogether refuse to take the witness stand even in criminal
proceedings. Also, the witness does not stand on equal footing with the accused. He is called not for
the purpose of him being incriminated
 Just like any other rights, the right against self-incrimination can be waived, either expressly or
impliedly. The implied waiver takes place.
 a) when the accused voluntarily takes the stand; or
 b) when a witness voluntarily answers an incriminating question; or
 c) when the counsel fails to timely object.
 What is protected by the privilege? Testimonial, object, and ALSO documentary –
 Regala v. Sandiganbayan - involves the Coco Levy Fund. It was alleged that proceeds of the fund were
funneled to corporations of the cronies of Marcos.
 During the proceedings, the government moved that the lawyers be compelled to disclose the
identity of their principals. The lawyers were forced to produce corporate records to establish the
identity of their principals. The lawyers invoked right against self-incrimination, for possible criminal
prosecution for violation of the Anti-Dummy Law.
 SC sustained the lawyers saying the right against self-incrimination covers not only testimonial but
also documentary evidence.
 Also covered here is with regard to privileged communication between lawyer and client. Generally,
disclosure of the identity of the client is not confidential. However, if it would lead to possible criminal
liability on the part of the client, then it becomes confidential
 Exclusionary Rules Under Special Laws
 Documentary Stamp Tax –
 What’s the procedural effect of non-payment of DST? - Any taxable document that does not comply
with DST is INADMISSIBLE in evidence in court.
 Court however is liberal in applying this. When a party fails to comply with the DST, the court shall
require its compliance first rather than outrightly excluding the document. Failure to comply with
such an order will then justify the exclusion of such documents in evidence.
 What are these taxable documents?
 a) Certificates of stocks;
 b) Any deed reconveying real property;
 c) Insurance policies;
 d) SPAs, etc
 Secrecy of Bank Deposits - All deposits of whatever nature with banks or banking institutions in the
Philippines including investments in bonds issued by the Government of the Philippines, its political
subdivisions and its instrumentalities, are hereby considered as of an absolutely confidential nature
and may not be examined, inquired or looked into by any person, government official, bureau or
office.
 Foreign Currency Deposits Act of the Philippines
 Secrecy of deposits. —The secrecy of deposits under this Act shall be governed in accordance with
the provisions of RA 1405.
 We have RA 1405, a law of general application, which prohibits the access or inquiring into the bank
deposit without the consent of the depositor, subject to exceptions.
 1. upon written permission of the depositor, or
 2. in cases impeachment, or
  3. upon order of a competent court in cases of bribery or dereliction of duty of public officials,
 4. in cases where the money deposited or invested is the subject matter of the litigation
 Another law is RA 6426, Foreign Currency Deposits Act, a law of specific application, that a foreign
currency deposit from being levied or attached on execution; as well as being examined or inquired
to. There is only one exception: CONSENT of depositor.
 Anti-Wire Tapping Act – law punishes anyone who, without the permission of all parties to a private
communication or spoken words, tap any wire or cable, or use any device to intercept, overhear,
record such communication by using devices such as dictaphone, dictagraph, walkie talkie, tape
recorder, or any device however described.
 Gaanan v. CA - involves a telephone conversation between two lawyers. Atty. Pintor called up Atty.
Laconico to discuss a possible settlement in a criminal case. Unknown to Pintor, Laconico allowed his
client to listen to the conversation using an extension telephone line.
 The client was prosecuted for violation of RA 4200.
 SC ruled that the use of an extension telephone line is not prohibited under RA 4200. Applying
ejusdem generis, the prohibited devices are used for illegal purposes, but an extension telephone line
is not intended for an illegitimate purpose. It was a common practice to allow extension wires
 Needless to state, RA 4200 does not cover video recordings. Not all communications are covered, only
PRIVATE.
 Navarro v. People - Two reporters proceeded to the police station to report the public exhibition of
women in a bar. Navarro acted hostile to the reporters
 Their conversation turned violent that resulted in the death of a reporter
 Unknownst to Navarro, the confrontation was secretly recorded by the other reporter. Navarro
objected to the presentation of the recording as it allegedly violated RA 4200
 SC rebuffed him holding that the recorded confrontation was PUBLIC, taking into account that:
 a) The confrontation happened in a public place;
 b) It took place in the presence of many other people
 All these negate privacy.
 Gaanan v. CA - SC took note that the conversations between the lawyers were private. If it was only
meant to be heard to a specific person, then it is private.
 Had Pintor known that someone else was listening to the conversation, he would not have proceeded
with it. The intent of the speaker was taken into consideration.
 Inadmissibility of any recording in violation of the Act only refers against the person who did not
consent to the recording, or whose right has been violated. So that if the recording is presented
against the violator, it is admissible
 Ramirez v. CA - Involves 2 friends, or maybe not so. One day, they had a meeting, Garcia lambasted
Ramirez, calling her names, and unleashed her vilifying words against Ramirez. Ramirez got offended
and sued Garcia for damages arising from defamation
 Ramirez presented a recording of the altercation hoping to nail Garcia, but ended up being nailed by
it.
 Ramirez contended that she could not be liable since she was a party to the conversation. SC
disagreed saying that the literal language of the law says that ANY person not being authorized is
liable.
 Rape Shield Protection Rule - prosecutions for rape, evidence of complainant's past sexual conduct,
opinion thereof or of his/ her reputation shall not be admitted unless, and only to the extent that the
court
 Sexual Abuse Shield Rule –
 a) Inadmissible evidence. — The following evidence is NOT admissible in any criminal proceeding
involving alleged child sexual abuse:
 1) Evidence offered to prove that the alleged victim engaged in other sexual behavior;
  2) Evidence offered to prove the sexual predisposition of the alleged victim.
 b) Exception. — 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.
 Anti VAWC - Confidentiality - All records pertaining to cases of violence against women and their
children including those in the barangay shall be confidential and all public or private clinics to
hospitals shall respect the right to privacy of the victim.
 Anti-Photo and Video Voyeurism Act - Prohibits taking of photo or video coverage of a person or
group of persons performing sexual act, or of a similar activity; capturing the image of the individual’s
private area under such circumstances without the consent of the person and under such
circumstances wherein there is reasonable expectation of privacy
 Covered:
 a) the naked or undergarment clad genitals,
 b) pubic area, with or without hair
 c) buttocks or
 d) female breast.
 The protection presupposes lack of consent on the part of the persons concerned; or wherein there is
reasonable expectation of privacy.
 Other prohibited acts include the act of copying or reproducing, sale or distribution, or possession of
such recordings. Consent must be given to each of the prohibited acts
 Exclusionary rule only applies against the person whose rights have been violated under the law. It
is admissible against the violator of the law subject to the following conditions:
 1) There should be a court order allowing the use of the recording;
 2) Court is convinced it is necessary for the purposes of prosecution and conviction of the law-
offender or if necessary, in the prevention of the commission of further similar acts
 This is unlike in any other exclusionary rules that does not require a prior court order in order to use
the evidence against the violator
 Does the Act protect crime? Is there privacy in crime? There’s nothing in the law that remotely
distinguishes so long as the video was taken without the consent of the persons concerned,
inadmissible. In the same manner that an illegally intercepted conversation is still protected
 Reason for the restrictions: This is a sensitive material that is not supposed to be exposed to the
public.
 Human Security Act - Provides the exception by allowing certain communications to be legally
intercepted, overheard or recorded. This applies in a situation wherein the communication is made
between persons or organizations which are judicially declared an outlawed terrorist, or any person
suspected or charged with terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism
 This can only be done if authorized by an order issued by an appropriate division of the CA. It has a
lifespan of 30 days, renewable for another 30 days. Take note of the subject of the surveillance:
 a) Judicially declared outlawed terrorist organizations
 b) Those suspected of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism;
 Terrorism is committed when a person or group of persons commit an act causing widespread panic
and extraordinary fear upon the populace to compel the government to give in to unlawful demands.
 This law also provides for exceptions to the so-called authorized surveillance. There are certain types
of communications which cannot be the subject of a CA-authorized wire-tapping:
 a) Lawyer-Client;
 b) Physician-Patient;
 c) Journalist-Sources;
 d) Business correspondence.
 These are still privileged communication that must be protected. It would appear from the literal
language of the law that any communication is protected regardless of tenor. But juxtaposed with the
privileged communication rule, while their communication is indeed by professional confidentiality, it
is far from being absolute.
 This does not protect illegitimate or illegal communication. It only covers conversations which are
relevant for the purpose of the professional engagement.
 Take note that the exclusionary rule imposes a positive command, makes any recorded conversation
inadmissible absolutely against ANY person
 Data Privacy Act - generally regulates the gathering, processing, use and disclosure of personal data
of individuals. This covers any person or entities that process personal information.
 Examples
 a) Academic institutions;
 b) Banks;
 c) Companies hiring employees, among others
 GR: The processing of personal information shall NOT be allowed, subject to exceptions.
 Personal Data is any information from which
 a) The identity of an individual is apparent; or
 b) The identity can be ascertained; or
 c) If put together with other information will directly and certainly identify an individual.
 Sensitive personal information includes the individual’s:
 a) Race, ethnic origin, marital status, age, color, and religious, philosophical or political
affiliations;
 b) health, education, genetic or sexual life of a person;
 c) social security numbers, previous or cm-rent health records, licenses or its denials,
suspension or revocation, and tax return.
 Privileged information refers to any and all forms of data which under the Rules of Court and other
pertinent laws constitute privileged communication
 1. Lawyer-Client;
 2. Physician-Patient;
 3. Journalist-Sources;
 4. Priest-Penitent;
 5. Business correspondence
 NOT COVERED are:
 1. Information about any individual who is or was an officer or employee of a government
institution that relates to the position or functions of the individual.
 2. Information about an individual who is or was performing service under contract for a
government institution;
 3. Information relating to any discretionary benefit of a financial nature such as granting a
license or permit given by the government
 4. Personal information processed for journalistic, artistic, literary or research purposes;
 5. Information necessary in order to carry out the functions of public authority;
 6. Information necessary for banks and other financial institution;
 7. Personal information originally collected from residents of foreign jurisdiction.
 GR: The processing of sensitive personal information and privileged information shall NOT be allowed
 XPN:
 1) With the consent of data subject — evidenced by a written or orally recorded consent
 2) The processing is necessary to protect the health and life of the data subject or any person
and the data subject is incapable of giving his consent
  3) When necessary for medical purposes;
 4) When required by existing laws;
 5) When necessary to protect one’s rights and interests in court proceedings.
 The Act affords some rights to the data subject, such as the right to be forgotten
 Take note of the extended privileged communication. Privileged communication can only be invoked
by the holder, in this case, the data subject. However, under Sec 15 of the Act, Personal information
controllers may invoke the principle of privileged communication over privileged information that
they lawfully control or process.
 Subject to existing laws and regulations, any evidence gathered on privileged information is
inadmissible.
 Although it provides penalties for violations against processing of personal and sensitive personal
information, it does not speak of the admissibility or inadmissibility of these information when
illegally procured.
 The law is conspicuous by its silence.
 EVIDENCE ADMISSIBLE AGAINST
 Wiretapping Act - Violator
 Anti-photo and Video Voyeurism Act - Violator
 Human security Act - None
 Data Privacy Act Privileged Info – Privilege Info (Violator)

E. Documentary Evidence (Rule 130, B)

 1. Definition - Consist of writings, recordings, photographs, or any material containing letters, words,
sounds, numbers, figures, symbols, or their equivalent, or other modes of written expressions offered as
proof of their contents. If offered for some other purpose, they constitute object evidence.
 Photographs include still pictures, drawings, stored images, x-ray films, motion pictures or videos
 Tape-recording as documentary evidence - If a tape recording is played to show that particular words
were uttered, it will constitute documentary evidence. However, if it is played to simply show the words
were uttered in a particular accent, the it is object evidence.
 May a private document be offered and admitted in evidence both as documentary evidence and object
evidence - Depending on the purpose for which the document is offered. If offered to prove its existence,
conditions or for any purpose other than the contents of a document, the same is considered as object
evidence. When the private document is offered as proof of its contents, the same is considered as
documentary evidence. The document may be offered for both purposes under the principle of multiple
admissibility
 REQUISITES
 1. The document must be relevant;
 2. The evidence must be authenticated;
 3. The document must be authenticated by a competent witness;
 4. The document must be formally offered in evidence
 A record of birth is merely prima facie evidence of the facts contained therein. It is not conclusive evidence
of the truthfulness of the statements therein by the interested parties. N should have adduced evidence of
her adoption, in view of the contents of her birth certificate. The mere registration of a child in his or her
birth certificate as the child of the supposed parents is not a valid adoption, does not confer upon the child
the status of an adopted child and the legal rights of such child, and even amounts to simulation of the
child’s birth or falsification on his or her birth certificate, which is a public document.
 Theory of indivisibility (Rule on Completeness) - When part of an act, declaration, conversation, writing or
record is given in evidence by one party, the whole of the same subject may be inquired into by the other;
and when a detached act, declaration, conversation, writing, or record is given in evidence, any other act,
declaration, conversation, writing or record necessary to its understanding may also be given in evidence.
 2. Original Document Rule
 GR: When the subject of inquiry is the contents of a document, writing, recording, photograph, or other
record, no evidence is admissible other than the original document itself.
 XPNs:
 1. When the original is lost, or destroyed, or cannot be produced in court, without bad faith on the
part of the offeror;
 2. When the original is in the custody or under the control of the party against whom the evidence is
offered, and the latter fails to produce it after reasonable notice, or the original cannot be obtained
by local judicial processes or procedures;
 3. When the original consists of numerous accounts or 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.
 4. When the original is a public record in the custody of a public officer or is recorded in a public
office; and
 5. When the original is not closely-related to a controlling issue
 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 delivery (external facts), the original document
rule does not apply, and testimonial evidence is admissible.
 The original document rule, applied to documentary evidence, operates as a rule of exclusion, that is,
secondary evidence cannot be inceptively introduced as the original writing itself must be produced in
court,
 Reason underlying adoption of original document rule - need to present to the court the exact words of a
writing where a slight variation of words may mean a great difference in rights. It is also for the prevention
of fraud or mistake in proof of the contents of a writing.
 Ruling - The original document rule applies only to documentary evidence, not to object evidence or
testimonial evidence. The presentation at the trial of the “buybust money” is not indispensable to the
conviction of the accused especially if the sale of dangerous drugs had been adequately proved by the
testimony of the police officers. So long as the drug actually sold by the accused had been submitted as an
exhibit, the failure to produce the marked money itself would not constitute a fatal omission.
 (a) An "original" of a document is the document itself or any counterpart intended to have the same
effect by a person executing or issuing it.
 An "original" of a photograph includes the negative or any print therefrom.
 If data is stored in a computer or similar device, any printout or other output readable by sight or
other means, shown to reflect the data accurately, is an "original."
 (b) A "duplicate" is a counterpart produced
 by the same impression as the original, or from the same matrix, or
 by means of photography, including enlargements and miniatures, or
 by mechanical or electronic re-recording, or
 by chemical reproduction, or
 by other equivalent techniques which accurately reproduce the original.
 (c) A duplicate is admissible to the same extent as an original
 unless (1) a genuine question is raised as to the authenticity of the original, or
 (2) in the circumstances, it is unjust or inequitable to admit the duplicate in lieu of the original
 General Rule: A duplicate is admissible to the same extent as an original
 Exceptions:
 1. A general question is raised as to the authenticity of the original; or
 2. In the circumstances, it is unjust or inequitable to admit the duplicate in lieu of the
original
  Carbon copies are deemed duplicate
 Writings with identical contents made by printing, mimeographing, lithography and other similar
methods executed at the same time are considered as original document. Thus, each newspaper sold
in the stand is an original.
 Production of the original may be dispensed with if, in the trial court’s discretion, the opponent
 (1) does not dispute the contents of such document and
 (2) no other useful purpose will be served by the production.
 Secondary evidence of the contents of the writing would be received in evidence if no objection was
made to its reception
 WHEN APPLICABLE –
 1. The original document of the writing is the writing itself;
 2. The contents of which is the subject of the inquiry; and
 3. The original document must be produced if the purpose is to prove its contents
 When the truth of the document is in issue and not the contents thereof, the original document rule is not
applicable. In such cases, it is the hearsay rule that will apply. Where the issue is the execution or existence
of the document or the circumstances surrounding its execution, the original document rule does not
apply and testimonial evidence is admissible.
 When Not Applicable –
 1. Where the issue is only as to whether such document was actually executed, or exists, or on the
circumstances relevant to or surrounding its execution, the best evidence rule (now original
document rule) does not apply and testimonial evidence is admissible. Any other substitutionary
evidence is likewise admissible without need for accounting for the original
 2. Affidavits and depositions are considered as not being the best evidence, hence not admissible if
the affiants or deponents are available as witnesses
 3. The best evidence rule (now original document rule) does not apply to all types of evidence. It does
not comprehend object and testimonial evidence
 COLLATERAL FACTS RULE – A document or writing which is merely “collateral” to the issue involved in the
case on trial need not be proved. Where the purpose of presenting a document is not to prove its
contents, but merely to give coherence to, or to make intelligible the testimony of a witness regarding a
fact contemporaneous to the writing, the original of the document need not be presented.
 3. Secondary Evidence
 Evidence other than the original instrument or document itself. It is the class of evidence that is relevant to
the fact in issue, it being first shown that the primary evidence of the fact is not obtainable. It performs
the same functions as that of primary evidence.
 A party must first present to the court proof of loss or other satisfactory explanation for the non-
production of the original instrument. When more than one original copy exists, it must appear that all of
them have been lost, destroyed or cannot be produced in court before the secondary evidence can be
given.
 The non-production of the original document, unless it falls under any of the exception, gives rise to the
presumption of suppression of evidence.
 Requisites BEFORE THE CONTENTS OF THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT MAY BE PROVED BY SECONDARY
EVIDENCE (LAYING THE BASIS) – Offeror must prove the following:
 1. The execution or existence of the original document;
 Due execution of the document should be proved through the testimony of either:
 1. The person or persons who executed it;
 2. The person before whom its execution was acknowledged; or
 3. Any person who was present and saw it executed and delivered, or who, after its
execution and delivery, saw it and recognized the signatures, or by a person to whom the
parties to the instruments had previously confessed the execution thereof
  2. The cause of its unavailability; and
 When more than one original copy exists, it must appear that all of them have been lost,
destroyed, or cannot be produced in court before secondary evidence can be given of anyone.
A photocopy may not be used without accounting for the other originals
 3. The unavailability of the original is not due to bad faith on his part.
 The general rule concerning proof of a lost instrument is, that reasonable search shall be made
for it in the place where it was last known to have been, and, if such search does not discover
it, then inquiry should be made of persons most likely to have its custody, or who have some
reasons to know of its whereabouts
 Accordingly, the correct order of proof is as follows: existence, execution, loss and contents. This order
may be changed, if necessary, at the sound of discretion of the court.
 Intentional destruction of the original by a party who acted in good faith does not preclude the
introduction of secondary evidence of the contents thereof.
 Proof of loss or destruction, may be proved by:
 1. Any person who knew of such fact;
 2. Anyone who, in the judgment of the court, had made sufficient examination in the places where
the document or papers of similar character are usually kept by the person in whose custody the
document was and has been unable to find it; or
 3. Any person who has made any other investigation which is sufficient to satisfy the court that the
document is indeed lost
 A reasonable probability of its loss is sufficient, and this may be shown by a bona fide and diligent search,
fruitlessly made, in places where it is likely to be found.
 All duplicates or counterparts of a lost or destroyed document must be accounted for before using copies
thereof since all duplicates are parts of the writing to be proved
 When a marriage certificate is considered the primary evidence of a martial union. It is not regarded as the
sole and exclusive evidence of marriage. Jurisprudence teaches the fact that marriage may be proven by
relevant evidence other than the marriage certificate. Hence, even a person’s birth certificate may be
recognized as competent evidence of marriage between parents.
 ORDER OF PRESENTATION OF SECONDARY EVIDENCE –
 When original document is unavailable - Upon proof if its execution and loss of the original document, its
contents may be proved by the following, in the order stated:
 1. Copy of the original
 2. Recital of the contents of the document in some authentic document; or
 3. Testimony of witnesses
 In order that secondary evidence may be admissible, there must be proof by satisfactory evidence of:
 1. Due execution of the original;
 2. Loss, destruction, or unavailability of all such originals; and
 3. Reasonable diligence and good faith in the search for or attempt to produce the original
 Definite Evidentiary Rule – Where the law specifically provides for the class and quantum of secondary
evidence to establish the contents of a document, or bars secondary evidence of a lost document, such
requirement is controlling.
 Example: evidence of a lost notarial will should consist of a testimony of at least two credible witnesses
who can clearly and distinctly establish its contents.
 Presentation or offer of the original may be waived upon failure to object by the party against whom the
secondary evidence is offered when the same was presented, as the secondary evidence becomes primary
evidence. But even if admitted as primary evidence, admissibility of evidence should not be confused with
its probative value
 When original document is in adverse party's custody or control - he or she must have reasonable notice
to produce it. If after such notice and after satisfactory proof of its existence, he or she fails to produce the
document, secondary evidence may be presented as in the case of its loss.
 Requisites:
 1. Original exists;
 2. Said document is under the custody or control of adverse party;
 3. Proponent of secondary evidence has given the adverse party reasonable notice to produce the
original document;
 No particular form of notice is required, to be given to the adverse party, as long as it fairly
appraises the other party as to what papers are desired. Even an oral demand in open court for
such production at a reasonable time thereafter will suffice. Such notice must, however, be given
to the adverse party, or his attorney, even if the document is in the actual possession of a third
person.
 4. Adverse party failed to produce the original document despite the reasonable notice.
 A justified refusal or failure of the adverse party to produce the original document will not give
rise to the presumption of suppression of evidence or create an unfavorable inference against
him. It only authorizes the presentation of secondary evidence
 Mere fact that the original of the writing is in the custody or control of the party against whom it is offered
does not warrant the admission of secondary evidence. The offeror must prove that he has done all in his
power to secure the best evidence by giving notice to the said party to produce the document.
 Ruling - Although the failure of L to produce the original of the note is excusable since she was not given
reasonable notice, a requirement under the Rules before secondary evidence may be presented, the copy
in possession of P is not secondary evidence but a duplicate original because it was executed at the same
time as the original and with identical contents. Hence, being an original, the rule on secondary evidence
need not be complied with.
 Summaries - When the contents of documents, records, photographs, or numerous accounts are
voluminous and cannot be examined in court without great loss of time, and the fact sought to be
established is only the general result of the whole, the contents of such evidence may be presented in the
form of a chart, summary, or calculation.
 Originals shall be available for examination or copying, or both, by the adverse party at a reasonable time
and place. The court may order that they be produced in court.
 A witness may be allowed to offer a summary of documents or summary of the contents may be admitted
if documents are so voluminous and intricate as to make an examination of all of them impracticable. They
may also be in the form of charts or calculations
 Requisites:
 1. Original must consist of numerous accounts or documents;
 2. They cannot be examined in court without great loss of time or inconvenient.
 Court may admit a summary of voluminous original documents, in lieu of the original
documents, if the party has shown that the underlying writings are numerous and that an in-
court examination of these documents would be inconvenient. The rule does away with item-
by-item court identification and authentication of voluminous exhibits which would only be
burdensome and tedious for the parties and the court.
 However, as a condition precedent to the admission of a summary of numerous documents,
the proponent must lay a proper foundation for the admission of the original documents on
which the summary is based. The proponent must prove that the source documents being
summarized are also admissible if presented in court. In concrete terms, the source must be
shown to be original and not secondary.
 Evidence admissible when original document is a public record - contents may be proved by a certified
copy issued by the public officer in custody thereof.
 The contents may proved by:
 1. A certified copy issued by the public officer in custody thereof
 2. Official publication
 Public records are generally not to be removed from the places where they are recorded and kept. Hence,
proof of the contents of a document which forms part of a public record may be done by secondary
evidence.
 Party who calls for document not bound to offer it - A party who calls for the production of a document
and inspects the same is not obliged to offer it as evidence.
 When a document produced is not offered in evidence - If the party who calls for the production of a
document does not offer the same in evidence, no unfavorable inference may be drawn from such failure.
This is because a party who calls for the production of a document is not required to offer it
 Sec 9, Rule 130 - Procured by mere notice to the adverse party, which is a condition precedent for the
subsequent introduction of secondary evidence by the proponent.
 Presupposes that the document to be produced is intended as evidence for the proponent who is
presumed to have knowledge of its contents
 Rule 127 - production of document is in the nature of a mode of discovery and can be sought only by
proper motion in the trial court and is permitted only upon good cause shown.
 Contemplates a situation wherein the document is either assumed to be favorable to the party in
possession thereof or that the party seeking its production is not sufficient informed of the contents of the
same.
 Secondary evidence may be presented upon proof of execution/existence and cause of lost - when the
original document has been lost or destroyed, or cannot be produced in court, the offeror, upon proof of
its execution or existence and the cause of its unavailability without bad faith on his part, may prove its
contents by presenting secondary evidence. This secondary evidence pertains to:
 (1) a copy of the lost document,
 (2) by a recital of the contents of the lost document in some authentic document, or
 (3) by a testimony of a witnesses, in the order stated
 Secondary evidence may be introduced by testimony of those familiar with the fact in issue - As relatives
of the deceased, their information was derived from their personal experiences or conversations with
those who knew or were familiar with the Gonzaga siblings. In view of these, Millonte's resort to
secondary evidence was proper, as the original documents (the death certificates of the other Gonzaga
siblings) were unavailable because these were destroyed by the fire. Hence, the deaths of the Gonzagas,
the supposed contracting parties, prior to the execution of the Deed of Absolute Sale were sufficiently
established.
 Secondary evidence may be admitted if the terms of a writing are not in issue - Original Document Rule)
applies only when the terms of a 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 Original Document Rule cannot be invoked. In such a case, secondary evidence may be
admitted even without accounting for the original
 4. Parol Evidence Rule
 Evidence of written agreements — When the terms of an agreement have been reduced to writing, it is
considered as containing all the terms agreed upon and there can be, as between the parties and their
successors in interest, no evidence of such terms other than the contents of the written agreement.
 However, a party may present evidence to modify, explain or add to the terms of the written agreement if
he or she puts in issue in a verified pleading:
 (a) An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or imperfection in the written agreement;
 (b) The failure of the written agreement to express the true intent and agreement of the parties
thereto;
 (c) The validity of the written agreement; or
  (d) The existence of other terms agreed to by the parties or their successors in interest after the
execution of the written agreement.
 The term "agreement" includes wills.
 It is any evidence aliunde (extrinsic evidence) which is intended or tends to vary or contradict a complete
and enforceable agreement embodied in a document. It may refer to testimonial, real or documentary
evidence.
 Parol evidence is evidence outside of the agreement of the parties while parol evidence rules prevent the
presentation of such parol evidence.
 Among the evidentiary rules, it is the parol evidence rule that has direct application to the law on
contracts. The rule applies only to contracts while the parties have decided to set forth in writing. Hence,
parol evidence does not apply to oral contracts.
 Rationale: When the parties have reduced their agreement in writing it is presumed that they made such
writing as the repository of all terms of the agreement, and whatever is not found in the said writing must
be considered as waived and abandoned.
 Condition precedent may be established by parol evidence because there is no varying of the terms of the
written contract by extrinsic agreement because there is no contract in existence. There is nothing in
which to apply the excluding rule. Conditions subsequently may not be established by parol evidence since
a written contract already exists.
 The present rule now requires that the admissibility of subsequent agreements be conditioned upon its
being put in issue
 REQUISITES FOR APPLICATION OF THE RULE –
 1. There must be a valid contract;
 2. The terms of the agreement must be reduced to writing. The term agreement includes wills;
 3. The dispute is between the parties or their successor-in-interest; and
 4. There is dispute as to the terms of the agreement.
 Parol evidence rule does not apply, and may not be properly invoked, by either party to the litigation
against the other, where at least one party to the suit is not a party or privy of a party to the written
instrument in question and does not base a claim or assert a right originating in the instrument of the
relation established thereby. Thus, if one of the parties to the case is a complete stranger to the contract
involved therein, he is not bound by this rule and can introduce extrinsic evidence against the efficacy of
the writing.
 Parol evidence rule applies to agreements, i.e., contractual obligations. However, the term “agreement”
includes wills. Therefore, there can be no evidence of the terms of the will other than the contents of the
will itself.
 While parol evidence applies to wills, an express trust concerning an immovable or any interest therein
may not be proved by parol evidence.
 MISTAKE – the mistake contemplated is one which is a mistake of fact mutual to both parties.
 Even when a document appears on its face to be a sale, the owner of the property may prove that the
contract is really a loan with mortgage by raising as an issue the fact that the document does not express
the true intent of the parties. In this case, parol evidence then becomes competent and admissible to
prove that the instrument was in truth and fact given merely as a security for the repayment of a loan.
 KINDS OF AMBIGUITIES
 INTRINSIC OR LATENT - On its face, the writing appears clear and unambiguous but there are collateral
matters which make the meaning uncertain
 Curable by evidence aliunde.
 Where the document refers to a particular person or thing but there are two or more persons having the
same name or two or more things to which the description in the writing may apply.
 EXTRINSIC OR PATENT - Ambiguity is apparent on the face of the writing and requires that something to
be added to make the meaning certain.
 Cannot be cured by evidence aliunde because it is only intrinsic not extrinsic ambiguity which serves as an
exception to the parol evidence rule
 Where the contract refers to an unidentified grantee or does not particularly identify the subject matter
thereof such that, in either case the text does not disclose who are or what is referred to.
 INTERMEDIATE - Ambiguity consists in the use of equivocal words susceptible of two or more
interpretation
 Curable by evidence aliunde
 Use of terms such as “dollars” “tons” and “ounces”.
 FAILURE OF THE WRITTEN AGREEMENT TO EXPRESS THE TRUE INTENT OF THE PARTIES - Parol evidence
may be admitted to show the true consideration of the contract, or the want or illegality thereof, or the
incapacity of the parties, or the fact that the contract was fictitious or absolutely simulated, or that there
was fraud in inducement. Despite the meeting of the minds, the true agreement of the parties is not
reflected in the instrument.
 In an action for reformation of instrument, the plaintiff may introduce parol evidence to show the real
intention of the parties. An action for reformation presupposes that a meeting of the minds exists
between the parties, i.e., there is a contract between them although the instrument that evidences the
contract does not reflect the true agreement of the parties by reason of, for instance, fraud or mistake.
 Ruling - As an exception to the parol evidence rule, a party may present evidence to modify explain or add
to the terms of the written agreement if he puts in issue in his pleading the failure of the written
agreement to express the true intent and agreement of the parties thereto. Here, P has alleged in her
complaint that the promissory note does not express the true intent and agreement of the parties. Parol
evidence rule may be admitted to show the true consideration of the contract.
 ORIGINAL DOCUMENT RULE - Not available or there is a dispute as to whether said writing is original
 Prohibits the introduction of secondary evidence in lieu of the original document regardless of
whether it varies the contents of the original
 Applies to all kinds of writings
 Can be invoked by any party to an action whether he has participated in the writing involved
 PAROL EVIDENCE RULE - Presupposes that the original document is available in court
 Prohibits the varying of the terms of a written agreement
 Applies only to agreements (contracts) and wills
 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.
 Failure to invoke the benefits of the rule constitutes as waiver of the rule. Inadmissible evidence may be
rendered admissible by failure to object.
 Even if the parol evidence is admitted, it does not mean that the court would give probative value to the
parol evidence. Admissibility is not the equivalent of probative value or credibility.
 Considering the agreement’s mistake, imperfection or supposed failure to express the parties’ true intent
was successfully put in issue in the complaint, this case falls under the exceptions. Accordingly, the
testimonial and documentary parol evidence sought to be introduced, which attest to these supposed
flaws and what they aver to have been the parties’ true intent, may be admitted and considered. However,
this admission and availability for consideration is no guarantee of how exactly the parol evidence
adduced shall be appreciated by the court. They do not guarantee the probative value, if any, that shall be
attached to them.
 Parol Evidence Rule is related to the “Plain Meaning Rule” and “Four Corners Rule” - parol evidence rule
forbids any addition to or contradiction of the terms of a written instrument by testimony or other
evidence purporting to show that, at or before the execution of the parties' written agreement, other or
different terms were agreed upon by the parties, varying the purport of the written contract. Related to
this is the plain meaning rule and the four corners rule. The cardinal rule in the interpretation of contracts
is embodied in the first paragraph of Article 1370 of the Civil Code: if the terms of a contract are clear and
 leave no doubt upon the intention of the contracting parties, the literal meaning of its stipulations shall
control. This provision is akin to the "plain meaning rule", which assumes that the intent of the parties to
an instrument is embodied in the writing itself, and when the words are clear and unambiguous the intent
is to be discovered only from the express language of the agreement. It also resembles the "four corners"
rule, a principle which allows courts in some cases to search beneath the semantic surface for clues to
meaning. A court's purpose in examining a contract is to interpret the intent of the contracting parties, as
objectively manifested by them. The process of interpreting a contract requires the court to make a
preliminary inquiry as to whether the contract before it is ambiguous. If the contract is determined to be
ambiguous, then the interpretation of the contract is left to the court, to resolve the ambiguity in the light
of the intrinsic evidence.

F. Testimonial Evidence (Rule 130, C)

 Testimonial or oral evidence is an evidence elicited from the mouth of a witness. 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.
 A witness is one who, being present, personally sees or perceives a thing, a beholder, spectator or
eyewitness. One who testifies to what he has seen or heard, or otherwise observed

1. Qualifications of Witnesses
 All persons who can perceive, and perceiving, can make known their perception to others, may be
witnesses.
 Religious or political belief, interest in the outcome of the case, or conviction of a crime, unless
otherwise provided by law, shall not be a ground for disqualification.
 Basic Qualifications of a Witness
 1. He/she can perceive
 Corollary to perception is that the witness must have personal knowledge of the facts
surrounding the subject matter of his testimony
 2. He/she can make known his perception
 This means that he/she must have the ability to remember and communicate the
remembered perception
 3. He/she must take an oath or affirmation
 4. He/she must not possess any of the disqualifications
 A deaf-mute is competent to be a witness so long as he/she has the faculty to make observations
and he/she can make those observations known to others.
 Parties declared in default are not disqualified from taking the witness stand for non-disqualified
parties. The law does not provide default as an exception.
 There is no substantive or procedural rule which requires a witness for a party to present some form
of authorization to testify as a witness for the party presenting him or her.
 There is no provision of the Rules disqualifying parties declared in default from taking the witness
stand for non-disqualified parties.
 It is axiomatic that truth is established not by the number of witnesses but by the quality of their
testimonies. The testimony of a single witness, if positive and credible, is sufficient to support a
conviction even in a charge of murder.
 The number of witnesses does not determine the outcome of the case. A positive identification will
prevail over the defense of alibi, the latter being considered a weaker defense since it can be easily
fabricated.
 Drug abuse will not render a person incompetent to testify. Drug abuses becomes relevant only if
the witness was under the influence of drugs at the time he is testifying.
 The relationship of a witness with a party does not ipso facto render him a biased witness in a
criminal case and likewise in a civil case.
 Inconsistencies in the testimonies of prosecution witnesses that do not relate to the elements of the
offense are too inconsequential to warrant a reversal of the trial court’s judgement of conviction.
Also, the defenses of denial and frame-up must be substantiated with clear and convincing
evidence; otherwise, the same cannot prevail over the positive and credible testimonies of the
prosecution witnesses.

 Presumption of competency of a witness

 GR: A person who takes the witness stand, is presumed to be qualified to testify. A party who
desires to question the competence of a witness must do so by making an objection as soon as the
facts tending to show incompetency are apparent.
 A prospective witness must show that he has the following abilities:
 1. To observe – the testimonial quality of perception
 2. To remember – the testimonial quality of memory;
 3. To relate – the testimonial quality of narration; and
 4. To recognize a duty to tell the truth – the testimonial quality of sincerity.
 XPNs: There is prima facie evidence of incompetency in the following:
 1. The fact that a person has been recently found of unsound mind by a court of competent
jurisdiction; or
 2. That one is an inmate of an asylum.
 When Determined - Qualification of a witness is determined at the time the said witness is
produced for examination or at the taking of their depositions
 With respect to children of tender years, competence at the time of the occurrence is also taken
into account.
 Burden of proof - Upon the party objecting to the competency of a witness to establish the ground
of incompetency
 Remedy for Errors or Questions on Competence - Appeal, not certiorari, is the proper remedy for
the correction of any error as to the competency of a witness committed by an inferior court in the
course of the trial
 Credibility of a Witness - A testimony must not only come from a credible witness, but must be
credible in itself, tested by human experience, observation, common knowledge and accepted
conduct that has evolved through the years.
 Credibility has nothing to do with the law or the rules. It refers to the weight and trustworthiness or
reliability of the testimony
 Mental unsoundness of the witness which occurred at the time of taking his testimony, affects only
his credibility. Nevertheless, as long as the witness can convey ideas by words or signs and give
sufficiently intelligent answers to questions propounded, she is a competent witness even if she is
feeble-minded or is a mental retardate or is a schizophrenic
 GR: Questions concerning the credibility of a witness are best addressed to the sound discretion of
the trial court as it is in the best position to observe his demeanor and bodily movements
 XPNs:
 1. The lower court has reached a conclusion that are clearly unsupported by evidence; or
  2. It has overlooked some facts or circumstances of weight and influence which, if considered,
would affect the result of the case
 COMPETENCY OF WITNESS - Refers to the basic qualifications of a witness.
 It is a matter of law or a matter of rule.
 It also includes the absence of any of the disqualifications imposed upon a witness
 CREDIBILITY OF WITNESS - Refers to the believability of a witness
 Refers to the weight and trustworthiness or the reliability of the testimony.
 GR: Discrepancies between the statements of the affiant in his affidavit and those made by him or
her on the witness stand do not necessarily discredit him or her because it is a matter of judicial
experience that an affidavit, being taken ex parte, is almost always incomplete and often inaccurate.
 XPN: The credibility of witnesses will be impaired if:
 1. The omission in the affidavit refers to a very important detail of the incident that one relating
the incident as an eyewitness would not be expected to fail to mention; or
 The point of inquiry is whether the omission is important or substantial.
 2. When the narration in the sworn statement substantially contradicts the testimony in court
 It is a jurisprudentially conceded rule that it is against human nature for a young girl to fabricate a
story that would expose herself as well as her family to a lifetime of shame, especially when her
charge could mean the death or lifetime imprisonment of her own father. AAA was without a doubt
telling the truth when she declared that her father raped her. The attempt to discredit the testimony
of AAA by the accused deserves no merit. When credibility is in issue, the Court generally defers to
the findings of the trial court considering that it was in a better position to decide the question,
having heard the witnesses themselves and observed their deportment during trial. Here, there is
nothing from the records that would impel this Court to deviate from the findings and conclusions
of the trial court as affirmed by the CA.

2. Disqualifications of Witnesses
 Effect of Interest in the Subject Matter - A person is not disqualified by reason of his interest in the
subject matter
 Interest only affects credibility, not competency
 Effect of Relationship – GR: Mere relationship does not impair credibility
 Exception - To warrant rejection, it must be clearly shown that
 a. Testimony was inherently improbable or defective
 b. Improper/evil motives had moved the witness to incriminate falsely
 Dead Man’s Statute – deleted
 In Case Person Is Convicted of a Crime
 GR: Not disqualified. The fact that a witness has been convicted of felony is a circumstance to be
taken into consideration as affecting his character and credibility.
 XPNs: Otherwise provided by law, e.g. under Art. 821 of the Civil Code, a person convicted of any of
the following crimes cannot be a witness to a will
 a. Falsification of documents,
 b. Perjury; or
 c. False testimony
 ABSOLUTE DISQUALIFICATION - The proposed witness is prohibited to take the witness stand.
 Disqualification by reason of marriage
 RELATIVE DISQUALIFICATION - The proposed witness is prohibited to testify only on certain matters
due to interest or relationship, or to privileges of other parties
 Disqualification by reason of privilege communication.
a) Disqualification by Reason of Marriage
 During their marriage, the husband or the wife cannot testify against the other without the
consent of the affected spouse,
 except in a civil case by one against the other, or in a criminal case for a crime committed by
one against the other or the latter's direct descendants or ascendants.
 Rationale
 a. There is identity of interests between husband and wife;
 b. If one were to testify against the other, there is a consequent danger of perjury;
 c. Policy of the law is to guard the security and confidence of private life, and to prevent
domestic disunion and unhappiness; and
 d. Where there is want of domestic tranquility, there is danger of punishing one spouse
through the hostile testimony of the other

 Requisites
 1. The spouse against whom the testimony of the other is offered is a party to the case;
 2. That the spouses are legally married (valid until annulled)
 3. That the testimony is offered during the existence of the marriage; and
 4. That the case is not by one against the other
 Exceptions
 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 latter’s direct
descendants or ascendants;
 4. Where the testimony was made after the dissolution of the marriage; or
 5. Where the spouse-party fails to raise the disqualifications, it is deemed a waiver
 Waiver of spousal immunity - Objections to the competency of a husband or wife to testify
in a criminal prosecution against the other may be waived as in the case of the other
witnesses generally. Thus, the accused waives his or her privilege by calling the other spouse
as a witness for him or her. It is also true that objection to the spouse’s competency must be
made when he or she is first offered as witness, and that the incompetency may be waived
by failure of the accused to make timely objection to the admission of the spouse’s
testimony, although knowing of such incompetency, and the testimony is admitted.
 Extent of prohibition - prohibition extends not only to a testimony adverse to the spouse. It
also extends to both criminal and civil cases and not only consists of utterances but also the
production of documents
 Duration
 General Rule: During their marriage
 Exception: Where the marital and domestic relations are so strained that there is no
more harmony to be preserved nor peace and tranquility which may be disturbed, the
reason based upon such harmony and tranquility fails. In such a case, identity of
interests disappears, and the consequent danger of perjury based on that identity is
non-existent.
 Scope of Rule - rule also includes utterance as to facts or mere production of
documents. It does not only prevent disclosure of matters communicated in nuptial
confidence but is an absolute prohibition against the spouse’s testifying to any facts
affecting the other however these facts may have been acquired
 Who can claim spousal immunity - privilege to object may be claimed only by the spouse-
party and not the other spouse who is offered as a witness
 Testimony where spouse is accused with others - spouse could testify in a murder case
against the other co-accused who were jointly tried with the accused-spouse. This testimony
cannot, however, be used against the accused-spouse directly or through the guise of taking
judicial notice of the proceedings in the murder case without violating the martial
disqualification rule, if the testimony is properly objected.
 Marrying the witness - accused can effectively “seal the lips” of a witness by marrying the
witness. As long as a valid marriage is in existence at the time of the trial, the witness-
spouse cannot be compelled to testify – even where the crime charged is against the
witness’ person, and even though the marriage was entered into for the express purpose of
suppressing the testimony.
 Waiver of Disqualification - one spouse imputes the commission of a crime against the
other, the latter may testify against the former
 Spouses as Co-accused - other cannot be called as an adverse party witness under this Rule
 Ruling - While neither the husband nor the wife may testify against the other without the
consent of the affected spouse, one exception is if the testimony of the spouse is in a
criminal case for a crime committed by one against the other or the latter’s direct
descendant or ascendants. Here, C is the direct descendant of B, the wife of A. Hence, the
testimony of B falls under the exception to the marital disqualification rule.
 The marital disqualification rule applies this time. One of the exceptions to the marital
disqualification rule is when the testimony is given in a civil case by one spouse against the
other. Here, the case involves a case by C for the recovery of personal property against B’s
spouse A.

b) Disqualification by Reason of Privileged Communications; Rule on Third Parties

 Privilege is a rule of law that, to protect a particular relationship or interest, either permits a
witness to refrain from giving testimony he otherwise could be compelled to give, or
permits someone usually one of the parties, to prevent the witness from revealing certain
information.
 Privilege may only be invoked by the persons protected thereunder. It may also be waived
by the same persons, either impliedly or expressly
 Scope - Applies to both civil and criminal cases except doctor-patient privilege, which is
applicable only in civil cases. Unless waived, disqualification remains even after the various
relationships therein have ceased to exist.
 Rule on third parties - communication shall remain privilege, even in the hands of a third
person who may have obtained the information, provided that the original parties to the
communication took reasonable precaution to protect its confidentiality.
 Disqualification by reason of privileged communications. - The following persons cannot
testify as to matters learned in confidence in the following cases:
 (a) The husband or the wife, during or after the marriage, cannot be examined
without the consent of the other as to any communication received in confidence
by one from the other during the marriage except in a civil case by one against the
other, or in a criminal case for a crime committed by one against the other or the
latter's direct descendants or ascendants.
 Husband and Wife - Also known as marital privilege
 Rationale - Confidential nature of the privilege; to preserve marital and domestic relations.
 Elements
 1. The husband or the wife
 2. During or after the marriage
 3. Cannot be examined
  4. Without the consent of the other
 5. As to any communication received in confidence by one from the other during the
marriage
 Except: Spouse may testify against the other even without the consent of the latter
 1. In a civil case by one against the other, or
 2. In a criminal case for a crime committed by one against the other or the latter’s
direct descendants or ascendants
 3. Information acquired by a spouse before the marriage even if received
confidentially will not fall squarely within the privilege.
 A widow of a victim allegedly murdered may testify as to her husband’s dying declaration as
to how he died since the same was not intended to be confidential

 Requisites for the application of marital privilege

 1. Valid marriage;
 2. Communication received in confidence by one from the other;
 3. Confidential communication received during the marriage;
 4. The spouse against whom such evidence is being offered has not given his or her
consent to such testimony
 When can be Invoked
 DISQUALIFICATION BY REASON OF MARRIAGE
 Only if one of the spouses is a party to the action
 DISQUALIFICATION BY REASON OF MARITAL PRIVILEGE
 Can be claimed whether the other spouse is a party to the action
 Coverage
 DISQUALIFICATION BY REASON OF MARRIAGE
 Includes facts, occurrences or information even prior to the marriage
 DISQUALIFICATION BY REASON OF MARITAL PRIVILEGE
 Only to confidential information received during the marriage
 Duration
 DISQUALIFICATION BY REASON OF MARRIAGE
 Applies only if the marriage is existing at the time the testimony is offered
 DISQUALIFICATION BY REASON OF MARITAL PRIVILEGE
 Even after the marriage has been dissolved
 Limitations
 DISQUALIFICATION BY REASON OF MARRIAGE
 Total prohibition against any testimony against the spouse of the witness
 Can no longer be invoked once the marriage is dissolved
 DISQUALIFICATION BY REASON OF MARITAL PRIVILEGE
 Only to confidential communications between the spouses
 The spouse affected by the disclosure of the information or testimony may object
even after the dissolution of the marriage
 Not affected by the death of the other spouse
 In both cases, it is essential that the marriage be valid in order to claim such privilege
 Other items of communication overheard or in presence of third parties
 GR: Third persons who, without the knowledge of the spouses, overhear the communication
are not disqualified to testify.
 XPN: When there is collusion and voluntary disclosure to a third party, that third party
becomes an agent and cannot testify.
 Ruling - Irrespective of the fact that B was informed of the killing before her marriage to A,
the testimony was offered during their marriage, which brings it into the ambit of the
marital disqualification rule.
 The testimony even if confidential was not communicated to B during the time of marriage,
but before the marriage.
 He can only object based on the marital disqualification rule if the testimony was offered
during their marriage and not to testimony offered after the dissolution of the marriage. The
proper objection must be based on marital privilege rule, because such defense is applicable
even after the dissolution of marriage provided that the communication was made
confidentially to B during their marriage.
 Ruling - testimony and affidavit of the wife are evidence used in the case against her
husband for child prostitution involving her daughter, the evidence are admissible. The
marital privilege communication rule, as well as the marital disqualification rule, do not
apply to and cannot be invoked in a criminal case committed by a spouse against the direct
descendants of the other
 Ruling - Under the privilege communication rule, the husband or the wife, during or after
the marriage, cannot be examined without the consent of the other as to any
communication received in confidence by one from the other except during the marriage
except in civil cases filed by one against the other, or in a criminal case for a crime
committed by against the other or the latter’s direct descendant or ascendant. In this case,
A cannot prevent J from testifying against her since the petition for declaration of nullity is a
civil case filed by one spouse against the other; hence, the rule on privileged communication
between spouses does not apply. J could testify on the confidential psychiatric evaluation
report of his wife that he obtained from the secretary of the psychiatrist, without offending
the rule on privileged communication.

(b) An attorney or person reasonably believed by the client to be licensed to engage in

the practice of law cannot, without the consent of the client, be examined as to any
communication made by the client to him or her, or his or her advice given thereon in
the course of, or with a view to, professional employment, nor can an attorney's
secretary, stenographer, or clerk, or other persons assisting the attorney be examined
without the consent of the client and his or her employer, concerning any fact the
knowledge of which has been acquired in such capacity, except in the following cases.

 (i) Furtherance of crime or fraud. If the services or advice of the lawyer were
sought or obtained to enable or aid anyone to commit or plan to commit what
the client knew or reasonably should have known to be a crime or fraud;
 (ii) Claimants through same deceased client. As to a communication relevant to
an issue between parties who claim through the same deceased client,
regardless of whether the claims are by testate or intestate or by inter vivos
transaction;
 (iii) Breach of duty by lawyer or client. As to a communication relevant to an
issue of breach of duty by the lawyer to his or her client, or by the client to his
or her lawyer;
 (iv) Document attested by the lawyer. As to a communication relevant to an
issue concerning an attested document to which the lawyer is an attesting
witness; or
 (v) Joint clients. As to a communication relevant to a matter of common
interest between two or more clients if the communication was made by any of
 them to a lawyer retained or consulted in common, when offered in an action
between any of the clients, unless they have expressly agreed otherwise.
 ATTORNEY AND CLIENT
 Requisites
 1. There must be a communication made by the client to the attorney, or and advice
given by the attorney to his client;
 2. The communication or advice must be given in confidence; and
 3. The communication or advice must be given either in the course of the professional
employment or with a view of professional employment.
 The rules of safeguarding privileged communications between attorney and client shall
apply to similar communications made to or received by the law student, acting for the legal
clinic.
 The privilege does not extend to:
 a. communications where the client’s purpose is the furtherance of a future intended
crime or fraud, or
 b. for the purpose of committing a crime or a tort, or
 c. those made in furtherance of an illicit activity
 Purpose. To encourage full disclosure by client to her attorney of all pertinent matters, so as
to further the administration of justice.
 Test in applying the attorney-client privilege - whether the communications are made to an
attorney with a view of obtaining from him professional assistance or advice regardless of
whether there is a pending or merely impending litigation or any litigation.
 The present rule do not require a perfected attorney-client relationship for the privilege to
exist. It is enough that the communication or advice be “with a view to” professional
employment.
 Further, the scope of this privilege is extended not only to the Attorney but also to those
persons reasonably believed by the client to be licensed to engage in the practice of law.
 Confidential communication - Refers to information transmitted by voluntary act of
disclosure between atty and client in confidence and by means which, so far as the client is
aware, discloses the information to no third persons other than one reasonably necessary
for the transmission of the information or the accomplishment of the purpose for which it
was given
 Waiver of Atty-client privilege - The privilege belongs to the client and if he waives the
privilege, no one else, including the atty can invoke it.
 Doctrine of absolute privilege - A communication is absolutely privilege when it is not
actionable, even if the author had acted in bad faith
 Includes allegations or statements made by parties or their counsel in pleadings or motions
or during the hearing of judicial and administrative proceedings, as well as answers given by
the witness in reply to questions propounded to them in the course of said proceedings,
provided that said allegations or statements are relevant to the issues, and the answers are
responsive to the questions propounded to said witnesses.
 The absolute privilege remains regardless of the defamatory tenor and the presence of
malice, if the statement are relevant, pertinent or material to the cause in and or subject of
the inquiry.
 Communications not covered by the privilege
 1. Intended to be made public;
 2. Intended to be communicated to others;
 3. Intended for an unlawful purpose;
  The privilege does not extend to communications where the client’s purpose is
the furtherance of a future intended crime or fraud, or for the purpose of
committing a crime or a tort, or those made in furtherance of an illicit activity.
 4. Received from third persons not acting in behalf or as agents of the client; or
 5. Made in the presence of third parties who are strangers to the attorney-client
relationship
 When applicable
 1. Privilege is not confined to communications regarding actual pending cases. It may
also refer to anticipated litigations.
 2. Communications may be oral or written but it is deemed to extend to other forms of
conduct, like physical demonstration;
 3. The statement of the client need not be made to the attorney in person. Those made
to attorney’s secretary, clerk or stenographer for purpose of professional relationship,
or those knowledge acquired by such employees in such capacity; and
 4. In an action filed for payment of attorney’s fees or for damages against the
negligence of the attorney.
 Elements
 As regards an attorney or any person reasonably believed by the client to be licensed to
engage in the practice of law
 1. Without the consent of his client
 2. Cannot be examined as to
 a. Any communication made by the client to him/her, or
 b. His/her advice given thereon in the course of, or with a view to, professional
employment
 As regards an attorney’s secretary, stenographer, clerk, or other persons assisting the
attorney
 1. Without the consent of the client and his/her employer
 2. Cannot be examined
 3. Concerning any fact the knowledge of which has been acquired in such capacity
 Subject-matter of the Privilege
 1. Communications
 2. Observations by the lawyer (regardless of medium of transmission which may
include oral or written words and actions)
 3. Tangible evidence delivered to a lawyer
 4. Documents entrusted to a lawyer
 When not applicable
 1. Furtherance of a crime or fraud/Future crime-fraud exception.
 If the services or advice of the lawyer were sought or obtained to enable or aid
anyone to commit or plan to commit what the client knew or reasonably should
have known to be a crime or fraud;
 The rationale for this exception is that clients are not entitled to use lawyers to
help them in pursuing unlawful or fraudulent objectives. If the privilege were to
cloak such activity, the result would be loss of public confidence and corruption
of profession.
 The policy or the privilege is that of promoting the administration of justice and it
would be a perversion of the privilege to extend it to the client who seeks advice
to aid him in carrying out an illegal fraudulent scheme. This would be
tantamount to participating in a conspiracy.
  2. Claimants through same deceased client.
 As to communication relevant to an issue between the parties who claim through
the same deceased client, regardless of whether the claims are by testate or
intestate or by inter vivos transaction.
 While the atty-client privilege survives the death of the client, there is no
privilege in a will contest or other case between parties who both claim through
that very client. This is because his communications may be essential to an
accurate resolution of competing claims of succession, and the testator would
presumably favor disclosure in order to dispose of his estate accordingly.

 3. Breach of duty by lawyer or client/self-defense exception.

 As to communication relevant to an issue of breach of duty by the lawyer to his
or her client, or by the client to his or her lawyer.
 If the lawyer and client become involved in a dispute between themselves
concerning the services provided by the lawyer, the privilege does not apply to
their dispute. Thus, where a client alleges breach of duty on the part of the
lawyer, i.e., professional malpractice, incompetence, or ethical violations – or
where the lawyer sues a client for his fee, either the lawyer or client may testify
as to communications between them. -In theory, the client has impliedly waived
the privilege by making allegations of breach of duty against the lawyer.
 4. Document attested by the lawyer
 As to communication to an issue concerning an attested document to which the
lawyer is an attesting witness;
 5. Joint clients
 As to communication relevant to a matter of common interest between two or
more clients if the communication was made by any of them to a lawyer retained
or consulted in common, when offered in action between any of the clients,
unless they have expressly agreed otherwise.
 The rationale for the exception is that joint clients do not intend their
communications to be confidential from each other, and typically their
communications are made in each other’s presence. Agreeing to joint
representation means that each joint client accepts the risk that another join
client may later use what he or she has said to the lawyer.
 Applicability of the rule regarding the identity of the client
 GR: A lawyer may not invoke the privilege and refuse to divulge the name or identity of his
client
 XPNs:
 1. Where a strong possibility exists that revealing the client’s name would implicate the
client in the very activity for which he sought the lawyer’s advice;
 2. Where the disclosure would open the client to civil liability;
 3. Last link doctrine – Where the government’s lawyers have no case against an
attorney’s client unless, by revealing the client’s name, the said name would furnish the
only link that would form the chain of testimony necessary to convict an individual for a
crime.
 Ruling - No. The subpoena may not be simply quashed on the allegation that the testimony
to be elicited constitutes privilege communication. It may be noted that the accused
committed the crime swindling on Aug 15, 2008, whereas he first visited his lawyer on Aug
14, 2008 or before he committed the swindling.
 Clearly, the conversations the accused had with his lawyer before he committed the
swindling cannot be protected by the privilege between atty and client because the crime
had not been committed yet and it is no part of a lawyer’s professional duty to assist or aid
in the commission of a crime; hence not in the course of professional employment.
 The second visit by accused E to his lawyer on the next day Aug 16, 2008 after the swindling
was committed may also suffer from the same infirmity as the conversations had during
their first meeting inasmuch as there could not be a complaint made immediately after the
estafa was committed. The privilege may not be invoked as it is not a ground for quashal of a
subpoena ad testificandum

 Ruling - The documents and information sought to be disclosed are not privileged. They are
evidentiary matters which will eventually be disclosed during the trials. Privileged matters
are: (a) communications made by the client to the attorney or (b) the advice given by the
atty, in the course of, or with the view to professional employment.
 The information sought is neither a communication by the client to the atty nor an advice by
the atty to his client

(c) A physician, psychotherapist or person reasonably believed by the patient to be

authorized to practice medicine or psychotherapy cannot in a civil case, without the
consent of the patient, be examined as to any confidential communication made for
the purpose of diagnosis or treatment of the patient's physical, mental or emotional
condition, including alcohol or drug addiction, between the patient and his or her
physician or psychotherapist. This privilege also applies to persons, including
members of the patient's family, who have participated in the diagnosis or treatment
of the patient under the direction of the physician or psychotherapist.

 Physician and patient

 A "psychotherapist" is:
 (a) A person licensed to practice medicine engaged in the diagnosis or treatment of a
mental or emotional condition, or
 (b) A person licensed as a psychologist by the government while similarly engaged.
 For one to be considered a psychotherapist a medical doctor need only be licensed to
practice medicine and need not be a psychiatrist, whereas a psychologist must be licensed
by the government.
 Requisites for the applicability of the privilege
 1. The privilege is claimed in a civil case;
 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.
 2. The person against whom the privilege is claimed is a physician, psychotherapist or
a person reasonably believed to be authorized to practice medicine or psychology;
and
 3. It refers to any confidential communication made for the purpose of diagnosis or
treatment of the patient’s physical, mental or emotional condition, including alcohol
or drug addiction.
 Purpose of the privilege - Intended to facilitate and make safe, full and confidential
disclosure by patient to doctor of all facts, circumstances, and symptoms, unrestricted by
apprehension of their subsequent and enforced disclosure and publication on the witness
 stand, to the end that the physician may form a correct opinion, and be enabled safely and
efficaciously to treat his patient
 To encourage the patient to open up to the physician, relate to him the history of his
ailment, and give him access to his body, enabling the physician to make a correct diagnosis
of that ailment and provide the appropriate cure. Any fear that a physician could be
compelled in the future to come to court and narrate all that had transpired between him
and the patient might prompt the latter to clam up, thus, putting his own health at great risk
 Does not apply to autopsy. There is no patient or treatment involved in autopsies, the
autopsy having been conducted on a dead person.
 Privilege is not limited to testimonial evidence because to compel physician to disclose
records or such documents would be in effect to compel him to testify against the patient.
 Discovery procedure cannot be used to access evidence that is otherwise inadmissible -
right to compel the production of documents has a limitation: the documents to be
disclosed are “not privileged.” Josielene of course claims that the hospital records subject of
this case are not privileged since it is the “testimonial” evidence of the physician that may
be regarded as privileged. Section 24(c) of Rule 130 states that the physician “cannot in a
civil case, without the consent of the patient, be examined” regarding their professional
conversation. The privilege, says Josielene, does not cover the hospital records, but only the
examination of the physician at the trial. To allow, however, the disclosure during discovery
procedure of the hospital records — the results of tests that the physician ordered, the
diagnosis of the patient’s illness, and the advice or treatment he gave him — would be to
allow access to evidence that is inadmissible without the patient’s consent. Physician
memorializes all these information in the patient’s records. Disclosing them would be the
equivalent of compelling the physician to testify on privileged matters he gained while
dealing with the patient, without the latter’s prior consent.
 Attending physician may testify as an expert provided that his opinion is strictly based on
hypothetical facts, excluding and disregarding any personal knowledge of the information on
the patient acquired to the physician-patient relationship
 Information which CANNOT be disclosed
 1. Any confidential communication made for the purpose of diagnosis or treatment of
the patient’s physical, mental or emotional condition, including alcohol or drug
addiction.
 2. Any information acquired by persons, including members of the patient’s family who
have participated in the diagnosis or treatment of the patient under the direction of the
physician or psychotherapist.
 Waiver of privilege by the patient: Express or implied
 1. By a contract, as in medical or life insurance;
 2. Disclosure by the patient of the information
 3. When the patient answers questions on matters which are supposedly privileged on
cross-examination
 4. By operation of law.
 Cases when the privilege is not applicable
 1. Communication was not given in confidence;
 2. Irrelevant to the professional employment;
 3. Made for an unlawful purpose
 4. Intended to be made public; or
 5. There was a waiver of the privilege either by provision of contract or law;
 6. Dentists, pharmacists or nurses are disqualified.
  XPN: If the third person is acting as an agent of the doctor in a professional
capacity.
 It is essential that at the time the communication was made, the professional relationship is
existing when the doctor was attending to the patient for curative, preventive or palliative
treatment. The treatment may have been given at the behest of another, the patient being
in extremis (in extreme circumstances at the point of death).
 This rule does not require that the relationship between the physician and the patient be a
result of a contractual relationship. It could be the result of a quasi-contractual relationship
as when the patient is seriously ill and the physician treats him even if he is not in a
condition to give his consent.
 Duration of privilege - privilege survives the death of the patient.
(d) A minister, priest or person reasonably believed to be so cannot, without the
consent of the affected person, be examined as to any communication or confession
made to or any advice given by him or her, in his or her professional character, in the
course of discipline enjoined by the church to which the minister or priest belongs.

 Priest and Penitent

 Elements
 1. A minister or priest or person reasonably believed to be so
 2. Without the consent of the affected person
 3. Cannot be examined as to any
 a. communication; or
 b. confession made to; or
 c. advice given by him/her
 4. in his/her professional character
 5. in the course of discipline enjoined by the church to which the minister or priest
belongs
 Purpose - Allow and encourage individuals to fulfill their religious, emotional or other needs
by protecting confidential disclosures to religious practitioners.
 Requisites for the applicability
 1. The communication, confession, or advice must have been made to the priest in his
professional character in the course of discipline enjoined by the church to which the
minister or priest belongs.
 2. Communication made must be confidential and must be penitential in character, e.g.,
under the seal of confessional.
 Privilege also extends not only to a confession made by the penitent but also to any advice
given by the minister or priest.
 Where the penitent discussed business arrangement with the priest, the privilege does not
apply.
 A third person who overhears the confession is not disqualified.
 The person making the confession holds the privilege. The priest or minister hearing the
confession in his professional capacity is prohibited from making a disclosure of the
confession without his consent.
 Ruling - N may not be allowed to testify against W. Under the Marital disqualification rule,
neither the husband nor the wife, during their marriage, may testify against the other
without the consent of the affected spouse, except in a civil case by one against the other, or
in a criminal case for a crime committed by one against the other or the latter’s direct
descendants or ascendants
 Foregoing exceptions cannot apply since it only extends to a criminal case of one spouse
against the other or the latter’s descendants or ascendants. Clearly, N is not the offended
party and her sister is not her direct ascendant or descendant for her to fall within the
exception
 The testimony of W’s psychiatrist may be allowed. The privileged communication
contemplated involves only persons authorized to practice medicine, surgery or obstetrics. It
does not include a Psychiatrist. Moreover, the privileged communication applies only in civil
cases and not in a criminal case for arson. Besides, the subject of the testimony of Dr. C was
not in connection with the advice or treatment given by him to W, or any information he
acquired in attending to W in a professional capacity. The testimony of Dr. C is limited only
to what he perceived at the vicinity of the fire and at about the time of the fire.
 The priest can testify over the objection of W. The disqualification requires that the same
were made pursuant to a religious duty enjoined in the course of discipline of the sect or
denomination to which they belong and must be confidential and penitential in character.
Here, the testimony of Fr. P was not previously subject of a confession of W or an advice
give by him to W in his professional character. The testimony was merely limited to what Fr.
P perceived ‘at the vicinity of the fire and at about the time of the fire

(e) A public officer cannot be examined during or after his or her tenure as to
communications made to him or her in official confidence, when the court finds that
the public interest would suffer by the disclosure. The communication shall remain
privileged, even in the hands of a third person who may have obtained the
information, provided that the original parties to the communication took reasonable
precaution to protect its confidentiality.

 Public officers
 Rationale - General grounds for public policy
 Right of the people to information on matters of public concern shall be recognized. Access
to official records, and to documents and papers pertaining to official acts, transactions, or
decisions, as well as to government research data used as basis for policy development,
shall be afforded to the citizen, subject to such limitations as may be provided by law.
 Requisites
 1. The holder of the privilege is the government, acting through a public officer;
 2. The communication was given to the public officer in official confidence;
 3. The communication was given during or after his or her tenure; and
 4. The public interest would suffer by the disclosure of the communication
 Cases when the privilege is inapplicable and disclosure will be compelled
 1. The disclosure is useful to vindicate the innocence of an accused person;
 2. To lessen the risk of false testimony;
 3. The disclosure is essential to the proper disposition of the case; or
 4. The benefit to be gained by a correct disposition of the litigation was greater than
any injury which could inure to the relation by a disclosure of information
 To invoke this rule, it must first be established that public interest would suffer by the
disclosure. In the case of closed bank, any disclosure of tapes and transcripts would not
pose danger or peril to the economy.
 The disclosure or non-disclosure is not dependent on the will of the officer but on the
determination by a competent court.
 Executive privilege - power of the President and other high-ranking executive officials to
withhold information from the public, the courts, and the Congress.
 This privilege, based on the constitutional doctrine of separation of powers, exempts the
executive from disclosure requirements applicable to the ordinary citizen or organization
where such exemption is necessary to the discharged of highly important executive
responsibilities involved in maintaining governmental operations, and extends not only to
military and diplomatic secrets but also to documents integral to an appropriate exercise of
the executive domestic decisional and policy making functions, that is, those documents
reflecting the frank expression necessary in intra-governmental advisory and deliberative
communications.
 There are types of information which the government may withhold from the public like
secrets involving military, diplomatic and national security matters, and information or
investigations of crimes by law enforcement agencies before the prosecution of the accused
were exempted from the right to information.
 It is a privilege which protects the confidentiality of conversations that take place in the
President’s performance of his official duties. The privilege may be invoked not only by the
President, but also by his close advisors under the “operational proximity test”.
 Requisites of Presidential Communications Privilege
 1. The protected communication must relate to a “quintessential and non-delegable
presidential power”
 2. The communication must be authored or “solicited and received” by a close advisor
of the president or the president himself. The judicial test is that an advisor must be in
operational proximity with the president;
 3. The presidential communication privilege remains a qualified privilege that may be
overcome by a showing of adequate need, such that the information sought “likely
contains important evidence” and by the unavailability of the information elsewhere by
an appropriate investigating authority.
 Ruling - The SC upheld Mr. R’s invocation of executive privilege (more specifically the
presidential communication privilege) stating that the disclosure might impair our
diplomatic as well as economic relations with China.
 Deliberative Process Privilege - protects from disclosure advisory opinions,
recommendations, and deliberations comprising part of a process by which are
governmental decisions and policies are formulated.
 Written advice from variety of individuals is an important element of the government’s
decision-making process and the interchange of advice could be stifled if courts forced the
government to disclose these recommendations; thus the privilege is intended to prevent
the “chilling” of deliberative communications
 Applies if its purpose is served, that is, to protect the frank exchange of ideas and opinions
critical to the government’s decision-making process where disclosure would discourage
such discussion in the future.
 Rule on Third Parties. — The communication shall remain privileged, EVEN IN THE HANDS
OF A THIRD PERSON who may have obtained the information, provided that the original
parties to the communication took reasonable precaution to protect its confidentiality.

c) Parental and Filial Privilege Rule

 Parental and filial privilege. - No person shall be compelled to testify against his or her
parents, other direct ascendants, children or other direct descendants, except when such
testimony is indispensable in a crime against that person or by one parent against the other.
 It is a privilege which consists of exempting the witness, having attended the court where
his testimony is desired, from disclosing a certain part of his knowledge.
 Two-types of privilege
 1. Parental privilege rule – a parent cannot be compelled to testify against his child or other
direct descendant.
 A person, however, may testify against his parents or children voluntarily but if he
refuses to do so, the rule protects him from any compulsion. Said rule applies to both
criminal and civil cases since the rule makes no distinction.
 2. Filial privilege rule – a child may not be compelled to testify against his parents, or other
direct descendants.
 Applies only to “direct ascendants and descendants, a family tie connected by a
common ancestry – a stepdaughter has no common ancestry by her stepmother.
 An adopted child is covered by the rule.
 Criminal cases
 GR: No descendant shall be compelled, in a criminal case, to testify against his parents and
grandparents
 XPNs - The descendant may be compelled to give his testimony in the following instances
 1. When such testimony is indispensable in a crime committed against said descendant;
 2. In a crime committed by one parent against the other.
 Ruling - The competency of his son is not affected by the filial privilege rule. The rule is not
strictly speaking a disqualification but refers to a privilege not to testify, which can be
invoked and waived like other privileges. The son was not compelled to testify against his
father but chose to waive that filial privilege when he voluntarily testified against the
accused.
 C is not a direct descendant of A but that of B, being the mother of the latter. Thus, the
privilege does not belong to A
 The Child witness rule provides that every child is presumed qualified to be a witness
 1. The rule on marital privilege does not apply in the annulment case because it is a civil
case filed by one against the other.
 2. W cannot invoke the privilege which belongs to the child, C may testify if he wants to
although he may not be compelled to do so.
 3. D, as a doctor who used to treat W, is disqualified to testify against W over her objection
as to any advice or treatment given by him or any information which he may have acquired
in his professional capacity

d) Privilege Relating to Trade Secrets

 Privilege relating to trade secrets. - A person cannot be compelled to testify about any
trade secret, unless the non-disclosure will conceal fraud or otherwise work injustice. When
disclosure is directed, the court shall take such protective measure as the interest of the
owner of the trade secret and of the parties and the furtherance of justice may require.
 Trade secret – a secret formula or process not patented, but known only to certain
individuals using it in compounding some article of trade having a commercial value. Trade
secrets are privilege matters whose disclosure is proscribed and penalized under the SEC
and the RPC
 Trade secret should receive greater protection from discovery, because they derive
economic value from being generally unknown and not readily ascertainable by the public.
 Other privileged matters:
 1. The guardian ad litem shall not testify in any proceeding concerning any information,
statement, or opinion received from the child in the course of serving as guardian ad
litem, unless the court finds it necessary to promote the best interest of the child.
 2. Editorial Privilege – Editors may not be compelled to disclose the source of published
news.
  3. Voters may not be compelled to disclose for whom they voted
 4. Information contained in tax census returns
 5. Bank deposits, except in certain cases provided for by law
 6. Information and statements made at conciliation proceedings
 7. Institutions covered by the law and its officers and employees who communicate a
suspicious transaction to the AMLC
 8. Informer’s Privilege – The prosecutor may not be compelled to present an informer
to protect his identity and when his testimony would be merely corroborative and
cumulative
 Human security act provides that the name and identity of the informant on a
suspect in the crime of terrorism shall be considered confidential and shall not be
unnecessarily revealed until after the proceedings against the suspect shall have
been terminated.
 9. Media Practitioner’s Privilege
 GR: Without prejudice to his liability under civil and criminal law, any publisher, owner, duly
registered or accredited journalist, writer, reporter, contributor, opinion writer, editor,
columnist manager, media practitioner involved in the writing, editing, production, and
dissemination of news for mass circulation of any print, broadcast, wire service organization,
or electronic mass media cannot be compelled to reveal the source of any news item, report
or information appearing or being reported or disseminated through said media which was
related in confidence to the abovementioned media practitioners.
 XPN: Revelation can be compelled if the court or the Congress or any of its committee finds
that such revelation is demanded by the security of the State.
 On the ground of public policy, the rules providing for production and inspection of books
and papers do not authorize the production or inspection of privilege matter; that is, books
and papers which, because of their confidential and privilege character, could not be
received in evidence. Such a condition is in addition to the requisite that the items be
specifically described, and must constitute or contain evidence material to any matter
involved in the action and which are in the party’s possession, custody or control.

3. Testimonial Privilege
 Parental and filial privilege. - No person shall be compelled to testify against his or her
parents, other direct ascendants, children or other direct descendants, except when such
testimony is indispensable in a crime against that person or by one parent against the other.
 Privilege relating to trade secrets. - A person cannot be compelled to testify about any
trade secret, unless the non-disclosure will conceal fraud or otherwise work injustice. When
disclosure is directed, the court shall take such protective measure as the interest of the
owner of the trade secret and of the parties and the furtherance of justice may require
 Discussed above

4. Admissions and Confessions

 Admission of a party — The act, declaration or omission of a party as to a relevant fact may
be given in evidence against him or her.
 Admission - any statement of fact made by a party against his interest or unfavorable to the
conclusion for which he contends or is inconsistent with the facts alleged.
 1. The act, declaration or omission must have been made by a party or one by whom he
is legally bound;
 2. The admission must be as to relevant fact; and
 3. The admission may only be given in evidence against him
 Requisites
 1. They must involve matters of fact and not of law;
 2. Categorical and definite;
 3. Made knowingly and voluntarily;
 4. Must be adverse to the admitter’s interests, otherwise it would be self-serving and
admissible
 Express - It is a positive statement or act. Those made in definite, certain and unequivocal
language.
 Implied - It is one which may be inferred from the declaration or acts of a person. Therefore,
an admission may be implied from conduct, statement of silence of a party.
 Judicial - When made in the course of a judicial proceeding.
 Extrajudicial - Made out of court or even in a proceeding other than the one under
consideration
 Adoptive - It is a party’s reaction to a statement or action by another person when it is
reasonable to treat the party’s reaction as an admission of something stated or implied by
the other person. A third person’s statement becomes the admission of the party embracing
or espousing it. Adoptive admission may occur when a party:
 1. Expressly agrees to or concurs in an oral statement made by another;
 2. Hears a statement and later on essentially repeats it;
 3. Utters an acceptance or builds upon the assertion of another;
 4. Replies by way of rebuttal to some specific points raised by another but ignores
further points which he or she has heard the other make; or
 5. Reads and signs a written statement made by another
 JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS - Those made in the course of the proceeding in the same case.
 Do not require proof and may be contradicted only by showing that it was made through
palpable mistake or that the imputed admission was not, in fact, made
 Need not be offered in evidence since it is not evidence. It is superior to evidence and shall
be considered by the court in as established.
 Conclusive upon the person admitting it
 Subject to cross-examination
 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.
 Require formal offer for it to be considered
 Rebuttable
 Not subject to cross-examination
 ADMISSION - Statement of fact which does not involve an acknowledgement 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
 Express or tacit
 CONFESSION - Statement of fact which involves an acknowledgement of guilt or liability
 Can only be made by the party himself and, in some instances, are admissible against
his co-accused.
 Criminal cases only
 Must be express
 An admission, in general sense, includes confessions, the former being a broader term
because, accordingly, a confession is also an admission by the accused of the fact charged
against him or some fact essential to the charge.
 Self-serving declaration - One which has been made extra-judicially by the party to favor his
interest. It is not admissible in evidence because they are inherently untrustworthy, and
would open the door to fraud and fabrication of testimony.
 Inadmissible because the adverse party is not given the opportunity for crossexamination,
and their admission would encourage fabrication of testimony.
 Statements in affidavits are not sufficient to prove the existence of agricultural tenancy. It is
self-serving, it will not suffice to prove consent of the owner independent evidence is
necessary.
 An admission against interest is the best evidence which affords the greatest certainty of the
facts in dispute since no man would declare anything against himself unless such declaration
is true. Thus, an admission against interest binds the person who makes the same, and
absent any showing that this was made through palpable mistake, no amount of
rationalization can offset it.
 Ruling - The document is the best evidence which affords greater certainty of facts in
dispute. While the affidavit may have facilitated the release of the retirement benefits from
SSS, hence, beneficial to him at that time, it may still be considered as admission against
interest since the disserving quality of the admission is judged as of the time it is used or
offered in evidence and not when such admission was made. Thus, it matters not that the
admission was self-serving at the time it was made, so long as it is against A’s present claim.
 Rest inter alios acta rule - Res inter alios acta alteri nocere non debet
 This principle literally means “things done between strangers ought not to injure those who
are not parties to them”
 Reason: On principle of good faith and mutual convenience, a man’s own acts are binding
upon himself and are evidence against him. So are his conduct and declarations. It would
not only be rightly inconvenient but also manifestly unjust, that a man should be bound by
the acts of mere unauthorized strangers; and if a party ought not to be bound by the acts of
strangers, neither ought their acts or conduct be used as evidence against him.
 Two branches of res inter alios acta rule
 1. Admission by third party The rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by an act,
declaration or omission of another.
 2. Similar Acts Rule 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.
 The rule has reference to extrajudicial declarations. Hence, statements made in open court
by a witness implicating persons aside from him are admissible as declarations from one
who has personal knowledge of the facts testified to.
 The testimony of the accused against his co-accused in open court is considered as
admissible testimony and not subject of the res inter alios acta rule since such testimony is
subject to cross-examination.
 Admission by a third party
 GR: The act, declaration or omission made out of court of a party as to a relevant fact may
be given in evidence against him but may not be given in evidence against another person.
 XPN: Admissible when its admission is made by:
 1. A partner, during the existence of the partnership.
 2. An agent authorized by the party to make a statement concerning the subject or
within the scope of his or her authority, during the existence of the agency.
  3. A joint owner
 4. A joint debtor
 5. A person jointly interested with the party
 6. A conspirator
 7. A privy or successor in interest
 Ruling - F was not a party to the previous criminal case where P was the accused. The acts
or declarations of a person are not admissible against a third party. Only to parties to a case
are bound by a judgment of the trial court. Without presenting J to testify on her admission
during the previous criminal case, even if made in a previous judicial proceeding, it remains
an extrajudicial admission without any effect, insofar as the present action against F is
concerned.
 Admission by a co-partner or agent - act or declaration of a partner or agent authorized by
the party to make a statement concerning the subject, or within the scope of his or her
authority, and during the existence of the partnership or agency, may be given in evidence
against such party after the partnership or agency is shown by evidence other than such act
or declaration. The same rule applies to the act or declaration of a joint owner, joint debtor,
or other person jointly interested with the party.
 Requisites
 1. Act or declaration of a partner or agent of the party must be within the scope of his
authority;
 2. Admission was made during the existence of the partnership or agency;
 3. Existence of partnership or agency is proven by independent evidence other than
such act or declaration. The articles of incorporation or SPA may be presented for such
purpose.
 Any declaration made before the partnership or agency existed, or those made after, are not
admissible against the other partners or principal but remains admissible as against the
partner or agent making the declaration.
 The same rule applies to an act or declaration of a joint owner, joint debtor or other person
jointly interested with the party
 Dissolved partnership
 GR: Admissions made after a partnership has been dissolved do not fall within the exception
because such are made when the partnership ceased to exist.
 XPN: Where the admissions are made in connection with the winding up of the partnership
affairs, said admissions are still admissible as the partner is acting as agent of his co-partner
in said winding up.
 Ruling - The individual and separate admissions of each respondent shall bind all of them.
The declaration of a party is admissible against a party whenever a “privity of estate” exists
between the declarant and the party. It generally denotes a succession of rights. Without
doubt, privity exists among the respondents in this case. Where several co-parties exist, who
are jointly interested in the subject matter of the controversy, the admission of one is
competent against all.
 Joint Interests
 a. The joint interest must be first made to appear by evidence other than the admission
itself
 b. The admission must relate to the subject matter of joint interest
 The word “joint” must be construed according to its meaning in the common law system,
that is, in solidum for the whole
 A mere community of interests between several persons is not sufficient to make the
admissions of one admissible against all [Herrera]. Just like in partnership and agency, the
interest must be a subsisting one unless for the admission to be admissible
 Admission by a conspirator - act or declaration of a conspirator in furtherance of the
conspiracy and during its existence may be given in evidence against the co-conspirator after
the conspiracy is shown by evidence other than such act of declaration
 Conspiracy - A conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an agreement
concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it.
 Once conspiracy is proven, the act of one is the act of all. The statement therefore of one
may be admitted against the co-conspirators as an exception to the rule of res alios acta
 Requisites
 1. Declaration or act be made or done during the existence of the conspiracy;
 2. Must be in furtherance of the purpose and object of the conspiracy;
 3. Conspiracy must be shown by evidence other than the declaration or act (evidence
aliunde).
 Applies only to extrajudicial acts or admission and not to testimony at trial where the party
adversely affected has the opportunity to cross-examine the witness.
 In order for such admission to be admissible in evidence, there must be independent
evidence aside from the extrajudicial confession to prove conspiracy. There being no
independent evidence to prove conspiracy. A’s culpability was not sufficiently established.
 Extrajudicial admissions made after the conspiracy has been terminated
 GR: Extrajudicial admissions made by a conspirator after the conspiracy had terminated and
even before the trial are not admissible against the co-conspirator.
 XPNs:
 1. If made in the presence of the co-conspirator who expressly or impliedly agreed
therein;
 2. Where the facts in said admission are confirmed in the individual extrajudicial
confession made by the co-conspirator after their apprehension;
 3. As a circumstance to determine the credibility of the witness; or
 4. As circumstantial evidence to show the probability of the co-conspirator’s
participation in the offense.
 When extrajudicial admission becomes a judicial admission - While it is true that
statements made by a conspirator against a co-conspirator are admissible only when made
during the existence of the conspiracy, if the declarant repeats the statement in court, his
extrajudicial confession becomes a judicial admission, making the testimony admissible as to
both conspirators
 Admission by privies - Where one derives title to property from another, the latter's act,
declaration, or omission, in relation to the property, is evidence against the former if done
while the latter was holding the title.
 Privies - Persons who are partakers or have an interest in any action or thing, or any relation
to another
 The declaration of a person are admissible against a party whenever a “privity of estate”
exists between the declarant and the party, the term “privity of estate” generally denoting a
succession in rights. Consequently, an admission of one in privity with a party to the record
is competent. Without doubt, privity exists among the respondents in this case. And where
several co-parties to the record are jointly interested in the subject matter of controversy,
the admission of one is competent against all.
 Requisites
 1. There must be an act, declaration or omission by a predecessor-in-interest;
  2. The act, declaration or omission of the predecessor must have occurred while he has
holding (not after) the title to the property; and
 3. The act, declaration or omission must be in relation to the property
 The admission of a former owner of a property must have been made while he was the
owner thereof in order that such admission may be binding upon the present owner. Hence,
L’s act of executing the 1968 document have no binding effect on DM, the ownership of the
land having passed to it in 1964
 ADMISSION BY SILENCE - act or declaration made in the presence and within the hearing or
observation of a party who does or says nothing when the act or declaration is such as
naturally to call for action or comment if not true, and when proper and possible for him or
her to do so, may be given in evidence against him or her.
 Requisites
 1. The party heard and understood the statement;
 2. He or she was at a liberty to make a denial;
 3. The statement was about a matter affecting his or her rights or in which he or she
was interested and which naturally calls for a response;
 4. The facts were within his or her knowledge; and
 5. The fact admitted from his or her silence is material to the issue.
 The silence of a person under investigation for the commission of an offense should not be
construed as an admission by silence because a person has the right to remain silent and to
be informed of that right
 However, if it is not the police investigator who confronted the accused but the owner of a
carnapped vehicle, the silence of one after being implicated by the other accused serves as
an admission by silence as he did not refute the statements of his co-accused despite having
heard of them.
 Ruling - The rule on admission by silence does not apply since P had a right to remain silent
while under custodial investigation.
 Principle of adoptive admission - party’s reaction to a statement or action by another
person when it is reasonable to treat the party’s reaction as an admission of something
stated or implied by the other person. The basis for admissibility of admissions made
vicariously is that arising from the ratification or adoption by the party of the statements
which the other person had made.
 Illustration: The alleged admissions made by President E when his option had dwindled
when, according to Angara Diary, the AFP withdrew its support from him as President and
Commander-in-chief. Thus, Angara had to allegedly ask Senate President Pimentel to advise
Estrada to consider the option of “dignified exit or resignation.” Estrada did not object to the
suggested option but simply said he could never leave the country. According to the court,
his silence on this and other related suggestions can be taken as adoptive admissions by
him.
 CONFESSIONS - declaration of an accused acknowledging his or her guilt of the offense
charged, or of any offense necessarily included therein, may be given in evidence against
him or her
 Requisites
 1. It must involve an express and categorical acknowledgement of guilt;
 2. Facts admitted must be constitutive of a criminal offense;
 3. It must have been given voluntarily;
 4. It must have been intelligently made, the accused realizing the importance or legal
significance of his act;
 5. There must have been no violation of Sec 12, Art III, 1987 Constitution
  A confession to a person, who is not a police officer, is admissible in evidence.
The declaration acknowledging his guilt of the offense charged, or of any offense
necessarily included therein, may be given in evidence against the declarant.
Such admissions are not covered by Secs. 12 (1) and (3), Art. III, 1987
Constitution, because they were not extracted while he or she was under
custodial investigation.
 6. 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 or her.
 Admissibility of extrajudicial confessions
 GR: An extrajudicial confession is not admissible against the confessor’s co-accused. Said
confession is hearsay evidence and violative of the res inter alios acta rule.
 XPN: It may be admitted in evidence against his co-accused in the following cases:
 1. In case of implied acquiescence of the co-accused to the extra-judicial confession;
 2. In case of interlocking confessions;
 3. Where the accused admitted the facts stated by the confessant after being apprised
of such confession;
 4. If they are charged as co-conspirators of the crime which was confessed by one of
the accused and said confession is used only as corroborating evidence;
 5. Where the confession is used as circumstantial evidence to show the probability of
participation by the co-conspirator;
 6. When the confessant testified for his co-defendant; and
 7. Where the co-conspirator’s extrajudicial confession is corroborated by other
evidence on record.
 Ruling - The oral confession is not admissible as evidence of guilt. The confession is in the
nature of an extrajudicial confession before an investigator while under custodial
investigation. Hence, the statutory provisions under RA 7438 will have to be complied with.
 Under said law, any extrajudicial confession made by a person arrested, detained, or under
custodial investigation shall be in writing and signed by such person in the presence of his
counsel. An oral confession does not comply with the mandator provisions of the law. Under
RA 7438, the confession is admissible in evidence in any proceeding.
 Requirements for an admission of guilt of an accused during a custodial investigation to be
admitted in evidence
 1. The admission must be voluntary
 2. The admission must be in writing
 3. The admission must be made with the assistance of competent, independent counsel
 4. The admission must be express
 5. 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.
 Doctrine of interlocking confessions - 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
 May an extrajudicial confession made by an accused be sufficient ground for conviction? -
No, unless it is corroborated by evidence of corpus delicti.

5. Previous Conduct as Evidence

 Similar acts as evidence. - Evidence that one did or did not do a certain thing at one time is
not admissible to prove that he or she did or did not do the same or similar thing at another
time; but it may be received to prove a specific intent or knowledge, identity, plan, system,
scheme, habit, custom or usage, and the like.
 Also referred to as the “Propensity Rule”
 Constitutes as the second branch of inter alios acta rule.

 Evidence of similar or previous acts may be received to prove the following:

 1. Specific intent;
 2. Knowledge;
 3. Identity;
 4. Plan;
 5. System;
 6. Scheme;
 7. Custom;
 8. Habit;
 9. Usage; and
 10. The like
 Purpose of the rule - Evidence of similar acts or occurrences compels the defendant to meet
allegations that are not mentioned in the complaint, confuses him in his defense, raises a
variety of relevant issues, and diverts the attention of the court from the issues immediately
before it. Hence, the evidentiary rule guards the practical inconvenience of trying collateral
issues and protracting the trial, and prevents surprise or other mischief prejudicial to
litigants.
 Ruling - 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 a similar thing at another time; but it may be
received to prove usage, habit or custom.
 Courts must contend with the caveat that before they admit evidence of usage, habit or
pattern or conduct, the offering party must establish the degree of specificity and frequency
of uniform response that ensures more than a mere tendency to act in a given manner but
rather conduct that is semi-automatic in nature. In determining whether the examples are
numerous enough and sufficiently regular, the key criteria are adequacy of sampling and
uniformity of response.
 Defendants did not introduce evidence that XEI and all the lot buyers in the subdivision had
executed contracts of sale containing uniform terms and conditions. Moreover, even in the 3
contracts adduced by the defendants, there was no uniformity as 2 referred 120-month
terms while the third mentioned 180-month term.
 Boston Bank v. Manalo - HABIT, CUSTOM, USAGE, PATTERN OF CONDUCT. The examples
offered in evidence to prove habit, or pattern of evidence must be numerous enough to
base on inference of systematic conduct
 Determining whether the examples are numerous enough, and sufficiently regular, the key
criteria are adequacy of sampling and uniformity of response
 Previous conduct can only be offered to show the scheme of the offender. - evidence is not
admissible which shows or tends to show, that the accused in a criminal case has committed
a crime wholly independent of the offense for which he is on trial. It is not competent to
prove that he committed other crimes of a like nature for the purpose of showing that he
committed the crime charged in the complaint or information. An exception to this rule is
when such evidence tends directly to establish the particular crime, and it is usually
competent to prove the motive, the intent, the absence of mistake or accident, a common
 scheme or plan embracing the commission of two or more crimes so related to each other
that proof of one tends to establish the other, or the identity of the person charged with the
commission of the crime on trial.

6. Testimonial Knowledge
 Testimony confined to personal knowledge. - A witness can testify only to those facts which
he or she knows of his or her personal knowledge; that is, which are derived from his or her
own perception.
 Lack of firsthand knowledge Rule - If it can be shown from the surrounding circumstances
that a hearsay declarant lacked firsthand knowledge of the subject of his declaration,
evidence of that declaration will ordinarily be excluded even if it would otherwise come
within some exception to the hearsay rule.

7. Hearsay and Exceptions to the Hearsay Rule

 Hearsay. - Hearsay is a statement other than one made by the declarant while testifying at a
trial or hearing, offered to prove the truth of the facts asserted therein. A statement is
 (1) an oral or written assertion or
 (2) a non-verbal conduct of a person, if it is intended by him or her as an assertion.
Hearsay evidence is inadmissible except as otherwise provided in these Rules.
 A statement is not hearsay if the declarant testifies at the trial or hearing and is subject to
cross-examination concerning the statement, and the statement is
 (a) inconsistent with the declarant's testimony, and was given under oath subject to the
penalty of perjury at a trial, hearing, or other proceeding, or in a deposition; (Prior
inconsistent statement under oath)
 (b) consistent with the declarant's testimony and is offered to rebut an express or
implied charge against the declarant of recent fabrication or improper influence or
motive; or (Prior consistent statement)
 (c) one of identification of a person made after perceiving him or her. (Prior statement
of identification)
 Hearsay testimony rests on the ground that there was no opportunity to cross-examine -
Evidence is called hearsay when its probative force depends, in whole or in part, on the
competency and credibility of some persons other than the witness by whom it is sought to
produce it. A person who introduces a hearsay statement is not obliged to enter into any
particular stipulation, to answer any question, to solve any difficulties, to reconcile any
contradictions, to explain any obscurities, to remove any ambiguities; and that he/she
entrenches himself/herself in the simple assertion that he/she was told so, and leaves the
burden entirely upon the dead or absent author. For this reason, the rule against hearsay
testimony rests mainly on the ground that there was no opportunity to cross-examine the
declarant. The hearsay rule, however, does not apply to independently relevant statements.
 The uncompleted testimony of a witness is rendered inadmissible in evidence - cross-
examination is not and cannot be done or completed due to causes attributable to the party
offering the witness, the uncompleted testimony is thereby rendered incompetent and
inadmissible in evidence. From the record, Arriola had been granted sufficient opportunities
to complete his cross-examination. He had been fairly warned and notified in the September
5, 2006 Order of the RTC that his cross-examination shall be reset for the last time, and that
another failure to appear for cross-examination shall be cause for the striking off of his
 direct testimony. Due to causes known only to Arriola, he failed to even begin the same. Add
to this that prior to his cross-examination, Arriola was already remiss in his attendance for
various reasons in the hearings before the trial court.
 Ruling - The defense may object on the ground of hearsay. An out-of-court statement
includes not only oral or written assertion but also non-verbal conduct intended as an
assertion. The victim’s act of pointing out a person in the lineup is a nonverbal assertion. It is
as if the victim was saying, “He is the one who assaulted me.” The proponent may try the
identification under the excited-utterance exception.
 Elements of hearsay evidence
 1. There must be an out-of-court statement; and
 2. The statement made out of court, is repeated and offered by the witness in court to
prove the truth of the matters asserted by the statement.
 Newspaper clippings are hearsay and of no evidentiary value at all whether objected to or
not, unless offered for a purpose other than proving the truth of the matter asserted.
 Medical certificates cannot be admitted in the absence of the testimony of the physician
who examined the complaint for alleged torture wounds.
 Affidavits are inadmissible unless affiants themselves are placed in the witness stand to
testify therefrom.
 Statements made through an interpreter
 GR: Statements made through an interpreter are considered hearsay if a witness is offered
to testify to the statements of another person, spoken in a language not understood by him,
but translated for him by an interpreter, such witness is not qualified, because he does not
speak from personal knowledge. All that he can know as to the testimony is from the
interpretation thereof which is in fact given by another person.
 XPN: In cases where the interpreter had been selected:
 1. By common consent of the parties endeavoring to converse; or
 2. By a party against whom the statements of the interpreter where offered in evidence
(Principal-Agent Rule)
 Reason for exclusion
 a. The lack of opportunity in the part of the party against which it is offered to cross-
examine the declarant, that is, the person who made the statement.
 b. The statement or declaration under oath
 c. The court does not have the opportunity to observe the demeanor of the declarant.
 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 the opportunity to test the
credibility of hearsay statements by observing the demeanor of the person who made them.
 HEARSAY RULE - statement other than one made by the declarant while testifying at a trial
or hearing, offered to prove the truth of the facts therein.
 witness purports to give an account of what another has told him and this is offered to
evidence the truth of the other’s report
 Subject to certain exceptions
 LACK OF FIRST-HAND KNOWLEDGE RULE - testimony that is not based on personal
knowledge of the person testifying
 witness purports to give the facts directly upon his own credit (though it may appear later
that he was speaking only on the faith of report from others)
 Has no formal exceptions
 Ruling - No, because the testimony is hearsay. In her testimony, J purports to give an
account of what R had told her. In effect, she is testifying to nothing more than her
statement, and not the truth of the facts asserted therein.
 EXCEPTIONS TO THE HEARSAY RULE
 1. Dying declaration - declaration of a dying person, made under the consciousness of an
impending death, may be received in any case wherein his or her death is the subject of
inquiry, as evidence of the cause and surrounding circumstances of such death.
 These are ante mortem statements made by a person after the mortal wound has been
inflicted under the belief that the death is certain, stating the fact concerning the cause of
and the circumstances surrounding the attack
 Where the elements of both a dying declaration and a statement as part of the res gestae
are present, the statement may be admitted as a dying declaration and at the same time as
part of res gestae
 Requisites
 1. Declaration concerns the cause and the surrounding circumstances of the declarant’s
death;
 2. Made when death appears to be imminent and the declarant is under consciousness
of an impending death;
 Factors in determining whether declarant is conscious of his impending death
 1. The words or statements of the declarant on the same occasion;
 2. His conduct at the time the declaration was made; and
 3. The serious nature of his wounds as would necessarily engender a belief on his part
that he would not survive therefrom.
 4. Declarant would have been competent to testify had he or she survived; and
 5. Offered in a case in which the subject inquiry involves the declarant’s death.
 In order to take a dying declaration admissible, a fixed belief in inevitable and imminent
death must be entered by the declarant. It is the belief in impending death and not the rapid
succession of death in point of fact that renders a dying declaration admissible
 Test to determine application - Whether the declarant has abandoned all hopes of survival
and looked on death as certainly impending
 Time interval
 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 consciousness of impending
death.
 XPNs:
 1. If there is retraction made by the declarant before he died; or
 2. His declaration is ambiguous as to whether he believed that his death was imminent
when he made such declaration.
 It is of no moment that the victim died seven days from the stabbing incident and after
receiving adequate care and treatment, because the apparent proximate cause of his death
was a consequence of the stabbing
 The dying declaration of the deceased is not admissible as an ante-mortem declaration
when the deceased was in doubt as to whether he would die or not. It may, however, be
admitted as part of res gestae when it is made immediate after a startling occurrence
 Ruling - The statement is admissible as a dying declaration if the victim subsequently died
and her answers were made under the consciousness of an impending death. The fact that
she did not sign the statement pointing to the accused as her assailant because she was in a
critical condition does not affect its admissibility as a dying declaration
 A dying declaration may be oral or written. If oral, the witness who heard it may testify
thereto without the necessity of reproducing the word of the decedent, if he is able to give
substance thereof. An unsigned dying declaration may be used as a memorandum by the
witness who took it down.
 Ruling - Yes. B’s statements constitute a dying declaration as they pertained to the cause
and circumstances of his death. Moreover, taking into consideration the number and
severity of his wounds, it may be reasonably presumed that he uttered the same under a
fixed belief that his own death was already imminent.
 In the same vein, B’s statements may likewise be deemed to form part of the res gestae as
they refer to startling occurrence, i.e., him being shot. While on his way to the hospital, B
had no time to contrive the identification of his assailants, thus, his utterance was made in
spontaneously and only in reaction to the startling occurrence.
 Assailing a dying declaration - declaration may be attacked in the same manner as one
would do a testimony in open court. The declarant himself may be impeached through the
normal methods provided under the rules. A dying declaration, as an exception to the
hearsay rule, is not meant to confer competency on an otherwise incompetent witness.
 A dying declaration is admissible as evidence as an exception to the hearsay rule - It must
be mentioned that a "dying declaration" is one of the recognized exceptions to the right to
confrontation. In the case at bar, it will not be amiss to state that Mary Jane's deposition
through written interrogatories is akin to her dying declaration. There is no doubt that Mary
Jane will be answering the written interrogatories under the consciousness of an impending
death — or execution by a firing squad to be exact. Mary Jane has already availed of all
available legal remedies and there is no expectation that her conviction will be overturned
by the Indonesian authorities. The only purpose for the grant of the reprieve was for Mary
Jane to assist the prosecution in erecting its case against her recruiters and traffickers. There
was nary any mention that the outcome of the legal proceedings here in the Philippines will
have a concomitant effect in Mary Jane's conviction by the Indonesian authorities. That
Mary Jane is facing impending death is undisputed considering the nature of her reprieve
which is merely temporary. It is therefore not a stretch of imagination to state that Mary
Jane's declarations in her deposition are made in extremity, she being at the point of death,
and every hope of this world is gone; when every motive to falsehood is silenced and the
mind is induced by the most powerful considerations to speak the truth, to vindicate
oneself, and to secure justice to her detractors
 Immediate death is not indispensable for a dying declaration to be admissible - The fact
that the victim did not expire right after his declaration, but survived seven days thereafter,
will not alter the probative force of his dying declaration. The occurrence of a declarant’s
death immediately thereafter is not indispensable. The rule on dying declarations does not
require that the person should be at the time in the throes of death, or that he should die
immediately, or within any specified time thereafter, in order to give the declaration
probative force

 2. Statement of decedent or person of unsound mind - action against an executor or

administrator or other representative of a deceased person, or against a person of unsound
mind, upon a claim or demand against the estate of such deceased person or against such
person of unsound mind, where a party or assignor of a party or a person in whose behalf a
case is prosecuted testifies on a matter of fact occurring before the death of the deceased
person or before the person became of unsound mind, any statement of the deceased or
the person of unsound mind, may be received in evidence if the statement was made upon
the personal knowledge of the deceased or the person of unsound mind at a time when the
 matter had been recently perceived by him or her and while his or her recollection was
clear. Such statement, however, is inadmissible if made under circumstances indicating its
lack of trustworthiness.
 Requisites
 1. There is an action against an executor or administrator or other representative of a
deceased person, or against a person of unsound mind;
 2. The action is upon a claim or demand against the estate of such deceased person or
against such person of unsound mind;
 3. A party or assignor of a party or a person in whose behalf a case is prosecuted
testifies on the matter of fact occurring before the death of the deceased person or
before the person became of unsound mind;
 4. There was a statement made by the deceased or other person of unsound mind;
 5. Such statement was made upon the personal knowledge of the deceased or the
person of unsound mind at a time when:
 a. the matter had been recently perceived by him or her; and
 b. while his or her recollection was clear
 If all the requisites are met the statement of the decedent or the person of unsound mind
may be received in evidence as an exception to the hearsay rule.
 Such statement is, however, INADMISSIBLE if made under circumstances indicating its lack
of trustworthiness
 The rule proscribes the admission of testimonial evidence upon a claim which arose before
the death of the accused. It does not apply to documentary evidence.

 3. Declaration against interest - declaration made by a person deceased or unable to testify

against the interest of the declarant, if the fact asserted in the declaration was at the time it
was made so far contrary to the declarant's own interest that a reasonable person in his or
her position would not have made the declaration unless he or she believed it to be true,
may be received in evidence against himself or herself or his or her successors in interest
and against third persons. A statement tending to expose the declarant to criminal liability
and offered to exculpate the accused is not admissible unless corroborating circumstances
clearly indicate the trustworthiness of the statement.
 These are ante litem motam statements made by a person who is neither a party nor in
privity with a party to the suit. Such are considered secondary evidence and admissible only
when the declarant is already dead or unavailable to testify as a witness and may be
admitted against himself or successors-in-interest and against third persons
 Reason for the admissibility
 1. Necessity – as such declaration, act, or omission is frequently the only mode of proof
available; and
 2. Trustworthiness – presumed that men will neither falsify nor commit mistakes when
such falsehood or mistake would be prejudicial to their own pecuniary interest, and
because of the fact that any fraudulent motive for making the statement may be
shown.
 Requisites
 1. The declarant is dead or unable to testify; -
 Inability to testify must be serious
 2.Declaration relates to a fact against the interest of the declarant;
 3. At the time he made said declaration, he was aware that the same was contrary to
his interest; and
 4. Declarant had no motive to falsify and believed such declaration to be true.
 Actual or real Interest - essential that at the time of the statement, the declarant’s interest
affected thereby should be actual, real or apparent, not merely contingent, future or
conditional; otherwise, the declaration would not in reality be against interest.
 E.G., Declarations regarding a declarant’s inheritance are not admissible because these are
future interests
 Ruling - Yes. H’s revelation to M regarding his illicit relationship with A’s wife is admissible in
evidence. With the deletion of the phrase “pecuniary or moral interest” from the present
provision, it is safe to assume that “declaration against interest” has been expanded to
include all kinds of interest, that is, pecuniary, proprietary, moral or even penal. H having
been missing since his abduction cannot be called upon to testify. His confession to M,
definitely a declaration against his own interest, since his affair with R was a crime, is
admissible in evidence because no sane person will be presumed to tell a falsehood to his
own detriment.

 4. Act or declaration about pedigree. - The act or declaration of a person deceased or

unable to testify, in respect to the pedigree of another person related to him or her by birth,
adoption, or marriage or, in the absence thereof, with whose family he or she was so
intimately associated as to be likely to have accurate information concerning his or her
pedigree, may be received in evidence where it occurred before the controversy, and the
relationship between the two persons is shown by evidence other than such act or
declaration. The word "pedigree" includes relationship, family genealogy, birth, marriage,
death, the dates when and the places where these facts occurred, and the names of the
relatives. It embraces also facts of family history intimately connected with pedigree.
 The relationship between the declarant and the person subject of the inquiry must be
legitimate unless the issue is the legitimacy itself
 There is no provision as to the extent of degree of relationship.
 Rationale for admissibility
 1. Necessity – since the facts about pedigree are usually those which occurred many
years before the trial and known only to a few persons; and
 2. Trustworthiness – since these are matters which members of a family are presumed
to be interested in ascertaining the truth.
 Requisites:
 1. Declarant is dead or unable to testify;
 2. Pedigree should be in issue;
 3. Declarant must be a relative of the person whose pedigree is in question, either by
birth or marriage or adoption or in the absence thereof, by person whose family he or
she was so intimately associated as to be likely to have accurate information concerning
his or her pedigree;
 4. Declaration must be made ante litem motam or before the controversy occurred;
and
 5. The relationship between the declarant and the person whose pedigree is in
question must be shown by evidence other than such act or declaration.
 Such declarations are natural expressions of persons who must know the truth. Although
hearsay, it is best that the nature of the case admits and because of greater evil might arise
from the rejection of such proof than from its admission.
 Pedigree Declaration by Conduct - rule may also consist of proof of acts or conduct of
relatives and the mode of treatment in the family of one whose parentage is in question
 People v. Alegado - It is long-settled that the testimony of a person as to his age is
admissible although hearsay. He may testify as to his age as he had learned it from his
parents and relatives and his testimony in such a case is an assertion of family tradition.
 Tison v. CA and Domingo - The general rule is that where the party claiming seeks recovery
against a relative common to both claimant and declarant, but not from the declarant
himself or the declarant’s estate, the relationship of the declarant to the common relative
may not be proved by the declaration itself. There must be some independent proof of this
fact.
 EXCEPT where it is sought to reach the estate of the declarant himself and not merely to
establish a right through his declarations to the property of some other member of the
family
 The present case is one instance where the general requirement on evidence aliunde may
be relaxed. Petitioners are claiming a right to a part of the estate of the declarant herself.
Conformably, the declaration made by Teodora Dezoller Guerrero that petitioner Corazon is
her niece, is ADMISSIBLE and constitutes sufficient proof of such relationship

 5. Family reputation or tradition regarding pedigree. — The reputation or tradition existing

in a family previous to the controversy, in respect to the pedigree of any one of its members,
may be received in evidence if the witness testifying thereon be also a member of the
family, either by consanguinity, affinity, or adoption. Entries in family bibles or other family
books or charts, engraving on rings, family portraits and the like, may be received as
evidence of pedigree
 declarant is the witness himself and a member of the family. The witness is the one to
whom the fact relates, it is not necessary for him to establish by independent evidence his
relationship to the family.
 Reason for admissibility - admissible by reason of necessity since tradition is often the sole
method by which proof of matters of pedigree can be obtained.
 Requisites
 1. There is controversy in respect to the pedigree of any member of the family;
 2. The reputation or tradition of the pedigree of the person concerned existed previous to
the controversy;
 3. The statement is about the reputation or tradition of the family in respect to the pedigree
of any member of the family; and
 4. 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, affinity
or adoption.
 How to establish
 1. Through testimony in open court of a witness who must be a member of the family either
by consanguinity, affinity or adoption; or
 2. Through entries in:
 a. Family bible;
 b. Family books or charts;
 c. Engraving on rings; or
 d. Family portraits and the like
 This enumeration, by ejusdem generis, is limited to “family possessions,” or those articles
which represent, in effect, a family’s joint statement of its belief as to the pedigree of a
person.
 A person statement as to his date of birth and age, as he learned these from his parents or
relatives, is an ante litem motam declaration of a family tradition.
 6. Common reputation - Common reputation existing previous to the controversy, as to
boundaries of or customs affecting lands in the community and reputation as to events of
general history important to the community, or respecting marriage or moral character, may
be given in evidence. Monuments and inscriptions in public places may be received as
evidence of common reputation.
 It is the definite opinion of the community in which the fact to be proved is known or exists.
It means the general or substantially undivided reputation, as distinguished from a partial or
qualified one, although it need not be unanimous.
 As a general rule, the reputation of a person should be that existing at the place of his
residence. It may also be that existing in the place where he is best known. Character is
what a man is, and reputation is what he is supposed to be in what people say he is.
 Requisites for Admissibility
 1. Common reputation existed ante litem motam
 2. Reputation pertains to:
 a. boundaries of or customs affecting lands in the community
 b. events of general history important to the community
 c. marriage, or
 d. moral character
 Reliability is ensured because the testimony represents the general consensus of the
community.
 Marriage, if not proven through an act or declaration about pedigree may be proven
through common reputation
 Unlike that of matters of pedigree, general reputation of marriage may proceed from
persons who are not members of the family — the reason for the distinction is the public
interest
 Pedigree may be established by reputation in the family, but not in the community
 Common reputation is hearsay like any other exception to the hearsay rule, but is admissible
because of trustworthiness
 Reputation has been held admissible as evidence of age, birth, race, or ancestry, and on the
question of whether a child was born alive
 Reason for admissibility
 1. Necessity arising from the inherent difficulty of obtaining any other evidence than that in
the nature of common reputation; and
 2. Trustworthiness of the evidence arising from:
 a. The supposition that the public is conversant with the subject to be proved because
of their general interest therein; and
 b. The fact that the falsity or error of such evidence could be exposed or corrected by
other testimony since the public are interested in the same.
 An adverse party’s witness may be properly impeached by reputation evidence provided
that it is to the effect that the witness’ general reputation for honest, truth or integrity was
bad. The reputation must only be on character for truthfulness or untruthfulness.
 Matters of public interest - involves those which are common to all citizen of the state or to
the entire people. While, matters of general interest are common only to a single
community or to a considerable number of persons forming part of the community.
 In Re Mallare - witnesses, all natives of Macalelon, who had personal knowledge of the
person, birth and residency of both Ana Mallare and her son Esteban, were one in their
declaration that Ana is a Tagalog who had continuously resided in the place, and that
Esteban, her son was reputedly born out of wedlock. Such declarations constitute
 admissible evidence of the birth and illegitimacy of Esteban Mallare. Unlike that of matters
of pedigree, general reputation of marriage may proceed from persons who are not
members of the family — the reason for the distinction is the public interest that is taken in
the question of the existence of marital relations.
 7. Part of the res gestae - Statements made by a person while a startling occurrence is
taking place or immediately prior or subsequent thereto, under the stress of excitement
caused by the occurrence with respect to the circumstances thereof, may be given in
evidence as part of the res gestae. So, also, statements accompanying an equivocal act
material to the issue, and giving it a legal significance, may be received as part of the res
gestae.
 A latin phrase which literally means “things done”
 Refers to those exclamations and statements made by either the participants, victims, or
spectators to a crime immediately before, during or immediately after the commission of
the crime, when the circumstances are such that the statements were made as spontaneous
reactions or utterances inspired by the excitement of the occasion, and there was no
opportunity for the declarant to deliberate and fabricate a false testimony.
 Refers to the circumstances, facts, and declarations that grow out of the main fact and serve
to illustrate its character and are so spontaneous and contemporaneous with the main act
as to exclude the idea or deliberation and fabrication.
 Test of admissibility - Whether the act, declaration, or exclamation is so intimately
interwoven or connected with the principal fact or even that it characterizes as to be
regarded as part of the transaction itself, and also whether it clearly negates any
premeditation or purpose to manufacture testimony.
 Reason for admissibility - reason for the rule is human experience. It has been shown that
under certain external circumstances of physical or mental shock, the state of nervous
excitement which occurs in a spectator may produce a spontaneous and sincere response to
the actual sensations and perceptions produced by the external shock
 The spontaneity of the declaration is such that the declaration itself may be regarded as the
event speaking through the declarant rather than the declarant speaking himself.
 Requisites for admissibility –
 1. That the principal act, the res gestae, be a startling occurrence;
 2. The statement were made before the declarant had the time to contrive or devise a
falsehood; and
 3. That the statements must concern the occurrence in questions and its immediate
attending circumstances.
 Factors to determine spontaneity of declaration
 1. The time that has lapsed between the occurrence of the act or transaction and the
making of the statement;
 2. The place where the statement is made;
 3. The condition of the declarant when the utterance is given;
 4. The presence or absence of intervening events between the occurrence and the
statement relative; and
 5. The nature and the circumstances of the statement itself
 Ruling - Yes. AAA’s denunciation was part of the res gestae. AAA when to Tita T’s house
immediately after feeling from E and spontaneously, unhesitatingly and immediately
declared to Tita T that E had sexually abused her. Such manner of denunciation of him as her
rapist was confirmed by Tita T’s testimony about AAA’s panic-stricken demeanor that
rendered it difficult to quickly comprehend what the victim was saying. Of course, AAA’s use
of the words “hindot and inano ako ni kuya E” said enough about her being raped.
 Verbal acts –
 1. The principal act to be characterized must be equivocal;
 2. The equivocal act must be material to the issue;
 3. The statement must accompany the equivocal act; and
 4. The statement gives a legal significance to the equivocal act.
 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.
 Ruling - Yes. H’s statement was part of the res gestae and was admissible. The requisites
concurred herein, firstly, the principal act of shooting H was a startling occurrence. Secondly,
his statement to his mother about being shot by B was made before H had the time to
contrive or to devise considering that it was uttered immediately after the shooting. And
thirdly, the statement directly concerned the startling occurrence itself and its attending
circumstance, that is, the identities of the assailants.
 Ruling - The trial court did not err in giving weight to PO2 A’s testimony. While a witness can
only testify as to those facts which he has personal knowledge, the Rules provide that a
statement made under influence of a startling event witnessed by the person who made the
declaration before he had time to think and make up a story, or to concoct or to contrive a
falsehood, or to fabricate an account, and without any undue influence in obtaining it, aside
from referring to the event in question or its immediate attending circumstances, is an
exception being part of res gestae.
 In addition, the statement of PO2 A may fall within the purview of the doctrine of
independent relevant statement, where only the fact that such statements were made is
relevant, and the truth and falsity thereof is immaterial. On the other hand, K’s statements
are also admissible as part of res gestae since the same were made under the influence of a
startling even and without any opportunity to concoct or devise a falsehood.

 8. Records of regularly conducted business activity. - memorandum, report, record or data

compilation of acts, events, conditions, opinions, or diagnoses, made by writing, typing,
electronic, optical or other similar means at or near the time of or from transmission or
supply of information by a person with knowledge thereof, and kept in the regular course or
conduct of a business activity, and such was the regular practice to make the memorandum,
report, record, or data compilation by electronic, optical or similar means, all of which are
shown by the testimony of the custodian or other qualified witnesses, is excepted from the
rule on hearsay evidence.
 Reliability is furnished by the fact that regularly kept records typically have a high degree of
accuracy. The law does not fix any precise moment when the entries should be made. It is
sufficient if the entry was made within a reasonable period of time so that it may appear to
have taken place while the memory of the facts was unimpaired
 Availability or unavailability of the entrant is no longer material
 Requisites for the admission
 1. There is a memorandum, report, record or data compilation of acts, events,
conditions, opinions, or diagnoses, made by writing, typing, electronic, optical or other
similar means;
 2. Made at or near the time of the act, event, etc;
 3. Made by, or from transmission of supply of information by, a person with knowledge
of the act, event, etc.;
 4. Kept in the regular course or conduct of a business activity;
  5. It was the regular practice of the business activity to make the memorandum, report,
record or data compilation by writing, typing, electronic, optical or similar means;
 6. All the foregoing conditions are shown by the testimony of the custodian or other
qualified witnesses
 Business records are not prima facie evidence of the facts stated therein.
 If the entrant is available as a witness, the entries will not be admitted, but they may
nevertheless be availed of by said entrant as a memorandum to refresh his memory while
testifying on the transactions reflected therein
 Entries in the payroll, being entries in the course of business, enjoy the presumption of
regularity
 Reason for rule - duty of the employees to communicate facts is itself a badge of
trustworthiness of the entries
 These entries are accorded unusual reliability because their regularity and continuity are
calculated to discipline record keepers in the habit of precision
 Canque v. CA - The admission in evidence of entries in corporate books requires the
satisfaction of the following conditions:
 1. The entries were made at or near the time of the transactions to which they refer;
 2. The entrant was in a position to know the facts stated in the entries;
 3. The entries were made in his professional capacity or in the performance of a duty,
whether legal, contractual, moral or religious; an
 4. The entries were made in the ordinary or regular course of business or duty
 Wallem Maritime v. NLRC and Macatuno - copy of an official entry in the logbook is legally
binding and serves as an exception to the hearsay rule.
 facts appearing in the logbook should be supported by the facts gathered at the
investigation. If no investigation is conducted, the contents of the logbook have to be duly
identified and authenticated lest an injustice result from a blind adaptation of such contents
which merely serve as prima facie evidence
 Northwest Airlines v. Chiong - While there is no necessity to bring into court all the
employees who individually made the entries, it is sufficient that the person who supervised
them while they were making the entries testify that the account was prepared under his
supervision and that the entries were regularly entered in the ordinary course of business

 9. Entries in official records. - Entries in official records made in the performance of his or
her duty by a public officer of the Philippines, or by a person in the performance of a duty
specially enjoined by law, are prima facie evidence of the facts therein stated.
 Official record - The original document that is legally recognized and thus ensuring the
quality of a fact when it is established. It may be a:
 1. Register;
 2. Cash book; or
 3. An official return or certificate
 Reason for admissibility
 1. Necessity – due to the impossibility of requiring the official’s attendance as a witness to
testify to the innumerable transactions occurring in the course of his duty; and
 2. Trustworthiness – there is presumption of regularity in the performance of official duty.
 Requisites for admissibility (KPOP)
 1. 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.
 2. 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; and
  3. Entries must have been made in official records.
 Should entries in the police blotter be given probative value? - No. They are not conclusive
evidence of the truth of the contents but merely of the fact that they were recorded
 People v. San Gabriel - Advance Information Sheet does not constitute an exception to the
hearsay rule, hence, inadmissible. The public officer who prepared the document had no
sufficient and personal knowledge of the stabbing incident.
 Sabili v. Comelec 2012 - Even without being sworn to before a notary public, Barangay
Captain Honrade’s Certification would not only be admissible in evidence, but would also be
entitled to due consideration.
 First, the Barangay Secretary is required by the LGC to “keep and updated record of all
inhabitants of the barangay.”
 Second, Mitra v. Comelec has recognized that “it is the business of a punong barangay to
know who the residents are in his own barangay.”
 Third, the Barangay Captain’s exercise of powers and duties concomitant to his position
requires him to be privy to these records kept by the Barangay Secretary.

 10. Commercial lists and the like. - Evidence of statements of matters of interest to persons
engaged in an occupation contained in a list, register, periodical, or other published
compilation is admissible as tending to prove the truth of any relevant matter so stated if
that compilation is published for use by persons engaged in that occupation and is generally
used and relied upon by them therein.
 Reason for admissibility
 1. Necessity – because of the usual inaccessibility of the persons responsible for the
compilation of matters contained in such lists, it would cause the court inconvenience if it
would issue summons to these numerous individuals; and
 2. Trustworthiness – persons responsible for such lists have no motive to deceive and they
further realize that unless the list, register or periodical or other published compilation are
prepared with care and accuracy, their work will have no commercial or probative value
 Requisites for admissibility
 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.
 Ruling - No. Statement of matters contained in a periodical may be admitted only “if that
compilation is published for use by persons engaged in that occupation and is generally used
and relied upon by them therein.” The cited report is a mere newspaper account and not
even a commercial list. At most, it is but an analysis or opinion which carries no persuasive
weight as no sufficient figures to support it were presented. Neither did anybody testify to
its accuracy. It cannot be said that businessmen generally rely on news items such as this in
their occupation. Besides, no evidence was presented that the publication was regularly
prepared by a person in touch with the market and that it is generally regarded as
trustworthy or reliable. Absent extrinsic proof of the accuracy, these reports are not
admissible.
 Examples of commercial list
 1. Trade journals reporting current prices and other market data;
 2. Mortality tables compiled for life insurance;
 3. Abstracts of title compiled by reputable title examining institutions or individuals; or
 4. Business directories, animal pedigree registers, and the like
 PNOC Shipping v. CA - exhibits mentioned are mere price quotations issued personally to
Del Rosario who requested for them from dealers of equipment similar to the ones lost at
the collision of the two vessels.
 Accordingly, the author of the letter should be presented as witness to provide the other
party to the litigation the opportunity to question him on the contents of the letter.

 11. Learned treatises. — A published treatise, periodical or pamphlet on a subject of history,

law, science, or art is admissible as tending to prove the truth of a matter stated therein if
the court takes judicial notice, or a witness expert in the subject testifies, that the writer of
the statement in the treatise, periodical or pamphlet is recognized in his or her profession or
calling as expert in the subject.
 Reason for admissibility - learned writers have no motive to misrepresent due to the
awareness that his work will be carefully scrutinized by the learned members of the
profession and that he shall be subject to criticisms and be ultimately rejected as an
authority on the subject matter if his conclusions are found to be invalid.
 Requisites for admissibility
 1. When the court can take judicial notice of them; or
 2. When an expert witness testifies that the author of such is recognized as expert in
that profession
 Scientific studies or articles and websites which were culled from the internet, attached to
the Petition, and were not testified to by an expert witness are hearsay in nature and cannot
be given probative weight.

 12. Testimony or deposition at a former proceeding. - The testimony or deposition of a

witness deceased or out of the Philippines or who cannot, with due diligence, be found
therein, or is unavailable or otherwise unable to testify, given in a former case or
proceeding, judicial or administrative, involving the same parties and subject matter, may be
given in evidence against the adverse party who had the opportunity to cross-examine him
or her.
 Requisites for the rule
 1. The witness is dead or unable to testify;
 2. His testimony or deposition was given in a former case or proceeding, judicial or
administrative, between the same parties or those representing the same interests;
 3. The former case involved the same subject as that in the present case, although on
different causes of action;
 Requires that the issues involved in both cases must, at least, be substantially the
same; otherwise, there is no basis in saying that the former statement was – or
would have been – sufficiently tested by cross-examination or by any opportunity
to do so.
 These considerations, among others, make a distinct rule on evidence and
therefore should not be confused with the general provisions on deposition. In
other words, even if the petitioner complies on the use of depositions, the
observance of Sec 47 Rule 130 cannot simply be avoided or disregarded
 4. The issue testified to by the witness in the former trial is the same issue involved in
the present case; and
 5. The adverse party had an opportunity to cross-examine the witness in the former
case
 Reason for admissibility - are the necessity for the testimony and its trustworthiness.
However, before the former testimony can be introduced in evidence, the proponent must
first lay the proper predicate therefor, i.e., the party must establish the basis for the
admission of testimony in the realm of admissible evidence
 Grounds which make a witness unable to testify in a subsequent case
 1. Death;
 2. Insanity or mental incapacity or the former witness’s loss of memory through old age
or disease;
 3. Physical disability by reason of sickness or advanced age;
 4. The fact that the witness has been kept away by contrivance of the opposite party; or
 5. The fact that after diligent search the former witness cannot be found.
 Proof of former testimony
 1. If reduced to writing, such writing is the primary evidence thereof and should be
used; or
 2. The stenographic notes or a copy thereof.
 The judge’s notes are not evidence of what the witness said, and, as a rule, they can be used
only to refresh the memory of a witness.
 Inability to Testify (Meaning and Standard) - inability of the witness to testify must proceed
from a grave cause, almost amounting to death, as when the witness is old and has lost the
power of speech. Mere refusal shall not suffice
 Tan v. CA and Tan - Subsequent failure or refusal to appear at the second trial or hostility
since testifying at the first trial does not amount to inability to testify, but such inability
proceeding from a grave cause, almost amounting to death, as when the witness is old and
has lost the power of speech.
 Francisco v. People - Only parties to a case are bound by a judgment of the trial court.
Strangers to a case are not bound by the judgment of said case

 13. Residual exception. - A statement not specifically covered by any of the foregoing
exceptions, having equivalent circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness, is admissible if
the court determines that (a) the statement is offered as evidence of a material fact; (b) the
statement is more probative on the point for which it is offered than any other evidence
which the proponent can procure through reasonable efforts; and (c) the general purposes
of these rules and the interests of justice will be best served by admission of the statement
into evidence. However, a statement may not be admitted under this exception unless the
proponent makes known to the adverse party, sufficiently in advance of the hearing, or by
the pre-trial stage in the case of a trial of the main case, to provide the adverse party with a
fair opportunity to prepare to meet it, the proponent's intention to offer the statement and
the particulars of it, including the name and address of the declarant.
 A statement not specifically covered by any of the exceptions, having circumstantial
guarantees of trustworthiness, is admissible.
 Requisites for admissibility
 1. The statement, having equivalent circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness, must
not be covered by any of the foregoing exceptions;
 2. The statement is offered as evidence of a material fact;
 3. The statement is more probative on the point for which it is offered than any other
evidence which the proponent can procure through reasonable efforts; and
 4. The general purposes of these rules and the interests of justice will be best served by
admission of the statement of evidence.
 Independent relevant statements - statements which are relevant independently of
whether they are true or not. They are neither hearsay nor an exception to the hearsay rule
as the purpose thereof is not to prove the truth of the declaration or document. It merely
proves the fact that a statement was made and not the truth of the fact asserted in the
statement.
 An out-of-court statement which is relevant not for the truth of a matter asserted therein,
but for something else, e.g., state of mind, intent, belief, the mere fact of utterance, or legal
effect. It is a statement relevant for something else other than its truth. Not being hearsay,
independently relevant evidence is admissible
 Classification of independently relevant statements
 1. Those statements which are the very facts in issue; and
 2. Those statements which are circumstantial evidence of the fact in issue. It includes the
following:
 a. Statements of a person showing his state of mind, that is, his mental condition,
knowledge, belief, intention, ill-will and other emotions;
 b. Statements of a person which show his physical condition, as illness and the like;
 c. Statements of a person from which an inference may be made as to the state of
mind of another, i.e., the knowledge, belief, motive, good or bad faith, etc. of the
latter;
 d. Statements which may identify the date, place and person in question; and
 e. Statements showing the lack of credibility of a witness.
 Ruling - The testimony of A is admissible in evidence as an independently relevant
statement. It is offered in evidence only to prove the tenor thereof, not to prove the truth of
the facts asserted therein. Independently relevant statements include statements which are
on the very facts in issue or those which are circumstantial evidence thereof. The hearsay
rule does not apply.
 Ruling - objection of the accused should be overruled. An evidence is admissible when it is
relevant to the issue and is not excluded by the law or the rules. A witness can testify only to
those which he knows of his personal knowledge and derived from his own perception.
 contention that the guards had no personal knowledge of the contents of the package
before it was opened is without merit. The guards can testify as to the facts surrounding the
opening of the package since they have personal knowledge of the circumstances thereof,
being physically present at the time of its discovery
 On the other hand, the testimony of the trainer of the dog is not hearsay on the basis of the
following grounds:
 a. He has personal knowledge of the facts in issue, having witnessed the same;
 b. Hearsay merely contemplates an out-of-court declaration to prove the truthfulness
and veracity of the facts asserted therein;
 c. He is an expert witness; hence, his testimony may constitute as an exception to the
hearsay rule;
 d. The accused has the opportunity to cross-examine him; and
 e. Testimony of a witness as to statements made by non-human declarations does not
violate the rule against hearsay.
 The law permits the so-called “non-human evidence” on the ground that machines and
animals, unlike humans, lack a conscious motivation to tell falsehoods, and because the
workings of machines can be explained by human witnesses who are then subject to cross-
examination by opposing counsel.
 Conversely, the accused may not argue that he cannot cross examine the dog as the
Constitutional right to confrontation refers only to witnesses. As alluded, the human
 witnesses who have explained the workings of non-human evidence is the one that should
be cross-examined. There is no doubt that the evidence of the prosecution is admissible for
being relevant and competent
 Ruling - The statements are independently relevant, that is, relevant independently of
whether they are true or not. Independently relevant statements are of two classes: (1)
those statements which are the very facts in issue; and (2) those statements which are
circumstantial evidence of the facts in issue.
 The second includes statements of a person showing his state of mind and statements of a
person from which an inference may be made as to the state of mind of another
 The Angara Diary contains statements of Estrada which reflect his state of mind and are
circumstantial evidence of his intent to resign. It also contains statements which one can
reasonably infer Estrada’s intent to resign. Such statements are independently relevant and
are excluded from the hearsay.
 Section 27, Rule 130 states that in criminal cases, except those involving quasioffenses or
criminal negligence or those allowed by law to be compromised, an offer of compromise by
the accused may be received in evidence as an implied admission of guilt.

8. Opinion Rule
 A person’s thought belief, or inference, especially a witnesses view about facts in dispute, as
opposed to personal knowledge of the facts themselves.
 GR: The opinion of a witness is not admissible. A witness testifies only with respect to facts
personally observed by him and it is for the court to draw conclusions from the facts testified to.
 XPNs:
 1. Opinion of expert witness; and
 2. Opinion of ordinary witness
 Opinion testimony involving questions of law or the ultimate fact in issue is not admissible.
 EVIDENCE NOT BASED ON PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE - Consist of testimony that is not based on
personal knowledge of the person testifying.
 OPINION EVIDENCE - Expert evidence based on the personal knowledge, skill, experience or training
of the person testifying and evidence of an ordinary witness on limited matters
 Opinion of expert witness - The opinion of a witness on a matter requiring special knowledge, skill,
experience, training or education, which he or she is shown to possess, may be received in evidence
 The use of the word “may”, signifies that the use of opinion of expert witness is permissive and not
mandatory on the part of the courts. It only assists the court in the determination of the issue
before it, and is for the court to adopt or not to adopt depending on its appreciation of the
attendant facts and the applicable law
 Expert witness - one who belongs to the profession or calling to which the subject matter of the
inquiry relates and who possesses special knowledge on questions on which he proposes special
knowledge to express an opinion.
 Before one may be allowed to testify as an expert witness, his qualification must first be established
by the party presenting him.
 Expert testimony is not amissible as to a matter not in issue.
 Expert witness is not necessary when the doctrine of res ipsa loquitor is applicable.

 Degree of skill or knowledge - no definite standard in determining the degree or skill or knowledge
that a witness must possess in order to testify as an expert as long as the following are present:
 1. Training and education;
  2. Particularity, first-hand familiarity with the facts of the case; and
 3. Presentation of authorities or standards upon which his opinion is based.
 An expert witness may base his opinion either on the first-hand knowledge of the facts or on the
basis of hypothetical questions where the facts are presented to him hypothetically and on the
assumption that they are true, formulates his opinion on such hypothesis.
 The probative force of testimony of an expert does not lie in a mere statement of his theory or
opinion, but rather in the aid that he can render to the courts in showing the facts which serve as a
basis for his criterion and the reasons upon which the logic of his conclusion is founded.
 The competence of an expert witness is a matter for the trial court to decide upon in the exercise of
its discretion. The test of qualification is necessarily a relative one, depending upon the subject
matter of the investigation, and the fitness of the expert witness. In our jurisdiction, the criterion
remains to be the expert witness’ special knowledge, experience, and practical training that qualify
him or her to explain highly technical medical matters to the court.
 Weight to be given opinion of expert witness - In any case where the opinion of an expert witness
is received in evidence, the court has a wide latitude of discretion in determining the weight to be
given to such opinion, and for that purpose may consider the following:
 1. Whether the opinion is based upon sufficient facts or data;
 2. Whether it is the produce of reliable principles and methods;
 3. Whether the witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case;
 4. Such other factors as the court may deem helpful to make such determination
 Discretion of the court in giving weight to the testimony - Although courts are not ordinarily bound
by expert testimonies, they may place whatever weight they may chose upon such testimonies in
accordance with the facts of the case. The relative weight and sufficiency of expert testimony is
peculiarly within the province of the trial court to decide, considering the ability and character of
the witness, his actions upon the witness stand, the weight and process of the reasoning by which
he has supported his opinion, his possible bias in favor of the side for whom he testifies, the fact
that he is a paid witness, the relative opportunities for study and observation of the matters about
which he testifies, and any other matters which deserve to illuminate his statements.
 Opinion of the expert may not be arbitrarily rejected; it is to be considered by the court in view of all
the facts and circumstances in the case and when common knowledge utterly fails, the expert
opinion may be given controlling effect. The problem of the credibility of the expert witness and the
evaluation of his testimony is left to the discretion of the trial court whose ruling thereupon is not
reviewable in the absence of abuse of discretion.
 Testimony of a qualified medical doctor cannot be excluded simply because he is not a specialist.
The matter of training and specialization of the witness goes to the weight rather than admissibility.
 Test in determining the need to resort to expert evidence - Whether the opinion called for will aid
the court in resolving the issue.
 Court discretion to exclude or include expert evidence - If men of common understanding are
capable of comprehending the primary facts and drawing correct conclusions from them, expert
testimony may be excluded by the Court
 Competency of witness is a preliminary question before testimony is admitted - must be shown
that the witness is really an expert; determination of competency is a preliminary
 competence of an expert witness is a matter for the trial court to decide upon in the exercise of its
discretion. The test of qualification is necessarily a relative one, depending upon the subject matter
of the investigation, and the fitness of the expert witness. In our jurisdiction, the criterion remains
to be the expert witness' special knowledge, experience and practical training that qualify him/her
to explain highly technical medical matters to the Court
 It is the specialist's knowledge of the requisite subject matter, rather than his/her specialty that
determines his/her qualification to testify
 Handwriting expert - 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 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.
 Ruling - While credentials of an expert witness play a factor in the evidentiary and persuasive weight
of his testimony, the same cannot be the sole factor in determining its value. The judge must
conduct his own independent examination of the signatures under scrutiny.
 Opinion of ordinary witnesses. - The opinion of a witness, for which proper basis is given, may be
received in evidence regarding –
 (a) The identity of a person about whom he or she has adequate knowledge;
 (b) A handwriting with which he or she has sufficient familiarity; and
 (c) The mental sanity of a person with whom he or she is sufficiently acquainted.
 The witness may also testify on his or her impressions of the emotion, behavior, condition or
appearance of a person
 That which is given by a witness who is of ordinary capacity and who has by opportunity acquired a
particular knowledge which is outside the limits of common observation and which may be of value
in elucidating a matter under consideration
 Where the sanity of a person is at issue, expert opinion is not necessary, the observation of the trial
judge coupled with evidence establishing the person’s state of mental sanity will suffice

9. Character Evidence
 Aggregate of the moral qualities which belong to and distinguish an individual person; the general
result of one’s distinguishing attributes.
 Character distinguished from reputation - Character' is what a man is, and 'reputation' is what he is
supposed to be in what people say he is. 'Character' depends on attributes possessed, and
'reputation' on attributes which others believe one to possess. The former signifies reality and the
latter merely what is accepted to be reality at present
 GR: Character evidence not generally admissible; exceptions. — Evidence of a person's character or
a trait of character is not admissible for the purpose of proving action in conformity therewith on a
particular occasion
 The reason for this is that the evidence of a person’s character does not prove that such person
acted in conformity with such character or trait in a particular occasion.
 XPNs:
 (a) In Criminal Cases:
 (1) The character of the offended party may be proved if it tends to establish in any
reasonable degree the probability, or improbability of the offense charged.
 (2) The accused may prove his or her good moral character, pertinent to the moral trait
involved in the offense charged. However, the prosecution may not prove his or her bad
moral character unless on rebuttal.

 AS TO THE ACCUSED –
 1. The character of the offended party may be proved if it tends to establish in any
reasonable degree the probability, or improbability of the offense charged.
  2. The accused may prove his or her good moral character, pertinent to the moral trait
involved in the offense charged
 AS TO THE PROSECUTION - They may not prove the bad moral character of the accused
is pertinent to the moral trait involved in the offense charged, unless in rebuttal when
the accused opens the issue by introducing evidence of his good moral character.
 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 of the offense charged.
 In criminal cases, character evidence is inadmissible under the following situations:
 1. In rebuttal, proof of the bad character of the victim is not admissible if the crime was
committed through treachery and premeditation; and
 2. In rape cases, the evidence of complainant’s past sexual conduct, or reputation or
opinion thereof shall not be admitted unless and only to the extent that the court finds
that such evidence is material and relevant to the case.
 Good Moral Character of Accused - purpose of presenting evidence of good moral character is
to prove the improbability of his doing the act charged. The accused may prove his good moral
character only if it is pertinent to the moral trait involved in the offense charged
 Bad moral character of accused in rebuttal - Unless and until the accused gives evidence of his
good moral character the prosecution may not introduce evidence of his bad character
 Character evidence must be limited to the traits and characteristics involved in the type of
offense charged. Thus:
 a. On a charge of rape: character for chastity
 b. On a charge of assault: character for peaceableness or violence
 c. On a charge of embezzlement: character for honesty
 Rape Shield Rule - prosecution for rape, evidence of complainant’s past sexual conduct,
opinion thereof or of his/her reputation shall not be admitted unless, and only to the extent
that the court finds that such evidence is material and relevant to the case
 Sexual Abuse Shield Rule - following evidence is not admissible in any criminal proceeding
involving alleged child sexual abuse:
 a. Evidence to prove that the alleged victim engaged in other sexual behavior;
 b. Evidence offered to prove the sexual predisposition of the alleged victim
 Ruling - Dv’s testimony on D’s previous conviction for homicide as evidence of his bad character
does not refer to a moral trait involved in the offense charged which is sexual assault

 (b) In Civil Cases:

 Evidence of the moral character of a party in a civil case is admissible only when
pertinent to the issue of character involved in the case.
 Proof of bad character
 1. Cross-examination; or
 2. Independent evidence of bad character.
 It is permitted only when pertinent to the issue of character involved in the case like in a civil
action for damages emanating from the offense of libel, slander, or seduction.
 Personal opinion as to the moral character of the accused and the specific conduct of the part
exhibiting character is excluded as evidence. However, reputation in the community is
admissible.
 Ruling - The prosecution may introduce evidence of good or even bad moral character of the
victim if it tends to establish any reasonable degree the probability or improbability of the
offense charged. In this case, the evidence is not relevant.
 CSC v. Belagan - Belagan When the credibility of a witness is sought to be impeached by proof
of his reputation, it is necessary that the reputation shown should be that which existed before
 the occurrence of the circumstances out of which the litigation arose, or at the time of the trial
and prior thereto, but not at a period remote from the commencement of the suit. This is
because a person of derogatory character or reputation can still change or reform himself.
 People v. Noel Lee - proof of the bad moral character of the victim is IRRELEVANT to determine
the probability or improbability of his killing. Accused has not alleged that the victim was the
aggressor or that the killing was made in self-defense. There is no connection between the
deceased’s drug addiction and thievery with his violent death in the hands of accused.

 (c) In Criminal and Civil Cases:

 Evidence of the good character of a witness is not admissible until such character has
been impeached.
 In all cases in which evidence of character or a trait of character of a person is admissible,
proof may be made by testimony as to reputation or by testimony in the form of an
opinion. On cross-examination, inquiry is allowable into relevant specific instances of
conduct.
 In cases in which character or a trait of character of a person is an essential element of a
charge, claim or defense, proof may also be made of specific instances of that person's
conduct.

G. Burden of Proof and Presumptions (Rule 131)

 Burden of proof and burden of evidence. - Burden of proof is the duty of a party to present
evidence on the facts in issue necessary to establish his or her claim or defense by the amount of
evidence required by law. Burden of proof never shifts
 Burden of Proof - duty of a party to present evidence on the facts in issue necessary to establish his
claim or defenses by the amount of evidence required by law. xxx Further, it is a basic principle that
whoever alleges a fact has the burden of proving it.
 Presumptions - Inferences of the existence or non-existence of a fact which courts are permitted to
draw from the proof of other facts
 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
 In a sense, a presumption is an inference which is mandatory unless rebutted.
 PRESUMPTION - Mandated by law and established a legal relation between or among the facts.
 It is a deduction directed by law
 EFFECT: A party in whose favor the legal presumption exists may rely on and invoke such legal
presumptions to establish a fact in issue. One need not introduce evidence to prove the fact for a
presumption is prima facie proof of the fact presumed.
 INFERENCE - A factual conclusion that can rationally be drawn from other facts
 It is a permissive deduction.
 PRESUMPTION OF LAW (PRAESUMPTIONES JURIS) - A deduction which the law expressly directs to
be made from particular facts.
 A certain inference must be made whenever the facts appear which furnish the basis of inference.
 Reduced to fixed rules and forms of the system of jurisprudence.
 Need not be pleaded or proved if the facts on which they are based are duly averred and
established.
 Kinds:
 1. Conclusive presumptions (presumptions juris et de jure)
 2. Disputable presumptions (presumptions juris tantum)
 PRESUMPTION OF FACT (PRAESUMPTIONES HOMINIS) - A deduction which reason draws from the
facts proved without an express direction from law to that effect. Discretion is vested in the tribunal
as to drawing the inference.
 Derived wholly and directly from the circumstances of the particular case by means of common
experience of mankind.
 Has to be pleaded and proved
 Conclusive presumptions. - The following are instances of conclusive presumptions:
 (a) Whenever a party has, by his or her own declaration, act, or omission, intentionally and
deliberately led another to believe a particular thing true, and to act upon such belief, he or she
cannot, in any litigation arising out of such declaration, act or omission, be permitted to falsify
it; and
 (b) The tenant is not permitted to deny the title of his or her landlord at the time of the
commencement of the relation of landlord and tenant between them
 A presumption which is rebuttable and any evidence tending to rebut the presumption is not
admissible. This presumption is in reality a rule of substantive law.
 Classes of presumptive presumptions
 1. Estoppel in pais (Equitable Estoppel) – Whenever a party has, by his or her 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.
 2. 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.
 Example: 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.
 Estoppel may attach even though the landlord does not have title at the time of the relations. It may
inure in favor of the successor.
 The rule on estoppel against tenants is subject to a qualification. It does not apply if:
 1. The landlord’s title has expired;
 2. It has been conveyed to another; or
 3. It has been defeated by a title paramount, subsequent to the commencement of lessor-
lessee relationship
 In other words, if there was a change in the nature of the title of the landlord during the subsistence
of the lease, then the presumption does not apply. Otherwise, if the nature of the landlord’s title
remains as it was during the commencement of the relation of landlord and tenant, then estoppel
lies against the tenant
 WAIVER - A voluntary and intentional abandonment or relinquishment of a known right, it must be
supported by an agreement founded upon a valid consideration
 EQUITABLE ESTOPPEL - May arise however, in the absence of any intention on the part of the person
estopped to relinquish or change any existing right, and it need not be supported by any
consideration, agreement, or legal obligation
 Disputable presumptions. — The following presumptions are satisfactory if uncontradicted, but may
be contradicted and overcome by other evidence:
 Refers to a presumption which is satisfactory if uncontradicted, but may be contradicted and
overcome by other evidence.
 Disputable presumptions under Sec 3, Rule 131
 1. A person is innocent of a crime or wrong:
 Applies to both civil and criminal cases. Presumption of innocence of the accused
accompanies him until the rendition of judgment and disappears after conviction, such that
 upon appeal, the appellate court will then presume the guilt of the accused. The
prosecution’s case must rise and fall on its own merits and cannot draw strength from the
weakness of the defense.
 2. Unlawful act is done with unlawful intent;
 3. Person intends the ordinary consequences of his voluntary act;
 4. Person takes ordinary care of his concerns;
 GR: All persons are sane and normal and moved by substantially the same motives. When of
age and sane, they must take care of themselves. Courts operate not because one person has
been defeated or overcome by another but because that person has been defeated or
overcome illegally. There must be a violation of the law.
 XPN: When one of the parties is unable to read or if the contract is in a language not
understood by him, and mistake or fraud is alleged, the person enforcing the contract must
show that the terms thereof have been fully explained to the former.
 5. Evidence willfully suppressed would be adverse if produced;
 Requisites:
 a. Evidence is material;
 b. Party had the reasonable opportunity to produce it; and
 c. Evidence is available only to the said party.
 Not applicable when:
 a. Suppression of evidence is not willful;
 b. Evidence suppressed or withheld is merely corroborative or cumulative;
 c. Evidence is at the disposal of both parties;
 d. Suppression is by virtue of an exercise of privilege.
 Failure of the prosecution to present a certain witness and to proffer a plausible explanation does
not amount to willful suppression of evidence since the prosecutor has the discretion/prerogative to
determine the witnesses he is going to present
 6. Money paid by one to another was due to the latter;
 7. Thing delivered by one to another belonged to the latter;
 8. Obligation delivered up to the debtor has been paid;
 9. Prior rents or installments had been paid when a receipt for the latter ones is produced;
 10. A person found in possession of a thing taken in the doing of a recent wrongful act is the taker
and doer of the whole act; otherwise, that things which a person possesses or exercises acts of
ownership over, are owned by him or her;
 In order to raise the presumption, the following must be proved:
 a. Crime was committed;
 b. Committed recently;
 c. Stolen property was found in the possession of the defendant; and
 d. Defendant is unable to explain his possession satisfactorily
 11. A person in possession of an order on himself or herself for the payment of the money, or the
delivery of anything, has paid the money or delivered the thing accordingly;
 12. Person acting in public office was regularly appointed or elected to it;
 Ratio: It would cause great inconvenience if in the first instance strict proof were required of
appointment or election to office in all cases where it might be collaterally in issue.
However, the presumption of a regular appointment does not apply to a public officer
seeking to recover salary attached to the office, or the benefits of a pension system.
 13. Official duty has been regularly performed;
 All things are presumed to have been done regularly and with due formality until the
contrary is proved. This presumption extends to persons who have been appointed pursuant
 to a local or special statute to act in quasi-public or quasi-official capacities and to
professionals like lawyers and surgeons
 GR: Applies to both civil and criminal cases
 XPNs:
 a. Petition for writ of amparo – presumption may not be invoked by the respondent
public officer or employee
 b. Does not apply during in-custody investigation.
 c. When official conduct in question is irregular on its face.
 14. A court or judge acting as such whether in the PH or elsewhere, was acting in the lawful
exercise of jurisdiction
 Lawful exercise of jurisdiction is presumed unless the record itself shows that jurisdiction
has not been acquired or the record itself shows the absence of jurisdiction
 15. All the matters within an issue in a raised case were laid before the court passed upon by it;
 16. All matters within an issue raised in a dispute submitted for arbitration were laid before
arbitrators and passed upon by them;
 17. Private transaction have been fair and regular;
 18. Ordinary course of business has been followed;
 19. There was a sufficient consideration for a contract;
 20. Negotiable instrument was given or indorsed for a sufficient consideration;
 21. An indorsement of negotiable instrument was made before the instrument was overdue and
at the place where the instrument is dated:
 Except where an endorsement bears date after the maturity of the instrument, every
negotiation is deemed prima facie to have been effected before the instrument was
overdue.
 22. A writing is duly dated;
 23. Letter duly directed and mailed was received in the regular course of the mail;
 It must be proved that the letter was properly addressed with postage pre-paid and it was
actually mailed.
 Bare denial of receipt of a mail cannot prevail over the certification of the postmaster,
whose official duty is to send notices of registered mail.
 24. Presumption of Death
 a. Absence of 7 years – it being unknown, the absentee still lives, he or she shall be
presumed dead for all purposes except for those of succession;
 b. Absence of 10 years – absentee shall be considered dead for the purpose of opening his
succession only after an absence of 10 years, and if he or she disappeared after the age of
75, absence of only 5 years is sufficient;
 c. The following shall be considered dead for all purposes including the division of estate
among the heirs:
 Person on board a vessel lost during a sea voyage, or an aircraft which is missing, who
has not been heard of for 4 years since the loss of the vessel or aircraft;
 Member of the AFP who has taken part in armed hostilities, and has been missing for
4 years; -Person who has been in danger of death under other circumstances and
whose existence has not been known for 4 years;
 Married person has been absent for 4 consecutive years, the spouse present may
contract a subsequent marriage if he or she has well-founded belief that the absent
spouse is already dead; 2 years in case of disappearance where there is danger of
death under circumstances hereinabove provided. Before marrying again, the spouse
present must institute a summary proceeding as provided in the FC and in the rules
 for declaration of presumptive death of the absentee, without prejudice to the effect
of re-appearance of the absent spouse.
 25. Acquiescence resulted from a belief that the thing acquiesced in was conformable to the law
or fact;
 26. Things have happened according to the ordinary course of nature and ordinary habits of life;
 27. Persons acting as co-partners have entered into a contract of co-partnership’
 28. A man and woman deporting themselves as husband and wife have entered into a lawful
contract of marriage;
 29. Property acquired by a man and woman who are capacitated to marry each other and who
have lived exclusively with each other as husband and wife without the benefit of marriage or
under void marriage, has been obtained by their joint efforts, work or industry;
 30. In cases of cohabitation by a man and a woman who are not capacitated to marry each other
and who have acquired property through their actual joint contribution of money, property or
industry, such contributions and their corresponding shares including joint deposits of money and
evidence of credit are equal;
 31. If the marriage is terminated and the mother contracted another marriage within 300 days
after such termination of the former marriage, these rules shall govern in the absence of proof to
the contrary:
 a. A child born before 180 days after the solemnization of the subsequent marriage is
considered to have been conceived during the former marriage, provided it be born within
300 days after the termination of former marriage;
 b. A child born after 180 days following the celebration of the subsequent marriage is
considered to have been conceived during such marriage, even though it be born within the
300 days after the termination of the former marriage.
 32. A thing once proved to exist continues as long as is usual with things of that nature;
 33. The law has been obeyed;
 34. A printed or published book, purporting to be printed or published by public authority, was so
printed or published;
 35. A printed or published book, purporting to contain reports of cases adjudged in tribunals of
the country where the books is published contains correct reports of such cases.
 36. A trustee or other person whose duty it was to convey real property to a particular person has
actually conveyed it to him when such presumption is necessary to perfect the title of such person
or his successor in interest;
 37. Except for purposes of succession, when 2 persons perish in the same calamity, and it is not
shown who died first, and there are no particular circumstances from which it can be inferred, the
survivorship is determined from the probabilities resulting from the strength and age of the sexes,
according to the following rules:
 a. If both were under age of 15 years, the older is deemed to have survived;
 b. If both were over age of 60, the younger is deemed to have survived;
 c. If one is under 15 and other above 60, the former is deemed to have survived;
 d. If both over 15 and under 60, and the sex be different, the male is deemed to have
survived; if the sex be the same, the older;
 e. If one be under 15 or over 60, and the other between those ages, the latter is deemed to
have survived.
 38. If there is doubt, as between two or more persons who are called to succeed each other, as to
which of them died first, whoever alleges the death of one prior to the other, shall prove the
same; in the absence of proof, they shall be considered to have died at the same time.
 No presumption of legitimacy or illegitimacy. - There is no presumption of legitimacy or illegitimacy
of a child born after three hundred days following the dissolution of the marriage or the separation
 of the spouses. Whoever alleges the legitimacy or illegitimacy of such child must prove his or her
allegation
 Presumptions in civil actions and proceedings. — In all civil actions and proceedings not otherwise
provided for by the law or these Rules, a presumption imposes on the party against whom it is
directed the burden of going forward with evidence to rebut or meet the presumption.
 INCONSISTENT PRESUMPTIONS: If presumptions are inconsistent, the presumption that is founded
upon weightier considerations of policy shall apply. If considerations of policy are of equal weight,
neither presumption applies
 Presumption against an accused in criminal cases. - If a presumed fact that establishes guilt, is an
element of the offense charged, or negates a defense, the existence of the basic fact must be proved
beyond reasonable doubt and the presumed fact follows from the basic fact beyond reasonable
doubt

H. Presentation of Evidence (Rule 132)

 GR: Examination to be done in open court. - 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.
 Ratio - Open court examination allows the court the opportunity to observe the demeanor of the witness
and allows the adverse party to cross-examine the witness.
 XPNs: The testimony of the witness may not be given in open court in the following cases:
 1. In civil cases, by depositions
 2. In criminal cases, by depositions or conditional examinations
 3. In criminal cases covered by Rule on Summary Procedure, the affidavits of the parties shall constitute
the direct testimonies of the witnesses who executed the same.
 4. In civil cases, covered by the Rules on Summary Procedure, the parties are merely required to submit
the affidavits of their witnesses and other piece of evidence on the factual issues, setting forth the law
and the facts relied upon.
 5. Under the Judicial Affidavit Rule, the judicial affidavit shall take the place of direct testimonies of
witnesses;
 6. Matters regarding the admissibility and evidentiary weight of electronic documents may be proved by
affidavits subject to cross by the adverse party;
 7. If the witness is incapacitated to speak;
 8. The question calls for a different mode of answer.
 OATH - outward pledge made under an immediate sense of responsibility to God or a solemn appeal to the
Supreme Being in attestation of the truth of some statement.
 object of the rule is to affect the conscience of the witness to compel him to lay him open to punishment for
perjury if he testifies falsely
 AFFIRMATION - substitute for an oath and is solemn and formal declaration that the witness will tell the
truth.
 The option to take either an oath or affirmation is given to the witness and not to the court room.
 Order that one may be competent as a witness, it is not necessary that he has a definite knowledge of the
difference between his duty to tell the truth after being sworn and before, or that he is able to state it, but it
is necessary that he be conscious that there is a difference.
 Waiver of the right to have the witness sworn - The right may be waived. If a party admits proof to be taken
in a case without an oath, after the testimony has been acted upon by the court, and made the basis of a
judgment, such party can no longer object to the admissibility of the testimony
 Proceedings to be recorded. - The entire proceedings of a trial or hearing, including the:
 1. questions propounded to a witness and his or her answers thereto, and
  2. the statements made by the judge or any of the parties, counsel, or witnesses with reference to the
case,
 Shall be recorded by means of shorthand or stenotype or by other means of recording found suitable by the
court.
 Transcript Deemed Prima Facie Correct - A transcript of the record of the proceedings made by the official
stenographer, stenotypist or recorder and certified as correct by him shall be deemed prima facie a correct
statement of such proceedings
 Exclusion and separation of witnesses - court, motu proprio or upon motion, shall order witnesses excluded
so that they cannot hear the testimony of other witnesses. This rule does not authorize the exclusion of:
 a. A party who is a natural person;
 b. A duly designated representative of a juridical entity which is not a party to the case;
 c. A person whose presence is essential to the presentation of the party’s cause;
 d. A person authorized by a statute to be present.
 The court may also cause witnesses to be kept separate and to be prevented from conversing with one
another, directly through intermediaries, until all shall have been examined.
 XPNs:
 1. An accused in a criminal case as it his constitutional right to be present at all stages of the
proceedings;
 2. Parties to the litigation will generally not be excluded, their presence usually being necessary to a
proper management of the case;
 3. Party in interest though not a party to the record and an agent of such party, if the presence of such
agent is necessary;
 4. Officers and complaining witnesses are customarily excepted from the rule unless the circumstances
warrant otherwise; and
 5. Expert witness are not excluded until production of evidence bearing upon the question or subject as
to which they have been called or unless liable to be influenced by the testimony of the other
witnesses.
 Recantation of a witness - Courts must not automatically exclude the original statement based solely on the
recantation. It should determine which statement should be given credence through a comparison of the
original and the new statements, applying the general rules of evidence.

1. Examination of Witnesses
a) Rights and Obligations of a Witness
 A witness must answer questions, although his or her answer may tend to establish a claim
against him or her. However, it is the right of a witness:
 (1) To be protected from irrelevant, improper, or insulting questions, and from harsh or
insulting demeanor;
 The trial court’s duty is to protect every witness against oppressive behavior of an
examiner and this is especially true where the witness sis of advanced age.
 (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 or her to a penalty for an offense
unless otherwise provided by law; or
 Refers to immunity statutes wherein the witness is granted immunity from criminal
prosecution for offenses admitted in his testimony, e.g., under the law providing for
the forfeiture of unlawfully acquired property and under prosecutions for bribery and
graft.
  (5) Not to give an answer which will tend to degrade his or her 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 or her previous final conviction for an offense
 USE OF IMMUNITY - Prohibits the use of the witness’ compelled testimony and its fruits in
any manner in connection with the criminal prosecution of the witness.
 It is immunity from use of any statement given by the witness.
 By the grant of use-and-derivativeuse immunity, a witness is only assured that his or her
particular testimony and evidence derived from it will not be used against him or her in
subsequent prosecution.
 TRANSACTIONAL IMMUNITY - Grants immunity to the witness from prosecution for an
offense to which his compelled testimony relates.
 It is immunity from prosecution by reason or on the basis of the testimony.
 Transaction immunity is broader in the scope of its protection. By its grant, a witness can no
longer be prosecuted for any offense whatsoever arising of the act or transaction to which
the testimony relates.
 Obligations of a witness in open court
 GR: A witness must answer questions, although his or her answer may tend to establish a
claim against him or her. Refusal to answer as a witness constitutes direct contempt.
 XPNs: A witness may validly refuse to answer on the basis of the following.
 1. Right against self-incrimination – his answers will tend to subject him to punishment
for an offense; or
 The constitutional assurance of the right against self-incrimination is a prohibition
against the use of physical or moral compulsion to extort communication from the
accused. It is simply a prohibition against legal process to extract from the
accused’s own lips, against his will, admission of his guilt. Hence, a purely
mechanical act required to be done or produced from the accused is not covered
by the right against self-incrimination.
 The privilege against self-incrimination must be invoked at the proper time, and
the proper time to invoke it is when a question calling for an incrimination answer
is propounded. Also, a person has been summoned to testify cannot decline to
appear, nor can he decline to be sworn as a witness and no claim of privilege can
be made until a question calling for an incriminating answer is asked.
 2. Right against self-degradation – If his answer will have a direct tendency to degrade
his character.
 XPNs to the XPN: A witness may not invoke the right against self-degradation if:
 1. Such question is directed to the very fact at issue or to a fact from which
the fact at issue would be presumed; or
 2. If it refers to his previous final conviction for an offense.
 A witness invited by the Senate who refuse to testify and arrested for contempt, cannot
invoke the right against self-incrimination in a petition for certiorari or prohibition. The said
right may be invoked only when the incriminating question is being asked, since he has no
way of knowing in advance the nature or effect of the questions to be asked of him. That
this right may possibly be violated or abused is no ground for denying the Senate
Committees their power of inquiry
 Prohibition on narrative form testimony - witness’s testimony should be elicited by way of
questions and answers. Thus, if the witness does a narration instead of answering the
question, the answer may be stricken out upon objection. The reason is that if a witness
testifies in narrative form, the adverse party is deprived of the opportunity to object to the
testimony beforehand.
 XPN: The court may allow a child witness to testify in a narrative form.
 Refusal of the witness to take the witness stand
 GR: A witness may not refuse to take the witness stand.
 XPNs:
 1. An accused in a criminal case; or
 2. A party who is not an accused in a criminal case is allowed not to take the witness
stand – in administrative cases/proceedings that partook of the nature of a criminal
proceeding or analogous to a criminal proceeding. As long as the suit is criminal in
nature, the party thereto can altogether decline to take the witness stand. It is not the
character of the suit involved but the nature of the proceedings that controls.
 Right against self-incrimination not available under the Witness Protection Program - Any
witness admitted into the program of the WP, Security and Benefit Act cannot refuse to
testify or give evidence or produce books, documents, records or writings necessary for the
prosecution of the offense or offenses for which he has been admitted into the Program on
the ground of the constitutional right against self-incrimination but he shall enjoy immunity
from criminal prosecution and cannot be subjected to any penalty or thing concerning his
compelled testimony or books, documents, records and writings produced.
 Persons eligible to the WP, Security and benefit Program - Any person who has witnessed
or has knowledge or information on the commission of a crime and has testified or is
testifying or about to testify before any judicial or quasi-judicial body, or before any
investigating authority may be admitted provided that:
 1. The offense in which his testimony will be used is a grave felony as defined under the
RPC, or its equivalent under SLs;
 2. His testimony can be substantially corroborated in its material points;
 3. He or any member of his family within the second civil degree of consanguinity or
affinity is subjected to threats to life or bodily injury or there is a likelihood that he will
be killed, forced, intimidated, harassed or corrupted to prevent him from testifying, or
to testify falsely, or evasively, because or on account of his testimony; or
 4. He is not a law enforcement officer, even if he would be testifying against the other
law enforcement officers. In such case, only the immediate members of his family may
avail themselves of the protection.
 Ruling - As counsel of an accused charged with homicide, I would ask the prosecutor to
recommend that the accused be made a state witness. It is the prosecutor who must
recommend and move for the acceptance of the accused as a state witness. The accused
may also apply under the Witness Protection Program.
 State witness may be liable for contempt or criminal prosecution - If he fails or refuses to
testify or to continue to testify without just cause when lawfully obliged to do so or if he
testifies falsely or evasively, he shall be liable to prosecution for perjury. If a state witness
fails or refuses to testify, or testifies falsely or evasively, or violates any condition
accompanying such immunity without just cause, as determined in a hearing by the proper
court, his immunity shall be removed and he shall be subject to contempt or criminal
prosecution. Moreover, the enjoyment of all rights and benefits under RA 6981 shall be
deemed terminated. The witness, may, however, purge himself of the contumacious acts by
testifying at any appropriate state of the proceedings.
 Order in the examination of an individual witness.
 (a) Direct examination by the proponent – to elicit facts about the client’s cause of
action or defense;
 (b) Cross-examination by the opponent
  1. To bring out facts favorable to counsel’s client not established by the direct
testimony
 2. To enable counsel to impeach or to impair the credibility of the witness.
 (c) Re-direct examination by the proponent;
 1. To afford opportunity to the witness to explain or supplement his answers
given during the cross-examination; and
 2. To rehabilitate a witness whose credibility has been damaged.
 (d) Re-cross examination by the opponent.
 1. To overcome the proponent’s attempt to rehabilitate the witness; and
 2. To rebut damaging evidence brought out during re-direct examination.
 Direct examination - examination-in-chief of a witness by the party presenting him or her
facts relevant to the issue.
 In light of the Judicial Affidavit Rule, most direct examinations are now in the form of a
judicial affidavit.
 Ruling - No, because for the written record to be admissible as past recollection recorded, it
must have been written or recorded by T or under his direction at the time with the fact
occurred, or immediately thereafter, or at any time when the fact was fresh in his memory
and he knew that the same was correctly written or recorded. But in this case, T has never
seen the writing before.
 Cross examination - Upon the termination of the direct examination, the witness may be
cross-examined by the adverse party on any relevant matter, with sufficient fullness and
freedom to his or her accuracy and truthfulness and freedom from interest or bias, or the
reverse, and to elicit all important facts bearing upon the issue
 Scope of a cross-examination
 1. American rule – restricts cross-examination to facts and circumstances which are
connected with the matters that have been stated in the direct examination of the
witness.
 2. English rule – where a witness is called to testify to a particular fact, he becomes a
witness for all purposes and may be fully cross-examined upon all matters material to
the issue, the examination not being confined to the matters inquired about in the
direct examination.
 Both rules are followed under Philippine Jurisdiction. In general, the English Rule is being
followed, which allows the cross-examination to elicit all important facts bearing upon the
issue, but this does not mean that a party by doing so is making the witness his own.
 Conversely, the American Rule is being followed as to the accused or a hostile witness, who
may only be cross-examined on matters covered by direct examination.
 Doctrine of Incomplete Testimony
 GR: When cross-examination cannot be done or completed due to causes attributable to the
party who offered the witness, the incomplete testimony is rendered incompetent and
should be stricken from the record.
 XPN: Where the prosecution witness was extensively cross-examined on the material points
and thereafter failed to appear and cannot be produced despite a warrant of his arrest, the
striking out is not warranted
 Effect of death or absence of a witness after the direct examination by the proponent
 1. If the witness was not cross-examined because of causes attributable to the cross-
examining party and the witness had always made himself available for cross-
examination, the direct testimony of the witness shall remain on record and cannot be
stricken off because the cross-examiner is deemed to have waived his right to
crossexamine.
  2. If the witness was partially cross-examined but died before the completion of his
cross-examination, his testimony on direct may be stricken out but only with respect to
the testimony not covered by the cross-examination.
 3. The absence of a witness is not sufficient to warrant the striking out of his testimony
for failure to appear for further cross-examination where the witness has already been
sufficiently cross-examined, and the matter on which cross-examination is sought is not
in controversy
 GR: The party who offered the testimony of a witness is bound by such testimony.
 XPNs:
 1. In the case of a hostile witness;
 2. Where the witness is the adverse party or the representative of a juridical person
which is the adverse party; and
 3. When the witness is not voluntarily offered but is required by law to be presented by
the proponent, as in the case of subscribing witnesses to a will
 Re-direct examination - After the cross-examination of the witness has been concluded, he
or she may be re-examined by the party calling him or her, to explain or supplement his or
her answers given during the cross-examination.
 On re-direct examination, may questions on matters not dealt with during the cross-
examination be allowed? - Yes. It may be allowed by the court in its discretion
 Re-cross examination - Upon the conclusion of the re-direct examination, the adverse party
may re-cross examine the witness on matters stated in his or her redirect examination, and
also on such other matters as may be allowed by the court in its discretion.
 Recalling the witness –
 GR: After the examination of a witness by both sides has been concluded, the witness
cannot be recalled without leave of court. Recalling a witness is a matter of judicial
discretion and it shall be guided by the interests of justice
 XPNs:
 1. The examination has not been concluded;
 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
 Something more than bare assertion of the need to propound additional questions is
essential before the court’s discretion may rightfully be exercised to grant or deny recall.
There must be a satisfactory showing of some concrete, substantial ground for instance, that
particularly identified material points were not covered in the cross-examination, or that
particularly described in vital documents were not presented to the witness whose recall is
prayed for, or that the cross-examination was conducted in so inept a manner as to result in
a virtual absence thereof. Absent such particulars, to repeat, there would be no foundation
for a trial court to authorize the recall of any witness.

b) Leading and Misleading Questions

 One which suggests to the witness the answer which the examining party desires. A leading
question is generally not allowed.
 Test is whether a question is leading or not is the suggestiveness of the conduct.
 Leading and misleading questions. - A question which suggests to the witness the answer
which the examining party desires is a leading question. It is not allowed, except:
 (a) On cross-examination;
 (b) On preliminary matters;
  (c) When there is difficulty in getting direct and intelligible answers from a witness who
is ignorant, a child of tender years, is of feeble mind, or a deaf-mute;
 A witness may be considered as unwilling or hostile only if so declared by the
court upon adequate showing of his or her adverse interest, unjustified
reluctance to testify or his or her having misled the party into calling him or her
to the witness stand.
 (d) Of an unwilling or hostile witness; or
 (e) 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.
 (f) A child of tender years may be asked leading questions
 (g) In all stages of examination of a child if the same will further the interests of justice.
 A misleading question is one which assumes as true a fact not yet testified to by the witness,
or contrary to that which he or she has previously stated. It is not allowed

c) Impeachment of Witnesses
 Technique employed usually as part of cross-examination to discredit a witness by attacking
his credibility.
 Impeachment of adverse party's witness. - A witness may be impeached by the party
against whom he or she was called,
 1. by contradictory evidence,
 2. by evidence that his or her general reputation for truth, honesty, or integrity is bad,
or
 3. by evidence that he or she has made at other times statements inconsistent with his
or her present testimony, but not by evidence of particular wrongful acts, except that it
may be shown by the examination of the witness, or record of the judgment, that he or
she has been convicted of an offense
 Other modes of impeaching a witness are:
 1. By involving him during cross-examination in contradiction;
 2. By showing the impossibility or improbability of his testimony;
 3. By proving action or conduct of the witness inconsistent with his testimony; and
 4. By showing bias, interest or hostile feeling against the adverse party.
 Impeachment by evidence of conviction of crime. - For the purpose of impeaching a
witness, evidence that he or she has been convicted by final judgment of a crime shall be
admitted if
 (a) the crime was punishable by a penalty in excess of one year;
 (b) the crime involved moral turpitude, regardless of the penalty
 However, evidence of a conviction is not admissible if the conviction has been the subject of
an amnesty or annulment of the conviction

 Impeachment of a witness by evidence of particular wrong acts

 GR: A witness may not be impeached by evidence of particular wrongful acts.
 XPNs: If it may be shown by the examination of the witness, or the record the judgment,
that he or she has been convicted of an offense.
 Party may not impeach his or her own witness. - Except with respect to witnesses referred
to in paragraphs (d) and (e) of Section 10 of this Rule, the party presenting the witness is not
allowed to impeach his or her credibility.
 A witness may be considered as unwilling or hostile only if so declared by the court upon
adequate showing of his or her adverse interest, unjustified reluctance to testify, or his or
her having misled the party into calling him or her to the witness stand.
 The unwilling or hostile witness so declared, or the witness who is an adverse party, may be
impeached by the party presenting him or her in all respects as if he or she had been called
by the adverse party, except by evidence of his or her bad character. He or she may also be
impeached and cross-examined by the adverse party, but such crossexamination must only
be on the subject matter of his or her examination-in-chief
 GR: The party presenting the witness is not allowed to impeach the credibility of such
witness.
 XPN:
 The witness is an:
 1. Unwilling or hostile;
 A witness may be considered as unwilling or hostile if so declared by the court
upon showing adequate showing of his or her adverse interest, unjustified
reluctance to testify, or his or her having misled the party into calling him or her
to the witness stand.
 2. Adverse party; or
 3. Officer, director, or managing agent of a public or private corporation of a
partnership or association which is an adverse party
 In these instances, such witnesses may be impeached by the party presenting him or her in
all respects as if he had been called by the adverse party, except by evidence of his or her
bad character
 Impeachment of the adverse party as a witness
 Witness is the adverse party does not necessarily mean that the calling party will not be
bound by the former’s testimony. The fact remains that it was at his instance that his
adversary was put on the witness stand. He is not bound only in the sense that he may
contradict him by introducing other evidence to prove a statement of facts contrary to what
the witness testifies. Unlike an ordinary witness in all respects as if he had been called by
the adverse party, except by evidence of his bad character. Under a rule permitting the
impeachment of adverse witness, although the calling party does not vouch for the witness’
veracity, he is nonetheless bound by his testimony if it is not contradicted or remains
unrebutted.
 How witness impeached by evidence of inconsistent statements. — Before a witness can
be impeached by evidence that he or she has made at other times statements inconsistent
with his or her present testimony, the statements must be related to him or her, with the
circumstances of the times and places and the persons present, and he or she must be
asked whether he or she made such statements, and if so, allowed to explain them. If the
statements be in writing, they must be shown to the witness before any question is put to
him or her concerning them
 Laying the predicate - 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, or to give the
witness a chance to reconcile conflicting declarations, such that it is only when no
reasonable explanation is given by him that he should be deemed impeached.
 Laying the predicate in impeaching a witness by evidence of prior inconsistent statements
 1. The prior inconsistent statements must be related to him or her, with the
circumstances of the times and places and the persons present;
 2. The witness must be asked whether he or she made such statements, and if so, be
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 or her concerning them.
 Contradicting testimony given subsequently does not necessarily contradict the previous
testimony if the contradiction is satisfactorily explained. There is no rule which states that a
previous testimony is presumed to be false merely because a witness now says that the
same is not true. A testimony solemnly given in the court should not be lightly set aside.
Before this can be done both the previous testimony and the subsequent one should be
carefully scrutinized – in other words, all the expedients devised by man to determine the
credibility of a witness should be utilized to determine which of the two contradicting
testimonies represents the truth.
 As between statements made during the preliminary investigation of the case and the
testimony of a witness in open court, the latter deserves more credence. Preliminary
investigations are commonly fairly summary or truncated in nature, being designed simply
for the determination, not of guilt beyond reasonable doubt, but of probable cause prior to
the filing of an information in court.
 Inapplicability of the rule - If the prior inconsistent statement appears in a deposition of the
adverse party, and not a mere witness, that adverse party who testifies may be impeached
without laying the predicate, as such prior statements are in the nature of admission of said
adverse party.
 The reason for laying the predicates are:
 1. To avoid unfair surprise to the adversary;
 2. To save time, as an admission by the witness may make the extrinsic proof necessary;
and
 3. To give the witness, in fairness to him, a chance to explain the discrepancy.
 CONTRADICTORY EVIDENCE - Refers to other testimony of the same witness, or other
evidence presented by him in the same case, but not the testimony of another witness
 PRIOR INCONSISTENT STATEMENTS - Refer to statements, oral or documentary, made by
the witness sought to be impeached on occasions other than the trial in which he is
testifying.
 Referral of witness to memorandum - witness may be allowed to refresh his or her memory
respecting a fact by anything written or recorded by himself or herself, or under his or her
direction, at the time when the fact occurred, or immediately thereafter, or at any time
other tie when the fact was fresh in his or her memory and he or she knew that the same
was correctly written or recorded.
 writing or record must be produced and may be inspected by the adverse party, who may, if
he or she chooses, cross-examine the witness upon it and may read it in evidence
 witness may also testify from such a writing or record, though he or she retains no
recollection of the particular facts, if he or she is able to swear that the writing or recording
correctly stated the transaction when made. Such evidence must be received with caution

 PRESENT RECOLLECTION REVIVED - Applies if the witness remembers the facts regarding his
entries.
 Requisites
 1. Memorandum has been written by him or under his direction; and
 2. Written by him:
 a. When the fact occurred or immediately thereafter; or
 b. At any other time when the fact was fresh from his memory and he knew that
the same was correctly recorded.
 Entitled to greater weight
 Evidence is the testimony
 Rule of evidence affected is competency of witness, examination of witness (laying the
predicate)
 The witness simply testifies that he knows that the memorandum is correctly written by him
or under his direction. There is no need to swear that the writing correctly states the
transaction.
 PAST RECOLLECTION RECORDED - Applies where the witness does not recall the facts
involved.
 Requisites:
 1. Witness retains no recollection of the particular facts; and
 2. But he is able to swear that the record or writing correctly stated the transaction
when made
 Entitled to lesser weight
 Evidence is the writing or record (the memorandum)
 Rule of evidence affected is the best evidence rule.
 Witness must swear that the writing correctly states the transaction.
 Right of the adverse party when writing is shown to a witness - Whenever a wiring or
record is shown to a witness, it must be produced and may be inspected by the adverse
party, who may, if he or she chooses, cross-examine the witness upon it and may read it in
evidence
 Rule on examination of child witness - rule shall govern the examination of a child witness
in all criminal and non-criminal proceedings of a child who is: (VAW)
 1. Victims;
 2. Accused; and
 3. Witnesses to a crime.
 Child witness
 1. Any person who at the time of giving testimony is below the age of 18 years old; or
 2. A person over 18 years of age, if he/she 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 physical or mental disability or condition.
 Presumption of competency
 GR: Every child is presumed qualified to be a witness. The burden of proof to rebut such
presumption lies in the party challenging his competence.
 XPN: When the court finds that substantial doubt exists regarding the ability of the child to
perceive, remember, communicate, distinguish from falsehood, or appreciate the duty to
tell the truth in court, the judge shall conduct a competency examination of a child.
 Examination of a child witness - examination of a child witness presented in a hearing or
any proceeding shall be done in open court. 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.
 Videotaped deposition - prosecutor, counsel, or guardian ad litem may apply for an order
that a deposition be taken of the testimony of the child and that it be recorded and
preserved on videotape. If the court finds that the child will not be able to testify in open
court at trial, it shall issue an order that the deposition of the child be taken and preserved
by videotape.
 Live-link TV testimony - court may order by an application may be made by the prosecutor,
counsel or guardian ad litem for the testimony of the child to be taken in a room outside the
courtroom and be televised to the courtroom by live-link television, if there is a likelihood
 that the child would suffer trauma from testifying in the presence of the accused, his
counsel or the prosecutor as the case may be.
 kind of trauma contemplated is trauma that would impair the completeness or truthfulness
of the testimony of the child.
 Hearsay exception in child abuse cases - statement made by a child describing any act or
attempted act of child abuse, not otherwise under the hearsay rule, may be admitted in
evidence in any criminal or non-criminal proceeding. In ruling on the admissibility of such
hearsay statement, the court shall consider the time, content and circumstances thereof
which provide sufficient indicia of reliability. It shall consider the following factors:
 a. Whether there is a motive to lie;
 b. The general character of the declarant child;
 c. Whether more than one person heard the statement;
 d. Whether the statement was spontaneous;
 e. The timing of the statement and the relationship between the declarant child and
witness;
 f. Cross-examination could not show the lack of knowledge of the declarant child;
 g. The possibility of faulty recollection of the declarant child is remote; and
 h. The circumstances surrounding the statement are such that there is no reason to
suppose the declarant child misrepresented the involvement of the accused.
 Sexual abuse shield
 GR: The following is not admissible in any criminal proceeding involving alleged child sexual
abuse:
 a. Evidence is offered to prove that the alleged victim engaged in other sexual behavior;
and
 b. Evidence offered to prove the sexual predisposition of the alleged victim.
 XPN: Evidence of specific instance 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.
 Protective order - videotape or audiotape of child that is part of the court record shall be
under a protective order that provides as follows:
 1. Tapes may be viewed only by parties, their counsel, their expert witness, and the guardian
ad litem.
 2. No tape, or any portion thereof, shall be divulged by any member of the court staff, the
prosecution attorney, the defense counsel, the guard ad litem, agents of investigating law
enforcement agencies, and other persons as determined by the court to any other person,
except as necessary for the trial.
 3. No person shall be granted access to the tape, its transcription or any party thereof unless
he signs a written affirmation that he has received and read a copy of the protective order;
that he submits to the jurisdiction of the court with respect to the protective order; and that
in case of violation thereof, he will be subject to the contempt power of the court.
 4. Each of the tape cassettes and transcripts thereof made available to the parties, their
counsel, and respective agents shall bear the following cautionary notice:
 This object or document and the contents thereof are subject to a protective order
issued by the court in (case title), (case number). They shall not be examined,
inspected, read, viewed, or copied by any person, or disclosed to any person, except as
provided in the protective order. No additional copies of the tape or any of its portion
shall be made, given, sold, or shown to any person without prior court order. Any
person violating such protective order is subject to the contempt power of the court
and other penalties prescribed by law
  5. No tape shall be given, loaned, sold, or shown to any person except as ordered by the
court.
 6. Within 30 days from receipt, all copies of the tape and any transcripts thereof shall be
returned to the clerk of court for safekeeping unless the period is extended by the court on
motion of a party.
 7. This protective order shall remain in full force and effect until further order of the court.
 Ruling - Every child is presumed qualified to be a witness. To rebut the presumption of
competence enjoyed by a child, the burden of proof lies on the party challenging his
competence. Here, AA, a 12-year old child witness who is presumed to be competent, may
be asked leading questions by the prosecutor in conducting his direct examination pursuant
to RECW and the revised Rules on Criminal Procedure. In order to obviate the counsel’s
argument on the competency of AA as prosecution witness, the judge motu proprio
conducted his voir dire examination of AA

2. Authentication and Proof of Documents

a) Meaning of Authentication
 Process of proving the due execution and genuineness of a document.
 Not only objects but also documents introduced in evidence need to be authenticated. It is a
preliminary step in showing the admissibility of an evidence.
 When authentication is not required
 1. The writing is an ancient document
 When evidence of authenticity of private document not necessary. - Where a
private document 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. The writing is a public document or record
 Public documents as evidence. - Documents consisting of entries in public records
made in the performance of a duty by a public officer are prima facie evidence of
the facts therein stated. All other public documents are evidence, even against a
third person, of the fact which gave rise to their execution and of the date of the
latter.
 Proof of official record. - The record of public documents referred to in paragraph
(a) of Section 19, when admissible for any purpose, may be evidenced by an official
publication thereof or by a copy attested by the officer having the legal custody of
the record, or by his or her deputy, and accompanied, if the record is not kept in the
Philippines, with a certificate that such officer has the custody
 If the office in which the record is kept is in a foreign country, which is a contracting
party to a treaty or convention to which the Philippines is also a party, or considered
a public document under such treaty or convention pursuant to paragraph (c) of
Section 19 hereof, the certificate or its equivalent shall be in the form prescribed by
such treaty or convention subject to reciprocity granted to public documents
originating from the Philippines
 For documents originating from a foreign country which is not a contracting party to
a treaty or convention referred to in the next preceding sentence, the certificate
may be made by a secretary of the embassy or legation, 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 or her office
  A document that is accompanied by a certificate or its equivalent may be presented
in evidence without further proof, the certificate or its equivalent being prima facie
evidence of the due execution and genuineness of the document involved. The
certificate shall not be required when a treaty or convention between a foreign
country and the Philippines has abolished the requirement, or has exempted the
document itself from this formality
 A private document required by law to be recorded, while it is transformed into a
public document by the “public record” thereof, is not included in this enumeration.
Such recording does not make the private writing itself public document so as to
make it admissible without authentication, e.g., birth certificate recorded in the NSO
is a public record, but it is still a private document.

 3. The writing is a notarial document acknowledged, proved or certified.

 Proof of notarial documents. - Every instrument duly acknowledged or proved and
certified as provided by law, may be presented in evidence without further proof,
the certificate of acknowledgment being prima facie evidence of the execution of
the instrument or document involved.

 4. The genuineness and authenticity of an actionable document have not been specifically
denied under oath by an adverse party
 5. When such genuineness and due execution are immaterial to the issue;
 6. The genuineness and authenticity of the document have been admitted
 7. The document is not being offered as genuine.

b) Classes of Documents
 Documents are either public or private.
 Public documents are:
 (a) The written official acts, or records of the sovereign authority, official bodies and
tribunals, and public officers, whether of the Philippines, or of a foreign country;
 (b) Documents acknowledged before a notary public except last wills and testaments;
 (c) Documents that are considered public documents under treaties and conventions
which are in force between the Philippines and the country of source; and
 (d) Public records, kept in the Philippines, of private documents required by law to be
entered therein.
 All other writings are private
 PUBLIC DOCUMENT
 Admissible without need of further proof of its genuineness and due execution
 Evidence even against third persons, of the fact which gave rise to its due execution as
to the date of the latter
 Certain transactions must be contained in a public document; otherwise, they will not be
given any validity.
 PRIVATE DOCUMENT
 Before any private document offered as authentic is received in evidence, its due and
execution and authenticity must first be proved
 Binds only the parties who executed them or their privies, insofar as due execution and
date of the document concerned
 Church registries of births, marriages and deaths are no longer public writings nor are they
kept by duly authorized public officials. They are private writings and their authenticity must
therefore be proved, as are all other private writings in accordance with the rules
c) Authentication of a Private Writing
 Proof of private documents. - Before any private document offered as authentic is received
in evidence, its due execution and authenticity must be proved by any of the following
means:
 (a) By anyone who saw the document executed or written;
 (b) By evidence of the genuineness of the signature or handwriting of the maker; or
 (c) By other evidence showing its due execution and authenticity
 Any other private document need only be identified as that which it is claimed to be
 Related jurisprudence –
 1. When the private document is ancient (ancient document/authentic document rule)
 Requisites
 a. That it be produced from a custody in which it would naturally be found if
genuine; and
 Ancient documents are considered from proper custody if they come from a
place from which they might be reasonably be expected to be found.
Custody is proper if it is proved to have had a legitimate origin or if the
circumstances of the particular case are such as to render such an origin
probable. If a document is found where it would not properly and natural
be, its absence from the proper place must be satisfactorily accounted for.
 The requirement of proper custody was met when the ancient document in
question was presented in court by the proper custodian thereof who is an
heir or the person who would naturally keep it.
 b. That it is unblemished by any alteration or circumstances of suspicion
 2. When the genuineness and authenticity of an actionable document have not been
specifically denied under oath by the adverse party;
 3. When the genuineness and authenticity of the document have been admitted; and
 4. When the document is not offered as authentic as implied
 This rule applies only if there are no other witnesses to determine authenticity.
 How genuineness of handwriting proved. - The handwriting of a person may be proved by
any witness who believes it to be the handwriting of such person because he or she has
seen the person write, or has seen writing purporting to be his or hers upon which the
witness has acted or been charged, and has thus acquired knowledge of the handwriting of
such person. Evidence respecting the handwriting may also be given by a comparison, made
by the witness or the court, with writings admitted or treated as genuine by the party
against whom the evidence is offered, or proved to be genuine to the satisfaction of the
judge.
 1. A witness who actually saw the person writing the instrument
 2. A 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;
 3. A comparison by the court of the question handwriting from the admitted genuine
specimens thereof; or
 4. An expert witness
 Law makes no preference, much less distinction among and between the different means
stated above in proving the handwriting of a person. Courts are not bound to give probative
value or evidentiary value to the opinions of handwriting experts, as resort to handwriting
experts is not mandatory.
 Comparison as a mode of authentication - Use of comparison technique to establish
authenticity actually involves two levels of authentication. In order to establish the requisite
connective relevance, the item or document in question must be compared with an item the
 authenticity of which has been demonstrated. Authenticity of the specimen, then, is a
logical prerequisite to the procedure.
 Testimony of a handwriting expert is not indispensable to the examination or the
comparison of handwritings in cases of forgery. The judge must conduct an examination of
the questioned signature in order to arrive at a reasonable conclusion as to its authenticity.
The opinions of handwriting experts are not binding upon courts, 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.
 Handwriting experts are usually helpful in the examination of forged documents because of
the technical procedure involved in analyzing them. But resort to these experts is not
mandatory or indispensable to the examination or the comparison of handwriting. A finding
of forgery does not depend entirely on the testimonies of handwriting experts, because the
judge must conduct an independent examination of the question signature in order to arrive
at a reasonable conclusion as to its authenticity

d) Public Documents as Evidence; Proof of Official Record

 Public documents as evidence. - Documents consisting of entries in public records made in
the performance of a duty by a public officer are prima facie evidence of the facts therein
stated. All other public documents are evidence, even against a third person, of the fact
which gave rise to their execution and of the date of the latter
 When a public officer in the performance of his duty makes an entry in the public record,
the document of such entry is deemed prima facie evidence of the facts stated in the entry.
Its probative value may either be substantiated or nullified by other competent evidence.
 Public or official records of entries made in excess of official duty are not admissible in
evidence. As to matters which the officer is not bound to record, his certificate, being
extrajudicial, is merely the statement of a private person.
 Related jurisprudence - CENRO and Regional Technical Director, FMS-DENR, certifications do
not fall within the class of public documents. The certifications do not reflect the entries in
public records made in the performance of a duty by a public officer, such as entries made
by the Civil Registrar in the books of registries, or by a ship captain in the ship’s logbook. The
certifications are conclusions unsupported by adequate proof, and thus have no probative
value. Certainly, the certifications cannot be considered prima facie evidence of the facts
stated therein.
 Ruling - The USAID certification is a public document, hence, does not require
authentication, public documents are written documents are the written official acts or
records of the official acts of the sovereign authority, official bodies and tribunals, and public
officers, whether of the PH or of a foreign country.
 USAID is an official government agency of a foreign country. The authenticity and due
execution of said Certification are already presumed. The USAID certification could very well
be used as basis for the award for loss of income to the heirs
 Apostille Convention – If the public document is originating in a foreign country which is a
contracting party to a treaty or convention to which the Philippines is a contracting party,
the required certificate or its equivalent shall be in the form prescribed by such treaty or
convention subject to reciprocity granted to public documents originating from the
Philippines.
 On the other hand, if the public document is originating from a foreign country which is not
party to a treaty or convention to which the Philippines is a contracting party, the required
certificate may be made by:
  1. a secretary of the embassy or legation,
 2. consul general,
 3. consul,
 4. vice-consul, or
 5. consular agent or
 6. 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 or her office
 Heirs of Arcilla v. Teodoro - rule that requires a certification from an officer of the foreign
service of the Philippines pertains to written official acts, or records of the official of the
sovereign authority, official bodies and tribunals, and public officers, whether the
Philippines, of a foreign country.
 Certification of non-forum shopping executed in a foreign country is not covered under this
rule.
 Disini v. Republic 15 Jun 2021 EN BANC - proof of the existence of the Westinghouse and
B&R contracts in relation to the BNPP project as well as the existence of their corresponding
commission agreements with Disini was-sufficiently established by the testimonies of
Vergara and Jacob.
 A. However, the Republic is only entitled to temperate and exemplary damages, and not to
actual damages amounting to $50.5M as the documentary evidence presented to prove
such amount was not properly authenticated.
 B. Despite the non-presentation of the original contracts themselves, Vergara's and Jacob's
affidavits satisfactorily' proved the due execution of the Westinghouse and B&R contracts
and their corresponding commission agreements with Disini
 C. As to Disini's commission agreements with Westinghouse and B&R, Vergara and Jacob
positively affirmed the existence thereof as they had the opportunity to personally witness
and participate in these transactions.
 D. Contrary to Disini's contention, the Best Evidence Rule is not applicable in the present
case. The Republic presented the affidavits of both Vergara and Jacob to prove the existence
and execution of these contracts and the corresponding commission agreements without
inference as to the contents or terms thereof
 E. It was also proven that Disini received commissions from Westinghouse and B&R.
 1. The sworn testimonies and affidavits of Vergara and Jacob are categorical, credible
and corroborative, sufficiently proving that Disini, through Herdis and its subsidiaries,
acquired ill-gotten wealth in relation to the BNNP project.
 2. Disini trusted Jacob as he hired him as President of Herdis and even allowed him to
join in his meetings with Westinghouse. Disini also entrusted to Jacob the task of
transferring his commissions from Westinghouse and B&R to his overseas personal
bank accounts.
 F. Despite the fact that the Republic offered mere photocopies of the bank documents, this
does not affect the admissibility and probative value of Jacob's sworn statement as to the
existence of the bank accounts and Disini's receipt of commissions, 'especially since these
statements came from a credible witness such as Jacob
 1. When the evidence presented concerns the existence, execution or delivery of the
writing, without inference to its terms, the Original Document Rule cannot be invoked.
 G. In cases involving ill-gotten wealth, EO No. 14-A requires preponderance of evidence
 1. Preponderance of evidence refers to the comparative weight of the evidence presented
by the opposing parties.
 H. Here, the factual circumstances established by the Republic through testimonial evidence
are sufficient and convincing enough to prove that DIsini received substantial commissions
from Westinghouse and B&R in relation to the BNPP project despite lack of documentary
proof of his receipt thereof.
 I. However, the Republic's witnesses did not specifically quantify the amount of commissions
but referred to certain documents which were not only mere photocopies but were also not
properly authenticated. Hence, these documents are inadmissible and have no probative
value
 1. Vergara and Jacob's testimony that Disini was paid 3% and 10% of the Westinghouse
and B&R contracts as commissions clearly warrants the review of the terms of the
contract which is covered by the Original Document Rule
 2. To prove the amount of the total commissions received by Disini, the best evidence
would be the Westinghouse and B&R contracts and their corresponding commission
agreements
 J. Here, the Sandiganbayan accorded great weight to Exhibit E-9 or a tabulation of
commissions allegedly typewritten on Disini's stationery, which was attached to Manahan's
affidavit, to arrive at the amount of $50.5M. 1. Exhibit E-9 is a certified true copy.
 K. Under the Original Document Rule, when the subject of inquiry is the content of a
document, no evidence shall be admissible other than the original document itself subject
to certain exceptions.
 1. Here, the Republic failed to offer any plausible reason justification why it presented a
mere photocopy instead of the original.
 L. Whether a document is public or private is relevant in determining its admissibility as
evidence.
 1. Exhibit E-9, as a private document, must be properly authenticated to be admissible
and given probative value
 2. However, its due execution and genuineness were not proved by the Republic in
accordance with Section 20 of Rule 131.
 M. Since Exhibit E-9 was unauthenticated, and thus inadmissible in evidence as proof of the
fact stated therein, the Sandiganbayan should not have relied thereon in determining the
exact amount of commissions received by Disini

 Proof of official record. - The record of public documents referred to in paragraph (a) of
Section 19, when admissible for any purpose, may be evidenced by an official publication
thereof or by a copy attested by the officer having the legal custody of the record, or by his
or her deputy, and accompanied, if the record is not kept in the Philippines, with a
certificate that such officer has the custody.
 If the office in which the record is kept is in a foreign country, which is a contracting party to
a treaty or convention to which the Philippines is also a party, or considered a public
document under such treaty or convention pursuant to paragraph (c) of Section 19 hereof,
the certificate or its equivalent shall be in the form prescribed by such treaty or convention
subject to reciprocity granted to public documents originating from the Philippines
 For documents originating from a foreign country which is not a contracting party to a treaty
or convention referred to in the next preceding sentence, the certificate may be made by a
secretary of the embassy or legation, 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 or her office
 A document that is accompanied by a certificate or its equivalent may be presented in
evidence without further proof, the certificate or its equivalent being prima facie evidence
 of the due execution and genuineness of the document involved. The certificate shall not be
required when a treaty or convention between a foreign country and the Philippines has
abolished the requirement, or has exempted the document itself from this formality.
 Official records are written official acts, or records of the official acts of the sovereign
authority, official bodies and tribunals, and public officers (foreign law). Official records may
be evidenced by:
 1. If it is within the Philippines:
 a. An official publication thereof; or
 b. By a copy attested by the officer having the legal custody of the record or his
deputy
 2. If the office in which the record is kept is 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 a certificate that such officer has the custody.
 Upon failure to comply with the above-mentioned requirements, courts will apply the
doctrine of processual presumption.
 Ruling - 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 under the law, and said
document did not comply with the requirements, 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 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 compatible and do not
always clash in discord.
 A special power of attorney executed before a city judge-public notary in a foreign country,
without the certification or authentication required under the rules of court, is not
admissible as admissible in evidence in the Philippines courts. The failure to have the SPA
authenticated is not mere technicality but a question of jurisdiction.
 Irremovability of public record. - Any public record, an official copy of which is admissible in
evidence, must not be removed from the office in which it is kept, except upon order of a
court where the inspection of the record is essential to the just determination of a pending
case.
 GR: Any public record must not be removed from the office in which it is kept.
 XPN: Upon order of a court where the inspection of the record is essential to the just
determination of a pending case.
 Reason: They have a common repository, from where they ought not to be removed.
Besides, these records by being daily removed would be in great danger of being lost.
 What attestation of copy must state. - Whenever a copy of a document or record is attested
for the purpose of evidence, the attestation must state, in substance, that the copy is a
correct copy of the original, or a specific part thereof, as the case may be. The attestation
must be under the official seal of the attesting officer, if there be any, or if he or she be the
clerk of a court having a seal, under the seal of such court.
 Attestation must state, in substance:
 1. That the copy is a correct copy of the original, or a specific part thereof, as the
case may be, and
  2. It must be under the official seal of the attesting officer, if there be any, or if he
be the clerk of court having a seal, under the seal of such court.
 Public record of a private document. - An authorized public record of a private document
may be proved by the original record, or by a copy thereof, attested by the legal custodian of
the record, with an appropriate certificate that such officer has the custody
 Proof of public record of a private document
 1. By the original record; or
 2. By a copy thereof, attested by the legal custodian of the record, with an appropriate
certificate that such officer has the custody.
 Proof of lack of record. - A written statement signed by an officer having the custody of an
official record or by his or her deputy that, after diligent search, no record or entry of a
specified tenor is found to exist in the records of his or her office, accompanied by a
certificate as above provided, is admissible as evidence that the records of his or her office
contain no such record or entry
 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; and
 2. That despite the diligent search, no record of entry of a specified tenor is found to
exist in the records of his office.
 The written statement must be accompanied by a certificate that such officer has the
custody of official records.
 Certification to be issued by the LCR must categorically state that the document does not
exist in his or her office or the particular entry could not be found in the register despite
diligent search
 How judicial record impeached. - Any judicial record may be impeached by evidence of:
 1. Want of jurisdiction in the court or judicial officer;
 2. Collusion between the parties; (annulment or legal separation cases)
 3. Fraud in the party offering the record, in respect to the proceedings
 Fraud refers to extrinsic fraud which is a ground for annulment of judgment.
 Ruling - Yes. A written statement signed by an officer having the custody of an official record
or by his deputy that after diligent search, no record or entry of a specified tenor is found to
exist in the records of his office, accompanied by a certificate as above provided, is
admissible as evidence that the records of his office contain no such record or entry
 records of the PNP F&E Officer are a public record. Hence, notwithstanding that the
certifying officer was not presented as a witness for the prosecution, the certification he
made is admissible in evidence against L
 Proof of notarial documents. - Every instrument duly acknowledged or proved and certified
as provided by law, may be presented in evidence without further proof, the certificate of
acknowledgment being prima facie evidence of the execution of the instrument or
document involved.
 Documents acknowledged before a notary public is considered a public document and enjoy
the presumption of regularity. A notarized document is entitled to full faith and credit upon
its face.
 document may be presented in evidence without further proof, the certificate of
acknowledgement being prima facie evidence of the execution of the instrument or
documents involved.
 Ruling - While a notarial document is presumed to be regular, such presumption is not
absolute and may be overcome by a clear and convincing evidence to the contrary. The fact
 that a document is notarized is not a guarantee of the validity of its contents. Here, E, is an
unlettered employee who may not have understood the full import of his statements in the
affidavit. Notably, he, along with a co-worker did not state the specific amount of what they
referred as salary above the minimum required by law. The employer’s mere reliance on the
foregoing affidavit is misplaced because the requirement established jurisprudence is for the
employer to prove payment, and not merely deny the employee’s accusation of
nonpayment on the basis of the latter’s own declaration.
 Alteration in document, how to explain. - The party producing a document as genuine
which has been altered and appears to have been altered after its execution, in a part
material to the question in dispute, must account for the alteration. He or she may show
that the alteration was made by another, without his or her concurrence, or was made with
the consent of the parties affected by it, or was otherwise properly or innocently made, or
that the alteration did not change the meaning or language of the instrument. If he or she
fails to do that, the document shall not be admissible in evidence
 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:
(ACID)
 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. Did not change the meaning or language of the instrument.
 Failure to do at least one of the above will make the document inadmissible in evidence.
 Documentary evidence in an unofficial language. - Documents written in an unofficial
language shall not be admitted as evidence, unless accompanied with a translation into
English or Filipino. To avoid interruption of proceedings, parties or their attorneys are
directed to have such translation prepared before trial.
 Shall not be admitted as evidence unless accompanied with a translation into English or
Filipino.
 requirement that documents written in an unofficial language must be accompanied with a
translation in English or Filipino as a prerequisite for its admission in evidence must be
insisted upon by the parties at the trial to enable the court, where a translation has been
impugned as incorrect, to decide the issue. Where such document, not so accompanied
with a translation in English or Filipino, is offered in evidence and not objected to either by
the parties or the court, it must be presumed that the language in which the document is
written is understood by all, and the document is admissible in evidence.
 Interpretation of a writing according to its legal meaning. — The language of a writing is to
be interpreted according to the legal meaning it bears in the place of its execution, unless
the parties intended otherwise
 Instrument construed so as to give effect to all provisions. — In the construction of an
instrument, where there are several provisions or particulars, such a construction is, if
possible, to be adopted as will give effect to all
 Interpretation according to intention; general and particular provisions. — In the
construction of an instrument, the intention of the parties is to be pursued; and when a
general and a particular provision are inconsistent, the latter is paramount to the former. So,
a particular intent will control a general one that is inconsistent with it
 When a general and a particular provision are inconsistent, the following rules shall be
followed:
 1. The particular provision is paramount to the general;
 2. A particular intent will control a general one that is inconsistent with it.
 Interpretation according to circumstances. — For the proper construction of an instrument,
the circumstances under which it was made, including the situation of the subject thereof
and of the parties to it, may be shown, so that the judge may be placed in the position of
those whose language he or she is to interpret.
 The proper construction of an instrument according to the circumstance shall be as
follows:
 1. The circumstances under which it was made, including the situation of the subject
thereof and of the parties to it, may be shown;
 2. Such circumstances must be shown so that the judge may be placed in the position
of those who language he is to interpret
 Peculiar signification of terms. — The terms of a writing are presumed to have been used in
their primary and general acceptation, but evidence is admissible to show that they have a
local, technical, or otherwise peculiar signification, and were so used and understood in the
particular instance, in which case the agreement must be construed accordingly
 The terms of a writing shall be interpreted as follows:
 1. It shall be presumed to have been used in their primary and general acceptation;
 2. Evidence is admissible to show that they have a local, technical, or otherwise
peculiar signification; and
 3. Evidence is admissible to show that it was so used and understood in the particular
instance, in which case the agreement must be construed accordingly.
 Written words control printed. — When an instrument consists partly of written words and
partly of a printed form, and the two are inconsistent, the former controls the latter
 Experts and interpreters to be used in explaining certain writings. — When the characters
in which an instrument is written are difficult to be deciphered, or the language is not
understood by the court, the evidence of persons skilled in deciphering the characters, or
who understand the language, is admissible to declare the characters or the meaning of the
language
 When the characters in which an instrument is written are difficult to be deciphered, or
the language is not understood by the court, it can be proved by evidence of:
 1. Persons skilled in deciphering the characters; or
 2. Those who understand the language, is admissible to declare the characters or the
meaning of the language
 Medical certificate has corroborative purposes but unnecessary for conviction of rape -
While a medical certificate attesting to the victim’s physical trauma from the rape has
corroborative purposes, it is wholly unnecessary for conviction, if not a mere superfluity. If
anything, Cabales only confirmed in his appeal that he indeed obtained carnal knowledge of
AAA. This is a complete turn- around from his initial denial of the incident before the trial
court, where he claimed that he stayed in his house the entire day of January 16, 2005
attending to his wife who had just given birth. Given Cabales’ contradicting stance, this
Court receives his defense with utmost caution
 Authentication of a private document is required before it could be presented as
evidence. - nature of documents as either public or private determines how the documents
may be presented as evidence in court. A public document, by virtue of its official or
sovereign character, or because it has been acknowledged before a notary public (except a
notarial will) or a competent public official with the formalities required by law, or because it
is a public record of a private writing authorized by law, is selfauthenticating and requires no
further authentication to be presented as evidence in court. In contrast, a private document
is any other writing, deed, or instrument executed by a private person without the
intervention of a notary or other person legally authorized by which some disposition or
 agreement is proved or set forth. Lacking the official or sovereign character of a public
document, or the solemnities prescribed by law, a private document requires authentication
in the manner allowed by law or the Rules of Court before its acceptance as evidence in
court. Whether a document is public or private is relevant in determining its admissibility as
evidence. Public documents are admissible in evidence even without further proof of their
due execution and genuineness. On the other hand, private documents are inadmissible in
evidence unless they are properly authenticated. Clearly, Exhibit E-9 is a private document,
thus it must be properly authenticated to be admissible and given probative value.
 Proof of official record can be given through an authentication by a Philippine Consul. -
Certificate of Acceptance of the Report of Divorce was accompanied by an Authentication
issued by Consul Bryan Dexter B. Lao of the Embassy of the Philippines in Tokyo, Japan,
certifying that Kazutoyo Oyabe, Consular Service Division, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Japan
was an official in and for Japan. The Authentication further certified that he was authorized
to sign the Certificate of Acceptance of the Report of Divorce and that his signature in it was
genuine. Applying Rule 132, Section 24, the Certificate of Acceptance of the Report of
Divorce is admissible as evidence of the fact of divorce between petitioner and respondent.

3. Offer and Objection

 GR: Offer of evidence. - The court shall consider no evidence which has not been formally offered.
The purpose for which the evidence is offered must be specified
 XPNs:
 1. Marked exhibits not formally offered may be admitted provided it complies with the following
requisites:
 a. Must be duly identified by testimony duly recorded; and
 b. Must have been incorporated in the records of the case
 2. Under the Rule on Summary Procedure, where no full-blown trial is held in the interest of speedy
administration of justice;
 3. In summary judgments under Rule 35 where the judge based his decisions on the pleadings,
depositions, admissions, affidavits and documents filed with the court;
 4. Document whose contents are taken judicial notice by the court;
 5. Documents whose contents are judicially admitted;
 6. Object evidence which could not be formally offered because they have disappeared or have
become lost after they have been marked, identified and testified on and described in the record
and became the subject of crossexamination of the witness who testified on them during the trial.
 7. Documents and affidavits used in deciding quasi-judicial or administrative cases.

a) When to Make an Offer

 All evidence must be offered orally
 Offer of the testimony of a witness in evidence must be made at the time the witness is
called to testify. The offer of documentary and object evidence shall be made after the
presentation of a party's testimonial evidence.
 Purposes of offer of evidence
 1. To notify the party of possible objection, and for the offeror to make necessary
correction at the trial level to meet the objection;
 2. To allow the trial judge to rule properly;
 3. To lay basis for appeal so that the appellate court can decide intelligently.
 A formal offer is necessary, since judges are required to base their findings of fact and their
judgment solely and strictly upon the evidence offered by the parties at the trial.
 To allow parties to attach any documents to their pleadings and then expect the court to
consider it as evidence, even without formal offer and admission may draw unwarranted
 consequences. Opposing parties will be deprived of their chance to examine the document
and to object to its admissibility. On the other hand, the appellate court will have difficulty
reviewing the documents not previously scrutinized by the court below.
 An offer of evidence is important because the court shall consider no evidence which has
not been formally offered
 Reasons for stating purposes of offer of evidence
 1. For the court to determine whether that piece of evidence should be
admitted/considered or not; and
 2. For the adverse party to interpose the proper objection.
 It is basic in the law of evidence that the court shall consider evidence solely for the purpose
for which it was offered.
 IDENTIFICATION OF A DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE - Done in the course of the trial and
accompanied by the marking of the evidence as an exhibit
 FORMAL OFFER AS AN EXHIBIT - Done only when the party rests its case.
 Ruling - The court shall consider no evidence which has not been formally offered. The trial
court rendered judgment considering only the evidence offered by F. The offer is necessary
because it is the duty of the judge to rest his findings of fact and his judgment only and
strictly upon the evidence offered by the parties at the trial.
 Ruling - demurrer to evidence should be denied because the defense counsel did not object
to her testimony despite the fact that the prosecutor failed to state its purpose and offer it
in evidence. Moreover, the defense counsel thoroughly cross-examined M and thus waived
the objection.
 Res inter alios acta rule does not apply because M testified in open court and was subjected
to cross-examination.
 TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE - Must be made at the time the witness is called to testify.
 Every time a new witness is called to testify, there must be an offer of evidence
 DOCUMENTARY AND OBJECT EVIDENCE - Shall be made after the presentation of a party’s
testimonial evidence.
 The evidence is only offered once, after all the testimonial evidence are offered and prior to
the resting of the case for a party.
 The presentation of a documentary or object evidence for marking and identification during
trial is not the offer contemplated in the rules.
 All evidence must be made orally
 Stages in the presentation of documentary evidence
 MARKING - The purpose is to facilitate the identification of the exhibit. It may be made
during the pre-trial or during the trial.
 IDENTIFICATION - Presenting proof that the document being presented is the same as the
one referred to by the witness in his testimony.
 AUTHENTICATION - Positive identification of the witness that the document presented is
genuine and has been duly executed or that it is neither spurious nor counterfeit nor
executed by mistake or under duress.
 INSPECTION - Whenever a writing is shown to a witness. It may be inspected by the adverse
party.
 FORMAL OFFER OF EXHIBIT - After the termination of the testimonial evidence the
proponent will then make a formal offer and state the purpose for which the document is
presented.
 OBJECTIONS - Objections to introduction of documentary evidence shall be made when it is
formally offered.
 TENDER OF EXCLUDED EVIDENCE - Remedy of a party if the court improperly excluded an
otherwise admissible evidence.
 Courts cannot consider evidence which was not formally offered. - even assuming that the
Reply-Letter dated June 27, 2003 was appended to the records, the fact still remains that
the court cannot consider evidence which was not formally offered. As such, any statement
allegedly made on behalf of petitioner Mandagan in the said letter could not be considered
an admission of receipt of a notice of dishonor as the same has no evidentiary value
whatsoever. Verily, the RTC could not be faulted, much less accused of capriciousness, in
appreciating the evidence without the Reply-Letter
 No formal offer is necessary for evidence duly recorded or incorporated in the records. -
Court has relaxed the procedural rule and allowed the trial court to consider evidence not
formally offered on the condition that the following requisites are present: (1) the evidence
must have been duly identified by testimony duly recorded; and (2) the same must have
been incorporated in the records of the case.

b) When to Make an Objection

 Objection to offer of evidence must be made orally immediately after the offer is made.
 Objection to the testimony of a witness for lack of a formal offer must be made as soon as
the witness begins to testify. Objection to a question propounded in the course of the oral
examination of a witness must be made as soon as the grounds therefor become reasonably
apparent.
 grounds for the objections must be specified
 Ways of impeaching the evidence of the proponent
 1. By objection to offer of evidence.
 2. By motion to strike out answer.
 Purposes of objections
 1. To keep out inadmissible evidence that would cause harm to a client’s cause;
 2. To protect the record, i.e., to present the issue of inadmissibility of the offered
evidence in a way that if the trial court rules erroneously, the error can be relied upon
as a ground for a future appeal;
 3. To protect a witness from being embarrassed on the stand or from being harassed by
the adverse counsel;
 4. To expose the adversary’s unfair tactics like his consistently asking obviously leading
questions;
 5. To give the trial court an opportunity to correct its own errors and at the same time
warn the court that a ruling adverse to the objector may supply a reason to invoke a
higher court’s appellate jurisdiction; and
 6. To avoid a waiver of inadmissibility of an otherwise inadmissible evidence.
 Time when objection should be made - Objection to evidence offered orally must be made
immediately after the offer is made.
 1. Objection to the testimony of a witness for lack of a formal offer – as soon as the
witness begins to testify.
 2. Objection to a question propounded in the course of the oral examination of a
witness – as soon as the grounds shall become reasonably apparent.
 As a rule, failure to specify the grounds for the objections is in effect a waiver of the
objection except where the evidence could not have been legally admitted for any purpose
whatsoever
 objection must be specific enough to adequately inform the court the rule of evidence or of
substantive law that authorizes the exclusion of evidence.
 Contemporaneous Objection Rule - requires that a specific and timely objection be made to
the admission of evidence. Objection to the admission of evidence must be made
seasonably, at the time it is introduce or offered, otherwise they are deemed waived, and
will not be entertained for the first time on appeal.
 Kinds of objections
 1. Irrelevant – The evidence being presented is not relevant to the issue. (E.g., when
the prosecution offers as evidence the alleged offer of an insurance company to pay for
the damages by the victim in a homicide case.)
 2. Incompetent – The evidence is excluded by law or rules. (e.g., evidence obtained in
violation of unreasonable searches and seizure)
 3. Specific objections – e.g., parol evidence and original document rule
 4. General objections – e.g., continuing objections a. objection to a question
propounded in the course of the oral examination of the witness; and b. objection to an
offer of evidence in writing;
 5. Formal – One directed against the alleged defect in the formulation of the question
(e.g., ambiguous questions, leading and misleading questions, repetitious questions,
multiple questions, argumentative questions)
 6. Substantive – One made and directed against the very nature of evidence (e.g.,
parol, not the original document, hearsay, privilege communication, not authenticated,
opinion, res inter alios acta)
 Objections to the admissibility of evidence cannot be raised for the first time on appeal.
When a party desires the court to reject the evidence offered, he must so state in the form
of objection. Without objection, he cannot raise the question for the first time on appeal.
 Repetition of an objection
 GR: When it becomes reasonably apparent in the course of the examination that the
question asked are the same class as those to which objection has been made (whether
sustained or overruled). It shall not be necessary to repeat the objection, it being sufficient
for the adverse party to record his continuing objection to such class of questions.

 XPNs:
 1. Where the question has not been answered, it is necessary to repeat the objection
when the evidence is again offered or the question is again asked;
 2. Incompetency is shown later;
 3. Where objection refers to preliminary question, objection must be repeated when
the same question is again asked during the introduction of actual evidence;
 4. Objection to evidence was sustained but re-offered at a later stage of the trial;
 5. Evidence is admitted on condition that its competency or relevancy be shown by
further evidence and the condition is not fulfilled, the objection formerly interposed
must be repeated or a motion to strike out the evidence must be made; and
 6. Where the court reserves the ruling on objection, the objecting party must request a
ruling or repeat the objection.
 Objection to offer of evidence must be made orally immediately after the offer is made. -
Since the Republic failed to object to the offer of evidence and even manifested that the
State will not submit controverting evidence, Edwin's testimony was properly admitted.
Further, while the Republic insists that it could not have objected to the offer because it was
not served a copy of Jocelyn's formal offer of evidence — implying that the Office of the City
Prosecutor (OCP)’s failure to object did not bind the Republic because the authority
conferred to it by the OSG is subject to the reservation that the latter be furnished with
 notices of "hearings, orders and other court processes" – the Court still upholds the
admission of evidence because the reservation does not cover pleadings of the parties. It is
limited only to issuances of the trial court. Besides, the records show that the offer was
done orally. Since objection to evidence offered orally must be made immediately after the
offer, the OSG, even if served a copy of all court processes and pleadings of the parties, still
could not have personally made the objection because it was not present during the hearing
and was instead duly represented by the OCP.
 Ruling - ruling on the objection must be given immediately after the objection is made,
unless the court desires to take a reasonable time to inform itself on the question
presented; but the ruling shall always be made during the trial and at such time as will give
the party against to whom it is made an opportunity to meet the situation presented by the
ruling.
 However, if the objection is based on two or more grounds, a ruling sustaining the objection
in one or some must specify the ground or grounds relied upon.
 The rulings of the trial court during the course of the trial are interlocutory in nature and
may not be the subject of separate appeals or review on certiorari but are assigned as errors
and reviewed on appeal properly taken from the decision rendered by the trial court.
 Ruling - Counsel D may ask the judge to specify the ground/s relied upon for sustaining the
objection and thereafter move its reconsideration thereof.
 Striking out of an answer
 1. Objection – when the evidence is offered;
 Objections may be waived because the right to object is merely a privilege which
the party may waive. However, such waiver only extends to the admissibility of
the evidence. It does not involve an admission that the evidence possesses the
weight attributed to it by the offering party.
 2. Motion to strike or expunge;
 a. When the witness answers prematurely before there is reasonable
opportunity for the adverse party to object, and such objection is found to be
meritorious;
 b. When a question is not objectionable but the answer is not responsive;
 c. When a witness testifies without a question being posed or testifies beyond
limits set by the court;
 d. When the witness does a narration instead of answering the question;
 e. When the answers are incompetent, irrelevant, or improper;
 f. When the witness becomes unavailable for crossexamination through no fault
of the cross-examination party;
 g. When the testimony was allowed conditionally and the condition for its
admissibility was not fulfilled;
 h. When a witness has volunteered statements in such a way that the party has
not been able to object thereto; or
 i. Uncompleted testimonies where there is no opportunity for the other party to
cross-examination
 Direct testimony given and allowed without a prior formal offer may not be expunged
from the record. When such testimony is allowed without any objection from the
adverse party, the latter is estopped from questioning the non-compliance with the
requirement.

c) Tender of Excluded Evidence

 Documents or things offered in evidence are excluded by the court, the offeror may have
the same attached to or made part of the record. If the evidence excluded is oral, the offeror
may state for the record the name and other personal circumstances of the witness and the
substance of the proposed testimony.
 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 properly preserving the record to the end that the question may be saved for
purposes of review
 This rule is in preparation in the filing of an appeal. Moreover, the rule is that the offeror
must preserve such excluded evidence on his record and stating the purpose of such
preservation. E.g., knowing that it is relevant and must be admitted.
 Purposes of tender of excluded evidence
 1. To allow the court to know the nature of the testimony or the documentary evidence
and convince the trial judge to permit the evidence or testimony; and
 2. To create and preserve a record for appeal, should the judge be not persuaded to
reverse his earlier ruling.
 Even assuming that the trial court erroneously rejected the introduction as evidence of the
CA Decision, petitioner is not left without a legal recourse. Petitioner could have availed of
the remedy where he could have included in the same in his offer of exhibits. If an exhibit
sought to be presented in evidence is rejected, the party producing it should ask the courts
permission to have the exhibit attached to the record.
 OFFER OF PROOF/TENDER OF EXCLUDED EVIDENCE - process by which a proponent of an
excluded evidence tenders the same.
 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
 How tender of excluded evidence is made
 1. As to documentary or object evidence: It may have the same attached to or made
part of the record.
 The party should ask that evidence ruled out at the trial be attached to the record
of case in order that same may be considered on appeal.
 2. As to oral evidence: It may state for the record the name and other personal
circumstances of the witness and the substances of the proposed testimony
 How offer of evidence is made
 1.Before the court has ruled on the objection, in which case its function is to persuade
the court to overrule the objection or deny the privilege invoked;
 2. After the court has sustained the objection, in which case its function is to preserve
for the appeal the evidence excluded by the privilege invoked; or
 3. Where the offer of proof includes the introduction of documents, or any of the
physical evidence, the same should be marked for identification so that they may
become part of the record.
 When offer of proof is no required
 1. When the question to which an objection has been sustained clearly reveals on its
face the substance, the purpose and relevancy of the excluded evidence;
 2. When the substance, purpose and relevancy of the excluded evidence were made
known to the court either in the court proceedings and such parts appear on record;
and
  3. Where evidence is inadmissible when offered and excluded, but thereafter becomes
admissible, it must be re-offered, unless the court indicates that a second offer would
be useless.
 ENGLISH EXCHEQUER RULE - provides that a trial court’s error as to the admission of
evidence was presumed to have caused prejudice and therefore, almost automatically
required new trial.
 HARMLESS ERROR RULE - appellate court will disregard an error committed by the trial
court in the admission of evidence unless in its opinion, some substantial wrong or
miscarriage of justice has been occasioned.
 We follow the harmless error rule, for in dealing with evidence improperly admitted in the
trial, courts examine its damaging quality and its impact to the substantive rights of the
litigant. If the impact is slight and insignificant, appellate courts disregard the error as it will
not overcome the weight of the properly admitted evidence against the prejudiced part

I. Judicial Affidavit Rule (A.M. No. 12-8-8-SC)

 Scope and where applicable - apply to all actions, proceedings and incidents requiring the reception of
evidence before:
 1. Municipal trial courts and Shari’a Circuit courts;
 It shall not apply to small claims cases
 2. The RTC and the Shari’a District Courts;
 3. The Sandiganbayan, CTA, CA and the Shari’a Appellate Courts;
 4. The investigating officers and bodies authorized by the SC to receive evidence, including the IBP; and
 5. The special courts of rules of procedure are subject to disapproval of the SC, insofar as their existing
rules of procedure contravene the provisions of this Rule
 In civil cases (with the exception of small claims), the application of the JAR is mandatory regardless of the
amount of money claimed.
 Effect of the Judicial Affidavit Rule (JAR) in the Philippine judicial system - It signals a dramatic shift from
dominantly adversarial system to a mix adversarial and inquisitorial system.
 Purpose of JAR - decongest the courts of cases and to reduce delays in the disposition of cases
 Significance of the use of a judicial affidavit - shall take the place of direct testimonies of witnesses

 Notable changes by the JAR

 1. Testimonies are now allowed to be taken and kept in the dialect of the place provided they are
subsequently translated into English or Filipino. These will be quoted in pleadings in their original
version with the English or Filipino translation in parenthesis provided by the party, subject to counter
translation by opposing side.
 2. In civil actions, the judicial affidavit rule requires the parties to lay their cards on the table before
pre-trial by submitting the judicial affidavits and documents of the parties and their witnesses and
serving copies on the adverse party at least 5 days before the pre-trial. No further stipulations of facts
are needed at the pre-trial since, by comparing the judicial affidavits of the opposing sides, the court
will already see what matters they agree and on what matters they dispute.
 3. The court will already take active part in examining the witnesses. The judge will no longer be limited
to asking clarificatory questions; he can also ask questions that will determine the credibility of the
witness, ascertain the truth of his testimony and elicit the answers that the judge needs for resolving
issues
 Submissions in lieu of direct testimony
 Requirements of the JAR which the parties are bound to follow - 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:
  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, and so in the case of the complainant or the plaintiff, and as Exhibits 1, 2
and so on in the case of the respondent or the defendant.
 Every pleading stating a party’s claims or defenses shall state, among others the summary of the witnesses’
intended testimonies, provided that the judicial affidavits of said witnesses shall be attached to the pleading
and form an integral part thereof. Only witnesses whose judicial affidavits are attached to the pleading shall
be presented by the parties during the trial. Except if a party presents meritorious reasons as basis for
admission of additional witnesses, no other witnesses or affidavit shall be heard or admitted by the court
 Attachment of the original document as documentary evidence - party or a witness may keep the original
document or object evidence in his possession after the same has been identified, marked as exhibit, and
authenticated, but he must warrant in his judicial affidavit that the copy or reproduction attached to such
affidavit is a faithful copy or reproduction of the original. In addition, the party or witness shall bring the
original document or object evidence for comparison during the preliminary conference with the attached
copy, reproduction, or pictures, failing which the latter shall not be admitted.
 Contents and Procedure - judicial affidavit shall be prepared in a language known to the witness and, if not
in English or Filipino, accompanied by a translation in English 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:
 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 evidence and establish their authenticity in
accordance with the rules of court
 5. The signature of the witness over his printed name;
 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
 7. Sworn attestation by the lawyer who conducted or supervised the examination of the witness
attesting to the following:
 a. He faithfully recorded or caused to be recorded the questions he asked and the corresponding
answers that the witness gave; and
 b. Neither he nor any other person present or assisting him coached the witness regarding the
latter’s answers
 A false attestation shall be subject the lawyer to disciplinary action, including disbarment.
 Effect of non-compliance with the content and attestation requirements - judicial affidavit shall not be
admitted by the court in evidence.
 Above provisions, however, does not absolutely bar the submission of a complaint replacement judicial
affidavit as long as the replacement shall be submitted before the hearing or trial and provided further that
the following requisites are met:
 1. The submission shall be allowed only once;
 2. The delay is for a valid cause;
 3. The delay would not unduly prejudice the opposing party; and
 4. The public or private counsel responsible for the preparation and submission of the affidavit pays a
fine of not less than P1K nor more than P5K at the discretion of the court.
 Subpoena - requesting party may avail himself of the issuance of a subpoena ad testificandum or duces
tecum if the government official or employee, or the requested witness, who is neither the witness of the
adverse party nor a hostile witness:
 1. Unjustifiably declines to execute a judicial affidavit; or
 2. Refuses without just cause to make the relevant books, documents, or other things under his control
available for copying, authentication, and eventual production in court.
 Regardless of whether the requested witness, who is the adverse party’s witness, unjustifiably declines to
execute a judicial affidavit or refuses without just cause to present the documents, Sec 5 cannot be made to
apply to him for the reason that he is included in a group of individuals expressly exempt from the
provision’s application.
 Submission by the prosecution of the judicial affidavit - prosecution shall submit the judicial affidavits of its
witnesses not later than 5 days before the pre-trial, serving copies of the same upon the accused. The
complainant or public prosecutor shall attach to the affidavits such documentary or object evidence as he
may have, marking them as Exh A, B and so on. No further judicial affidavit, documentary, or object
evidence shall be admitted at the trial.
 Offer and objection
 Trial - After submitting to the court and serving the adverse party a copy of the judicial affidavits, trial shall
commence as follows:
 1. The party presenting the judicial affidavit of his witness in place of direct testimony shall state the
purpose of such testimony at the start of the presentation of the witness
 2. The adverse party may move to disqualify the witness or to strike out his affidavit or any of the
answers found in it on ground of inadmissibility;
 The court shall promptly rule on the motion and, if granted, shall cause the marking of any excluded
answer by placing it in brackets under the initials of an authorized court personnel, without prejudice
to the tender of excluded evidence.
 3. The adverse party shall have the right to cross-examine the witness on his judicial affidavit and on
the exhibits attached to the same.
 4. The party who presents the witness may examine him on re-direct;
 In every case, the court shall take active part in examining the witness to determine his credibility
as well as the truth of his testimony and to elicit the answers that it needs for resolving the issues.
 5. Upon termination of the testimony of his last witness, a party shall immediately make an oral offer of
documentary evidence, piece by piece, in their chronological order, stating the purpose or purposes for
which he offers the particular exhibit.
 6. After each piece of exhibit is offered, the adverse party shall state the legal ground for his objection,
if any, to its admission, and the court shall immediately make its ruling respecting that exhibit.
 Since the documentary or object exhibits form part of the judicial affidavits that describe and
authenticate them, it is cited by their markings during the offers, the objections, and the rulings,
dispensing with the description of each exhibit.
 Applications to criminal actions - judicial affidavit rule shall apply to all criminal actions:
 1. Where the maximum imposable penalty does not exceed 6 years;
 2. Where the accused agrees to the use of judicial affidavits, irrespective of the penalty involved; or
 3. With respect to the civil aspect of the actions, whatever the penalties involved are
 Can a party filing a criminal action cognizable by the RTC be mandated to follow the JAR? - No, the
jurisdiction of the RTC in criminal cases includes offenses where the imposable penalty exceeds 6 years,
thus, as a rule, the JAR has no application except when the accused agrees to its use.
 Is it mandatory on the part of the accused to submit a judicial affidavit? - No. Since the accused is already
aware of the evidence of the prosecution, he has the option to submit or not to submit his judicial affidavits.
If the accused desires to be heard, he may submit his judicial affidavit as well as those of his witnesses
 within 10 days from receipt of the affidavits of the prosecution with service upon the public and private
prosecutor.
 The JAR took effect last Jan 1, 2013, but with some modification as to its applicability to criminal cases.
What are these modifications? - modified only with respect to actions filed by public prosecutors, subject to
the following conditions:
 1. For the purpose of complying with the JAR, public prosecutors in the first and second level courts
shall use the sworn statements that the complainant and his or her witnesses submit during the
initiation of the criminal action before the office of the public prosecutor or directly before the trial
court;
 2. Upon presenting the witness, the attending public prosecutor shall require the witness to affirm
what the sworn statement contains and may only ask the witness additional direct examination
questions that have not been amply covered by the sworn statement;
 3. This modified compliance does not apply to criminal cases where the complainant is represented
by a duly empowered private prosecutor. The private prosecutor shall be charged in the applicable
cases the duty to prepare the required judicial affidavits of the complainant and his or her witnesses
and cause the service of the copies of the same upon the accused.
 Effect of non-compliance
 GR: A party who fails to submit the required judicial affidavits and exhibits on time shall be deemed to have
waived their submissions.
 XPN: 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 P1K nor more than P5K, at the discretion of the court.
 Appearance of the witness at the scheduled hearing - submission of the judicial affidavit of the witness
does not exempt such witness from appearing at the scheduled hearing. His appearance is necessary as the
adverse party has the right to cross-examine him on his judicial affidavit and the attached exhibits.
 Court shall not consider the affidavit of any witness who does not appear in the scheduled hearing of the
case as required. As for the counsel, his failure to appear without a valid cause despite notice shall be
deemed to have waived his client’s right to confront by cross-examination, the witnesses present
 Effect on other rules –
 As to Rules of Court and Rules of Procedure governing investigating officers and bodies authorized by the
Supreme Court to receive evidence - They are repealed or modified insofar as they are inconsistent with the
provisions of the Judicial Affidavit Rule.
 As to Rules of Procedure governing quasi-judicial bodies which are consistent with it - They are thereby
disapproved.
 Ruling - P’s lawyer is not correct in objecting to the judicial affidavit of M. The judicial affidavit rule shall
apply only to criminal actions where the maximum imposable penalty does not exceed 6 years. Here, the
maximum imposable penalty for the crime of theft of a cellphone worth P20K is Arresto mayor in its
medium (3 months and 11 days to 4 months and 20 days to) to prision correccional in its minimum (6
months and 1 day to 2 years and 4 months)
 P’s lawyer is not correct in objecting to the judicial affidavit or J because the judicial affidavit rules apply
with respect to the civil aspect of the actions, regardless of the penalties involved. Here the judicial affidavit
of J was offered to prove the civil liability of P.
 The motion for reconsideration is not meritorious. The judicial affidavit is not required to be orally offered as
separate documentary evidence, because it is filed in lieu of direct testimony of the witness. It is offered, at
the time the witness is called to testify, and nay objection to it should have been made at the time the
witness was presented. Since the receipt attached to the judicial affidavit was orally offered, there was
enough basis for the court to award civil liability.
 Judicial Affidavit Rule does not apply to the presentation of an adverse party’s witness - Judicial Affidavit
Rule 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) 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. Here, Yap is a requested witness who is the adverse party’s witness. Regardless of whether he
unjustifiably declines to execute a judicial affidavit or refuses without just cause to present the documents,
Section 5 cannot be made to apply to him for the reason that he is included in a group of individuals
expressly exempt from the provision’s application.
 The good cause exception to allow evidence not stated in pre-trial order does not apply to Judicial
Affidavit Rule. - No documentary evidence shall be presented and offered in trial other than those that had
been earlier identified and pre-marked during the pre-trial, except if allowed by the court for good cause
shown. There is no hard and fast rule to determine what may constitute "good cause," though this Court has
previously defined it as any substantial reason "that affords a legal excuse." The good cause exception,
however, does not extend to testimonial evidence, especially since the Judicial Affidavit Rule governs
presentation of testimonial evidence.

J. Weight and Sufficiency of Evidence (Rule 133)

 Weight of Evidence - probative value given by the court to particular evidence admitted to prove a fact in
issue.
 A prima facie case need not be countered by a preponderance of evidence nor by evidence of greater
weight. Defendant’s evidence which equalizes the weight of plaintiff’s evidence or puts the case in equipoise
is sufficient. As a result, plaintiff will have to go forward with the proof. Should it happen that at the trial the
weight of evidence is equally balance or at equilibrium and presumptions operate against plaintiff who has
burden of proof, he cannot prevail.

 GUIDELINES IN THE ASSESSMENT OF CREDIBILITY OF A WITNESS

 1. A witness who testified in clear, positive and convincing manner and remained consistent in cross-
examination is a credible witness.
 2. Findings of fact and assessment of credibility of a witness are matters best left to the trial court that
had the front-line opportunity to personally evaluate the demeanor, conduct, and behavior of the
witness while testifying.
 HEIRARCHY OF QUANTUM OF EVIDENCE
 PROOF BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT - Required to convict an accused
 Moral certainty or that degree of proof which produces conviction in an unprejudiced mind
 Does not demand absolute-certainty and the exclusion of all possibility of error
 CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE - Degree of proof which produces in the mind of the court a firm belief
or conviction as to the allegation sought to be established
 Adduced to overcome a prima facie case or a disputable presumption
 PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE - Degree of proof required in civil cases
 Evidence which is of greater weight or superior weight of evidence than that which is offered in opposition
to it
 SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE - Applicable in cases filed before administrative or quasi-judicial bodies
 Such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion
 Evidence, to be worthy of credit, must not only proceed from a credible source, but must also be credible in
itself. It must be natural, reasonable and probable as to make it easy to belief.
 The trial courts findings of facts will not be disturbed on appeal, unless there is a clear showing that it
plainly overlooked matters of substance which, if considered might affect the result of the review. The
credibility of witnesses is best determined by the trial judge, who has the direct opportunity to observe and
evaluate their demeanor on the witness stand.
 It may suffice to convict his co-accused if it’s given in a straightforward manner and is full of details which by
their nature could not have been the result of deliberate afterthought, otherwise, it needs corroboration,
the presence or lack of which may ultimately decide the case of the prosecution and the fate of the accused.
 In determining the sufficiency of evidence, what matters is not the number of witnesses but the credibility
and the nature and quality of their testimony. The testimony of a lone witness is sufficient to support a
conviction if found positive and credible
 The testimony of a witness may be believed in part and disbelieved in another part, depending on the
probabilities and improbabilities of the case
 If the testimony of the witness on a material issue is willfully false and given with an intention to deceive,
the court may disregard all the witness’ testimony under the Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus rule. This is not
a mandatory rule of evidence but is applied by the courts in its discretion. The court may accept and reject
portions of the witness’ testimony depending on the inherent credibility thereof.
 Falsus in uno, falsus omnibus means “false in one thing, false in everything.” - Applies when:
 1. That the false testimony is as to one or more material points; and
 2. That there should be conscious and deliberate intention to falsify a material point
 If the testimony of a witness on a material issue is willfully false and given with an intention to deceive, the
jury may disregard all the witness’ testimonies.
 The principle is not strictly applied in this jurisdiction. It deals only with the weight of the evidence and is
not a positive rule of law. Modern trend in jurisprudence favors more flexibility when the testimony of a
witness may be partly believed and partly disbelieved depending on the corroborative evidence presented
at the trial.
 Extrajudicial confession, not sufficient ground for conviction. - An extrajudicial confession made by an
accused shall not be sufficient ground for conviction, unless corroborated by evidence of corpus delicti.
 An extrajudicial confession taken with color of state function without counsel is inadmissible. - Barangay-
based volunteer organizations in the nature of watch groups, as in the case of the “bantay bayan,” are
recognized by the local government unit to perform functions relating to the preservation of peace and
order at the barangay level. Thus, without ruling on the legality of the actions taken by the head of “bantay
bayan”, and the specific scope of duties and responsibilities delegated to a “bantay bayan,” particularly on
the authority to conduct a custodial investigation, any inquiry he makes has the color of a state-related
function and objective insofar as the entitlement of a suspect to his constitutional rights provided for under
Article III, Section 12 of the Constitution, otherwise known as the Miranda Rights, is concerned. The
extrajudicial confession of appellant, which was taken without a counsel, is therefore inadmissible in
evidence
 Circumstantial evidence, when sufficient. - Circumstantial evidence is sufficient for conviction if:
 1. There are more than one circumstances;
 2. The facts from which the inferences are derived and proven; and
 3. The combination of all circumstances is such as to produce a conviction beyond reasonable doubt
 Inferences cannot be based on other inferences.
 The corollary rule is that the circumstances proven must constitute an unbroken chain which leads to one
fair and reasonable conclusion pointing to the accused, to the exclusion of all others, as guilty person.
 Ruling - The identity of the perpetrator of a crime and a finding of guilt may rest solely on the strength of
circumstantial evidence. The commission of a crime the identity of the perpetrator, and the finding of the
guild may all be established by circumstantial evidence. The circumstances must be considered as a whole
and should create an unbroken chain leading to the conclusion that the accused authored the crime. The
proven circumstances must be “consistent with each other, consistent with the hypothesis that the accused
 is guilty, and at the same time inconsistent with the hypothesis that he is innocent, and with every other
rational hypothesis except that of guilt.” In this case, no one saw petitioner actually set the fire to the nipa
hut. Nevertheless, the prosecution has established multiple circumstances, which, after being considered in
their entirety, support the conclusion that petitioner is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of simple arson.
 WEIGHT TO BE GIVEN OPINION OF EXPERT WITNESS, HOW DETERMINED - In any case where the opinion
of an expert witness is received in evidence, the court has a wide latitude of discretion in determining the
weight to be given to such opinion, and for that purpose may consider the following:
 1. Whether the opinion is based on sufficient facts or data;
 2. Whether it is the product of reliable principles and methods;
 3. Whether the witness has applied the principles and methods to the reliability of the facts of the
case; and
 4. Such other factors as the court may deem helpful to make such determination
 ALIBI - defense where an accused claims that he was somewhere else at the time of the commission of the
offense. It is one of the weakest defenses an accused may avail because of the facility with which it can be
fabricated, just like a mere denial. When this is the defense of the accused, it must be established by
positive and clear satisfactory evidence.
 A categorical and positive identification of an accused, without any showing of illmotive on the part of the
eyewitness testifying on the matter prevails over an alibi.
 For the defense of alibi to prosper, the accused must show that:
 1. He or she was somewhere else; and
 2. It was physically impossible for him to be at the scene of the crime at the time of its commission
 Alibi may serve as basis for acquittal if it can really be shown by clear and convincing evidence that it was
indeed physically impossible for the accused to be at the scene of the crime at the time of the commission
 For the defense of alibi to prosper, the requirements of time and place must be strictly met.

 OUT OF COURT IDENTIFICATION – means of identifying a suspect of a crime and is done thru the following:
 1. Show-ups where the suspect alone is brought face-to-face with the witness for identification;
 Eyewitness identification is often decisive of the conviction or acquittal of an accused. Identification of
an accused through mug shots is one of the established procedures in pinning down criminals.
However, to avoid charges of impermissible suggestion, there should be nothing in the photograph that
would focus attention on a single person.
 2. Mug shots where photographs are shown to the eyewitness to identify the suspect; or
 3. Line ups where a witness identifies the suspect from a group of persons lined up for the purpose.
 A police line-up is merely a part of the investigation process by police investigators to ascertain the
identity of offenders or confirm their identification by a witness to the crime. Police officers are not
obliged to assemble a police line-up as a condition sine qua non to prove the identity of an offender. If,
on the basis of the evidence on hand, police officers are certain of the identity of the offender, they
need not require any police line-up anymore
 ADMISSIBILITY OF OUT-OF-COURT IDENTIFICATION - admissible and reliable when it satisfies the “totality
of circumstances” test
 1. Witness opportunity to view the criminal at the time of the crime;
 2. Witness degree of attention at the time;
 3. Accuracy of any prior description given by the witness;
 4. Level of certainty demonstrated by the witness at the identification;
 5. Length of time between the crime and the identification; and
 6. Suggestiveness of the identification procedure
 FRAME-UP – Allegations of frame-up by police officers are common and standard defenses in most
dangerous drugs cases. For this claim to prosper, the defense must adduce clear and convincing evidence to
overcome presumption that government officials have not performed their duties in a regular and proper
manner. Thus, in the absence of proof of motive to falsely impute such a serious crime against the accused,
the presumption of regularity in the performance of official duty shall prevail.
 CORPUS DELICTI – actual commission by someone of the particular crime charged. It refers to the fact of the
commission of the crime, not to the physical body of the deceased or to the ashes of a burned building. The
corpus delicti may be proven by the credible testimony of a sole witness, not necessarily by physical
evidence
 Elements:
 1.Proof of the occurrence of a certain event; and
 2. A person’s criminal responsibility for the act.
 Identity of the accused is not a necessary element of corpus delicti.
 A plea of guilty at the arraignment in open court, which is a confession of guilt by the defendant, is sufficient
to support a conviction without necessity of proof aliunde of corpus delicti. In contrast, an extrajudicial
confession made by defendant does not warrant a conviction unless corroborated by independent evidence
of corpus delicti.
 Ruling - The elements necessary for a charge of illegal sale of drugs are: (1) identity of the buyer and the
seller, object and consideration and (2) delivery of the thing sold and the payment therefore. It is
indispensable that the identity of the drugs which constitutes the corpus delicti must be established before
the court. During the trial, the drugs were never presented as evidence to prove that the appellant indeed
sold the same during the entrapment operation. It is indispensable in every prosecution for illegal sale of
drugs, is the admission of proof that the sale for the illicit drug took place between the poseur-buyer and
the seller thereof, and the presentation further of the drugs, the corpus delicti, as evidence in court
 RES IPSA LOQUITOR – thing speaks for itself”. This doctrine provides that the fact of the occurrence of an
injury, taken with the surrounding circumstances. Where the thing caused the injury complained of is shown
to be under the management of the defendant or his servants and the accident is such as in ordinary course
of things does not happen if those who have its management or control use proper care, it affords
reasonable evidence, in the absence of participation by the defendant, that the accident arose from or was
caused by the defendant’s want of care.
 Application of the doctrine does not dispense with the requirement of proof of negligence. It is considered
merely as evidentiary or in the nature of procedural rule. It is simply in the process of such proof, permitting
the plaintiff to present enough of the attending circumstances to invoke the doctrine, creating an inference
or presumption of negligence and thereby place on the defendant the burden of going forward with the
proof to the contrary.
 Proof beyond reasonable doubt. - In a criminal case, the accused is entitled to an acquittal, unless his or her
guilt is shown 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.
 Moral Certainty is that degree of certainty which will justify the trial judge in grounding on it his verdict. It is
a certainty that convinces and directs the understanding and satisfies the reason and judgment of those
who are bound to act conscientiously upon it.
 Identity of the accused must be proved beyond reasonable doubt. When the identity of the accused is not
established beyond reasonable doubt, acquittal necessarily follows. Conviction for a crime rest on the
strength of the prosecution’s evidence, never on the weakness of that of the defense.
 In every criminal prosecution, the prosecution must prove two things:
 1. The commission of the crime; and
 2. 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
 Ruling - 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 the other competent evidence and the testimonies
of witnesses had directly and positively identified and incriminated J as the assailant of C. The presentation
of the weapon is not a prerequisite for conviction. Positive identification of the accused despite the non-
presentation of the weapon used in the commission of the offense.
 Preponderance of evidence, how determined. - In civil cases, the party having the burden of proof must
establish his or her case by a preponderance of evidence. In determining where the preponderance or
superior weight of evidence on the issues involved lies, the court may consider all the facts and
circumstances of the case, the witnesses' manner of testifying, their intelligence, their means and
opportunity of knowing the facts to which they are testifying, the nature of the facts to which they testify,
the probability or improbability of their testimony, their interest or want of interest, and also their personal
credibility so far as the same may legitimately appear upon the trial. The court may also consider the
number of witnesses, though the preponderance is not necessarily with the greater number.
 Means that the evidence adduced by one side is, as a whole, superior to or has greater weight than that of
the other. It means evidence which is more convincing to the court as worthy of belief than that which is
offered in opposition thereto.
 judgement cannot be entered in the plaintiff’s favor if his or her evidence still does not suffice to sustain his
cause of action.
 Matters that the court may consider in determining whether there is preponderance of evidence.
 1. All the facts and circumstances of the case;
 2. The witnesses’ manner of testifying, their intelligence, their means and opportunity of knowing the
facts to which they are testifying, the nature of the facts to which they testify, the probability or
improbability of their testimony.
 3. The witnesses’ interest or want of interest, and their personal credibility so far as the same may
legitimately appear upon the trial; and
 4. The number of witnesses, though the preponderance is not necessarily with the greater number
 To persuade by the preponderance of evidence is not to take the evidence quantitatively but qualitatively.
 In civil cases, only a preponderance of evidence or “greater weight of the evidence” is required. While the
charge invoices are not actionable documents per se, they provide details on the alleged transactions. These
documents need not be attached to or stated in the complaint as these are evidentiary in nature. In fact, the
cause of action is not based on these documents but on the contract of sale between the parties. Here, the
delivery of the supplies and materials was duly proved by the charge invoices and purchase orders indicating
that Asian Construction indeed ordered supplies and materials from H and these were delivered.
 Substantial evidence. - In cases filed before administrative or quasi-judicial bodies, a fact may be deemed
established if it is supported by substantial evidence, or that amount of relevant evidence which a
reasonable mind might accept as adequate to justify a conclusion.
 Applies to cases filed before the administrative or quasi-judicial bodies and which requires that in order to
establish a fact, the evidence should constitute that amount of relevant evidence which a reasonable mind
might accept as adequate to justify a conclusion.
 Substantial evidence is more than mere scintilla
 CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE – degree of evidence that produces in the mind of the trier of fact a
firm belief or conviction as to allegation sought to established. It is intermediate, being more than
preponderance, but not to the extent of such certainty as is required beyond reasonable doubt as in
criminal cases
 Instances when clear and convincing evidence is required:
 1. Proving forgery
 2. Proving ownership over a land in annulment or reconveyance of title
 3. Invoking self-defense, onus is on the accused-appellant to establish his justification for the killing
 4. Proving allegation of frame-up and extortion by police officers in most drugs cases
  5. Proving physical impossibility for the accused to be at the crime scene when using alibi as a defense
 6. Using denial as a defense like in prosecution for violation for drug cases
 7. Overcome presumption of due execution of notarial instruments
 8. Proving bad faith to warrant an award of moral damages
 9. Proving that the police officers did not properly perform their duty or that they were inspired by an
improper motive
 10. When a person seeks confirmation of an imperfect or incomplete title to a piece of land on the
basis of possession by himself and his predecessors-in-interest, he must prove with clear and
convincing evidence compliance with the requirements of the applicable law
 11. In granting or denying bail in extradition proceedings.
 List is not exclusive.
 In civil cases, burden of proof is on plaintiff to establish case by preponderance of evidence. - In civil cases,
the burden of proof rests upon the plaintiff, who is required to establish his/her case by a preponderance of
evidence. Preponderance of evidence is defined as 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 that, in the last analysis, means probability of the
truth. It is evidence that is more convincing to the court as it is worthier of belief than that which is offered
in opposition thereto. Preponderance of evidence refers to the probability to truth of the matters intended
to be proven as facts
 Substantial evidence is the least demanding among the hierarchy of evidence. - well-established rule that
the party-litigant who alleges the existence of a fact or thing necessary to establish his/her claim has the
burden of proving the same by the amount of evidence required by law, which, in labor proceedings, is
substantial evidence, or such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a
conclusion. To be clear, in the hierarchy of evidentiary values, proof beyond reasonable doubt is placed at
the highest level, followed by clear and convincing evidence, preponderance of evidence, and substantial
evidence, in that order. Thus, in the hierarchy of evidence, it is the least demanding. Corollarily, the ground
for the dismissal of an employee does not require proof beyond reasonable doubt. The quantum of proof
required is merely substantial evidence — which only entails evidence to support a conclusion, even if other
minds, equally reasonable, might conceivably opine otherwise. Accordingly, requiring a quantum of proof
that is over and above substantial evidence is contrary to law

K. Rules on Electronic Evidence (A.M. No. 01-7-01-SC)

 Electronic Document
 1. Information or the representation of information, data, figures, symbols or other modes of written
expression, described or however represented, by which a right is established, or an obligation
extinguished, or by which a fact may be proved and affirmed, which is received, recorded, transmitted,
stored, processed, retrieved or produced electronically; and
 2. It includes digitally signed documents and any print-out or output, readable by sight or other means,
which accurately reflects the electronic data message or electronic document.
 For the document to be deemed electronic, it is important that it be received, recorded,
transmitted, stored processed, retrieved, or produced electronically. The Rule does not absolutely
require that the electronically document be initially generated or produced electronically.
 Electronic data message - Information generated, sent, received, or stored by electronic, optical or similar
means
 ELECTRONIC DOCUMENT - Information or the representation of information, data, figures, symbols or other
modes of written expression, described or however represented, by which a right is established or an
obligation extinguished, or by which a fact may be proved and affirmed, which is received, transmitted,
stored, processed, retrieved or produced electronically.
 It includes digitally signed documents.
 Electronic documents as functional equivalent of paper-based documents - Whenever a rule of evidence
refers to the term of writing, document, record, instrument, memorandum or and other form of writing,
such term shall be deemed to include an electronic document
 Admissibility
 1. It must comply with the rules on admissibility prescribed by the Rules of Court and related laws;
 2. It must be authenticated in the manner prescribed by these Rules.
 Privilege communication - confidential character of a privilege communication is not denied solely on the
ground that it is in the form of an electronic document.
 While “data message” has reference to information electronically sent, stored or transmitted, it does not
necessarily mean that it will give rise to a right or extinguish and obligation, unlike an electronic document.
Evidence from the law, however, is the legislative intent to give the two terms the same construction.
 Related jurisprudence - terms “electronic data message” and “electronic document,” as defined under the
E-Commerce Act of 2000, do not include a facsimile transmission. Accordingly, a facsimile transmission
cannot be considered be considered electronic evidence. It is not the functional equivalent of an original
under the Original Document Rule and is not admissible as electronic evidence.
 What differentiates an electronic document from a paper-based document is the manner by which the
information is processed. By no stretch of the imagination can a person’s signature be affixed manually be
considered as information electronically received, recorded, transmitted, stored, processed, retrieved or
produced. Hence, the argument that since the paper printouts were produced through an electronic
process, then these photocopies are electronic documents as defined in the Rules of Evidence is obviously
an erroneous, if not preposterous, interpretation of the law.
 Original of an electronic document - electronic document shall be regarded as the equivalent of original
document under the Original Document Rule if it is a printout or output readable by sight or other means,
shown to reflect the data accurately.

 Copies as equivalents of the originals

 GR: Copies or duplicates shall be regarded as the equivalent of the original when:
 1. A document is in two or more copies executed at or about the same time with identical contents; or
 2. It is a counterpart produced by the same impression as the original, or from the same matrix, or by
mechanical or electronic re-recording, or by chemical reproduction, or by other equivalent techniques
which are accurately reproduction of the original.
 XPNs:
 1. A genuine question is raised as to the authenticity of the original; or
 2. In the circumstances, it would be unjust or inequitable to admit a copy in lieu of the original.
 The Supreme Court held, that the picture images of the ballots are electronic documents that are regarded
as the equivalents of the original official ballots themselves. The picture images of the ballots, as scanned
and recorded by the PCOS, are likewise official ballots that faithfully capture in electronic form the votes
cast by the voters, as defined. As such, the printouts thereof are the functional equivalent of the paper
ballots filled out by the voters and, thus, may be used for purposes of revision of votes in an electoral
protest.
 These two documents – the official ballot and its picture image- are considered “original documents” simple
means that both of them are given equal probative weight. In short, when either is presented as evidence,
one is not considered as weightier than the other.
 Probative value of Electronic Documents or Evidentiary Weight; Method of Proof
 Burden of proving authenticity - person offering the document has the burden to prove its authenticity
 Evidentiary weight of electronic documents: Factors for assessing evidentiary weight
 1. The reliability of the manner or method in which it was generated, stored or communicated,
including but not limited to input and output procedures, controls, tests and checks for accuracy and
 reliability of the electronic data message or document, in the light of all the circumstances as well as
any relevant agreement;
 2. The reliability of the manner in which its originator was identified;
 3. The integrity of the information and communication system in which it is recorded or stored,
including but not limited to the hardware and computer programs or software use as well as
programming errors;
 4. The familiarity of the witness or the person who made the entry with the communication and
information system;
 5. The nature and quality of the information which went into the communication and information
system upon which the electronic data message or electronic document was based; or
 6. Other factors which the court may consider as affecting the accuracy or integrity of the electronic
document or electronic data message.
 Affidavit of evidence - All matters relating to the admissibility and evidentiary weight of an electronic
document may be established by an affidavit stating facts of direct personal knowledge of the affiant or
based on authentic records. The affidavit must affirmatively show the competence of the affiants to testify
on the matters contained therein
 Cross-examination of the deponent is allowed as a matter of right by the adverse party.
 Electronic documents and the hearsay rule
 Inapplicability of the hearsay rule - memorandum, report, record or data compilation of acts, events,
conditions opinions, or diagnoses made by electronic, optical or other similar means at or near the time of
or from transmission or supply of information by a person with knowledge thereof, and kept in the regular
course or conduct of a business activity, and such was the regular practice to make the memorandum,
report, record, or data compilation by electronic, optical or similar means. All of which are shown by the
testimony of the custodian or other qualified witnesses, is excepted from the rule on hearsay evidence.
 presumption provided for in Sec. 1 Rule 8 may be overcome by evidence of the untrustworthiness of the
source or information or the method or circumstances of the preparation, transmission or storage
 Authentication of electronic documents and electronic signatures
 1. By evidence that it had been digitally signed by the person purported to have signed the same;
 2. By evidence that other appropriate security procedures or devices as may be authorized by the SC or
by law for authentication of electronic documents were applied to the document; or
 3. By other evidence showing its integrity and reliability to the satisfaction of the judge.
 The above-mentioned requirements will only apply when the documents is a private document and the
same is offered as an authentic document.
 Manner of authentication of electronic signatures
 1. By evidence that a method or process was utilized to establish a digital signature and verify the
same;
 2. By any other means provided by law; or
 3. By any other means satisfactory to the judge as establishing the genuineness of the signature
 Audio, video and similar evidence - admissible provided it shall be shown, presented or displayed to the
court and shall be identified, explained or authenticated by the person who made the recording or by some
other person competent to testify on its accuracy.
 Ephemeral electronic communication - Telephone conversations, text messages, chatroom sessions,
streaming audio, streaming video, and other electronic forms of communication the evidence of which is
not recorded or retained.
 Ephemeral communications shall be proven by the testimony of a person who was a party to the same or
who has personal knowledge thereof. In this case, the complainant who was the recipient of said messages
and therefore had personal knowledge thereof testified on their contents and import. Respondent herself
admitted that the cellphone number reflected in complainant’s cellphone from which the messages
originated was hers. Moreover, any doubt respondent may have had as to the admissibility of the text
 messages had been laid to rest when she and her counsel signed and attested to the veracity of the text
messages between her and the complainant. It is also well to remember that in administrative cases,
technical rules of procedure and evidence are not strictly applied. There is no doubt as to the probative
value of the text messages as evidence in determining the guilt or lack thereof of respondent.
 By analogy, a deleted Facebook post may be admitted as an ephemeral electronic communication subject to
the exclusionary rule of whether it was illegally obtained or not
 Authentication of electronic evidence can be through testimony of the origin and transfer. - Court agrees
with the RTC in appreciating the CCTV footages and admitting the same as evidence because they bolstered
the testimonies of the witnesses and supported the finding of treachery in the case at bar. As correctly held
by the CA, the Rules on Electronic Evidence provides that persons authorized to authenticate the video or
CCTV recording is not limited solely to the person who made the recording but also by another competent
witness who can testify to its accuracy. In the case at bar, Asas was able to establish the origin of the
recording and explain how it was transferred to the compact disc and subsequently presented to the trial
court. Hence, this Court finds no reason to contradict such finding.
 An electronic document is admissible if it complies with the rules on admissibility. - to consider an
electronic document as evidence, it must pass the test of admissibility. According to Section 2, Rule 3 of the
Rules on Electronic Evidence, an electronic document is admissible in evidence if it complies with the rules
on admissibility prescribed by the Rules of Court and related laws and is authenticated in the manner
prescribed by these Rules. Rule 5 of the Rules on Electronic Evidence lays down the authentication process
of electronic documents. Section 2 of Rule 5 sets forth the required proof of authentication: —Before any
private electronic document offered as authentic is received in evidence, its authenticity must be proved by
any of the following means: (a) by evidence that it had been digitally signed by the person purported to
have signed the same; (b) by evidence that other appropriate security procedures or devices as may be
authorized by the Supreme Court or by law for authentication of electronic documents were applied to the
document; or (c) by other evidence showing its integrity and reliability to the satisfaction of the judge.