Actions in rem, in personam, and quasi in rem

1. An action in rem, one instituted and enforced against the whole world. Not directed against
particular person but in the things/res itself.
2. An action in personam is one filed against a definite defendant. It is intended to subject the
interest of defendant on a property to an obligation or lien. Jurisdiction over the person
(defendant) is required. It is a proceeding to enforce personal rights and obligations brought
against the person, and is based on the jurisdiction of the person, although it may 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. The purpose is to impose through the judgment
of a court, some responsibility or liability directly upon the person of the defendant. No other than
the defendant is liable, not the whole world, as in an action for a sum of money or an action for
damages.
3. An action quasi in rem, also brought against the whole world, is one brought against persons
seeking to subject the property of such persons to the discharge of the claims assailed. An
individual is named as defendant and the purpose of the proceeding is to subject his interests
therein to the obligation or loan burdening the property. It deals with status, ownership or liability
or a particular property but which are intended to operate on 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. Examples of actions quasi in rem are action for partition, action for
accounting, attachment, foreclosure of mortgage.
4. An action in personam is not necessarily a personal action. Nor is a real action necessarily an
action in rem. An in personam or an in rem action is a classification of actions according to
foundation. For instance, an action to recover title to or possession of real property is a real
action, but it is an action in personam, not brought against the whole world but against the person
upon whom the claim is made.
5. The distinction is important to determine whether or not jurisdiction over the person of the
defendant is required and consequently to determine the type of summons to be employed.
Jurisdiction over the person of the defendant is necessary for the court to validly try and decide a
case against said defendant where the action is one in personam but not where the action is in
rem or quasi in rem.
6. SC sums up the basic rules in Biaco vs. Philippine Countryside Rural Bank, GR 161417,
February 8, 2007: