September 30 and October 7, Pre-Trial to Discovery

Answer the following, 10 points each

1. What is the nature and purpose of pre-trial? 

ANSWERS:

A pre-trial is a procedural device held prior to the trial for the court to consider the
following purposes:

(a) The possibility of an amicable settlement or of a submission to alternative modes of dispute

resolution;
(b) The simplification of the issues;
(c) The possibility of obtaining stipulations or admissions of facts and of documents to avoid
unnecessary proof;
(d) The limitation of the number and identification of witnesses and the setting of trial dates;
(e) The advisability of a preliminary reference of issues to a commissioner;
(f) The propriety of rendering judgment on the pleadings, or summary judgment, or of
dismissing the action should a valid ground therefore be found to exist;
(g) The requirement for the parties to:
(h) Such other matters as may aid in the prompt disposition of the action. (Section 2, Rule 18 of
the 2019 Rules of Civil Procedure)

2. What is the difference between pre-trial in civil and criminal cases?

ANSWERS:

A . The pre-trial in a civil case the branch clerk of court shall issue , within 5 calendar days from
filing, a notice of pre-trial (Sec. 1, Rule 18, Rules of Court). The pre-trial in a criminal case is
ordered by the court and no motion to set the case for pre-trial is required from either the
prosecution or the defense (Sec. 1, Rule 118, Rules of Court).

B. The motion to set the case for pre-trial in a civil case is made after the last responsive
pleading has been served and filed (Sec. 1, Rule 18, Rules of Court). In a criminal case, the pre-
trial is ordered by the court after arraignment and within 30 days from the date the court
acquires jurisdiction over the person of the accused (Sec. 1, Rule 118, Rules of Court).

C. The pre-trial in a civil case considers the possibility of an amicable settlements an important
objective (Sec. 2[a], Rule 18, Rules of Court). The pre-trial in a criminal case does not include
considering the possibility of amicable settlement of criminal liability as one of its purposes (See
Sec. 1, Rule 118, Rules of Court).
D. The sanctions for non-appearance in a pre-trial in a civil case, court-annexed mediation, and
judicial dispute resolution are imposed upon the plaintiff and the defendant (Sec. 4, Rule 18,
Rules of Court). The sanctions in a criminal case are imposed upon the counsel for the accused
or the prosecutor (Sec. 3, Rule 118, Rules of Court).

E. A pre-trial brief is specifically required to be submitted in a civil case (Sec. 6, Rule 18, Rules of
Court). A pre-trial brief is not specifically required in a criminal case.

3. What is the remedy of a party whose motion for intervention is denied?

ANSWERS:

The party cannot do anything if the motion for intervention is denied because an
intervention is not a matter of right but may be permitted when the applicant shows facts
which satisfy the requirements of the statute authorizing intervention. The allowance or
disallowance of a motion for intervention rests on the sound discretion of the court after
consideration of the appropriate circumstances. It is not an absolute right.

4. How is the attendance of a witness compelled?

ANSWERS:

The attendance of witnesses may be compelled by the use of a subpoena as provided in

Rule 21.

5. Enumerate the sanctions that may be imposed to who refuses to cooperate or comply
with each mode of discovery (you may create a table)

ANSWER:

The sanctions for refusal to comply with the modes of discovery are as follows:

A. Refusal to answer any question upon oral
examination
(a) If a party refuses to answer any question
upon oral examination, the proponent may
apply to the proper court, for an order to
compel an answer. The same procedure may
be availed of when a party or witness refuses
to answer any interrogatory submitted
pursuant to the rules on the modes of
discovery (Sec. 1, Rule 29, Rules of Court). If
 the application is granted, the court shall
order the deponent or refusing party to
answer the question or interrogatory. If the
refusal is unjustified, the court 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 (Sec. 1, Rule 29, Rules
of Court). Also, a refusal to answer after being
directed by the proper court may be
considered
a contempt of that court (Sec. 2, Rule 29,
Rules of Court).

(b) If the application for an order to compel a

deponent to answer is denied because of the
absence of a substantial justification, the court
may require the proponent or the counsel
advising 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 (Sec.
1, Rule 29, Rules of Court).
B. Refusal to answer designated or particular (a) The court may order that the matters,
questions or refusal to produce documents or regarding which the questions were asked,
things or to submit to physical or mental shall be taken as established for purposes of
examination the action in accordance with the claim of the
party obtaining them (Sec. 3[a], Rule 29, Rules
of Court).

(b) The court may issue an order refusing to

allow the disobedient party to support or
oppose designated claims or defenses or
prohibiting him from introducing in evidence
designated documents or things or items of
testimony, or from introducing evidence of
physical or mental condition (Sec. 3[b], Rule
29, Rules of Court).

(c) The court may issue an order striking out

pleadings or parts thereof, or staying further
proceedings until the order is obeyed, or

C. Refusal to be sworn
D. Refusal to admit
E. Failure to attend depositions or to serve
answers to interrogatories.
dismissing the action or proceeding or any
part thereof, or rendering a judgment by
default against the disobedient party (Sec.
3[c], Rule 29, Rules of Court).
(d) The court may direct the arrest of any
party or
agent of a party for disobeying any of the
orders of the court, except an order to submit
to a physical or mental examination (Sec. 3[d],
Rule 29, Rules of Court).
A refusal of a party to be sworn after being
directed by the court may be considered a
contempt of that court (Sec. 2, Rule 29, Rules
of Court).
If a party refuses to admit the genuineness of
any
document or the truth of any matter of fact
and serves a sworn denial thereof, and if the
other party later on proves the genuineness of
the document or the truth of such matter of
fact, the court, upon proper application, may
order the former to pay the reasonable
expenses in making such proof, including
attorney's fees (Sec. 4, Rule 29, Rules of
Court).
1. The court may (a) strike out all or any part
of the
pleading of that party, (b) dismiss the action or
proceeding or any part thereof, (c) enter a
judgment by default against that party, and, in
its discretion, (d) order him to pay reasonable
expenses incurred by the other, including
attorney's fees (Sec. 5, Rule 29, Rules of
Court).
2. The consequences under Sec. 5 of Rule 29
will
apply if a party refuses to answer the whole
set of written interrogatories, and not just a
particular question. Where the party, upon
whom the written interrogatories is served,
refuses to answer a particular question in the
set of written interrogatories and despite an
order compelling him to answer the particular
question, still refuses to obey the order, Sec.
3(c) of Rule 29 will apply (Zepeda v. China
Banking Corporation,
504 SCRA 126, 134).

The following are the consequences provided

for in Sec.
3(c) of Rule 29:
(a) The court may issue an order striking out
pleadings or parts thereof;

(b) The court may issue an order staying

further
proceedings until the order is obeyed;

(c) The court may issue an order dismissing

the
action or proceeding or any part thereof; or

(d) The court may issue an order rendering a

judgment by default against the disobedient
party.

3. The matter of how, and when, the above

sanctions should be applied is one that
primarily rests on the sound discretion of the
court where the case is pending, having
always in mind the paramount and interest of
justice. For while the modes of discovery are
intended to attain the resolution of litigations
with great expediency, they are not
contemplated, however, to be ultimate causes
of injustice. It behooves trial courts to
examine well the circumstances of each case
and make their considered determination
thereafter (Zepeda v. China Banking
Corporation, supra).