zi ALBANDG be sie aaa BAR REVIE IT Nake prcvicenreee -1 Saige OCCA tO, Magic Areas in REMEDIAL LAW Dean Ed Vincent S lbano Bar Review Director sunisp1crt0% Nature and reasons forthe doctrine a rare of our. Stet obereance the dot of era curs shld NOt Re ameter of mete ply. tsa constant imperative ie (1) the strctore four ju stem and 2] Ue requirements of de proces Te dati of rachy of ours recog the aos eves of courts the country as they ae established under de Cosettian nd y la ther ening ad ell ofthe rulings in eaion wih oe another how these Siterere tes of court ntact with ne ner (AS a Mel Chics for Overseas Worker x. (AMCOW {ce Approved Medal Core Assan Ine GR Nas 2071328 207205, Dcomber 6 2016, B12 SCRA $52,499). 1 determines the venues of appeals and the appropriate lor or the suance of exteodiary writs (People w Cuaesm, UG No. 07787, Ape 8, 1989), ‘Wher tga Sek ee crcl from the Court. they bypass the judi structure and open themselves to the rik of presenting compote o disputed hts THs consguenty hampers the resuition of controversies before the our Without he necesry fet the Curt anhotautharitatvey determine the rigs aed obigaions ofthe artis. ‘The case would then become another aditon to the out’ alreaty congested dv kets (Alonso v. Cebu Country Cb, inc ER AS SATE, Api 2, 300,61 SERA Gon Sa, I.» DOT a GR Ne 27158, ch 12,21, lr este purpose ofthe doctrine of erarchy of courts The doctrine of blorarehy of courts operates: (2) proven nordiate dmwnds up the Cour’ tine and senton wich are bat devoted t those mars wi Iselin sin People v ares, GA No. 6787, ‘Apri 16999) (2) prevent further overeroweing fhe Cour’ dake and (3) preven the inevitably and ress delay, teed or ther nthe audeaton fests bichon have ob remanded or fred tothe lower cot 3 the froperforu under the eles of procedure asthe curt better equipped to resoive fats questions (Sanlago ‘angus GR. Nos 99280-90, january 27,198,217 SCRA G8, 62; Gos Samar, nev DOTE, et a, CH No 217158, March 122019 fardcee. Gow Saran, Ine BRE a, sup) Juric of courts deterred bythe legions tn the compl. tis a welled ue that rsdn ofthe cout deed by the legatins i the complaint athe haracor fhe ei sought in sell Vest GR No. 11920, Mare 1,199,404 SRA 758744). was sued tha lewenuting whether am con fone suet mater which Rt capable of pecuniary estimation the eserion 3 frst ascertaining the nature ofthe principal acta or rere subs esr. ipa fr thereover fa sm of mons the sm ienssered capable of pata estimation 2d whether json the mba our ‘rin the ATC: wu depend on the amount ofthe aim ut where ene ne someting ter tha he gh Co Fecove a sum of money. where the moey as puly ign t,o consequence of the pict rele sought. ‘Suchsetins cases whore thesubjcr othe gation ay tbe stint tars of money Rene, 2 Reape of pecaniary estat These cases ate coe eeasvelyby MICs Surg Hes Alfeds Hous. Ld, al, SH No 208232, March 10,2014 Sp Eros vp Duml, GR No 195479, Janaay 25, 2016 Carer, Branco, January 27,2016, Pera Bernat Doctrine of jl stab. "der the rine adel tay. oo (2) curso equal grade can enon or hae ju rere a the proceedings of the ther Hence ar the Frsonie male om action to nully the suction sae fed ad "nce ofthe te ofthe ber ne proceed cao e fica becuse of sai doctrine. Ie would ea to contusion and Serius hamper the adminsuation 0 jusice (Ching Cojargc. ca, 46 SCRA 121 [2003] Tan c Caco, GR Ra 213056, hut 5, 2016 Feds Bora, ‘Tsou branes ofthe RTC of «province or chy, being co-egul cate restrain one another. They ae cordate Np rer. Thong yo Jue 30.1988, Ruble Reyes 185 SCRA 330987) Tas te bssed onthe dns ‘tj say wag founded on pubic ply asinforeace would hamper ot dla the amination of fui. ‘ot the darn of jal stay dacs oot apply where ard pet liam volved (Traders Royal Bank TAC, 139SCRA 44} [1984 Viamor Sala, Vilonor»Gurrev Noveber 13.1991) and ts prosecuted ina prope act The car bere te proper stan bv prosetd conus 2 TKO or jcc san eneption tothe vale. The bas ofan extn da proes Principle of adherents tjuristction Once juradton fe seqred or ached to 3 cour over 3 aki contin the end ofthe case However, wader the rematanee the eee fe RIC fale sha aw be place under the rapertson and conelo {he SC, even the RTC agent Isard Ba and con no lnge be modes or ered (Arngs CAG No 95607, July 231952) Jurisdiction ditagushed fom venue, {a} fredicion fs the author to bear and deter a ane; vende the place where the case 0 be heard ae tee (0) Juradcton is mater of substantive aw venue, of procera {6} Jordon exalts 3 relation tween the cur an the subect mater: ve thu deendast or ettoner and respondent ad 4 rebtion between pant | ABUCZ019 Mag ease Rome Law sqrt (cenblaed)REVISED conan )EDITED/UA/EVSAr(@) fusion i ed by law and cannot be conkred by the putes venee maybe conferred By the acto geen ofthe ports (ct eta Lic Tat, GR. No 148022 Sperber 2, 2005), Nature ofthe atom for speci erfermance to execute deed of reconseyance; beyond pecuniary estimation “hn scton for specie perormance scl fo alge ordoring the dtendant to excite the approMae seeds fcauveyancewaaction eyo peanaryestmatn tat real acta, Wat termes the ratre othe aon Sind whch court has uation on tae te aptons athe cmp ad he character of he rei sought (Mio Pare v.Fractoss Bail fol Bl, Preeatacon Cables cl, 658 Phil 5,54) In hs compa, exponent ‘nine hat petitiners prone convey tm he subj ua ene ht say wht company Fo as, ‘spondent paved tha petieers be compelled opto trp eth alge ral agreement The object othe ‘to compel petzner to ptr a ac, pcre, eaeete wien struments pursuant fo geno orl nit Nota, rend doesnt aim omer or et he subj! properes. ‘That te end resatwoud be ho trae fhe sje unt orespandetsnome nthe event that is ut 6 cided havo i ated oraaquce ad tayo the case for wht the act [or specie perfec ‘nth dagen ws sted Had respon action raced to ral the crux of he controversy would have Deen the exstnce cr anvestnce of the aged oral eookact rom which woald Now respondent's aed gh (0 cmpel $ettoners to eusate dacs of conveyante The tater of property eight By respond cba een to 0 a8 fs ofthe desert a tro ot hae ded a beg Wh, a agement ocenvey the popes in sebig or svete (nC Bt fe, 6 Po No.1 sary 208 The RTC and MTC have jrisdcton over acon pelicans Tuco ner ston mvlang to tae possrsan ore propery sno determined by sass alae {See Ouano PUTT Inmates 434 P20 [202 loss 457 Ph. 327 [AOS Hes of Seb tera oh. 595 [200 Pre Bal, cl No. 168423 Jouay 1,201,640 SCRA 50.66) The assessed ‘aha oft propery sar market vale mld y thease eve kona a tnable ale (ie ‘Suva supe ian orp te, Na 7595 uy 2200 220SCRA 220,229, Tn Qtnagor Cour of pe, S57 pi 80,657 [2007 was rues tha a8 hg ow tan 2 distinction ‘mast be mage betwen thos ropes the aesed vale of whch ow P2000, feusee Metre Mul: and 5000000, wht the asa ve a shown byte it decbraton is F9.00000 and athe othe compl the NTC af Manis hs tdcton even tae Sapo. Sp De est, GR. Na 196356, Apri 20,2015, Bron Catling: angel GR No. 187496 une 1201) Boundary dispute "band depte must eave inthe conto aan rene at on jectinent case The Doundiry spate snc about pessesin bt encroachment, tht whee th rope ened by the deena formed pat the slats property. A toundary dapate cant be seed sammarty ser Rule 7 ol the Rules of Court, the etd neh ted tae ey (oan. Ra, GN 3695 nay 2.2015) Value of property found inthe document std upon con be the Ba i determining urdcion st fort uvery of gssesan and ara eal property whan assessed value of P291000 file withthe RTC can tess Hesse the has ha urn ove he subyat mattr. The NTC has anion flac the assed vate cst eee PER000.00, Under te law expanding the arisiction of the MTC the assessed Sal ote property lester ete of Meto Mania oe at exceed 2000000, compl for econveyance ts whin theron ofthe NTs sleet athe tox dalton ian the assesae vale of he propery ej ‘he presumption of rgulny de hat been abd bythe proper goverment agency (uano ¥. PTT Interoationst Ivete Corp e as, 134230, ly 172002) ‘ithe Boy fe compan does ot aeged th axsexed valu, the he vl of said property a stated in he docament sued pon shoul beth: tats for deterring jeralicon (Sp. Taya. Sea eta, ER No 204870, February 12016) Acton for qugting ole whine MTCor RTC urisaetion depending upon ts assessed valu. “Toeorpol and xlutvejnsdiion ove 3 compli for gutingt ile and rconeyance vol att eto to tt tne Setaal Tia our (RTC or he Muna Trl Core (TC) ependang upon the assessed alo the propery Contra with Sc 19, 0 125 as amended by RA 791, because 2 acon for eenveyance oo rere ‘ouk moe’ ute involves the ile foo possession of eal property, or ay interest therein, exlsve cig Funston overs action pertaned othe RTE, uss teases Yao he popety dos oot ext P20,000.00 Ur'PEOOMAED i whieh imence the ME having terra uradictog vould have excsve ongnal junction Determine of ch regular cour as urd woud be the algations ofthe compan on the assess vale of the property ands princi rb therey sug (Hats of Ceneroso Seb Hef Sv, GI No. 174497, Ocab 2, 2009 S08 SERA 398 els of teria cal Sp Lapa GI No 159941, August 1,201, Bers I Acton for revival odes within che arta ofthe RTE: beyond pecuniary etic. ‘in acon to teva ucgnent salon hose exchae Purpose fo enforce adgment wich coud 0 lange beenisred by mete motion Cae v Cour Appeal GR No. 114399, December 1S, 1994, 299 SCRA 252 261) Seton kat Once agent becomes fi) a exeetby the prevaing party can have executes 3 matier afi never win ve ens rom the ta ey of agen the preva party aso awe he Crcstoncntrey motion aor the peso ve yar the si uignent rede ryht aio whch st Be sored bythe stitution of crn sn 3 regu oar etn TO years om the tne the fgnen esomes al {Hutvev Alta Gi No 203047, february 26 9014, 717 SCRA 358, 580-50) The acon te one beyond pecuniary ‘stuns the RI has rascion (Ama CUbaDk NAL GR. No, 142048, Deere 13,2077 Jorden. 2 IABNCZO19 Mag Aas a Rel La (sgrete combina REVISED conse dete) EDITED ESAsWen ofenseconsiered as having been commited i eelaton tan office nollens sudo have been commited telat to thot fens stimately connects” wth the slice ofthe fence ad perpettted whl he was nthe peeformance of is ofc functions Esteban SB. eal GR No 1464), March 1, 2005 Gurr) "he rian beter he crime athe office mist be det ad ma acide such hatte lense amnat eit without the fice (Monta ¥, ho, 90 i483 (98D) ropes Mono by way of except the precip that although public office not an clement ofthe oflense ‘hacyd, a long te cna charged the informant sstimaely connected wth the ofc of he offender and peetrted whic he wasn the perermae, though improper er regula, of soft uncioos Ue accused eld ave boon inte fran otlene corumated in elation to ofc (People . Money, 108 Pi 613; Aden vB (GR. No. 15286 fly 28,2005, Estchn 9. Sealy, No. 1466449, March 11,2005, Guerre | tng People Mendoza Gi Mo 57610 fly 31, 199,175 SCRA 743 People v-Cosre 95 Phil 57 (1954) [BARANGAY CONCILIATION (R4.NO. 7160) fuleso/vnuc nde ow governing aang contin eye: 2) Disputes btwoun persons actual eidngin thesame barangay sal be brought for amcable seamen before ‘helupor of saidbaraney. b) Those vou acts resseas of diferent arsogays wan the same ity or municipality shalt be brut ia thebarangay where the respondent or any ofthe respndents actly resides. a the election athe compliant «) Al dsputes veiving eat propery or any interest therein sal be brought the barangay whee the real property o he age portion theoo! saad 6) Thowe arog at the workplace where the contending ports ate employed or atthe intution where such partis are onoled or workplace rattan lated (Se 09,8. Na. 7360), Neture of compromise nthe barangay: means of enforcement "The fect! KatarungargPambaragay Law (Soe, 399-422, RA 7610), provides that an aca stiement reached after barsngsyconctason proceedings isthe force an effect of ial udgrana ofa court fn reputed oF potion to liy te same sed bore the peopr yor mums eat wan ten (10) days fom ts date (Sec. 416 RA7610) lt further prowdes hat the etna maybe enforced by execution y the upon tugspamayaps win 3 (0) ‘month from te ate ry scion the appropateeay or municipal court by nd the axon prod (Se. 417, RA ‘Fot0) The specu provscn alow the peers prey enunlated ts Arce 2037 of the Ci Code whucha compromise ‘hs upon the pats the cc nd authorty of re jueat, bu there shall be ao exeiton except i capac wR 2 atest compromise (Loner v Sein, LSCRA 1215; tad Traders Fence I¥. Hers bt Soran 404 SCRA 6? (2003) Diaagea CA 21 scita 49 (1999) Tans because he may regard the compromise a alread) escinde L20n0r 8 Syn} SCRA E215) by the breath thereto theater party (ChaveeCA,et al G-NO.I5¥SN1 March LR, 2095) Rule 2 “ACTION Concept of pling causes of ation. Shitting single cute often the ac of ding single o vibe case of acon it several parts ae ams an siting tor na acon pn hem (Pere Cout of Appeals GA. No 157616 aly 222005, 404 SCRA ‘eng Nabus Court of Appts, Gi No, 91624 February 7, 1993, 198 SCRA 782} A single cause af action or eire {um or demon Cannot be sit up ot dvided norte ad the subet of wo or toe diferent acuons (Tut Everhat Heater Cos nc: 249 NM. 467 [1933], Tha Section Rule Zo the les Gaur expressly profits spting of [single aus of econ went prone that 0 oF re bute ee iasatuted onthe bass ofthe sae cause of act, he Tiiagot one ova juignen son the ners in ay as avalabe s+ ground forte dss ofthe eters (Chea. ‘Canaan et GR No. 156185 Septber 5, 2011 Bers} Reason forthe rleagonat sping of euses of action Poros arent ot bey to opt thar demand and praseut preceedloF present only a portion ofthe same case, and too eae the fet toe presented waar su there, tore woul be bo end gain (Mao ‘iota, a Ma 141520, October 312006, 50h SRA 336, Peres Cour of Apeals GR No 157616, ly 22,2008, 44 SCRA 69) Their splating vidated th ply agen mslpiey of sus Whose pemaryobjctve was (ovo und inudening Bre davots ofthe courte hoi canavention a the poley mer the dstussa f the second ease on the ron ft reset (Cet al Caranan.et al, GA No, ISL, September 1,201, Besa ‘ect ofemisolnderof uses of action gender af suse of acon is No ground for cismisal Indeed the caus have the power acting upon the motion oe party othe cso su sont to ort the severance ofthe mioined cause of action to be proceeded th epaatly Howevge there sn objeto to the imprope onder a he cOUr i ot motu prop dec a severance, then thre vss be bar the simultaneous adjudication of all he eereneusl oud causes of action Republic of the Piippnesy rt 498 Phil 227 (2008) "Fhe fregoing rule oly applies ft cour trying the cage has union ower al ofthe causes of action herein orwnhstanding the musjrode of the sme (lla Ase + Bayon, GI. No, 182435, August 18,2012) ke acon for parton andanndimet of eed of donation Concept ofthe scaled Totaly ue when opplieable. ‘Yher here are several clams and cotses of action betwen the same or diferent partes embed ne sme complaint the amount ofthe demand sal be the ttayof he cams all aus of action, respective a wither the ‘uses of ction aes ou ofthe sme or dere transactions (Se. 3. BP ly. 129). “ine Toa Rue pica the alwingeases 2)" Inaction where the juradctton of the Court dependent on te amount volved, te et of writen Shall bet agate sun of athe mooey demand, excusve of teres and cons, respecte of whether { )AWRC2019 Mage Aros in eri Lam (segregate cmne) REVISED consist DITED na PEVSA 3oma the separate aime de we By oF du to deren pts. any dani fr damages ma acum. the ame thera mst be alee gov Purge, Ge No. 166876, Mah 24, 2006, 48 sena74. by ase afere there are two or more pais having separate causes of aon agit two oF more detent ted nop The Toulay Ale apple nd the condition thatthe causes faction fava of wn or mare pails rage ‘wo or more defense ance oto the sme sacs an here should he comman question of aw oF act (Pores Mallar Pius 144 SCRA 377. “Action pubitan; ts nature ‘Nudge a compe For recovery of possesion ofa pare! ofan cant be res data 3 compli for ting ft ewnership an possesin ener The sae oper Base the ses fain ardent om ach “Resjuscoto Mealy means mater ajadgo 2 hing ea atte upon or dec de thing or matter sete by jadgment cals eters othe ule tht an extn fn! gent or decree reader ot the mets and without fraud or callus, by 2 court of competent jrisdicuon vpem ony mute within seston, is condasive othe rhs ff the parts or thor prvies nal thee acvons of Sule Inthe sue or anyother jueal Enna af coneureat Jurisdiction the ots mates soe nthe st a” For res juuta to absolutly tara subsequent action the following requisites must concur: (a) de former judgment or odor mst be ial (the judasent er Order ma be on the brs) must Rave been ended by ‘Sour having tsi over te sect matter and partes a () here must be eten ther and yecond actions. ‘dentyof parties, of sbjet mater, and of aus of action (Dy Ya, 763 Pi 491 $09 (2015) aon ont. Se also Kepubc of the Fhipenes (Cn) Aeronautics Adminsttation (CAA) v. Yup and Guborez v. CA: Hr of Amst Vale, GR. No.227124, December 62017, Pras Bera * Action for support and recognition may be eompleedintegroed la one complet. ation must be esblishe for 3 cht clam support rom putave father: When “ston is beyond question, suport olows os a mater of eblgaton” To esl ation at acum fr compulsory recog ion may be ‘ed sist the putative he aheas of ak action fr supper I he serv, an acon for support may be aectiy ‘eg, whete te mater o fiston shale integrated and saved (Agusta Cour: of Appeals 499 Ph 307,317 2008] Abele Catatero, GR: No, 208547, Aupst 9 2017, Leaen Rhee Abella Cabufer, GR. No. 206647, August 8. 2017, Leann, [) Te ies ntended to fromone dca eooany; avon ting of ease of actions tat woul und ‘ver dg the cour. Rule 3- PARTIES 70 CIVIL ACTIONS ‘Reasons why acons should be fled under the name of rel party-t-ntres ‘This provision has two ures: 1) ast a an the plan st be te Fal party nest and (2) the action must be rosette ithe name ofthe eal pay in nkset Necessary, the pusposes of Oh browsion ae [) to prevent tne prosacuuon of aio by persone without any rh ie or ares othe ase: (2) 0 equiv thatthe actual party ete ops rete the ane ta presente the acon (2) tad mui of ats ae (4) to discourage itgation and heep twit crea buds, pura o sun pubic pohy [Oco umboring, GA. No.t61208 january 312006; Song Is Co, Une. Cbenea, RNa 173297, Mur 6, 2015), Action of court an indispensable part 1s not impleaded “i amindspense party haste ome ormplease the yo the cout sap the ral and order the wciavon of such party (Crtexv Avia, 101 Pi 205). The presice of the sae a cin sine ua on fo the exer of dial power (Borst v. Poise, 47 Pl. 343) ot one, the rennet dismal ofthe seen, (PP odriguez 106 Ph 825) espe te oie Yo amend ae mead sah party the pi ast mod The demise Isbased onthe face to comply wh the order af the court and not dtr eer fut Co-owners are lndspensable parte in potion action. "The absence athe ihspensabe porte ins cerplan fra partition renders subsquea! actions fhe RVC ay ang Word for want uthorky ts 2 ot nly state abet pate but vena to hoe resent. “A indlspetsahle arty fame whose ttre wil be acted by the caus actin i the gstion, ad wthoue ‘hot no i determination of the case can be hc. The party's rest nthe subject ater of thes an in he Flt Sought ae go naxrcably nertined withthe ober putes that his lga resee as a party te the proceeding 5 39 hvoute megs Ip he absence, there cant be 3 resto othe dept othe paris ele the court which ‘Mective-enmplee arequisbe (Catan Land ano! he Phipps, ABB Pi a, 379°300 (200), cing Banka the ‘hippie Inds CA450 Pil, $32, 4 (2003) farther etation omit), Thus the absence ofan indepen party Fender al subsequent tonsa he court alam vn! for want of ahary Wo act ot only at the ant partes fevenas totes preset [Domingo v Shee, AGG Ph. 235,265 (2004). ‘Section I Rtle 69 of the Hues of Court reqs tht sl posons wrested i the propery shal be ed 3¢ efendaes Thus, the coe ad persons having wrest the propery ate aspeasaie artis as Suc, an Baton fr partion vl not be without the juner othe al prs (Davari Parla, ct al- GR Ne 196750, March 11,2015, Pera Barbe) ‘ecto death ofa party namacion that survives an action sures afer the death of pay, there ca Be sabstion ofthe dese by his hes (Se. 16 Rule Rules ofCou) Ifthe acon survives despite death ofa party. the dt ofthe deceased's counsel ofr the cur of sch eat, and to pe the amor and addosset of the desea opal romerenttves. The deceased ay be subsea Fishews nthe pending scion [Cun Cruz GW Na. 174292, Septembre 2010) + Hama2019 ap es Rerel Law (seyeteconned REVISED conse ITED VSA/e)sUno leg epresentative tamed by the counsel of the deceased oF the lea represenaie fas appear thin specie pric the duty ofthe out where he case peng Lo order the opposing party to procar he potent ofan exec armmstatr forthe estate ofthe deceased. The reason forth al et Pett 3 ‘ancrned wo maybe afeted by the mtervening death patubly the deceased an is esate (Suma Ltersto ‘GH No 149707, fe 18 2008 S555CKASS Crue Cruz GH No 178292 Septem 2010), ‘The decease or his esate may note named defendant. ‘A dccaseyersn des not have the casey to be sued and may not be made a defendaat na case (Venu. Maan, 374 Phi 375 [1999 ted im Spouses Brot Sapo, 738 Ph 67, 82 [2014]} Secon 1, Ree of the Revised Rules of Court uneqavocly ates that “only natal or urd rss rent thorized by aw may be arts mac action (See Boston Equty Resouces, nC, 714 PRLASY [201 Hence, here ean be no doubt a3 eceated person ar his etate may mo be enpleaded a defendant in a cui {ction as they lac eal personality. Thos when the deceased ded seal perso ecsed and he cou anger be “pleas 35 respondent tho present arinary el su for enletian (ose Spouses Beret Sip) AS Sh he ‘empl apunst hn should te demise onthe round that the pleading wert the cm ates ease of on for far wo state 3 cause of action pursuant o Section f(g Rule 16 othe Rules of Court because a complain cannot Dsibly sate 2 case of chon apsinat one who cannot be a party ta a i acta (Boston Egy Resoures, In. Court fAppals 711 Fil 41, 475475 2013] Cathey Ber GR No 219408, Novenbe 8, 2017, Pers-Bermbe. ‘sam, mpleading the deceased ar his estate me present petton was improper. The action against in mist be dns he same may js eid a aim agit estate na proper procadng. Ta CA sd not erin eversing the tl cours Requisite ofa clase sult ‘Tae reeuinesof a lass su are the allowing 2) Subject of or otersy sof common oF general mores to many persons. 1) Personsare so nasieros https toby hemo cou (Silom Bayan Ing. Araneta 72ScRA7 [L970 ©) Portes acualy Before the court are sufceniy numerous and represetatve ap that alt iterests cere sr Fly pratt. Rule -VENUEOF ACTIONS enue of personal actions eu actos. Rule ofthe Rules of Coart governs the rales on ven ofc eins Under the les, cons afecting te to ‘or ponsession area property, riers harem, sal be commence a thd inthe pope court wh has ur sdccon (ver the aea wer there property led ra prin threo suse. Forable entry and delainer actions shal ‘becommenced snd tod inthe munca ral our Othe uncpay orcywherin the rel pooper volved, oF 3 prin theo, stuated With rexpet to person! acon the Rules proade stl oder actos may De comme nd ted whece the plait ora of he Priel lat eeides or where the defend or any ofthe pineal defendants reads, oi he ese oeidetdeteedant where hem be faut, athe election te lama (Lay Contraction & Development Carp v Sedan, GR Na P2271, Aus 31,2017, Pela Bona, I Requisite of venue stipulation. "Fhe venue for personal ations sal = as a geveral cule: he withthe court which has junadcion where the ait or the defendant recs, the eloion othe pai (Secon 2 Rue 4 Rules of Court) Av ameacepon, aris ‘may, through ween ssruort. reset the igo sa aun na cetan excuse venue (Secu 4D), Rule Fults four In drone: Curt Appeal GA Ma S46NS, osiary 14, 2015, 76 SA 240 te Court expane: Wetenspultions sto Venu may be resicive athe sense tat he sul may be fed ol a the place apr upon or merely permissive in thatthe price may Ble her sat nat ly nthe place Sereed upon but aso th places Axed bylaw. AS tn any ote agreement, Whats eset o ‘Seren of th tenon th artis expect he mater Ae rope resrtve spline on venue Jurapraderc structs tha mas be shown that ‘sueh mipuation caeie To the absence of quliying or estctve words, such a “excusvely” “ating fortis purse anyother venue “eal on preceding the doignation of wen to the snoution ote eer courts wards of sumiar import he stpuaton shout bedeeaed as ese an Sgreement nam sional forum, nt 38 luting venue to the specified place (Leospv.Rep of he Phils 8 Pi 381,385 2005) la Pipa Telephone Corporation v Teton 472 Ph. 411 (2004) the Court be that an excuse venue stpulaie vst bg prego that (2 the ipuaton the hose ven we excuse nt orin inten) ‘Cisexpressedinwting bythe pres theta, and (ii entered io Bore the Mago he Su (ey Construction & Development Corp Sedano, Gi No, 222711, Aust 3, 2017, Peat Barabe, Venue of reat actions. MRcuons afeting tle to ot ponsesson of el property, o sere tere, shal be comenced nd tein he prope court which as ur ton eer the area wherein tera! property ive a porn threo ates Se. 1) Thinchges foreclosure oa mortgage, The reason forte rue tht te acbon ar orecasure alts The meres on the land (BP Savings ak Ie, Sps Sac GR Na 175796, uly 22,2015; YU . PCI, GI No. 147902, Pebrany 17, 2006; AM. No, 91.050) an therfore ala real actu (Cheng ¥ Sarto GR No. 169647, Aygst 3, 2007, 531 SERS 730; uv PCIB Gi. Na. 147902, February 17,2006, AMLNo.99-10-05-), lowever the action dy prosper the deena fae abet othe ground of wrong vena, whch case the objction s desmod waned Te lying of venves procera rather thn substan. reiting dees oud of the eat over the person rather ton the sbject matter Vere eas toa and not to urn, 8a procera, ot jradictonal mater (acu Tan Git No. 145022 September 23, 2008470 SCRA 60) ‘SHAWRC2019Mapc Avast Reed Law sero) combined MEVISEDcutobdatd}EDITED tl /EVSA/99Stiputaenon venue withthe ase ofthe word sal effect. {tie ports tend nthe coerrt tat the ae spc asthe venue of all sts exlase hey must trmpoy a ctegnrl ad stale main langue tht they wh He venue of al actions between then oe ad oy Saenivsvey ss date pce, here sperms, The lt that i the aroement the partes spect on} cae ‘fee wenacs montane Ku ort pace for tons reat on those specie i sa ue does tice te characterize the arene asa rsrcive one Tere ust be accompanying language cet and ategocally ‘apres thr orp mesg thi actions beac erm be tigated amy the pla warmed by the. Any bt or "certian st brane gst ging he areemen reste or mandatny aspect (Unaster Congiomertion ne m= CA a. 79 SCAD 241 GR. Na 119657, Febroary 7.197), eu of an action for spec prformance oer a parcel oftand. ‘av action compe! nection of eed of ale eal property wa real action to be brought the prownce oF tity wherete lands stuted. Although appelascomplant son of specie prfrmanc, ye the et hat he ask or $ dead of sale of pee ana state in Queaoa Cy be sen Ms or aD at arse ceticate of ie covering faid and be ret hn shows thatthe ary pps are he ae to recover the parcel of ln sl Brcause to excite nvr othe plant the conveyance reqstd tere anced to make ngs that ne she ener sid land whic the st ana ess an se of ewarshp. Hace, the action must be commenced the province where the poperty tuted (Tere FM. Tuazon 8 Co, 12 SCRA 174 ee alo Pacerang . Busan 45 SCADSS,GA No. 9475 September 28 13) PROCEDURE 1 REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS Rule KINDS OFPLEADINGS, fect where acountercaln sed beyond the aration of the MTC. 3)" ia countercum sbeyond the urn the MYC, teed no be St up but even su, ts done 50 ‘nly by way of defence (si, An nertanal, 22 SRA 996: Reyes CA. 38 SCRA 138 De Chua v. IAG 47 SCAD0, onus, 1954) by Theiss waierel theese whee the counter Hed inthe MTC Agi. Boa. 188 SRA san 6) The aes of rit ia independent action apis to counters (Clo v. Ax Iteration, 22 SRA 996 and aver AC 172 SCRA 608) tn oer word, 9 counterclay before the MT: must be within the Durston of sit court, bth a othe amount and tre threo De Chua v AC january 5 1994) fo 30 bral ston bos the the cumterenn maybe conde compueny tears ofthe amount (Sc 7 Rule, 1997 ux onc Process) ‘Neture of compulsory counterclaim "Acomulsory contest ty cai for money ot any rhe, whch defending party may have against a9 opposing patty, whist th tone of st anaes out of or se necessary ened with the same aston oF cure {hie the sujet matter ofthe pantie compat Ie compulsary te sense hi ts en the risdtion f the ur, des not ru fr saudi the presente of itd partes ver hor he court cannot aque frst, fd willbe brzed in the ce ot setup the anne to theca the same cae. Any cer counerela 5 perswe(Bungeayan Sv Pot lands Property Hole and Development Corparsn, 632 Pl 91 (2010) ang rvzngana Hon, Suapeapian 495 Ph 165 (205)) "The compeling testo computers characters councraim ax compulsory there should exst2 lope retauonshp between thems cunt and the coutercan Te Curt further rled Ca there ets such reatnship tien conducting separate tals of the respective dig of he pares wool eral sistant duplication of ine an ‘or by the parts andthe cour whe the mil coi ove the swe actual and eal ssue or when the cams Se oot a the same basic controwrsy betwee the partes king Laarge Cement Phil fv Continental Cement orp, 406 Ph 125 (2004) further cng Gunna CA 344 Pi 81 (197) and Alay v- FD insurance Corporatio, ‘SZ ha 962 (200%) Newt ovens Ase, nc Ay, Nes Morals, No. No, 222821, August. 2017. Mend.) Requirements ofa permissive counterclam “Theyre (1) docs not este farts adjudeation the presence of thd partis of whom the court cannot acquire Junsition, (ayes be within the eriscctan of the court wherein the cases peng andi cognaable by the epular ‘ours ftir 9) eae not rine out of the same tansacon or snes of transaction subj ofthe complaint (Vans ¥. stateof lane Ongos Set al, GR No 221062 October, 2018). Counterclaim, essentially complaint Tris mat crc to rue that a ie cannot be svat because i consutes sa cailierl tac which & conirary te the price ofan of tes Te Cs dane to vauate the te Ke mas be noted tht defendant Intepored a countrcim ins Ansner Soin tobe declared tthe tra sad sul our ofthe Aspe propery nd that hs ie ty docared ay superior ove the oer tiles othe pai Since a couneeaun i essential a compat thon determination uf the tly ofthe tle wwe ils ofthe pnts can be considered as 9 re, nok ‘ollteral atackon the subject tes. “A contercln econstered 2m ois complaint and as suck the attack an the tle nese omy fe -ecvey of possession canoe copidered aa colstra attack onthe til (Past Manterayo: Development Bat the Pitppines Couto Appeals) Bess, the prombsan against coal tack docs at apply spr oF non ‘use les, whieh remot scored indleabty, 3 ths cae (Bangs. Hes of Ado GR No 190875, une 1, ota Pera Berna, ‘2019 aap Ares a ental La (eopt cube HHVISE conde EDETED fale e99ule - MANNER OF MAKING ALLEGATIONS IN PLEADINGS Genaineness and due executton of etionable document. Rule Section # special apie fo actions or defenses founded upon 3 Westen instrument an provides the smannero deny wick ust be une uth and speteady eres the isrumentotherwrae ts genuine and dae “recation shall be admitted. es mor controling thon Rule Section 10 wich merely prods the eft of fare to fle $eply which cal the new matters Seed in fhe Answer were deemed contevered Thus, where the defense the “Answer rs bed on an actonable document, 4 Reply apecieally denjng under oak mist be made otherwise the {genuineness a! due eneution othe damned! lb dened adm, However adnussion ofthe genuineness and due ftceitn ofthe ecument oes ot prevent the snroducton of eédzace show tht the document exudes the pramissory notes (Maunla Suing & Leone Assn nev €A, GR. Ma 114542, November 27, 2000 ITM, nv. CA, e {GR Ne R668 March 22.1900), Mere statement “special deny” allegations, nt “Theme statement that thy “speticly deny the pertinent legato ofthe Complaint Yor beng sls ‘nd pare concasons intend to a plas purposes” dors ot cst an eee spec Genial a contempt Inylaw Very demal vet pce spy becase toque by the deka Stated aterm, geneel deal does not hecome sce by the use othe word “specie. Meter does become 30 by the simple expedient of ‘coupling he same wh real conclusion olay thatthe alpotions contested ar "sleserving’ or are imnded Wo uit Pains purpnes" ‘The dlenian’ must declare ender oath that head not sig the document or that Iti otherwise false oF fabricated. Nester does the statereat the answer tothe flee tht the ntruneat was pracied by frauiulent repression raise nyse a tote gentnenes ods exoation On th contrary such a ples sa adiisin bth of the genuineness nd de exciton therea, since sede to avo the Wstrument upon + ground ne affeting her (Permanent Sovnge& Laan ny Vere (ermanent Sing & Laan Bank) cing tho eae as of Sono v Sle "To add Section 6 Rle 8 o the Wales farther regues that he defendant ses forth what be calms to be the facts? whch requreneat Howse, romans absent fom the Answer in this case, Thus with sid pleading ing to ‘comply with the specie den ue oth requiemen under Section 8, Ru @ ofthe Rules, the proper conclusions That pettioners ae impliedly admit the doe excetin abd Eonueness ofthe dacements evidencing tei loon obgation to respondent (Go Tong Electr Supply Co inc et a BPI Fay Savings Bank Ine, GR. No, 187487, June 25,2015, Pers Bernabe Extent of edmisson of genuinenes ond due exceaion of document “Tne penusentts snd duc excestion os document deemed adotted i Cocunon i ot dented special and underoath Butte party can prove that hee wasn cansiraton xtex o fe admston are hinted to the genuineness and duc exction ofthe actionable document he senatucts ofthe notary public wtaesses ax wel as the fures conte therein bu ne nbuty (Mand Savings & ssn Asociton Inc. CA. GR No 114942, November 27; 2000, Catent Realy Development Corporation vs ‘PhilBanking Corporation, GR. No 150731, Sepember 14 2007 Vlas e-1 ‘Alot flectvely eliminated any defense relating tothe authenticity and due execution of the document cg tha he dacamoot vs spars courertetor of deren nortan Hs fac a the one exec by the partes. oF ‘bt the signatures apes thereon wee fog o that he satus were unauthorand (co Tong ctl Sapp Coutnecal BPI Fel Songs Bn In No 187487, june 29,2015), Defenses that con be invoked even theres admission of enulnenes nd due excuton of cunent “Th taut to Gory tne genus od de enseeon a an Acuonble document does net previa party om arguing aganst by evence of faud, mistake, compromise, payment, statute of hmtaans sorrel and want of “Ksdeetion [ne] bra party om rang the defense hs answer o reply and yeove atthe ral hat thet 3 make imperfect the wang ot tat dos not onpress he rae agreement te partes, ot atthe agreements lid etka here am nisi sug nthe vertng (G0 Tang Eieal Supply Cnet a BP Family Savings Ban Inc Gi No, 187487 June 22015 Perla Gorabe Defendant can even prove nolabity (Maunla Savings & Laan ‘Association I v.CA, Gi No, 114942 Noveber27, 2000). no knowledge suficienten form a ele when Kt sa specific dena. “tnd stents dna of aepibons frac of kngedje as othe truth ad having appli or membership nthahe cataompany and that he meter authored anyone to get er aeged card thas Not beg a member, se as no Uiigatcnsmooctary oe other othe pin i consdored as specie denial under cath the genuineness and de caeretes of scuonsle documents ts tue that se end the documents reel for lack of knowledge” which den (logue sce by ther notre she vag know the ruth ofthe aegatons regarding thowe document But Ss cesses ene by her assertion tha she was denying th algal regarding those acuonabe documents sang (hate ces app for membership mith theca company. Tew ean cane he guored athe frm part of the ‘twee ence een she deme the transact or “ick of knowledge was he Way of saying that such eanacoNs ‘uk pie athnut Her owing Since teaser as vere, she effect ceased er oath the enuneaess and de ree othe dacmens supporting tem For ths reason, she not bared fom unrduing erence that tose documents were lore (Faust Crainetwork lev. Capistane, GR No. 180157 Februry 8.2012) Role 9 EFFECT OF FAILUE'TO PLEAD pets of decoration of defeat Mtg been dccacd ia delau prt considered to hve wated vot ony his opportu to contest the edeoce presente by the pai bu alo fo presen evidene i suport ofa vai defense It does not mean, however ‘Bitte reer pajed fers toms granted. The court has to weigh te eindece presente and apply relevant wi (Relate (8 Litres Faateat nese, Pel Leasing & France Corp. No. 160831, Auge 3, 2008) -Thaste2019 Map Aven in Re Le gragte combine) REVISED costae) EDITED fmal/E¥SAryeRemedy of defong party ‘Roary decked de u'll rtm sto move fr the itu ofthe declaration a ts aut ts mation or that purpose should ave been under fhe ath of one who ad knowledge of the Tats, ad should show hat had Inertrous etn, (Moncinl, je. Republic Planers Bank No. -66183, May 4, 1988, 161 SCRA 4, 82). that ts fret eth as had ten ee to fu acoder. stake r excusable nehgenc. is uryent purpose to move in Ue RTC isto er the rendition ofthe dell jdgment (Monaro Import Co. Ins Vilanueva, GR No 1¥247F [aly 27, 2016, Borssnan “Arden the allowing te the remedhes of party dela 1 Motin or ew “PPetan for declaration of malty or annulment of gent 2. Appeal ume adgnen: 5 Spec eu action er erro thee isa showng 8 Peto orc! om gmt; rave abuse ofhcretion artuntingt lack of excess of Janson and there sno pat speedy and adequate remedy Several defends: some tn defaulted: procedure Tethere are several putes nc ul where Ue a cmon cause of acon ogaast them and one was tear in default the court should alow the presentation of eidence ex parte agnst the defied defendant and ene judgment others tate neamount to preudging the case apne the othe The tral court shou allow the ules of Court which states thit "when 3 pleatag aserting 1 can tates common cause of ston yas several sofeading paras some of who answer a the ther a todo 2, Oe court shal tthe case agunst all upon the Snswers ho Hed od ener gent spam the evadence presented (Seton 3 [el Hak 9). Therefore the answer fle iby detendanc mores to the Benet fal he defendant, defaulted or no, apd al of tern share acoso fate the action. Ics not wan thesuthoty fthe tal our todd te ase Beore by hist hearing expartasagnnst the efated detent and rendering 3 etait jagment gaia then proceed go ear the ease, as to te non ‘lefatied defencomt. This deprives the defeated delendato due proces ass die the benefit ofthe answer andthe ‘evidence which could have foen presented by is now dead codeendant (Ha of Mamerto Mangus, ea ¥.CA. ct SUG Na 150768, 20 August 200% Pini, ta WC A ett, GR No. 91408, amuny 19, 2001) Rule 10 - AMENDED AND SUPPLEMENTAL PLEADINGS Amendment can substantially olter cause of ection tind the neve ules the snndmett may substantaly ake the cause of acon (or defense prowded hat the amendment out toe made hl serve the her sees of subtatal ustice and prev delay and promote the Iauaable objective a th rales whch sto secure just speeey and expensive sposton of every achon oF proceeding [Pine Ports atmos Walam Cehong and abv Ine Gi No. S840. Jantary 28,2008) "Ths should only be re, however when deste 3 subsantal change uc alteration i te couse of ation oF ‘efene, the sendments sought to he made Sal serve the higher inert of ebstanal ese, and prevent delay and ‘gualy promote the lsvdabnnystive a the ules wicks secre jst speedy and inexpensive disposition of every Scionand proceeding” (Valenelct ab ¥.CA eta, GR Ne 149449, February 20,2006, 42 SCRA 637) _Supplementa pleading distinguished from an amended pleading. "A supplement pleating docs eatogush the exstenes of he nga pleading. wile an zmondod pleading takes the pace the ors pleading supplemental leading exists sid By sce wath he erga it doesnot replace {hat which supplements does ot siperide the argll bat assumes thatthe eiginal pleats to stand and the Ishuce ome une the orginal plea rain a ius tobe tra inthe action A Supplemental pieading supplies the YAsc2019 Magi wasn Repel Law (eye) combined EVISED{consaed)EDITED/ nl /ESALJunsdicton over the person ofthe cafendant shall a Be dete velunary appearance By seeking aflmative cele From the tral cart hel dened o fave vue submated othe jusdton ofthe court. A party cannot tnvoke the nsdicton the cut to seure te arate ree gas hisoppone ander abarning or fal to ‘that such ce repute or question thal some ured (Nation Petroleum Gas, ne. Rua Commere Banking agp GI Ne 183370, gust 17-2015 Tau Sttanev. Musto GR No, 209508 une 19, 2017, Tom ‘ule 16 - MOTION TO Diss ale nresobing an MTD onthe ground of fllureto state a cause of clon Seta the rate tata Main o Dams Base on fare to state a caus facto, these passed UPON fon the hse agains the complaint seeming cmt be re. The court doesnt igure the th of he SMegatns and declare them to be fae arse, woul hea procedural eror and a denal of de proces othe ‘lain. Only the statements in the complaint may be propery considered, andthe cour cannot take cognizance of ‘rer facte or hol pelimiory hese to ceri thr esionee ‘The test for determing whether» compli Sates odes na sate cause of acto agains the defendants s wether orn ating hypothetical the tah of he Slgations ef fact made nthe compan the age may voy gan! the rel dmanced nthe complaint (St Mary ofthe ‘Woots School ne eta Otic ofthe Roty af Deed of Maka cy eta GR. Nes 174290, 176116, anuary 20, 200% ‘Trias. Ham Margomenet ab GH. Me 22385), Mare 4, 2018, Tam.) Dente of MTD i irurboctory: remedy. It aces that an ter denying 2 notion to dss being merely neloeloy,canet be the Bass of 2 potion for eetoran. An incrieutory order atthe proper sub of certorat change by wre of ts 90 {erminating te proceeding n whch te waved. Yo alow euch ort be the suet of rev by cetera ot only detgs the sdmistrstion fasten rd the courts (tensa ¥ Cour of Appeals, GH No. 8545S, june 2.1994, 232 SCRA 737 744; Oy «RTC of Zamboanga City Br. XI GR. No. 7119, November 22,1990, 191 SCRA 610, Prades anand Tras Co.» Macadaca 1 Ph. 91 [1959 People v-Cour a Appeals 51635, December 14,1982, 119CRA 162.173) 1h pin for cera may be fil! to as a nlerlciory order 1s sued wthout json, oF wath cos furan, orn gat as of cretion outing to lark or excess of rst. Tiss because 8 such Ser there no apes. rn pat spc adequate remedy i he ordinary course af law le 65 of he Rules of Cour apex, rv Hon Concepcion tal GR No 159808, gst 29, 2012, 679'SCR8 297 Beran. “he rhe shuld stowed go toa He may go tot Supretme Cou on certorae under Rae 6S stead of an appl tte Supreme Gout under Rae othe le of Court (Aboaron vA, al, 208 SCRA 89 [1992}) there ‘grate abun of dnretion amounting t eka jveiton (Dre ef ov CA, ea GR. No 1701, March 20,1977. Herannot appeal becouse the order erly telat, hence, at appelable (Hes of Teodoro Layla v.CA, a CGR Ro. 188688 faary 11,2017) Distinctions between a motion to dismiss on the ground of foltae ta state a case of ection and a motion to dsmiss on the ground of ack of case of ection "To est governed y fle, Section 1(g we the scons governed by Rule 33. The distinctions between ‘ese twa hive been exained ths: Te fe vation where the complaint does natal cus of actan i ras ino mason: tums unter Rule 1 fore resi pleing i lel ad canbe deterred oly fron te algo tn theintatory pleading an tram edenbary other male: unde The son ton wher 0 ltudence does astm he couse acon ae raed na mare Co codeee wide Rule oftor the plant has rested hs cue ond cam be rove ony ont aus ofthe evidence Re hs reser “Apart of hs clam. The st dor mot conor withthe tu and ast of the agains and has found he endence wing China Roa ud Brge Cop. CA 348 SCRA 401 uo}. COMELEC, 283, SCRA 22% Damondon We udge Lopee, AM. No. RTFDE-16%. June 20,2002; Dubuco ¥. CA, No. 155775, anny 20, 2000; As Brewery, Jc 8. Eqatable PCi Bank GR. No. 190832, Apa 25,2017 BatugnDensCarp. 248 Divan ofthe CAe GR No 197386, Ape 8 2017, Reyes le 17 DISMISSAL OF ACTIONS Ways by which am acton maybe dismissed upon the nsance othe plan. ape ae ways by which a action may be damsel poo a tstnce a he pa Ps, isms 2 ‘mar fg whens nati of hea fled by the plant ear a nse ora maton fr Suse judgment as been sere onturnby the detendan Second stmasalicecrctonary onthe court when the motion othe desl et the asians Nedby de pawn at any sage af the procending ther han inore arc fan sewer ers mation "Summary edge White ismissl nthe fest mode ahs eect upon the mete noice othe plant wihou needa Shula order the second mace requiesthe autor oho cour lore canis ofthe case maybe efected THs eso because m he dma fan action he sfc ofthe Gres pon he rights ofthe defeat shou always be akan ‘nt consideration (Cy of Matta Ryman, 7 Ph. 12 (2918) Lunacy, et a. Shon Gakuct Cd's House Pls ne, GH No. 15H245, ne 30, 2005), Natie of diamssoby pln mandatory for court tose order config "teers 3 oti of Semis by plant, ix mandtery that he tal ue ssc an nde config ich ‘tna unless ere ated nthe ale, the dss 6 widhout peje and cul! be acopished bythe Plait eregh mere noe of dismiss and nt though mation subject to approval bythe eur. smal 20 fate Upon aoc, and without prejudice unless ahereise sated nthe notice (OB veer Cons and Devt, corp. Maca Featy and bert Corp, 446 SCRA 483 [2d Theta court has noche Dut conse th complain as dissed ‘nce the pani! may op for such dissal x4 mater of gh, egress f the round (Dac spouses Bean GR. No. 156470, 10 ap 2003; HoniverosBaragucl eal ¥. Tol Roguatry Barc a GR. No No, 181295, brary 25, 2015). {W1ABHC2D19 Mage Arvo emai La (sete combnesREISEconslasteLITED/ a B¥SA/eynConcept of he ewordsmissl rue Ttisastuaton whore the some complain ha tween damussd by the pail without order ofthe court by ‘themere acto serving notice of isms. nth case, the secon smal operates san adjudication on the merits. ‘fect an action s dsise for fallre co prosecute. ‘Adismisl of an action for alure to pesecute operate asa udgment om the mers ipa tals to appr 3 the neo the ral to poste hata fo an aveasonabe length tine. or ‘tw cory wath these ues a any oer aver ofthe co, the acon ay be sms upon rion ofthe defendant oF ‘pon the cous on motion. This dismal shal have te elfetof an adubeaton upon the mers unless otherwise Drove by te court the Order aes wot state that the dismal the complain withowe prejudice. Henge such fismssal operates a har to the My of another Acton alleging the same ease of ection (Hers ofthe Late For “Tungpaln et av A, eal. GR No 134207. Jane 21, 2003: Ko ¥- PNB, GAL No. 16913132, January 20, 2008 479 SCRA 298; Crus CA, al, CR No. 164797, February 13, 2006 42 SCRA 379; Reger v Logarta, GR No, 108747, October 19, 2007: Esprit al Lazaro, etl, GR No. 181030, November 25, 2009; Mala stranc Ca nc Hon Reyes a GR. No 167403, august 6, 2008; Plo Pus v Lourdes Dey etal, GR No. 1733, November 26,2012 Marunee¥. Bue, (GR No. 187342, Apel, 2017), Dismissal of actlon: rule on countercain, ‘Section 2. Rue 17 ofthe les of Cour provides hate dismissal shal be without prejudice to the gh ofthe defendant o prosecute his caatrsaim na spare ation unless wit en (25) days om notice of the mation he Imanfest his preference o have hs counterclaim resolve in the sme ston Unless there specified m the oder, 9 sdsassl under ths yorgraph shall ho without projadice. las sul shal not be dsmsed or compromised without the approval the out “The rationale Behind this rule sna ficult wo discern: the passing othe len (15) ay pend triggers the Analy ofthe court's ssl ofthe complaint and heee baste cond offre proceesigs, the proscetin of respondents counter. nthe sue acvon. Ths, im ode to obviate hs fay he defendants required oe the Fequired manifestation within te aforesaid period therwse, the counerlim maybe penscuted ony in sparate ‘ction (Bay «Bana Gie No. 23218, March 72018, Perle Bernas. ‘reumstonces when the court may dismiss om action meu proprio, They are (2) falarete prosecute for unressonabe length af une; (4) fare wcompiy wth the oder of the court (2) fedureto appear atthe tt (Gplsckoffradtion Marte. Bu, GA (5) fatareta comply the ra ‘187342, Ape 5, 2017), ‘Parton is impreseripible; exception. “The cannon that partons already bared by res jdcoea since the fist case for parivon was sms for fare wo prosecate i ck correc. “he dismissal mith projudice uae ule 17, Se. of he Rules of Court cane defeat he righ of a co-owner a 2 fr parton t any tie, provided et there fe wo aca sidcation of wrershp of shares yet The rules 40 ‘ezause ne ce-awne shall bled to enuann the erooraersip. Each e-oter may derma tay the pron ofthe hing owned in commen, insta: his shar conermed. ‘The i generally docs avr the tenon of eoawneshp.s 3 propery relation ans nterested stead in ascertaining the co-owners! spc shares soa to preven the alocaton of parton o remain perpetsal i mbo- Th {he ae provides haeach cower may demand a any ume the parton of hath owed in common (Quinto, ‘Nicol eta GR No 210252, June 16,2014, Vlas) ‘Rule 18 PRETRIAL ‘fect of falta to appear athe preri {the plaints te appear the same shal be a caus or dita of he action which shall be wth predic, unless otbermieerdered by the cour. I he deennt aso appear sal be 3 cause to alow the pls opreson Wis ewdence ex parte andthe cour stall render julgmen’ on he basis terete 5). Unde the le, the defends alto appara the pr nal cobferenc, shal e couse for the plain reset endnce ot porte andthe cout to tender Jdgrort on the oss tere (S 5, Rule 18) Faure tole the pe {nal ital have the sme eflect ab ale to appear atthe prestal (Soe. 6, ule 18) Since the defendants fae Sppear without any utiable reason, the ato the cur proper (Khonghun ined Cocomat Pages Bank GR Na 18434 fly 31. 2005 Ching. Rope al, GR No. 1E8608, uly 31,2015; Metropolitan Banka Tras Cov. acon AGH NOwT9797O, famury 25,2016; Ultra Mar Agus Resource. Inv Feca Contrcton Series, GR, No 191383,Ape 17-2017), Pxceptons wo the ple By way ofexcepton the nom appearance of party and counsel maybe exc (1) aval cause shown: oF (2) there an pearance of representative ob babi 3 purty fly authoraed i writing toner tao 28 mae Element tu submit to aternauwe modes of dispute Fesalaton atd to ener ae stipulation a atimsios of fix and tf documents, What conte ld cause te subject tothe cour’ sound deren ad the exercise of such dierebon Shall not be distur ence in aue of lear and mandest abuse (aco ¥- Ya GA Ma 144394 une 2, 2015 Ultra Mar [Agua lesoure ne» Feemida Construction Serves, GR Na. 191353, Api 17,2017, Tn | Dom v. Sgn eth (GR No. 208287 ape 5, 2017 Reyes Rule 23 - DEPOSITIONS PENDING ACTION Importance o the rales of dscovery. Hascall, hey shorten te ponod of iigavon and speedup adudcation In Republic Sandganbayan, 204 SCRA 24a, wassaid fat herules of acovery seve se 3) donces along wath the pret hearing under Rule 18 to narrow and clarify the bai waves Between the 1142019 apc res Hemme La(serepate canis) REVIED{ const) EDITED/Aa/EVSA/ersparves: and by dences ter ascertaining the ets relate to thoes ‘Te evden: purpose to enable the pris, consent wth recgnacdjrncpes, a aba the alles posse ‘eawidge oth acts ad ses tare inl tals an ths prevent sai tases beg cari on nthe de Bost parposes of the rules of scones Ty a Tr werabic apart stan ioedge fate swath the knoe othe adver pay or of id Ports hgh epson (2) toebam owed of mater fits or admins rom the adverse party through writen interrogates, (Ph. Heath ns cor Our Ley aur Hosp GR No 19158 November 2015, Pera) (9) to ation aisom tom the averse party regarding he genuineness of eleva documents ce evant imatersof fet thrngh equ for sana (4) to nsjectreevan documents eet and lands or ther propery a the possession an contol ofthe ders pay (5) teeter he physical metal condition ofa party when such in controversy (KOR WIA, 144 SCRA 28) ‘ule25 INTERROGATORIES TO PARTIES Wen an adverse party may be called take witness stand ‘sara cl ca, the procedure of ealing the adverse party tothe witness stand sna alowed, unoss wren nerrogatris are st served upon th ter. This embodied in Scion le 25 ofthe les, whieh provides ‘at unless theater alley the cout fer go cause shawn and prevent fare josie, party no served Wit \nrten terrogatores may nthe competed by the advere pat oe estinory open cour orto pve a poston ending appeal (ne ofthe purposes he sbve rule sto prevent fishing expections and needles delays: is there to mnt ede facta the conde wat wl be presumed thts arty who dest serve wt trrogatares othe vere party hfechand wil st ely be able ee fs etl tot case ft ate opts ocak te averse arty {othe wits and 2s wits Instead the process could be esto ishing expedition or an attempt ying the proceeds I produces a sigan recut pri wren mnerqatris might ring (Spe, Aliens Metcbanic ta CR No. 185145, ebrary 5.2014) Rule 26 ADMISSION BY ADVERSE PARTY ‘fet fa parey served witha request for admission doesnot fle onanswer. ‘The acts ar documens ste deemed admit Under tho fale ach ofthe matters of whieh an admission ‘requested shal bo decned admted unless withina period designated ihe equet whch shal at bee than 18 2) after service theeo or wiin sich frcer ume a court tay allow on motion the pet to whom te ees ‘ected os and serves upon the party rexuering te admesion sworn statement ether deren spacey the maar ‘of which a amssion ws requested o setng fm in deta the reason wy he cannot rhflyeaber admit or ey ‘hose matters (Aled Agi Busts Dev Co nev. a, 101 SCAD 450, CR Ne 118438, December 4 1988, cing Se 2 Hale 2 Rule Cou). ‘The rule sot however absolute. Tare sao need to regu an sneer to 4 reguest for admission when 8 ‘upertuous be when «grt seared oat what has aeady tee denis under sth the ae Sac the mses there was an under oth nal the eben ot correc (Dagvev CA Jl 22002 cng Poe CA, 154 SCRA Reyes. PCP Employees Cede Uon Ine GHL No D4GSIS, Aust 18. 2006, Dayue'v. Spe Yur otal CR Ne 226130 February 15,2018, Veloac ‘The Rl sos oobi smasions rm he avers party eegardng the genuneness of relevant documents oF ‘relevant mater of fact throu eauests for admissions ta suble» party ta cacover the evden of ake aves ae "horoby fcitaing 2 amablesitiement a he case or expen te tral he Some: However the rages fe auimssion only serves tb dela he procceding by abetting eduane inthe placings the teed purpose or the Fle val eral be defeated (Roy Lads v. CA, wa Git Noe 102399 and 102408 Feruary 2.2000, Moo Mola Shopping Mecca Corp, et a Teed IG No. 19081, une 5.2013). Request fer admsson ts not inconsistent wth Motion for Summary Jedgent ‘Aseguet for admission can be the bass for the grant uf Summary adgzent. Te request ean be the basi ‘herefarhea Ussbj eure to have been ated by the party and rexel ost real fst pasty ey te respond to te courts drective to state what spies happened athe ene (conc Agrtgreg Cog eC 954 Pl.77 (1997) Dynan v. Alumbres 359 Pi. 796 (1950) and Aled AgBusiness¥ CA 360 Phe OBR) Pe root to sch a request 353 mode of discovery rendered all he mutters contaged therein as mates that have beet ose ‘ited pursuit oR 2, Section 2 the 1997 Flas ofc Procdare (Ete of Fema Mars Re of the rs, GR No, 213027; mel R Matos eal Rep ofthe Pais Gl Ne 242285, nary 1 2017} Request or edison con complemen motion fr summary judgment {A request for amiss may even complement a sma alge tat the request for adeusion may be sed as asi fr fg # summary ade eng thee cases a lions Cane Agrees Corp ws 394 PA, {19971 Biman» Aunbres, 359 Pi 796 (1998 nd Aled Are Bases CA 40 Phi 64 [YOR] Te fst case arts that a eaguest for admsson “should st forth relevant evidentiary maters 0! fc, ot dovueits descebed ts at ‘exited with the ues tse purpose st 14, 200,459 SCRA 633; Suma, ta Urban Bank fn tal R- No. 142534 une 27,2006, Gomales Gone, Git NO 151976 February 22.2005 483 SCRA S7; Suman ¥. SPS Damas GA Ma 162518 Apt 1, 2009) Purpose ofthe fen 15 day pried to appeal “standart sea! pad provided nthe Roles an to afford ants far opportunity to appeal ete cases, th aut deems acta allow eh ora of 15 dys within whofe the note ppl in he RTC, ‘une rm rect ofthe or essing moto for 9 ee alo to fo reconsiert0n aes "This" pera eu sha ss spp tole 4 generaing apes fm the Muna Tal Cours ule 420m pettons or ree oa Ron Tal ut fo the Cour of Apa Ue 43 on pels om Guat - ube agencies tothe Court of Apps fle 45 govern aps cereren oh Spree Court. Te ew rile Sims to fegment oc make the apps! erie frm, oe conte rom cet ie ods denying he ain for nee tr magon reconsideration ter lor array al rer a esto Sumaia ab. Urn Ban, Icy eta, GR No 42544 fue 27 2006 ctingNeypesv. CAG Ne BER Septmber 14,205,469 SCRA 633) Neypes principle applicable in rina cases "Tae Neypes pint sapplable ruminal ase with more reason ‘The rauan dre forthe es pri ruts andar he appl prio povided nthe Rules ad do aay ‘withthe canfstn ast when the 15 ay spel period sould be counted. Thus the 15-day pero to appeals no longer Interrupted hy the fing of» moton for new tl or mation for Feconsieratan;Iigas today need aot concern thersefves with counting the halance ofthe 15-63 perio to appeal se the 15-3) peied snow counted rom recent ‘ofthe order dimssing 8 ton for nen tao tion for reconsideration ofan fil order o” resolution. A srt Interpretation ef the Wes prio ul” ws ype and nae appicae ony tothe period io appease. shal ‘ectiely foster at encourage av absurd suarion wee a gata coi case il have a etter right to appeal tan $n sccused in criminal ease salon tht aves unde favor to ov igonts and aust discrntes aginst the Sceusea-appllans ltsuggete double andor ttm to vor auton Where propery interests area stake 36 Senne ston where iery stn abe prsadied Th duble and wneqslslandard must be rejected for being ntrary to reasn. Over ume courts ave recognised with almost pedantic arenes tat whats COMA to reason 6 ‘ot allewed in tw = Quod et incor aut Smt ane non permis ex age (Juha v Hon Rosa Samson ata etal, GR No 170979, ebay 9.2011) principle nt opplealeo administrative cases “Th esh perk rule" Nepes applies ony tical ppeasand nt to administrative appeals. Int cathe subject appeal, appeal rom decision the HLUS Bard of Commussianersto the OP, snot Juaieat ut admintrative im ature: us the "sh period rule” in Nejpes does wot apy (Panoline val GB No Sise16, une 29,2010, Sea Lorenz Rus Burs & De’ Corp Ine. st als Mara Cristina Bunya Gi No. 194P02, Ap 20,2015), fresh 18-day period sna pple ner Rule G& wheve the dexisian ofthe Cele is questined in the SC “The per of 50 days cool be Changes I there is MR, the period is Hot ceded It continues hence, he eR pesos ths net i perton before the SE Pate Comelee) ‘When appeal deemed perfected "saul appeal deemed perfected arte lps ofa ths pis to whi al partis are entitle to appeal (ay A pasty’ appeal by note f spel deemed petete a hum upon the ling ofthe nue of appeal im due (@)°A pars appeal by record on appeals deemed perfected ast him wth respect tothe subject mater tereot tin te approval ofthe reurd on appeal led me (Sr to Se 9, le AT; Sp Lae & Hang ABB Peenary 17,2016 Perse Bernabe, expos, ‘ae 4 the remedy fo Farflture Proceeding i dismissed via demurrer to evidence. Pettionce Republic sted the wrong mode of evew of the Sand ganbayo's asad resolutions dismissing thecasesoma demutrerloeviencs,Frfeture proceedings Rad under Rpuble Act No. 1379 are civ nature (Gare Sonigonayan 18 Phil 346,462. 353 (2009) tus the proper mode of eee beng 2 pon fe review on ertrar Under Ral 45 fhe Rules auras amend and wots special action af eeruoran under Rule 5 thera! (Republic ‘times No. 17467S January 11,2016, 778SCRA 20}, 28) “an onder gronting demurrer to evfonce 3 judgment onthe mers (Qropess¥. Oroesa, 686 Pi 877,888, {2012p Seto 1, Hale 4 ofthe Roles of Cour as amu, provides ita party desing to appl by certra Irom a Iudginent inal order er resolaton of he Court of Appeals, the Sndigabayan, the Court Tax Appeals, the Rapona Tea Court a eer courts whenever suthored hy lw, ay He eth he Supreme Cou a veriied petion fOr reve ot fertararc The pont c+ sal ase oly questions ofa wick must be stn set orth xx (Republi St {GR No 169590, api 23, 2018 Lenard De Casto f Condes Curt of Appeals, 555 Ph. 3,328 [2007 Pl Bk oF {Communes CA. eal, GR Na 21890, February 18,2017, agua. 17 4ac2019 Map Areas Heme Law see} combined REVISED|cosistes)EDITED/Hnal/EVSA/<¥8xcepion tthe rule Considering tht ruks of yeonedute ate subservient to substan righ nd nord to finally wm lato prolong liiaton the Cour somctnes dispenses wih the forgoing pes athe benader teres fist Te Cut has repeat ovored the resolution of spats on the mers, rather than on procedural defects expel where the ‘te undenly mgrained with mnmease pubic terest publ ply andor esp bone repercuetns Certee sllowed notwihstaning the enstence and avalaity ofthe remedy of appeal (eputew Sandganbuyan, 453 Pal 10,1087 [2005 ‘Applicaton ofthe Harness rear Rae INo error meter the admisio 0 the enelason of evidence and no errr or dees i any Tling oF oder ee anything done or onited bythe leat o by ny ofthe parse ein for ating 3 new tla Tor setting ake, ‘modiving oF otherwise eistrbing > judguent or order unless refuel to take sich acon appears tO the cour Ineansstent with sbstatal rights fhe pte ‘The harmless ero ue obtans durin evew afte things done by iter the tral court o by any ofthe pares {hemseves inthe course a ral and ay err thereby ound does ot ae the sna righs or eve the mesa "he case. The rule applies nthe carrectio of msl ane duet ler errr, (See Republy Mereader GR Na. 386027, December 8 2010, 551 SCRA SD, $16) the sarang ofthe decedent’ names nthe nice of appeal by the hes (Reponal Aganan Reform Adjcication Soar v Cour of Appeal, GR Me 168155, Apr 13, 2010, 618 SCRA 181, 202: 208) the wl cour’ treatment of the testimony ofthe ary as an adverse witess during ross-xamaation by Rs. owD ‘counsel: (Ga Cha, GR No. 150855 Apri 1 2008, 551 CTA 506, $16) andthe fare of theta cout to give the Pisin the oppatunty o rally ange agaist 4 motion (Remon Bote, Na, 19900, February 28,1966, 16 SCRA 257,261) All theerars extant in the mersvoned uations dd not have We eect falictng the aspostions rendered bythe respecte tal cours (Fight Attendants and Stewards Aah, Inv. PAL Ine t 3, GR. No. 178083, Maze 13, 2018 erst) ‘ale 41- APPEAL FROM THE REGIONALTRIAL COURTS: ‘ules onthe fect} those who dd ot appeal from judgment Rules on those wh i a appt ae te flown 4) “Ithe abt of ore ho taleao appx dependent onthe pps abit the appeal nures this benefit (say aims, 14ScRA 4) 1) Ifthe rights and ils of those who dno sppeat nd those who apes are so dependent on each te the reversal th judgment aso ane woul parte a3 reversal at wal (Du of Lands v Reyes, 69 SCRA 419) oot the jugmert 25 to tose who fed apes sal become al 204 executor (ty Tost Bank v.CA Apri 10, 1989) The season forthe lt ra te atone whoa Ot apes! canna aban rom the appeate {ur anyafirmatve rele other than those grated i the detion of Ue tower court (Quintana. CA et 17 SCAD 240, No. 101747, eptember 4, 1997, cling AG A P CoO! Manda V.CA, 83 SCAD B71, 247 SCA 606) )_ third party who dd wot appa bts held ble ow appeal cannot cum afirmatve oi against thie pary detenne (Go Go, 1O0SCRA 54, 4) Appelt courts cannat reverse or may decision to these who hd nox appeal (eyes. AC, 195 SCRA 214) In Lim v Cour of Appeal, GR No. 147526, une 20,2006, 91 SCRA 385, was thatthe Rees of hs provsion extended toa the acased regardless of tbr they appealed or not (People Valder el, GAL Na. 175602, February 15,2013 Bersami, | Pople Las, al, Git No, 227425, September 2017, Periay Bernabe) ‘ecenuons ‘Pra cour fae to award terest on damages which may be awarded by the CAn ts discretion in ew of ‘Ar 2210, NOC (Lina Lagu Tayobas Co, Apr 15,1988) 1a Enemplary damages and storey’ es that were erroneously deleted bythe CA (Rapabaran Bus Line Coron, Augst 25,1985) su. Ith court aims the decigion on appl of elas may ictease the award of damages (Fknest rede orp.v-CA ata, 41SCAD 645 CR No. 100644, Septem 10,1995 Facundo. Pala, 4SCRA 575; “replat Hees, Ine + Fortuna, 169 SCRA I}. Mode ofappeat from KIC CA, ee Appeals ror the RTC to the CA in the exes ofthe RT's ong jnsicton pursuant to Sees. 3 ado le 4 ofnpelierofCoure the pettners lea nouce of poe inthe RTC withthe prt of 18 days rom tee ace of ‘he udgment ofthe FC. and within the same period should hve pad tothe cv ofthe RTC the fl ato the ‘opel gure dake sn gtr wl ees The Hing the notice of appl wth the pera allowed by Section Bete ‘motion the remedy of ordinary appel becuse the appeals deemed perletd st the appealing pee vpon is ime Ming ofthe nouge oF appeat I's upon the perfection Ofte apes! He! ty de mea the expiration the me "opel ofthe ether ttes tha the RC sal ose arson over incase On the ater tad, the non payment te {pelt court doket ee wi the replementary period regued by Secon bah mandation the noncompliance wi ehh stl othe appeal i gran wo dss the appeal under Soton 114). Rule 50 ‘ol the Rois of Court. The compliance with these requirements waste aly way by which hay could have perfected het Sppeal irom the averse judgment ofthe RTC Appeal under Ral 42. in contrast an applied under Role 42s dcmed perfected sto the yettiover upon the time fling of he pettion fa rene before tho CA, whe the RTC shall se jursdetion upon presi heea an the expraton af he fine appl of theater partis "The appeal by ate of appa under Rue 412 mutter ght butte appeal by pion for evew under Rae ‘2isamatter oraisncton An appeal 3s 4 mate of right whieh refer toe right sek he ev bya superior cau {the adgrent eave hy te ral eau enna afer he ral the rat mtn In contrast the asertionaey ape Us YAURCZ0L0Mopi Aras in Renal Law soropte combined REVISED consaatedDEDTED EVA rswhich taken from te devson ofl rer render By a court i the exerese of ts primary appeate sors, tay be dao by the superior cout s dceton Very, the CA ha he drei wath o de course othe petion for emow or Appeolunder Rule $1 and #2 dstingished. The procedure taken afer the perfection of an appeal under Hule 41 aso suc es om tat ake unde Rule 42 Unter Section 10 of Kae 4, the ler of eort ofthe RTC s burdened to metatey undertake the Uansata the records hy tng the coe ara corpletenss the records af the ase; he tanctal he {EArmust be made within Hoy onthe pert ote spp Ths requirement of asta the record des nat tare under le 42. chcpt pn order of the CA when deibed necessary (Hers af ARuro area Fv. Mun of a, Tambses, GN. No. 162217, fly 222015 ers Th ‘ule 45 - APPEAL BY CERTIORARI 10 THE SUPREME COURT sno ewe crates de of pra ane ale 4S and ear especie onder Re (1) tnsppeatty cetorn only questions of aw my be ris while speciale actin fr cron under le 5 the ony question thst may bere whether or the respndent as acted th gave abuse of fiseretion or sted without a ences fared (Rear Bale, 190 SCKA 433, October 17,1960), (2) Arson fr cerarur under Rule 9 read to be fed within 60 dys fom note ofthe decison, wile ‘errata mod of apa under Rake Sanus eed yh 5 day rm pte oe agent or oder. (6) Thepsrtes cornaroras3 mods of appeal ae the appelans andthe appellss a peters and respondents spectively whe ma setae atin or etioart he partes are the agreed party and the respondent the otal exresing jal lnc (Mackey. Mon Adaraion Angles ctl, Gi No, H230, Seplamber 30, 2003), ale 42s the remedy the MTC disnisses a UD cose ofr by the RTC. ‘Under Rule 42, Section Lof the Hues of Court the remedy rom an averse decison onder hy a Regal ral Court exerising ts apple jurston tt leavened ptiton for rei withthe Court of Appeals (ntramsros ‘Adminstration Dshore Construction ev. Carp, GR No 196795, March 7, 2016 Lene J} ‘PROVISIONAL REMEDIES ule 57 PRELIMINARY ATTACHMENT ‘ale on contemporaneous service of summons and writ of tachment ‘Apart sut may at shy tine se ng the complain svat the provsionl remedies under the Rules af court. Spotl, Rule 5? an pralianaty sachet ses oe gant ofthe remedy “tthe commencement of te tion or at ay time theater” (Se, He 87), This phrase refs tothe dato ng. of he complaa which s the ‘omen that markt commencement the acon” Te relerene plants tine bore summons served onthe Getendant,o even Defoe sumone 8506 In one eas, the ata te when arson shoud be had was ln ‘hat prior tthe acquisin furan ove the person of defendant sua of sunmons ore of tacit ant ‘wet atachment these dono ond cant bind and at he dated al sad unless rsdn ver his persons ‘venualy obtained by the court, ether by serve on of Summons or oth coercive process his Woltary Sbmusion tothe cour’sauthorty- Hes, when theater ater proper oficer commences plement. ofthe Wet ‘of atachmeat ts eset that he seers on the detent tt ony 2 copy a the appa hdavi and atachuneat ond sind of the order of taht excl equred by Secon 5 of le 57, but also the surmons adresse to ‘id deerant a well as 3 copy ol he compl (Dave Light and Power Ca In ¥-CA, 204 SERA 343, Mang ¥-CA, (1,GR No. 125027, august 12 2002). ale 58 PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION Requistes forte lwance of preliminary injunction ‘The reuises necessary forth tence of Wnt of poinary tyuncon are) the exstence of cet and ‘uomistkable right that must be protects a (2) am urgent ad paramount neces fr the wrt preven eras ‘amage (Ong China Kir Chea v CA 363 SCRA 15 (2001) The dy fhe court aan coguzance oa pape fo awn tf retina nuction sto determine well he requis necetsar fo the gan of an nye ate presen he ‘ase afore (MAA v. CA, et a, G1 No. 118249, February 14,2008 City of Hoe v- How ona, GR: No. 160395, December 2015 Barts San March? 2016 Pras Bernabe "The ssuanee of pciary ijction eproor when the pla appears ened to the re demanded the compat ands sud would preserve the statue gu that exer othe lg othe ase ul the on these respective rights and wba unde the contract determed aRer the tl (Dango 8 CA tS. GIL No. 499767, hugust 5 200% Maresto Mendon Perxie Phi Ie, GH No 203492, Ap 24,2017) Injunctan doesnot sue to prevent implementation ofthe Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law. ‘No court tn he Piippine sta have urn toss any reson orer or wrt of prelewnay sanction agpinst the PARC or any of duly authoraed oF designed agen xs ay ese xp or conconesy PS Hm, ‘necessary tao in Conicton with the application implementation, enorcemen, or irprtation ft Act and abet ting som ara erm (Secbon 58) No myuneton,estraning oder, protien of manda shall be issu Dy the lower cout agent the Depounent of Agrarian Reform (DA). the Depart of Agree (DA) the Departement an Nal Resources DEN), and the Department fuse [DO] nthe implementation o! the progam (Section 6 Al aL Antporsto, GR No, 192396, January 17,2018 Martie. > yaunc2019Mage Ares Rene am segregate combined) REVISED|consadaed) ITED inal E¥SA 3{ ES No munction wo desta person of possesion and ownership of propery ie contested otherwise would preempt the mains (Sp aut. Optoma Securty Serces In GR NO 208343, february 3, 2016, Per Bernabe, hh ule 60 - REPLEVIN What.a pare apving Jor recovery of posesson of personal property should do. ‘Wheneer th comps i am acon pas rte recovery of possession of personal property, the pall ma, at the commencement of he ata rat ny tne before answer, apy Fram ordc or diver a ich pope) to him. in the manor berenaer proved (Se) Aipon applsng for sich order the ML must show by bi en ait o Wat of sme ater perton Who personaly mows the ct (a) That the applicat ss the owner af th property camed, partially deserting oF ented! to the posession terol (b) Mat the property w wrongly detaned by the averse party, alleging the AUS of detention thereat according othe best ois knowledge, information at eb (6) That the property has uot bem ditrained or taken fora tax assessment fine pursuant to aw or sete under writ ewcuion or preliminary tach e there paced under catada ls, rs seed, thant sexempt om ston eure oct te (a) The ast marist ve othe propery, ‘The plant mst als ve a bond executed to the dofendant double the valu ofthe proparty 2 stated nthe amicait aforementioned fo the reutm ofthe property tothe defendant the recur thera! be acjalged. and fo the Payment tothe defendant of such um ase may recover the pli nthe acon (S82). ‘emo forthe return of property seied pursuant ta wrt of Ifa defendant ina ropevin ase want to have Uae property retarted to i, he must witha ive days from the ate Ue Sheri tok posession of he proper (1) up 3 bond th doabe i valu ofthe cate and (2) he plat with copy ofthe nevtaking Boh requvemeats are mandatory. Te rising a3 copy oft casterbond bast be acomplshed within the probed ered he pal so ave an oppertemty to contest the redler of {he property sought by the dfendant. Anda judge acta meee of edn when he approve 3 bond forte every of chatss tothe defenant rested ae he statuary prod hak expe (Cate and Nant Joga ea, 77 Phil $17 Bachrach Motor Corporanon. Abert, 60 Phi 3, Yang alex, supra ‘Rule 65 ~ CERTIORARI, PROHIBITION AND MANDAMUS. ‘fect te pendency of petition for ceriorarion a case pending before Tower court ‘The mere pendency ofa speci acon or certian comafesged treatin oa cane peng before 3 lower ‘oust does ant auomataly erupt the proceedings nthe lower court. Aton for cerboret dacs wat vest The lowe courts of unsdcon vail acu over the case arg before thems A peti certo, wie 3 SPS, ‘san ong acton: ts nota cotaation athe praceedng in hele our itis deed to correct ony errs of |unsiction nul rave absw of cet amuting wacko exes of ursicton, ‘Under Section 7, Rule 65 ofthe Rls of Core the higher court shou ise gains the public respondent a temporary restraung order ora writ of preening ieion in order fo inerrue Ge course a the primal case (RULES OF COURT, Rule 65. section 7) The petstoner ina Hue 5 petbon has he burden of pont to show tat here sa Imeronous ground for tho ssuanet of ab njneive writ oF arder to asjal the prceeirgs before the Pub "esponent. He shoul show the eustence of a urgent neces forthe wrt of Ode, 3 tha serous damage may be Prevented. Nabethclss, even an injunctive writ ordre sue, the awe ca etn tan ene he pre ‘hse (Trajan v Unde Sales Warahouse Cub, Gk No. 190253, Jane 1, 2014) ‘Remedy party was legally delved In defo "eS pory was gal ecard i deta the remedy pond fora Rul 4, Seton 2, par. peop though not exchsvely, avaliable Wr eoes it prcled acetendant whe hasbeen egy dvlares deta emporio Spee aid efrarious remedy, lke potion lor ertorr to have the figment Uy dtale seaside a 2 ality A defencnt wis propery celared vn datas iterenty stated from one wos provi) ecard in df ‘The farmer rreparably lows his ght to pareipate nthe Wal, whe he attr retina sch ngs snd ney eet he same afer having the order f deat and the Subsequent jdent by deta stint andthe cave rmsnded to the ‘Surfers Moreover, he former sued he remedy st forth in ection 2 pat 3 of Rule 4 by vee o whch he ‘an coatastnl thejcgent by dalton the designated round that = cntary tothe evidence aw, theater, howove asthe option to aval ofthe same remedy ato forth inerpoe a ptiion for err acelang the ‘ulation of he ererof dats even before the promulgation of = acgment by default oan the eve ha the er Inastcen rendered. to hae bth writ decrees declared vou (tate. CA, Zo ScHA 768), Ceriorari nota subst for appeat rule nat absolute, ‘A special actin for certiorari canot be ubstue for lst appl but the cue ot able. Teve are excepoons te: (A) where eer ble weltare and the advancement of public poi as tat Festi nave demande or (2) When the orders complained of ate found tobe patent nites: md (G) that an appeals considered cesry au appropri remedy (Glide De ta Rama, 4 SCAD 64 GR. No. 305072, ecember 9, 1998: Dongonv. Rapid Mowers Forwarders, Ca, Inc, lt No 1634, August 28, 2013; Butuan Dev Corp. 21 Dison, CAvet al, GR No. 197988 Ap 8 2017) 1.0 the broader erst of Petidon for mandamus may aot be tsued to compel the PMA to restore Cadet Cuda’ rights and eatidements asa Jultpledged groduatng cadet 20 ABKC2019 ag vein Reseda Law (rept (bined REVISED costed) EDTED foal /EVSA/09s