Civil Procedure

 John and Maria entered into a Contract to Sell for a piece of real property
located in Quezon City. John failed to comply with his obligations under the
contract, prompting Maria to cancel the contract and demand the return of
the down payment she made. John refused to return the down payment,
leading Maria to file a complaint against him for breach of contract and
damages. Which court has jurisdiction over the case?

 Jenny filed a complaint for damages against her former employer, XYZ
Corporation, in the Metropolitan Trial Court (MTC) of Manila. However,
XYZ Corporation filed a Motion to Dismiss on the ground that the MTC has
no jurisdiction over the case as the amount of damages being claimed
exceeds its jurisdictional limit. In response, Jenny wants to file an amended
complaint to reduce the amount of damages being claimed so that the case
can remain with the MTC. Can she do so as a matter of right?

 Miguel filed a complaint for damages against his neighbor, Maria, in the
Municipal Trial Court (MTC) of Quezon City. However, after filing the
complaint, Miguel discovered that the actual amount of damages he is
entitled to is actually much higher than what he originally claimed in his
complaint. As such, he wants to amend his complaint to increase the amount
of damages being claimed and transfer the case to the Regional Trial Court
(RTC) where it properly belongs. Can he do so as a matter of right?

 Juan filed a complaint for breach of contract against ABC Corporation,

claiming that the company failed to deliver the goods he ordered. In
response, ABC Corporation filed a motion for leave to file a third-party
complaint against Marcelo, alleging that Marcelo was responsible for the
delay in the delivery of the goods. Can ABC Corporation file a third-party
complaint against Marcelo in this case?

 Rosa filed a complaint for damages against XYZ Corporation, claiming that
she was injured while using a defective product manufactured by the
 company. In response, XYZ Corporation filed a motion for leave to file a
third-party complaint against Juan, claiming that Juan was the one who sold
the defective product to Rosa. Can XYZ Corporation file a third-party
complaint against Juan in this case?

 A and B entered into a contract for the sale of a car. B failed to pay the full
purchase price, and A filed a complaint for collection of sum of money
against B in the Regional Trial Court. In his answer, B denied the allegations
and filed a permissive counterclaim against A for damages arising from the
latter's alleged misrepresentation regarding the condition of the car. B also
filed a cross-claim against D, who allegedly sold him the car and warranted
its roadworthiness.

Question: Who is liable to pay for the docket fees of the permissive
counterclaim and cross-claim filed by B?

 X filed a complaint against Y for breach of contract. The trial court rendered
a decision dismissing the complaint. X filed a motion for reconsideration
(MR) within the reglementary period to appeal. The trial court denied the
MR. X then wanted to appeal the trial court's decision.

Can X file a notice of appeal even if the reglementary period for appeal
already lapsed?

 A client hires a lawyer to represent him in a civil case. During the trial, the
lawyer fails to present a crucial piece of evidence that could have changed
the outcome of the case in favor of the client. The court renders a judgment
adverse to the client. The client later discovers the mistake of the lawyer and
files a Petition for Annulment of Judgment based on extrinsic fraud.

Is a petition for the annulment of judgment based on counsel's mistake

proper?
 In a civil case for damages, the Regional Trial Court rendered a decision
dismissing the complaint for lack of merit. The plaintiff filed a notice of
appeal to the Court of Appeals. However, the defendant filed a motion to
dismiss the appeal on the ground that the plaintiff should have filed a
Petition for Review instead of a notice of appeal. Is the defendant's motion
to dismiss proper?
 A filed a case against B before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) for damages
arising from a breach of contract. The RTC rendered a decision in favor of
B, stating that there was no breach of contract and dismissing the case. A's
counsel later discovered that the RTC did not have jurisdiction over the
subject matter of the case and should have been filed before the Municipal
Trial Court (MTC). A filed a Petition for Annulment of Judgment before the
Court of Appeals (CA), citing lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter as
the ground. B argued that the Petition should not be given due course since
A's counsel was negligent in filing the case before the wrong court and
should be bound by such mistake.

Question: Should the CA give due course to A's Petition for Annulment of
Judgment based on lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter, despite the
mistake of A's counsel in filing the case before the wrong court?

 X filed a complaint against Y for breach of contract before the Regional

Trial Court (RTC) of Makati City. Y filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that
the proper venue should be in the RTC of Taguig City since the contract was
executed and performed in Taguig City. X opposed the motion to dismiss,
arguing that the venue was proper in Makati City since Y had an office and
conducted business in Makati City. The RTC denied the motion to dismiss
and ruled that the venue was proper in Makati City.
Y filed a petition for certiorari before the Court of Appeals, arguing that the
RTC committed grave abuse of discretion in denying the motion to dismiss.
X filed a comment, arguing that the petition for certiorari should be
dismissed outright since improper venue is not a ground for a petition for
certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court.
Is X correct?
 X filed a complaint for recovery of possession and damages against Y,
alleging that he is the rightful owner of a parcel of land covered by a Torrens
title, but Y has been unlawfully occupying and cultivating it for several
years. In his answer, Y asserts that he has been occupying the land in
question by virtue of a valid and subsisting lease agreement with the
previous owner, and that X's claim of ownership is baseless since the
Torrens title submitted by X was fraudulently obtained.

 During trial, X presents the Torrens title as evidence of his ownership of the
land. However, upon examination of the title, Y's counsel noticed that it
contained several inconsistencies and defects that cast doubt on its
authenticity. Moreover, Y was able to produce documents and testimonies to
show that X's predecessor-in-interest did not have the capacity to transfer
ownership of the land, and that the lease agreement between Y and the
previous owner was duly registered with the proper authorities.

In this scenario, what affirmative defense can Y raise, and why?

 X filed a complaint for damages against Y in the Regional Trial Court

(RTC) based on a contract of sale of a parcel of land. Y filed a motion to
dismiss the case on the ground of lack of jurisdiction, arguing that the
contract of sale was void and unenforceable as it was a simulated contract.
The RTC denied Y's motion to dismiss and proceeded with the trial.

 While the case was pending, Y filed a separate complaint for nullification of
the same contract of sale in another RTC. X also filed a complaint for
specific performance in yet another RTC, seeking to compel Y to transfer
ownership of the same parcel of land to him.
 Y argued that the two cases he filed involved different causes of action,
while X argued that Y's actions amounted to splitting of actions and violated
the rule against multiple suits.

Assuming you are the judge handling the case, which party's argument
would you uphold, and why?

 X filed a complaint for breach of contract against Y, alleging that Y failed to

deliver the goods as agreed upon in their contract. While the case was
pending, Y filed a counterclaim against X, alleging that X actually breached
the contract by failing to pay the agreed price for the goods.
In his answer to the counterclaim, X also included a third-party complaint
against Z, claiming that Z was actually the one responsible for the breach of
contract as Z was the one who provided X with faulty goods. Z filed a
motion to dismiss the third-party complaint, arguing that there is no basis for
impleading him in the case.
As the judge handling the case, what is your ruling on Z's motion to dismiss
the third-party complaint?

 X filed a complaint for breach of contract against Y, alleging that Y failed to

deliver the goods as agreed upon. During pre-trial, the parties submitted a
pre-trial order, which only mentioned the issues of whether a contract
existed between the parties, whether Y failed to deliver the goods, and
whether X suffered damages as a result of Y's breach.
During trial, X presented evidence of his emotional distress and mental
anguish resulting from Y's breach. Y objected to the presentation of
evidence, arguing that the issue of moral damages was not included in the
pre-trial order.
Can the court still award moral damages to X despite not being included in
the pre-trial order?

 X is a foreign corporation engaged in the business of selling luxury cars. Y,

a resident of the Philippines, bought a car from X through its branch office
in Hong Kong. However, the car that was delivered to Y had defects, and
despite repeated demands, X refused to replace or repair the car. Y filed a
complaint for damages against X before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of
Quezon City.

X did not have a branch office in the Philippines, and Y was unable to serve
the summons on X in Hong Kong. Instead, Y served the summons on X's
agent in the Philippines, a local car dealer that sold X's cars. X filed a
motion to dismiss the complaint, arguing that the court did not acquire
jurisdiction over its person since there was no valid service of summons.

As Y's lawyer, what would be your response to X's motion to dismiss?