CIVIL PROCEDURE If issues/evidence were raised/presented during trial and there is failure to

object that it is not included in the pleadings, then it is accepted without

Classification of Actions need to amend the pleading to conform to evidence (Rule 10)
1. As to Subject Matter This rule will not apply in the following:
a. Real Actions 1. If evidence will rest/conform jurisdiction
b. Personal Actions 2. In criminal cases
(Compare with Real and Personal Rights)
Two-dismissal rule, when NOT applicable
2. As to Binding Effect 1. One of the courts where the case was filed is not the competent
a. Action/proceeding in rem court (no jurisdiction)
b. Action in personam 2. Bot dismissal must be done by notice (not by motion where court
c. Action quasi-in-rem permission was needed)

Money Claims Only Dismissal by plaintiff, effect on counterclaim

Ordinary Small Claims Summary When pleaded to the
Effect on the counterclaim
Procedure Procedure defendant/counterclaimant
RTC P400,000++ P300K-400K X After service upon him of Counterclaim will be dismissed
MT plaintiff’s motion for dismissal
C Before service upon him of Defendant’s counterclaim will not
All other personal actions (not money claims only) – except probate plaintiff’s motion for dismissal be dismissed, he has the
proceedings right/preference to resolve
Within Metro Manila counterclaim in the same action or
RTC P400,000++ X in a separate action (must
manifest his choice within 15
MT Less P400,000 X P200,000
days)
C
Outside Metro Manila
 Effect if no manifestation were made within 15 days?
RTC
o Counterclaim can be only manifested in a separated
MT P100,000
C action
 Ideally better to prosecute in same case
for expediency and no need to pay docket
What if claim is P200,000++
fees (if NOT permissive counterclaim)
 Will be under the MTC threshold of 300k/400k depending on
the area
Dismissal of class suit, as initiated by plaintiff(s)
 Always with approval of the court
In actionable documents
1. When the issue is the want of consideration and not genuineness
Dismissal by plaintiff under different rules, defendant’s counterclaim
and due execution, there is NO NEED to deny such document
- e.g.: Admits that such document exist but denies that Rule 17, Sec. 2 Rule 17, Sec. 3
hews really bound by the document Manifestation required No manifestation required
- How: Specifically deny under oath
2. If defendant/plaintiff is NOT a party to the When: Pre-Trial – 60 day period to be counted from date of last pleading
instrument/actionable document
- No need to specifically deny under oath
 But deny still and state the facts he claims
to be
3. Actionable document is upon which an action or defense is
based
- If YES: Specifically deny under oath
- If NO: No need to deny specifically deny under oath Last Clerk of court deadline to issue pre-trial
4. If the same actionable document is already denied and Court annexed
pleading noticemediation, JDR
proponent asks that it be denied under discovery modes (e.g. answer)
30 Days 15 Days
- No need to deny
5. If there is substantial traversal
- No need to deny under oath Time for clerk Pre-trial period, set by the Clerk of Court
End ofto issue notice CAM JDR
Pre- of pre-trial (Last (Last
Trial Day) Day)
Negative Pregnant Intervention
 Denial of a fact alleged with some qualifying or modifying Available defenses when waived
circumstance which denial is ambiguous or conjunctive.  Intervenor cannot subsequently raise the waived defense
 If allowed, it might be a way to circumvent omnibus motion rule
Example:
Q: Did you bump into plaintiff’s car under the influence of the Viatory right of a witness
alcohol Right of a witness not to be compelled to attend in court under a subpoena
A: No, I did not bump the car while under the influence if the witness resides more than 100km away from where he/she is
supposed to testify
- But the question remains: did you bump it in any  Not available in:
other circumstance 1. Criminal case
2. Subpoena duces tecum
Effect of Negative Pregnant: Denial only of modification or
qualifying statement

Multiple defendants, Partial default

 If there is common cause of action, plaintiff cannot move for a
default judgment on defaulting parties Use of Deposition
- e.g. Solidary debtors Deposition of: Who may use? Purpose?
 If there is NO common cause of action, plaintiff can move for a Any deponent Any party  Impeaching
default judgment on defaulting parties  Contradicting
- e.g. Joint debtors  The
testimony of
Amended complaints the deponent
as witness
A party or director, Adverse party Any purpose
1
 officer, manager of
private/public Sin perjuicio judgment
corporation  A judgment without a statement of facts in support of its
Witness, whether or Any party Any purpose conclusion. Such a judgment is void
not a party – If court
finds: DOSUE Memorandum decision
 Rendered by an appellate court which adopts in reference the
DOSUE (witness) findings of facts and the conclusion of law set forth in the
1. Dead witness decision appealed from
2. Out of the Philippines or 100 km away
3. Subpoena not procured Nunc pro tunc judgment or order
4. Unable to testify due to:  Means “now for then” – one rendered to record some judicial act
 Age done at a former time but which was not carried into the record
 Sickness  Proper only for the purpose of placing into the record judicial
 Infirmity action which
 Imprisonment  In short: may nakalimutan! Kaya need isama sa judgment
5. Exceptional circumstances
Partial judgment v. separate judgment
Note: If the deposition will be used in trial, the deponent should be Partial summary judgment Separate judgment
presented in court unless DOSUE exist One claim More than one claim
 Otherwise, deposition is considered as hearsay Interlocutory order Judgment or final order
Cannot be enforced & appealed May be enforced,
Can deposition in other case be used in another case? until the entire case has been  Appeal – subject to
 NO! Unless they are the same parties (Rule 130, S47) rendered discretion of the court

Letters Rogatory v. Commission Motion for new trial

Commission Letters Rogatory Civil Cases Criminal Cases
Who To a specific person To a foreign tribunal 1. Trial Court ü ü
(magistrate etc.) 2. Court of Appeals ü ü
Rule to Commission issuer’s Foreign tribunal’s rules GR: NO.
Follow rules 3. SC Except in ü
exceptional cases
Admission by adverse party
A request for admission is not proper where the subject matter thereof are Second motion for reconsideration
the same as the ULTIMATE FACTS alleged in the complaint  Not allowed as a general rule
 A party should not be required to make a second denial  However, in exceptional cases, the supreme court in the
exercise of equity jurisdiction, may entertain a 2nd MR
Production and Inspection of documents/tings does to apply to:
1. Those which are privileged matter Periods, Remedies after judgment
- not limited to testimony, extends to documents
Judgment
embodying confidential info Fresh
15 Days Period
15 Days
Demurer to evidence, risk when reversed on appeal
 A demurer to evidence granted by the trial court which was
reversed by the appellate court will not allow the defendant to
RULE 37 RULE 40 – 45
present evidence on appeal New trial or Appeal
- deemed to have waived the right to present evidence Motion for
Recon

Judgment on the pleadings, when proper

1. Answer fails to tender an issue
2. Answer admits the material allegations of the adverse party
(either expressly or by failing to specifically deny)
Terms, final judgment
Ibid, when not allowed  No order to do by the court: Final & unappealable Onwards:
 In actions for declaration of nullity or annulment of marriage or  Court orders something to be done: Final & Executory RULE 47
for legal separation Where to file motion for execution pending appeal Action to
Petition for relief: 60 Days annul the
TRIAL
RULE 38
COURT
within: 6 months
APPELLATE COURT
Summary judgment, when proper judgment
a. While it has jurisdiction  Trial court lost jurisdiction
(w/in 4 yrs.)
1. There is no genuine issue except as to the amount of damages over the case and
2. SCA, declaratory relief b. In possession of either the
3. Summary procedure, small claims original record or the
record on appeal
When to move for summary judgment Things to note when filing a motion for execution pending appeal
 Anytime after the pleading in answer thereto has been served, at 1. Trial court must have BOTH lost jurisdiction and lost possession
any stage of litigation whenever it becomes evident that no of the original record / record on appeal to file at appellate court
triable issue exists 2. Wait for the period to appeal for BOTH PARTIES to be
considered that jurisdiction is lost at the trial court
Judgment of the pleadings v. summary judgment
Judgment on the pleadings Summary judgment Supersedeas Bond
No genuine issue No genuine issue on the material  Given to suspend/stay the discretionary execution of judgment
facts. Only issue is the amount of  Court will approve: court which issued the execution pending
damages appeal
Based exclusively on pleadings Not only on pleadings but also  If trial court approved, but the record is transferred to
upon supporting affidavits, appellate court, appellate court’s approval is necessary
depositions and admissions
Prayed for by the plaintiff or Defendant too, for counter-claim 5 year, 10 year periods, motion for execution
claimant ONLY etc…  Does not apply to special proceedings (e.g. land registration and
cadastral cases)
Partial summary judgment  Criminal cases, penalty of imprisonment, RPC applies
 NOT subject to separate appeal & execution

2
Alias unit of execution 1. Administrative disciplinary case
 No more. The 60 days lifetime of the unit is no longer in the  Respondents are exonerated from liability
1997 Rules  Rule 65
 Any decision, appeal by aggrieved party
Right of redemption, execution sale  Rule 43, to CA
 Real property - ü
 Personal property – û 2. Criminal Case
 Any decision
Time to redeem:  Rule 65, Supreme Court
 1st redemption – 1 year
 2nd, onward – 60 days Cross: Appeal
 Judgment obliger – 1 year, once  Both parties in the case have appealed

Bar by prior judgment v. conclusiveness of judgment Grant of extension to file

BAR BY PRIOR JUDGMENT
CONCLUSIVENESS OF  A.M. No. 00-2-14-SC – any extension of time granted by a court
JUDGMENT should be computed from the expiration of the original period,
As to identity of causes of action regardless of the fact that said expiry date falls on Saturday,
 There is identity of causes of  Causes of action are Sunday or legal holiday
action different
As to conclusiveness Scope of Rule 47
 Conclusive not only as to the  Only limited to matters  Limited to civil actions, not applicable to criminal actions
matters directly adjudged but actually raised  Not applicable to judgments, final orders of quasi-judicial bodies
also other matters that could
have been raised Grounds of Rule 47
As to preclusive effect  Extrinsic fraud
 Bars relitigation of a case  Bars relitigation of an issue – file in 4 years from discovery
As to ground for motion to – as long as it was not availed of or cold have been availed of
dismiss  Not ground in an MR or new trial
 Ground
 Lack of jurisdiction – imprescriptible
Test: Resolving situation w/ 2 or more conflicting decisions which are final – person of the defending party
& executory – subject matter
Two Tests:
1. Which judgment came first  Lack / denial of due process (added ground from jurisprudence)
2. Which judgment was rendered by a court of last resort
Harmless Error Rules
Appeal of RTC decisions to SC  No error in either the admission or the exclusion of evidence and
 Allowed if no error or defect in any ruling or order or anything done by the
 Purely questions of law court is a ground for granting new trial or setting aside,
 Not apply to a judgment of conviction in a criminal case modifying or disturbing a judgment
*RTC only, not MTC

Appeal from MTC to RTC

 Decide based on the whole record Preliminary attachment, sufficient security
 Errors which are not assigned can be hired by the RTC  For the provisional remedy of preliminary attachment to be
 If MTC dismisses a case on the ground that it has no granted, there must be NO SUFFICIENT SECURITY for the
jurisdiction, RTC may decide the case as if it is originally filed claim
(if it has jurisdiction)  So generally, prem. Attachment is not available in an
 MTC dismiss (No trial on the merits) action to recover mortgage
 RTC exercises original jurisdiction - CA - except: mortgage abandons his security or mortgage
 MTC tries the case but it has no jurisdiction not enough to fulfill obligation
 RTC exercises appellate jurisdiction – CA
Summons, attachment
P: Notice of appeal v. D’s MR  Irregularity will not dissolve the writ but can cause the discharge
 Allowed there is nothing in the Rules w/c makes a party’s right of the attached property
contingent on the opposing party’s MR
Writ of attachment
Motion to implead / file a 3rd party complaint – denied remedy  Issuance: even before summons
Remedy: appeal  Implementation: should be AFTER the summons is served
 Because the right of the party in a case was decided w/  Subsequent service will not cure the irregularities in the
finality (as against the 3rd party) enforcement
 Same with inferential  Enforcement could also be done simultaneous w/ the
service of summons
Dismissal w/out prejudice
 When a case was dismissed w/out prejudice, the proper action is Applicant’s bond v. Counterbond
to re-file rather than to file an appeal APPLICANT’S BOND COUNTERBOND
As to who posts
Appeal: matter of right v. not a matter of right  By the applicant or writ of  Against whom attachment
Matter of Right Not a Matter of Right preliminary attachment is issued
 Ordinary appeal  Rule 42 As to purpose
 Rule 43  To obtain a unit of  Prevent or discharge a
 Rule 45 preliminary attachment preliminary attachment
As to liability of bond
 Appeal from several or
separate judgment  Answer for all cost which  Secures the payment of the
may be adjudged to the judgment w/c the applicant
adverse party and damages may be entitled to
Grounds of disallowing appeal (RTC)
which he may sustain
 Taken out of time
Requirement of notice & hearing
 Non-payment docket fee & other lawful fees to surety  Sureties therefore are
 Enforced by an application forthwith charged under the
Ombudsman appeal
after motion w/ due notice judgment and their liability
3
 has been given to the may be recovered after Note: Does not apply in action for reformation, quieting of title
applicant notice & hearing in the or consolidation of ownership
same action
Constitutional Commissions
Territory of enforcement; unit of injunction  CSC CA SC
RTC: withing the judicial region where the RTC belongs
e.g. RTC Makati, National Capital Judicial Region  COMELEC COA SC
CA: anywhere in the Philippines
SC: anywhere in the Philippines Neypes Rule on Rule 64
 Does not apply the applicable provision is:
Periods, Preliminary Injunction …shall have the remaining period within which to file the
 TRO: 72 Hours petition but which shall not be less than 5 days
Grounds: Extreme urgency, Grave injustice, irreparable
injury SC Broader Power of Certiorari
Who may issue: - Executive Judge (multi-sala) Gen Rule: CA is available only against
 Presiding Judge (single sala)  Those exercising quasi-judicial or judicial functions
 w/in 72 hours, near in a summary hearing if (ministerial for mandamus & prohibition)
extension is necessary (ex-parte)  Ground: Grave abuse

 TRO: 20 Days SC: can be exercise even if not exercising quasi-judicial or judicial
Grounds: Great / irreparable injury functions (ministerial)
Who may issue: Court to which the application for  Same grounds
preliminary injunction was made. BASIS: Constitution
 w/in 20 days. Order said party/person to show cause
why the injunction should not be granted

 Writ of Preliminary injunction

Grounds: (Sec. 3, Rule 58)
Who may issue: Court where the case is raffled Mandamus v. Quo Warranto
(the same w/ TRO – 20 days) MANDAMUS (R65) QUO WARRANTO (R66)
 Summary hearing w/in 24 hrs. after the records are Merely excludes the petitioner Claims any right to the office and
transmitted to the branch to w/c it is raffled from the office without usurping, usurps, intrudes into or unlawfully
 w/ Notice intruding into or unlawfully holds it
 Effective while the case is pending holding the office

Timeline Mandamus available against:

 Public officers
Day 1 3 20
 Private persons
*Both must exercise ministerial duty

TRO: TRO: indefinitely 60 Days to file petition for C.P.M

72 20 Writ of PI
HOUR DAYS
 Counted from:
Non-working days  Notice of judgment, order or resolution (No MR)
 Included in TRO except when the last day of TRO falls on a  Notice of denial of motion (when MR is required)
non-working day
 Not applicable: when there is no judgment, order or resolution
Receivership (e.g., Mandamus)
 Allowed only if the subject of litigation is PROPERTY
 Not applicable for sum of money actions unless the case is Time to file petition for CPM, extension
already in execution stage and debtor is disposing property and  Allowed for exceptional & meritorious case
avoiding application of judgment Jurisprudence: SC is the only court to allow/grant an extension

Replevin Quo Warranto damages

 Available if the principal relief is recovery of personal property  Not allowed to be awarded in the same case
- If merely incidental: attachment  Separate case for damages must be filed 1 year after the
 Must be availed BEFORE filing of an answer entry of judgment of the quo warranto case
 Diff: Damages v. costs
Real Property, subject of Replevin
 Generally, NOT subject of replevin Deposit, exploration, amount
Except: when treated by the parties as personal property  Real property – assessed values
(execute a chattel mortgage on the RP)  Exploration of right of way – 100% market value of the land
– Replacement cost
SPECIAL CIVIL ACTIONS – CMV of crops & trees
Rule 63: Declaratory Relief & other similar remedies  By LGU – 15% of FMV
 Non-joinder of parties will not direct jurisdiction  Personal Property – provisionary ascertained
 Declaratory relief is merely declaratory & not
executory Motion to dismiss in expropriation
 Not allowed any objections or defenses. The defendant may
Conversion: DR to OCA have must be set forth in an answer
 If before the final termination of the case, a breach or violation
of an instrument or a stature etc.…thereupon be converted into Just compensation, formula
an ordinary action FMV + (CO – CB) = JC

Court may refuse to hear or try DF Just compensation when determined

If: (motu proprio or upon motion) GR:
1. Decision would not terminate the uncertainty or  Time of taking or
controversy  Time of filing
2. Declaration or construction is not necessary and proper *whichever comes first
under the circumstances
If expropriation by LGU
 Time of taking
4

Inverse condemnation
 Filed by the property owner in the situation wherein the state,
LGU etc., seizes or takes private property for public use without
filing beforehand a complain for expropriation
Execution pending appeal in expropriation cases
 Not allowed
 Public funds cannot be seized under a writ of execution
Value of estate, community property, basis of jurisdiction
 When a married individual died, the basis for the determination
of jurisdiction is the value of the community property, not the
share of the deceased spouse
Rule of Preferential Jurisdiction
 Applies only to non-resident decedent
 If decedent is resident, the place where the resided at the time of
his death is the place/venue where the action of the settlement of
his estate should be filed
 This rule should be taken in conjunction with the rule on
precedence over interstate proceeding
 If there is a interstate proceeding already commenced, it
should not be dismissed just because there is a petition
for probate
1. Generally: institution of criminal action
either:
a. complaint with proper officer (preliminary investigation
requiring)
b. complaint/information at MTC, or complaint at office of
the prosecutor (preliminary investigation not required)
2. For violation of special law:
 Filing of the complaint with prosecutor’s office
(executive character) or at courts (judicial character –
Panaguiton v. DOJ)
3. For cases covered by Rule on Summary Procedure
 Only upon filing of the complaint or information in court
(Zaldivia v. Reyes)
Note to self: memorize jurisdiction of cases under summary
procedure
“Complaint” under Section 5, Rule 110. Prosecution of private offenses
 May refer to:
1. Complaint – affidavit filed by offended party
2. Sworn statement of the offended party
 Why liberal interpretation
 The avoiding consideration in determining compliance with
the requirement is the intent and determination of the
offended party to seek judicial redress
Why is substitution of complaint required to be done before judgment
 If after judgment, double jeopardy already sets in

Unit of HC v Privilege of the Writ of HC Prejudicial question

 Unit of HC – inquiry as to the reason/validity of detention
 Privilege of the Writ of HC – order releasing the person asking
for the Writ of HC
 If the privilege of Writ of HC is suspended by the
President, courts can still hear the petition but may not
issue the privilege if the person is covered by the
suspension (e.g., detained for rebellion)
 Civil action must be commenced ahead of the criminal action
Special Rule, BP 22
 Civil case is always instituted w/ the criminal case
*Related:
 In estafa: deemed instituted if off. party fails to
manifest within 15 days

Writ of Habeas Corpus, Post-conviction remedy Preliminary investigation, when required

A person detained/sentenced to suffer imprisonment may avail of the 4 yrs – 2 mos – 1 day
Writ of HC if: Penalty prescribed
1. Decision has been final & executory. Appeal is not available
anymore Preliminary investigation, record
2. Grounds:  Not automatically part of the case unless ordered by the court
a. Deprivation of a constitutional right resulting in the upon request or it is necessary
restraint  SC Guidelines on Pretrial & Discovery (Aug. 16, 2004)
b. Court had no jurisdiction  Mandates judges to order prosecution to attach the
c. Excessive penalty has been imposed records of the preliminary investigation

Writ of HC v. Nullity of cases proceeding Inquest

 If a writ of HC over the minor child is pending/filed it will be  Formal & summary investigation by the inquest prosecutor to
dismissed to give way to the nullity of marriage case determine the validity of the warrantless arrest

Service of summons, Writ of HC Requirement of arraignment before bail application

 Writ of HC whenever under Rule 102 or HC over minors, service  Not required
of summons are not required  To do so will deprive the accused of the remedy to file a motion
 Service of the writ is enough, court will require to quash (available w/ bail)
jurisdiction
Bail – negating circumstances
Writ of Amparo, Government involvement 1. Recidivist
Navia v. Pardico, June 2012 2. Escaped before
 Government involvement in the disappearance remains an 3. Committed an offense while on probation
indispensable element in writ of Amparo cases 4. Flight risk
 It is limited to extralegal killings and enforced disappearance 5. Crime risk

Writ of Amparo, Criminal case Oral motion to quash

 When a criminal action has been commenced, no separate  Not allowed
petition for the writ shall be filed Except:
 Reliefs under the writ shall be available by motion in the 1. Ground is lack of jurisdiction
criminal case 2. Lack of jurisdiction is apparent from the evidence on record

Decisions in Writ of HC & Amparo  In motion to quash, all grounds must be raised, and failure to do
 Immediately executory so will deem such ground as waived and would not be
 No need to file a motion for execution for an amparo or considered
habeas corpus decision Except: lack of jurisdiction
 Court may motu proprio consider
Writ of Habeas data, nexus required
 A petition for habeas data must show that there exist a nexus Motion to quash to question lack of jurisdiction over the person of the
between the right to privacy & the right to life, liberty & security accused
 Must raise only one ground, otherwise it will lead to voluntary
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE appearance

5
Double jeopardy applies even w/ express consent of the accused MR is summary procedure, criminal cases
1. Dismissal due to a demurer to evidence  Not available
2. Based on the denial of the accused’s right to speedy trial, case
was dismissed Search warrants, nature
 Special criminal process
 Only be applied in furtherance or public prosecution

Nolle prosequi Cybercrime courts with special authority to issue search warrant
 Voluntary dismissal or withdrawal of criminal information by the (enforceable anywhere in th PH)
prosecution *requires court approval 1. Quezon City
 It will not lead to acquittal if it was withdrawn before 2. Manila
arraignment or if after arraignment accused expressly consented 3. Pasig
4. Cebu
Delito continuado. Double jeopardy 5. Iloilo
 It is prohibited that multiple cases are filed against accused’s 6. Davao
multiple acts constituting a crime but arose out of a single 7. Cagayan de Oro
criminal intent
 Otherwise, double jeopardy Invalid search warrant
 Non waivable defense
Online libel, online child pornography  Constitutional safeguard
 If the same material which is said to be libelous or violative of
anti-child pornography law, it cannot be punished again if it is Validity of search warrant
republished online  40 days
 Double jeopardy
EVIDENCE
Accused’s appeal, no double jeopardy Classification of evidence (natural form)
 When accused appears, he waives the constitutional safeguard 1. Documentary evidence
against double jeopardy and threw the whole case open for 2. Object/real evidence
review 3. Testimonial evidence

Provisional dismissal Classification in relation to fact in issue

 Dismissing a case provisionally without prejudice to the revival 1. Direct evidence – proves a fact without aid of any inference
of the case within one-year/two-year period 2. Circumstantial evidence
 Requires the express consent of the accused
When is evidence admissible?
Provisional dismissal, periods  Admissibility = relevant & competent
 Counted from: date of notice to public prosecutor/private counsel
 Offense punishable by imprisonment: Document as object evidence
 Not exceeding 6 years  If it is offered not as proof of its contents but its existence or
- 1 year after issuance, automatically permanent physical condition or feature
dismissal e.g., Document as handwriting example, not to prove the
 More than 6 years contents
- 2 years
Original document rule for electronic evidence
Non-waivable grounds. Motion to quash  Same approach with non-electronic documents
1. Lack of jurisdiction  Duplicates are admissible to the same extent as the original
2. Extinction of criminal liability (adopted from REE)
3. Facts alleged do not constitute an offense Note: original document rule; requires to show the document in court
4. Double jeopardy NOT about original copy or duplicate copy
5. Officer who filed the information had no authority to do so
Parol evidence
Plea bargaining  Applies only to written contracts
 Lesser offense NOT lesser penalty  Applies only to parties in the written contract. Strangers to the
document sought to be proven can introduce parol evidence
Case not referred to mediation *Not strangers: a beneficiary of a stipulation pour autrui in a
1. Summary procedure contract
2. Cases under VAWC
3. Case which are not purely civil liability Marital disqualification rule, when effective
 As long as the marriage subsist
Time to file demurrer to evidence  Also covers marriage while case was pending. Spouse will not be
 To calendar days from the date leave of court is granted allowed to testify even on matters that occurred prior to marriage

Acquittal MOR, non-application

1. If dismissed/acquitted based on the merits of the case  In Alvarez v. Ramirez, the court did not apply MOR because the
2. Demurrer to evidence marital harmony or tranquility in marital relations (something that
3. Violation of accused’s right to speedy trial MOR seeks to protect) does not exist since the spouses has been
estranged
Failure to appear at promulgation  However, the lack of marital relations/harmony does not
 Accused will lose the remedies available under the Rules of Court automatically mean that MOR should apply. There must be
(e.g., appeal) careful consideration that the facts fall squarely w/ Alvarez v.
Ramirez.
Res judicata in criminal cases * Sec. pg 110. Riguera Vol. II
 Not available * The mere fact that spouses are estranged does not mean that
 What is available is “res judicata in prison grey” (double MOR will not apply
jeopardy) Dead man’s rule, Disqualification by reason of adverse party’s insanity
 2020 amendments/Rules abolished the disqualification
New trial & Reconsideration
Initiated only by: Marital disqualification Rule, Marital communication privilege waiver
1. Court w/ consent of the accused  It is possible that MOR may be waived (by failure to object) but
2. Accused still raise MCP as an objection when the issue is the contents
(privileged natura) of the spouses testimony

6
7