I.

GENERAL PRINCIPLES
1. What is the principle of judicial hierarchy and what are its exceptions?
The Principle of Judicial Hierarchy or the Doctrine of Hierarchy of Courts requires that recourse must first be obtained from
lower courts sharing concurrent jurisdiction with a higher court. This is to ensure that this Court remains a court of last resort
so as to satisfactorily perform the functions assigned to it by the fundamental charter and immemorial tradition. Generally,
the rule on hierarchy of courts may be relaxed when dictated by public welfare and the advancement of public policy, or
demanded by the broader interest of justice, or the orders complained of were found to be patent nullities, or the appeal
was considered as clearly an inappropriate remedy. (Provincial Bus Operators v. DOLE, G.R. No. 202275, 2018)

2. What is the doctrine of judicial stability or non-interference?

The doctrine of judicial stability or non-interference in the regular orders or judgments of a co-equal court is an elementary
principle in the administration of justice: no court can interfere by injunction with the judgments or orders of another court of
concurrent jurisdiction having the power to grant the relief sought by the injunction . (Metro Rail Transit Development Corporation
v. Trackworks Rail Transit Advertising, G.R. No. 204452, June 28, 2021, J.Hernando)

3. AAA filed a Petition for Certiorari, Prohibition and Mandamus with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Pasig City who
denied such. May AAA file the same case, involving the same parties or at least parties who represent the same
interest, to RTC Makati?
No, it would violate the doctrine of judicial stability. AAA's Petition for Certiorari, Prohibition and Mandamus ought to have
been dismissed at the outset for lack of jurisdiction as the RTC of Makati City is bereft of any authority to nullify the orders
of the RTC of Pasig City, a coordinate and co-equal court. The doctrine of judicial stability or non-interference in the regular
orders or judgments of a co-equal court is an elementary principle in the administration of justice: no court can interfere by
injunction with the judgments or orders of another court of concurrent jurisdiction having the power to grant the relief sought
by the injunction. (Metro Rail Transit Development Corporation v. Trackworks Rail Transit Advertising, G.R. No. 204452, June 28, 2021,
J.Hernando)

II. JURISDICTION
5. What is the effect if a judgment is rendered by a court without jurisdiction?
All the proceedings therein, as well as the decision and other orders issued thereon, are void for lack of jurisdiction. Settled
is the rule that a judgment rendered by a court without jurisdiction is null and void and may be attacked anytime. It creates
no rights and produces no effect. It remains a basic fact in law that the choice of the proper forum is crucial, as the decision
of a court or tribunal without jurisdiction is a total nullity. A void judgment for want of jurisdiction is no judgment at all. All
acts performed pursuant to it and all claims emanating from it have no legal effect. (Metro Rail Transit Development Corporation
vs. Trackworks Rail Transit Advertising, G.R. No. 204452. June 28, 2021, J. Hernando)

6. When should the issue of lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter and over the person of a party be raised?
Over the subject matter Over the person of a party
Lack of jurisdiction over the Since the defense of lack of jurisdiction over the person of a party to a case is not
subject matter can always be one of those defenses which are not deemed waived under Section 1 of Rule 9, such
raised anytime, even for the first defense must be invoked when an answer or a motion to dismiss is filed in order to
time on appeal, since prevent a waiver of the defense. If the objection is not raised either in a motion to
jurisdictional issues cannot be dismiss or in the answer, the objection to the jurisdiction over the person of the
waived subject, however, to the plaintiff or the defendant is deemed waived by virtue of the first sentence of Section
principle of estoppel by laches. 1 of Rule 9 of the Rules of Court.
(Boston Equity Resources, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 173946, June 19, 2013)

7. Distinguish between general and special jurisdiction.

General Jurisdiction Special Jurisdiction
Those with competence to decide on their Those which have jurisdiction only for a particular purpose or clothed with
own jurisdiction and take cognizance of all special powers for the performance of specific duties beyond which they
cases of a particular nature. have no authority of any kind.

8. What is the principle of continuity of jurisdiction?

Under the principle of continuity of jurisdiction or doctrine of adherence, a court or tribunal which acquired jurisdiction over
a case by the filing of the complaint, never lost said jurisdiction despite the passage of a later law transferring jurisdiction to
another court or administrative body. Once jurisdiction is attached, it cannot be ousted by subsequent happenings or events,
although of a character which would have prevented jurisdiction from attaching in the first instance, and it retains jurisdiction
until it finally disposes of the case. (ERC v. Therma Mobile, G.R. Nos. 244449 & 244455-56, September 29, 2021)

9. What are the cases falling under the exclusive original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court?
Petitions for issuance of writs of certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus against the following:
1. Court of Appeals (CA);
2. Commission on Elections En Banc;
3. Commission on Audit;
4. Sandiganbayan;
5. Court of Tax Appeals En Banc; and
6. Ombudsman in criminal and non-administrative disciplinary cases. (J. De Leon, Remedial Law Reviewer-Primer, 2021)

11. Does the CA have jurisdiction over a special civil action for certiorari assailing an interlocutory order issued by
the RTC in a local tax case?
No. If the Supreme Court were to sustain the contention that jurisdiction over said certiorari petition lies with the CA, the
Court would be confirming the exercise by two judicial bodies, the CA and the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA), of jurisdiction

2
 over basically the same subject matter – precisely the split-jurisdiction situation which is anathema to the orderly
administration of justice. The Court cannot accept that such was the legislative motive, especially considering that the law
expressly confers on the CTA, the tribunal with the specialized competence over tax and tariff matters, the role of judicial
review over local tax cases without mention of any other court that may exercise such power. Since appellate jurisdiction
over a local tax case is vested in the CTA, it follows that a petition for certiorari seeking nullification of an interlocutory order
issued in the said case should, likewise, be filed with the same court. To rule otherwise would lead to an absurd situation
where one court decides an appeal in the main case while another court rules on an incident in the very same case. (City of
Manila v. Judge Cuerdo, G.R. No. 175723. February 04, 2014)

12. Can a petition for certiorari be filed before the CA to assail the criminal aspect of the OMB Resolution?
No. The proper mode to assail the OMB's finding of probable cause in criminal cases is by filing a petition for certiorari
before the Supreme Court. Indeed, in Carpio-Morales, the Court struck down as unconstitutional the second paragraph of
Section 14 of RA 6770. However, it is settled that the doctrine laid down in Carpio-Morales has no application in criminal
cases before the OMB. In Gatchalian v. Office of the Ombudsman, the Court examined previous case law and clarified that
Carpio-Morales has limited application to administrative cases before the OMB. The Carpio-Morales decision never intended
to disturb the well-established distinction between the appellate remedies for orders, directives, and decisions arising from
administrative cases and those arising from non-administrative or criminal cases. (Patdu, Jr. vs. Carpio-Morales, G.R. No.
230171, 1 September 27, 2021, J. Hernando)

13. What are the crimes within, and who are the officials covered by, the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan?
Crimes 1. Violations of:
a. Republic Act No. 3019 “Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act”
b. Republic Act No. 1379
c. Chapter II, Section 2, Title VII, Book II of the Revised Penal Code,
where one or more of the accused are officials occupying the positions in the government mentioned
below, whether in a permanent, acting, or interim capacity, at the time of the commission of the offenses.
2. Other offenses of felonies whether simple or complexed with other crimes committed by the public officials
and employees mentioned in subsection of this section in relation to their office.
3. Criminal cases filed pursuant to and in connection with Executive Order Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14-A, issued in
1986.

Officers Officials of the executive branch occupying the positions of regional director and higher, otherwise classified
as Grade '27' and higher, of the Compensation and Position Classification Act of 1989 (Republic Act No.
6758).
(Section 2, RA 10660; Section 4, RA 8249; Section 4, RA 8249)

14. Is the death of the co-accused public officer before the filing of the information a ground for motion to quash the
information for Sec. 3(e) of RA 3019 filed against the co-conspirator who is a private person?
No. The requirement before a private person may be indicted for violation of Section 3(g) of R.A. 3019, among others, is
that such private person must be alleged to have acted in conspiracy with a public officer. The law, however, does not
require that such a person must, in all instances, be indicted together with the public officer. Indeed, it is not necessary to
join all alleged co-conspirators in an indictment for conspiracy. (People v. Go, G.R. No. 168539, 2014)

15. Does the Sandiganbayan have jurisdiction over drug cases involving public officers when the alleged offense was
committed in relation to their office?
No. While it is true that the Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction over public officers, the RTC designated as a drug court has
been vested by R.A. No. 9165 with the exclusive authority to hear violations of such law. Hence, drug cases are exceptions
to the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan, even if the offender is a public officer. (De Lima v. Guerrero, GR. No. 229781, 2017)

16. What are the civil cases falling under the the exclusive original jurisdiction of the Regional Trial Court:
Regional Trial Courts shall exercise exclusive original jurisdiction:
1. In all civil actions in which the subject of the litigation is incapable of pecuniary estimation;
2. In all civil actions which involve the title to, or possession of, real property, or any interest therein, where the
assessed value exceeds Four hundred thousand pesos (P400,000.00), except for forcible entry into and unlawful
detainer of lands or buildings, original jurisdiction over which is conferred upon the Metropolitan Trial Courts, and
Municipal Trial Courts in Cities, Municipal Trial Courts, and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts;
3. In all actions in admiralty and maritime jurisdiction where the demand or claims exceeds Two million pesos
(P2,000,000.00);
4. In all matters of probate, both estate and intestate, where the gross value of the estate exceeds Two million pesos
(P2,000,000.00);
5. In all actions involving the contract of marriage and marital relations;
6. In all cases not within the exclusive jurisdiction of any court, tribunal, person or body exercising jurisdiction or any
court, tribunal, person or body exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions;
7. In all civil actions and special proceedings falling within the exclusive original jurisdiction of a Juvenile and Domestic
Relations Court and of the Courts of Agrarian Relations as now provided by law; and
8. In all other cases in which the demand, exclusive of interest, damages of whatever kind, attorney’s fees, litigation
expenses and costs or the value of the property in controversy exceeds Two million pesos (P2,000,000.00). (Sec. 19
of Batas Pambansa Blg. 129 as amended by R.A. No. 11576)

17. In the petition for reconstitution, the first petition was amended by AAA. Then, the posting and publication of the
notices were complied with. Afterwards, the petition underwent a second amendment, with substantial changes
and additional annexes. Should the absence of publication to the second amendment divest the Regional Trial
Court (RTC) of jurisdiction?
No. The absence of the same does not divest the RTC of its jurisdiction that it validly acquired in the first instance. Settled
is the rule that jurisdiction once acquired is not lost upon the instance of the parties but continues until the case is terminated.
(Republic vs. Abellanosa, G.R. No. 205817, October 6, 2021, J. Hernando)

3
18. Banco Filipino suffered from heavy withdrawals, prompting it to seek help and submit its Long-Term Business
Plan to Bangko Sentral. The latter informed the former that its business plan could not be acted upon. Banco
Filipino eventually filed a Petition for Certiorari and Mandamus with prayer for issuance of Temporary Restraining
Order (TRO) and Writ of Preliminary Injunction (WPI) against Bangko Sentral and the Monetary Board. RTC granted
the request for the issuance of a TRO. Does the trial court have jurisdiction over the subject matter of the petition?
No. Bangko Sentral's Monetary Board is a quasi-judicial agency exercising quasi-judicial functions. The petition may be filed
in the Court of Appeals whether or not the same is in aid of its appellate jurisdiction, or in the Sandiganbayan if it is in aid of
its appellate jurisdiction. If it involves the acts or omissions of a quasi-judicial agency, unless otherwise provided by law or
these Rules, the petition shall be filed in and cognizable only by the Court of Appeals. Unless otherwise provided by the law
or the Rules of Court, petitions for certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus involving acts or omissions of a quasi-judicial
agency are cognizable only by the appellate court pursuant to Section 4, Rule 65 of the Rules of Court. (Banco Filipino Savings
and Mortgage Bank v. Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas, G.R. No. 200642, April 26, 2021, J. Hernando)

19. What are the instances where a defendant is deemed to have voluntarily submitted himself to the jurisdiction of
the court?
1. If the defendant seeks affirmative relief from the court which includes the filing of motions to admit answer, for additional
time to file answer, for reconsideration of a default judgment, and to lift order of default with motion for reconsideration;
2. If the party, after the opposing party sought the execution of the decision, files a motion asking for the resetting of the
hearing without reserving their continuing objection to the lower court's lack of jurisdiction over their person; or
3. If the party actively participates in the proceedings
XPN: A special appearance operates as an exception to the general rule on voluntary appearance," but only when the
defendant explicitly and unequivocably poses objections to the jurisdiction of the court over their person . (Jorgenetics Swine
Improvement Corporation vs. Thick & Thin Agri-Products, Inc., G.R. Nos. 201044 & 222691. May 5, 2021, J. Hernando)

20. How is jurisdiction acquired over the person of the respondent in cases of special civil action for certiorari?
The court shall acquire jurisdiction over the person of the respondent not by service of summons but by the service on him
of its order or resolution indicating its initial action on the petition or by his voluntary submission to such jurisdiction. (Sec. 4,
Rule 46, Rules of Court)

21. What are the cases falling under the special and delegated jurisdiction of the Municipal Trial Courts?
Special Jurisdiction Delegated Jurisdiction
In the absence of all the Regional Trial Judges in a province or a. Cadastral or land registration cases covering
city, any Metropolitan Trial Judge, Municipal Trial Judge, or lots where there is no controversy or
Municipal Circuit Trial Judge may hear and decide: opposition; or
a. Petitions for a writ of habeas corpus or b. Contested lots where the value of which does
b. Applications for bail in criminal cases not exceed One hundred thousand pesos
in the province or city where the absent Regional Trial Judges sit. (P100,000.00).
(Secs. 34-35 of Batas Pambansa Blg. 129)

22. What are the distinctions between jurisdiction and venue?

Jurisdiction Venue
Authority of the court to hear and determine cases. Place where the case is to be heard or tried.
It is a matter of substantive law. It is a matter of procedural law.
It establishes a relation between the court and the It establishes relation between plaintiff and defendant, or
subject matter of the action. petitioner and respondent.
It is fixed by law and cannot be conferred by the It may be conferred by the act or agreement of the parties.
agreement of the parties.
It cannot be waived since it is conferred by law. It can be waived for failure to raise the objection in the answer
as an affirmative defense.
There can be motu proprio dismissal of the action based As a rule, there can be no motu proprio dismissal of the action
on the lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter of the based on improper venue, except under the Rules on
case. Summary Procedure and Rules on Small Claims Cases.

23. What are the cases falling under the Rules on Summary Procedure?
The following are Summary Procedure cases:
a. Forcible entry and unlawful detainer cases, regardless of the amount of damages or unpaid rentals sought to be
recovered. Where attorney's fees are awarded, the same shall not exceed One Hundred Thousand Pesos
(P100,000.00);
b. All civil actions, except probate proceedings, admiralty and maritime actions, and small claims cases falling under
Rule IV hereof, where the total amount of the plaintiff's claim does not exceed Two Million Pesos (P2,000,000.00),
exclusive of interest, damages of whatever kind, attorney's fees, litigation expenses and costs;
c. Complaints for damages where the claim does not exceed Two Million Pesos (P2,000,000.00), exclusive of interest
and costs;
d. Cases for enforcement of barangay amicable settlement agreements and arbitration awards where the money claim
exceeds One Million Pesos (P1,000,000.00), provided that no execution has been enforced by the barangay within
six (6) months from the date of the settlement or date of receipt of the award or from the date the obligation stipulated
or adjudged in the arbitration award becomes due and demandable, pursuant to Section 417, Charter VII of Republic
Act No. 7160, otherwise known as The Local Government Code of 1991;
e. Cases solely for the revival of judgment of any Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Municipal Trial
Court, and Municipal Circuit Trial Court, pursuant to Rule 39, Section 6 of the Rules of Court; and
f. The civil aspect of a violation of Batas Pambansa Blg. 22 (the Bouncing Checks Law), if no criminal action has been
instituted therefor. Should a criminal action be later instituted for the same violation, the civil aspect shall be
consolidated with the criminal action and shall be tried and decided jointly under the Rule on Summary Procedure.
(Sec. 1 (A)(1), Rule I, Rules on Expedited Procedures in the First Level Courts (A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC)

4
24. What cases fall under small claims?
Small claims cases are actions where the claim does not exceed One Million Pesos (P1,000,000.00), exclusive of interest
and costs. The claim or demand may be:
a. For money owed under
1. Contract of Lease,
2. Contract of Loan and other credit accommodations,
3. Contract of Services, or
4. Contract of Sale of personal property, excluding the recovery of the personal property, unless it is made the subject
of a compromise agreement between the parties.
b. For the enforcement of barangay amicable settlement agreements and arbitration awards, where the money claim does
not exceed One Million Pesos (P1,000,000.00), provided that no execution has been enforced by the barangay within
six (6) months from the date of the settlement or date of receipt of the award or from the date the obligation stipulated
or adjudged in the arbitration award becomes due and demandable, pursuant to Section 417, Chapter VII of Republic
Act No. 7160, otherwise known as The Local Government Code of 1991. (Sec. 1(A)(2), Rule I, A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC)

25. What is the remedy against judgment in small claims cases?

Considering the final nature of a small claims case decision, the remedy of appeal is not allowed, and the prevailing party
may, thus, immediately move for its execution. Nevertheless, the proscription on appeals in small claims cases, similar to
other proceedings where appeal is not an available remedy, does not preclude the aggrieved party from filing a petition for
certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court. (A.L. Ang Network, Inc. vs. Mondejar, G.R. No. 200804, January 22, 2014)

26. What are the criminal cases governed by the Rules on Summary Procedure?
The following are the criminal cases governed by the Rules on Summary Procedure:
a. Violations of traffic laws, rules and regulations;
b. Violations of the rental law;
c. Violations of municipal or city ordinances;
d. Violations of Batas Pambansa Blg. 22 (the Bouncing Checks Law); and
e. All other criminal cases where the penalty prescribed by law for the offense charged is imprisonment not exceeding
one (1) year, or a fine not exceeding Fifty Thousand Pesos (P50,000.00), or both, regardless of other imposable
penalties, accessory or otherwise, or of the civil liability arising therefrom. In offenses involving damage to property
through criminal negligence under Article 365 of the Revised Penal Code, this Rule shall govern where the imposable
fine does not exceed One Hundred Fifty Thousand Pesos (P150,000.00). (Sec. 1(B), Rule I, A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC)

27. What are the prohibited pleadings and motions in the Rules on Summary Procedure?
The following pleadings, motions, or petitions shall not be allowed in cases governed by the Rules:
a. In civil cases, a motion to dismiss the complaint or the statement of claim, and in criminal cases, a motion to quash the
complaint or information, except on the ground of lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter or failure to comply with
the requirement of barangay conciliation, pursuant to Chapter VII, Title I, Book III of Republic Act No. 7160;
b. Motion to hear and/or resolve affirmative defenses;
c. Motion for a bill of particulars;
d. Motion for new trial, or for reconsideration of a judgment on the merits, or for reopening of proceedings;
e. Petition for relief from judgment;
f. Motion for extension of time to file pleadings, affidavits or any other paper;
g. Memoranda;
h. Petition for certiorari, mandamus, or prohibition against any interlocutory order issued by the court;
i. Motion to declare the defendant in default;
j. Dilatory motions for postponement. Any motion for postponement shall be presumed dilatory unless grounded on acts
of God, force majeure, or physical inability of a counsel or witness to personally appear in court, as supported by the
requisite affidavit and medical proof;
k. Rejoinder;
l. Third-party complaints;
m. Motion for and Complaint in Intervention;
n. Motion to admit late judicial affidavit/s, position papers, or other evidence, except on the ground of force majeure or
acts of God; and
o. Motion for judicial determination of probable cause in criminal cases. (Sec. 2, Rule II, A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC)

28. Distinguish the effect of noncompliance with the rule on barangay conciliation in a regular proceeding and in an
expedited procedure.
Regular Proceeding Expedited Procedure
Failure to comply with the condition Where there is no showing of compliance with the requirement of prior referral of
precedent for filing a claim is an the case to barangay conciliation, the complaint shall be dismissed without
affirmative defense only. prejudice, on the court’s own initiative or upon motion by the defendant.
(Sec. 12, Rule 8, ROC; Sec. 2, Rule III, A.M. No. 08-8-7-SC)

III. CIVIL PROCEDURE (A.M. NO. 19-10-20-SC)

29. When is the rule on splitting of causes of action and what is the test of identity of causes of action?
If two or more suits are instituted on the basis of the same cause of action, the filing of one or a judgment upon the merits
in any one is available as a ground for the dismissal of the others. The test of identity of causes of action is predicated on
whether the same evidence would support and establish the former and the present causes of action. In other words, under
the same test evidence, if the same evidence ultimately support and establish the causes of action in the first and second
cases, then there is likely an identity of causes of action. (Villaroman vs. Estate of Arciaga, G.R. No. 210822. June 28, 2021, J.
Hernando)

5
30. What are the requisites for proper joinder of causes of action?
The requisites for proper joinder of causes of action are the following:
1. The party joining the causes of action shall comply with the rules on joinder of parties;
2. The joinder shall not include special civil actions or actions governed by special rules;
3. Where the causes of action are between the same parties but pertain to different venues or jurisdictions, the joinder
may be allowed in the Regional Trial Court provided one of the causes of action falls within the jurisdiction of said court
and the venue lies therein; and
4. Where the claims in all the causes of action are principally for recovery of money, the aggregate amount claimed shall
be the test of jurisdiction (Totality Rule). (Sec. 5, Rule 2, Revised Rules of Court)

31. Who are real parties-in-interest and indispensable and necessary parties?
Real Real parties-in-interest are those who stand to be benefited or injured by the judgment in the suit or
parties-in- those parties entitled to the avails of the suit. Such interest must be real, such that there is a substantial
interest or material and direct interest as opposed to a future, a mere expectancy, or a consequential interest.

A party who has an interest in the controversy or subject matter that a final adjudication cannot be made,
in his absence, without injuring or affecting that interest. It has also been considered that an indispensable
Indispensa
party is a person in whose absence there cannot be a determination between the parties already before
ble parties
the court which is effective, complete, or equitable. Further, an indispensable party is one who must be
included in an action before it may properly go forward.

Necessary Those who are not indispensable but ought to be joined as parties if complete relief is to be accorded to
parties those already parties and for a complete determination or settlement of the claim subject of the action.
(Technical Education and Skills Development Authority v. Abragar, G.R. No. 201022, 2021, J. Hernando; Sec. 2, 7, & 8, Rule 3)

32. What is the doctrine of exclusivity of venue?

The parties are allowed to stipulate on the venue as long as the agreement is in writing, is made before the filing of the
action, and is exclusive as to the venue of the action. Written stipulations as to venue may be restrictive in the sense that
the suit may be filed only in the place agreed upon, or merely permissive in that the parties may file their suit not only in the
place agreed upon but also in the places fixed by law. As regards restrictive stipulations on venue, jurisprudence instructs
that it must be shown that such stipulation is exclusive.1âwphi1 In the absence of qualifying or restrictive words, such as
"exclusively," "waiving for this purpose any other venue," "shall only" preceding the designation of venue, "to the exclusion
of the other courts," or words of similar import, the stipulation should be deemed as merely an agreement on an additional
forum,not as limiting venue to the specified place. (Sec. 4(b), Rule 4, Revised Rules of Court; Briones v. CA, G.R. No. 204444,
January 14, 2015)

33. When is there forum shopping?

Forum shopping exists when, as a result of an adverse decision in one forum, or in anticipation thereof, a party seeks a
favorable opinion in another forum through means other than appeal or certiorari. There is forum shopping when the
elements of litis pendentia are present or where a final judgment in one case will amount to res judicata in another. They
are as follows:
a. Identity of parties, or at least such parties that represent the same interests in both actions;
b. Identity of rights or causes of action; and
c. Identity of reliefs sought. (Asis v. Calignawan, G.R. No. 242127, September 15, 2021; Commissioner of Customs vs. PTT Philippines
Trading Corporation, G.R. Nos. 203138-40, February 15, 2021, J. Hernando)

34. AAA, as the chairperson and president of BBB Corp., signed the verification and certification on behalf of BBB. It
also submitted the secretary’s certificate indicating AAA's authority and ratifying the filing of the Petition. Should
the Petitions be dismissed for failure of the petitioner to comply with the rules on verification and certification of
non-forum shopping?
No. The chairperson and president of a corporation may sign the verification and certification without need of board
resolution. Moreover, lack of authority of a corporate officer to undertake an action on behalf of the corporation may be
cured by ratification through the subsequent issuance of a board resolution. (Jorgenetics Swine Improvement Corporation v. Thick
& Thin Agri-Products, Inc., G.R. Nos. 201044 & 222691, May 5, 2021, J. Hernando)

35. What is the effect of willful and deliberate forum shopping on two pending actions?
Where there is forum shopping, the penalty is summary dismissal of both actions. This is so because twin dismissal is a
punitive measure to those who trifle with the orderly administration of justice. (Heirs of Mampo v. Morada, G.R. No. 214526, 2020)

36. AAAs filed a complaint before the trial court a complaint for Quieting of Title with Damages against the BBBs.
When the case reached the Supreme Court via a Petition for Review on Certiorari filed by the AAAs, the BBBs
argue that the Petition should be dismissed because of its defective Verification and Certification against Forum
Shopping considering not all of the AAAs signed thereon. The AAAs contend that their common cause of action
empowers any one of them to sign the certification against forum shopping to substantially comply with the rule.
Did the AAAs substantially comply with the Verification and Certification against Forum Shopping?
Yes. The certification against forum shopping must be signed by all the plaintiffs or petitioners in a case; otherwise, those
who did not sign will be dropped as parties to the case. Under reasonable or justifiable circumstances, however, as when
all the plaintiffs or petitioners share a common interest and invoke a common cause of action or defense, the signature of
only one of them in the certification against forum shopping substantially complies with the Rule. (Viloria vs. Heirs of Gaetos,
G.R. No. 206240, May 12, 2021, J. Hernando)

39. What are affirmative defenses?

An affirmative defense is an allegation of a new matter which, while hypothetically admitting the material allegations in the
pleading of the claimant, would nevertheless prevent or bar recovery by him or her. The affirmative defenses include fraud,
statute of limitations, release, payment, illegality, statute of frauds, estoppel, former recovery, discharge in bankruptcy, and
any other matter by way of confession and avoidance. Affirmative defenses may also include grounds for the dismissal of

6
 a complaint. specifically, that the court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter, that there is another action pending
between the same parties for the same cause, or that the action is barred by a prior judgment. (Sec. 5, Rule 6, Rules of Court)

40. Distinguish compulsory and permissive counterclaim.

Permissive
One which is not barred even if not set up and which has no
logical relation with the transaction or occurrence that is the
subject matter of the opposing party’s claim, or even when there
is such a connection, the court has no jurisdiction to entertain the
claim or it requires for its adjudication the presence of third
persons of whom the court cannot acquire jurisdiction.
Docket and other lawful fees should be paid.
Should be accompanied by a certificate against forum shopping
and certificate to file action issued by the proper Lupong
Tagapamayapa
Should be answered by the claiming party
(Sec. 7, Rule 6 and Sec. 2, Rule 9, Rules of Court; National Marketing Corp. vs. Federation of United Namarco Distributors, Inc. G.R. No.
L-22578 January 31, 1973)
Compulsory
One which, being cognizable by the regular courts of
justice, arises out of or is connected with the
transaction or occurrence constituting the subject
matter of the opposing party's claim and does not
require for its adjudication the presence of third
parties of whom the court cannot acquire jurisdiction.
No docket fee is paid.
Said certificates are not required.
GR: Answer to compulsory counterclaim is not
required.
XPN: When the counterclaim makes use of an
actionable document.

41. What is an actionable document?

It is a written instrument or document which is the basis of an action or defense, such as a promissory note for collection of
a sum of money. (Young Builders Corporation v. Benson Industries, Inc., G.R. No. 198998, June 19, 2019)

42. Who are exempt from payment of docket fees?

1. Indigent litigants
a. whose gross income and that of their immediate family do not exceed an amount double the monthly minimum wage
of an employee; and
b. who do not own real property with a fair market value as stated in the current tax declaration of more than three
hundred thousand (P300,000.00) pesos;
2. The Republic of the Philippines, its agencies and instrumentalities; and
3. All court actions, criminal or civil, instituted at the instance of the provincial, city or municipal treasurer or assessor under
Sec. 280 of the Local Government Code of 1991. (Secs. 19 & 22, Rule 141, Revised Rules of Court)

43. What are the required contents of a pleading?

Every pleading shall contain in a methodical and logical form, a plain, concise and direct statement of the ultimate facts,
including the evidence on which the party pleading relies for his [or her] claim or defense, as the case may be . (Sec. 1, Rule
8, Rules of Court)

44. Is an amendment of pleading necessary to cause the issues to conform to the evidence?
No. When issues not raised by the pleadings are tried with the express or implied consent of the parties, they shall be
treated in all respects as if they had been raised in the pleadings. No amendment of such pleadings deemed amended is
necessary to cause them to conform to the evidence. (Sec. 5, Rule 10, Rules of Court)

45. When may a party be declared in default and what is the effect of default?
If the defending party fails to answer within thirty (30) days from, the court shall, upon motion of the claiming party with
notice to the defending party, and proof of such failure, declare the defending party in default. Thereupon, the court shall
proceed to render judgment granting the claimant such relief as his or her pleading may warrant, unless the court in its
discretion requires the claimant to submit evidence. A party in default shall be entitled to notice[s] of subsequent proceedings
but shall not to take part in the trial. (Sec. 3, Rule 9 & Sec. 1, Rule 11, Rules of Court)

46. What are the remedies available to a defendant in the regional trial court who has been declared in default?
a. The defendant in default may, at any time after discovery thereof and before judgment, file a motion, under oath, to set
aside the order of default on the ground that his failure to answer was due to fraud, accident, mistake or excusable
neglect, and that he has a meritorious defense;
b. If the judgment has already been rendered when the defendant discovered the default, but before the same has become
final and executory, he may file a motion for new trial under Section 1(a) of Rule 37;
c. If the defendant discovered the default after the judgment has become final and executory, he may file a petition for
relief under Section 2 of Rule 38; and
d. He may also appeal from the judgment rendered against him as contrary to the evidence or to the law, even if no
petition to set aside the order of default has been presented by him. (Ramnani v. CA, G.R. No. 101789. April 28, 1993)

47. When is amendment of pleadings available as a matter of right in civil and criminal cases?
Amendment in civil cases Amendment in criminal cases
A party may amend his [or her] pleading once as a matter of right A complaint or information may be amended, in form
at any time before a responsive pleading is served or, in the case or in substance, without leave of court and when it
of a reply, at any time within ten (10) calendar days after it is can be done without causing prejudice to the rights
served. of the accused, at any time before arraignment.
(Sec. 2, Rule 10 & Sec. 14, Rule 110, Rules of Court)

7
48. What are the manners of filing and modes of service of pleadings?
Manner of filing Modes of service
The filing of pleadings and other court submissions Pleadings, motions, notices, orders, judgments, and other
shall be made by: court submissions shall be served
a. Submitting personally the original thereof, plainly a. Personally;
indicated as such, to the court; (b) Sending them by b. By registered mail;
registered mail; c. Accredited courier;
b. Sending them by accredited courier; or d. Electronic mail;
c. Transmitting them by electronic mail or other e. Facsimile transmission; or
electronic means as may be authorized by the court f. Other electronic means as may be authorized by the
in places where the court is electronically equipped. court. or as provided for in international conventions
to which the Philippines is a party.
(Sec. 3 & 5, Rule 13, Rules of Court)

49. What is presumptive service?

There shall be presumptive notice to a party of a court setting if such notice appears on the records to have been mailed at
least twenty (20) calendar days prior to the scheduled date of hearing and if the addressee is from within the same judicial
region of the court where the case is pending, or at least thirty (30) calendar days if the addressee is from outside the judicial
region. (Sec. 10, Rule 13, Rules of Court)

50. What are the rules on conventional service or filing of orders, pleadings and other documents?
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the following orders, pleadings, and other documents must be served or filed personally or
by registered mail when allowed, and shall not be served or filed electronically, unless express permission is granted by the
court:
a. Initiatory pleadings and initial responsive pleadings, such as an answer;
b. Subpoena, protection orders, and writs;
c. Appendices and exhibits to motions, or other documents that are not readily amenable to electronic scanning may, at
the option of the party filing such, be filed and served conventionally: and
d. Sealed and confidential documents or records. (Sec. 14, Rule 13, Rules of Court)

51. What are the modes of service of summons?

Personal service is effected by handing a copy thereof to the defendant in person and informing the
Personal
defendant that he or she is being served, or, if he or she refuses to receive and sign for it, by leaving
Service
the summons within the view and in the presence of the defendant.

Substituted service is effected if, for justifiable causes, the defendant cannot be served personally after
at least three (3) attempts on two (2) different dates:
a. By leaving copies of the summons at the defendant's residence to a person at least eighteen (18)
years of age and of sufficient discretion residing therein;
b. By leaving copies of the summons at [the] defendant's office or regular place of business with some
Substituted competent person in charge thereof. A competent person includes, but is not limited to, one who
Service customarily receives correspondences for the defendant;
c. By leaving copies of the summons, if refused entry upon making his or her authority and purpose
known, with any of the officers of the homeowners' association or condominium corporation, or its
chief security officer in charge of the community or the building where the defendant may be found;
and
d. By sending an electronic mail to the defendant's electronic mail address, if allowed by the court.

a. Service may be made on the president, managing partner, general manager, corporate secretary,
treasurer, or in--house counsel of the corporation wherever they may be found, or in their absence
Service or unavailability, on their secretaries.
upon b. If such service cannot be made upon any of the foregoing persons, it shall be made upon the person
Domestic who customarily receives the correspondence for the defendant at its principal office.
Private c. In case the domestic juridical entity is under receivership or liquidation, service of summons shall be
Juridical made on the receiver or liquidator, as the case may be.
Entity d. Should there be a refusal on the part of the persons above-mentioned to receive summons despite
at least three (3) attempts on two (2) different dates, service may be made electronically, if allowed
by the court.

Service may be made on its resident agent designated in accordance with law for that purpose, or, if
there be no such agent, on the government official designated by law to that effect, or on any of its
officers, agents, directors or trustees within the Philippines.

If the foreign private juridical entity is not registered in the Philippines, or has no resident agent but has
Service
transacted or is doing business in it, as defined by law, such service may, with leave of court, be effected
upon
outside of the Philippines through any of the following means:
Foreign
a. By personal service coursed through the appropriate court in the foreign country with the assistance
Private
of the Department of Foreign Affairs;
Juridical
b. By publication once in a newspaper of general circulation in the country where the defendant may
Entities
be found and by serving a copy of the summons and the court order by registered mail at the last
known address of the defendant;
c. By facsimile;
d. By electronic means with the prescribed proof of service; or
e. By such other means as the court, in its discretion, may direct.

Service by a. Service upon a defendant whose identity or whereabouts are unknown;

8
 Publication b. Extraterritorial service upon a non-resident defendant; or
c. Service upon a resident temporarily out of the Philippines.

Extraterritorial service of summons may be availed of:

a. When the defendant is a non-resident and is not found in the Philippines and the action affects the
Extraterritori personal status of the plaintiff;
al Service of b. When the action relates to property within the Philippines in which the defendant has or claims an
Summons interest, or in which the relief demanded consists of excluding the defendant from any interest
therein; or
c. In action wherein the property of the defendant has been attached within the Philippines.

International Service may be made through methods which are consistent with established international conventions
Conventions to which the Philippines is a party.

(Secs. 5, 6, 9, 12, 14, 16, and 17, Rule 14, Revised Rules of Court)

52. What are litigious and non-litigious motions?

Litigious Motion Non-litigious Motion

Litigious motions, or those requiring parties to be heard before a Non-litigious motions, or those which do not
ruling in the motion is made by a court, are as follows: require that the parties be heard and which the
a. Motion for bill of particulars; court may act upon without prejudicing the rights
b. Motion to dismiss; of the other party, are as follows:
c. Motion for new trial (MNT); a. Motion for the issuance of an alias summons;
d. Motion for reconsideration (MR);Motion for execution pending b. Motion for extension to file answer;
e. Appeal; c. Motion for postponement;
f. Motion to amend after a responsive pleading has been filed; d. Motion for the issuance of a writ of execution;
g. Motion to cancel statutory lien; e. Motion for the issuance of an alias writ of
h. Motion for an order to break in or for a writ of demolition; execution;
i. Motion for intervention; f. Motion for the issuance of a writ of possession;
j. Motion for judgment on the pleadings; g. Motion for the issuance of an order directing the
k. Motion for summary judgment; sheriff to execute the final certificate of sale;
l. Demurrer to evidence; and
m. Motion to declare defendant in default; and h. Other similar motions.
n. Other similar motions.
(Secs. 4-5, Rule 15, Revised Rules of Court)

53. What are the prohibited motions under the Revised Rules on Civil Procedure?
a. Motion to dismiss except:
i. That the court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter of the claim,
ii. That there is another action pending between the same parties for the same cause; and
iii. That the cause of action is barred by a prior judgment or by the statute of limitations;
b. Motion to hear affirmative defenses;
c. Motion for reconsideration of the court's action on the affirmative defenses;
d. Motion to suspend proceedings without a temporary restraining order or injunction issued by a higher court;
e. Motion for extension of time to file pleadings, affidavits or any other papers, except for one (1) motion for extension to
file an answer which may, for meritorious reasons, be granted for a period of not more than thirty (30) calendar days;
and
f. Motion for postponement intended for delay, except if it is based on acts of God, force majeure or physical inability of
the witness to appear and testify. (Section 12, Rule 15, Revised Rules of Court)

54. What is the “two-dismissal rule”?

When a complaint is dismissed a second time, the plaintiff is now barred from seeking relief on the same claim. The purpose
of the "two-dismissal rule" is "to avoid vexatious litigation. (Sec. 1, Rule 17, Revised Rules of Court; Ramon Ching and Powing
Properties, Inc., v. Cheng, G.R. No. 175507, October 8, 2014)

55. What are the effects of dismissal of action?

Dismissal with prejudice Dismissal without prejudice

A dismissal is with prejudice when the notice of dismissal by the plaintiff A dismissal without prejudice is made by
provides that the dismissal is with prejudice and when the plaintiff has the filing of the notice of dismissal and
previously dismissed the same case in a court of competent jurisdiction based that the complaint can be refiled.
on or including the same claim. Dismissal with prejudice shall have the effect
of adjudication on the merits, unless otherwise declared by the court.
(Sec. 1, Rule 17, Revised Rules of Court; Pillars Property Corporation v. Century Communities Corporation, G.R. No. 201021, March 4,
2019)

56. Is the absence of the defendant’s counsel during the pre-trial a sufficient ground for allowing the plaintiffs to
present their evidence ex parte?
No. When the party-defendant is present, the absence of his counsel during pre-trial shall not ipso facto result in the plaintiffs’
ex parte presentation of evidence. Pre-trial serves a significant purpose in court proceedings. It simplifies, abbreviates and
expedites the trial, if not the entire process of administering and dispensing justice. For this reason, the parties and their
counsels cannot take this stage for granted as it is more than just a part of procedural law or its technicality. Accordingly,
Section 4 and Section 5, Rule 18 of the Revised Rules of Court mandate the appearance of the parties and their counsels,
and the consequences for their failure to appear during the scheduled pre-trial. With the advent of AM 19-10-20-SC, said

9
 Section 5 has been clarified by already including the word counsel and putting the conjunctive word and, to the effect that
it is only when both the party-litigant (plaintiff or defendant) and his counsel fail to appear in pre-trial that there be the
concomitant consequence of either a dismissal (plaintiff and counsel were absent), or presentation of evidence ex parte
(defendant and counsel were absent). (Gemina v. Heirs of Espejo, G.R. No. 232682, September 13, 2021, J. Hernando)

57. Provide and briefly describe at least five (5) different modes of discovery.
Upon ex-parte motion of a party, the testimony of any person, whether a party or not, may
Deposition
be taken by deposition upon oral examination or written interrogatories.

Under the same conditions specified in Section 1 of Rule 23, any party shall file and serve
Interrogatories to
upon any adverse party written interrogatories regarding material and relevant facts to be
Parties
answered by the party served.

At any time after issues have been joined, a party may file and serve upon any other party a
Admission by Adverse
written request for the admission by the latter of the genuineness of any material and relevant
Party
document or of the truth of any material and relevant matter of fact.

Upon motion of any party showing good cause therefor, a court may order any party to
Production or produce and permit the inspection and copying or photographing of any designated
Inspection of documents, etc. or order any party to permit entry upon designated land or property for
Documents or Things inspecting, measuring, surveying, or photographing the property or any designated relevant
object or operation thereon.

In an action in which the mental or physical condition of a party is in controversy, the court
Physical and Mental
in which the action is pending may in its discretion order him to submit to a physical or mental
Examination of Persons
examination by a physician.
(Sec. 1, Rule 23; Sec. 1, Rule 25; Sec. 1, Rule 26; Sec. 1, Rule 27; Sec. 1, Rule 28, Revised Rules of Court)

58. What are the effects of failure to serve written interrogatories and failure to file and serve request for admission?
Failure to serve written interrogatories Failure to file and serve request for admission
Unless thereafter allowed by the court for good cause Unless otherwise allowed by the court for good cause shown
shown and to prevent a failure of justice, a party not and to prevent a failure of justice, a party who fails to file and
served with written interrogatories may not be compelled serve a request for admission on the adverse party of
by the adverse party to give testimony in open court, or to material and relevant facts at issue which are, or ought to
give a deposition pending appeal. be, within the personal knowledge of the latter, shall not be
permitted to present evidence on such facts.
(Sec. 6, Rule 25 & Sec. 5, Rule 26, Rules of Court)

59. May Rule 23 of the Rules of Civil Procedure be applied suppletorily to a criminal case so that a prosecution witness,
like AAA, who was convicted of drug trafficking and sentenced to death by the Indonesian Government and who
is presently confined in a prison facility in Indonesia, may testify by way of deposition upon written interrogatories
while confined in Indonesia without violating the constitutional right to confrontation of a witness by the accused?
Yes. Interestingly, nowhere in the present Rules on Criminal Procedure does it state how a deposition, of a prosecution
witness who is at the same time convicted of a grave offense by final judgment and imprisoned in a foreign jurisdiction, may
be taken to perpetuate the testimony of such witness. The Rules, in particular, are silent as to how to take a testimony of a
witness who is unable to testify in open court because he is imprisoned in another country. Depositions, however, are
recognized under Rule 23 of the Rules on Civil Procedure. Although the rule on deposition by written interrogatories is
inscribed under the said Rule, the Court holds that it may be applied suppletorily in criminal proceedings so long as there is
compelling reason. (People v. Sergio, G.R. No. 240053, October 9, 2019)

60. Distinguish Summary Judgment from Judgment on the Pleadings.

Summary Judgment Judgment on the Pleadings

When the Answer specifically denies the material When the Answer fails to tender any issue, that is, if it does
averments of the complaint or asserts affirmative not deny the material allegations in the complaint or admits
defenses, or in other words raises an issue, a summary said material allegations of the adverse party’s pleading by
judgment is proper provided that the issue raised is not admitting the truthfulness thereof and/or omitting to deal with
genuine. them at all, a judgment on the pleadings is appropriate.
(Rule 34-35, Revised Rules of Court; Basbas v. Sayson, G.R. No. 172660, 2011)

61. What final orders are unappealable?

a. An order denying a motion for new trial or reconsideration;
b. An order denying a petition for relief or any similar motion seeking relief from judgment;
c. An interlocutory order;
d. An order disallowing or dismissing an appeal;
e. An order denying a motion to set aside a judgment by consent, confession or compromise on the ground of fraud,
mistake or duress, or any other ground vitiating consent;
f. An order of execution;
g. A judgment or final order for or against one or more of several parties or in separate claims, counterclaims, cross-
claims and third-party complaints, while the main case is pending, unless the court allows an appeal therefrom; and
h. An order dismissing an action without prejudice.
In all the above instances where the judgment or final order is not appealable, the aggrieved party may file an appropriate
special civil action under Rule 65. (Section 1, Rule 41, Revised Rules of Court)

10
62. What is the doctrine of immutability of judgment and what are its exceptions?
Under the doctrine of immutability of judgment, a decision or order that has attained finality can no longer be modified in
any respect, even if the modification is meant to correct erroneous conclusions of fact and law and whether it be made by
the court that rendered it or by the Highest Court of the land. The doctrine is grounded on public policy and sound practice
which must not simply be ignored. It is adhered to by the courts to end litigations albeit the presence of errors. The doctrine
admits of the following exceptions: (a) clerical errors; (b) nunc pro tunc entries that cause no prejudice to any parties; (c)
void judgments; and (d) whenever circumstances transpire after the finality of the decision rendering its execution unjust
and inequitable. (Taningco v. Fernandez, G.R. No. 215615, December 9, 2020, J. Hernando; Apo Fruits and Hijo Plantation v. Court of
Appeals, G.R. No. 164195, 2009)

63. What are the grounds for the filing of a Motion for Reconsideration and a Motion for New Trial?
Motion for Reconsideration Motion for New Trial

a. Damages awarded are a. Extrinsic fraud, accident, mistake, or excusable negligence which ordinary
excessive; prudence could not have guarded against and by reason of which the rights
b. Evidence is insufficient to satisfy of the parties were impaired; or
a decision or final order; or b. Newly discovered evidence which could not, with reasonable diligence,
c. Decision or final order is contrary have been discovered and produced at trial, and which, when presented,
to law. would possibly alter the result.
(Sec. 1, Rule 37, Revised Rules of Court)

64. What are the modes of appeal?

APPEAL FROM PETITION FOR APPEALS FROM
APPEALS FROM PETITION FOR REVIEW
RTCs (original REVIEW FROM RTC QUASI JUDICIAL
THE MTCs to RTCs BY CERTIORARI TO SC
jurisdiction) (appellate jurisdiction) AUTHORITY to CA

RULE 40 RULE 41 RULE 42 RULE 43 RULE 45

Ordinary Appeal Petition for Review

Questions of fact,
questions of law,
Questions of fact or mixed
or mixed Only questions of law
Questions of fact and law
questions of fact
and law

Notice of appeal: Within 15 Within 15 days from notice of the judgment or final order or resolution
days from notice appealed from or the denial of the petitioner’s MNT or MR filed in due time
after notice of the judgment
Record of appeal: Within 30
days from notice Extendible 15 days, and no further extension
Extension of 30 days only
except for the most compelling reason and not
for justifiable reasons
Not extendible to exceed 15 days

Notice of appeal: deemed perfected

upon filing of the notice of appeal in due
Upon the timely filing of a petition for review and
time
the payment of the corresponding docket and
other lawful fees, the appeal is deemed
Record on appeal: deemed perfected
perfected as to the petitioner.
upon approval of the record on appeal
filed in due time

65. Can a final and executory decision of a quasi-judicial agency still be subject to judicial review?
No. A decision that has acquired finality becomes immutable and unalterable, and may no longer be modified in any respect,
even if the modification is meant to correct erroneous conclusions of fact and law. This principle of conclusiveness of prior
adjudications is not confined in its operation to the judgments of courts, but extends as well to those of all other tribunals
exercising adjudicatory powers. (Municipality of Corella v. Philkonstrak Development Corporation, G.R. No. 218663, February 28, 2022,
J. Hernando)

66. What are the exceptions to the general rule that only questions of law are reviewable in a petition under Rule 45?
a. The conclusion is grounded on speculations, surmises or conjectures;
b. The inference is manifestly mistaken, absurd or impossible;
c. There is grave abuse of discretion;
d. The judgment is based on misapprehension of facts
e. The findings of fact are conflicting;
f. There is no citation of specific evidence on which the factual findings are based;
g. The findings of absence of facts are contradicted by the presence of evidence on record;
h. The findings of the Court of Appeals are contrary to those of the trial court;
i. The Court of Appeals manifestly overlooked certain relevant and undisputed facts that, if properly considered, would
justify a different conclusion;
j. The findings of the Court of Appeals are beyond the issues of the case; and
k. Such findings are contrary to the admissions of both parties. (Republic v. Kikuchi, G.R. No. 243646, June 22, 2022, J.
Hernando)

11
67. What are the grounds for motu proprio dismissal of petitions under Rule 42, 43, 45, and 65?
The court may dismiss the petition if it finds the same:
a. patently without merit;
b. prosecuted manifestly for delay; or
c. if the questions raised therein are too unsubstantial to require consideration. (Sec. 4, Rule 42; Sec. 8, Rule 43; Sec. 5, Rule
45; Sec. 8, Rule 68)

68. Distinguish Rule 38 (Petition for Relief from Judgments) and Rule 47 (Petition for Annulment of Judgment).
Rule 38 (Petition for Relief from Judgments) Rule 47 (Petition for Annulment of Judgment)
When there is: When there is:
1. Fraud; 1. Extrinsic fraud;
When
2. Accident; 2. Lack of jurisdiction; or
applicable
3. Mistake; or 3. Violation of the right to due process
4. Excusable negligence
Should be filed with Court which rendered the judgment 1. Judgment of the MTC - file the petition
Where to
with the RTC
File
2. Judgment of the RTC - file with the CA
Within 60 days from knowledge, but not exceeding 6 a. Extrinsic fraud: within four (4) years from
When to months from entry of judgment its discovery
File b. Lack of jurisdiction: before it is barred by
laches or estoppel
Only when the remedy of Motion for Reconsideration, When the remedy of Appeal, Motion for
New Trial, or Appeal is no longer available to the Reconsideration, New Trial, and Petition for Relief
When
plaintiff are no longer available, nor did the petitioner file
available
any Motion to Quash Writ of Execution before the
lower court
Remedy is to file a Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65, Remedy is to appeal either under Rule 41 or 45
Remedy if
since the Order denying a petition for relief or other since the court is exercising original jurisdiction,
denied
motion seeking relief from judgment is not appealable. and the judgment is appealable.

69. Distinguish conclusiveness of judgment from bar by prior judgment.

Conclusiveness of judgment Bar by prior judgment

Precludes the relitigation of a particular issue in another action Bars a second action when there is identity of parties,
between the same parties on a different cause of action subject matter, and cause of action
(Sec. 47(b)(c), Rule 39, Revised Rules of Court)

IV. PROVISIONAL REMEDIES

70. What are the ways to secure a discharge of an attachment?
Under Sections 12 and 13, Rule 57 of the Rules of Court, there are two ways to secure the discharge of an attachment.
First, the party whose property has been attached or a person appearing on his/her behalf may post a security. Second,
said party may show that the order of attachment was improperly or irregularly issued. (Chua vs. China Banking Corporation,
[G.R. No. 202004. November 4, 2020, J. Hernando)

71. May a temporary restraining order be issued ex parte?

A temporary restraining order may be issued ex parte "to preserve the status quo until the hearing of the application for
preliminary injunction, which cannot be issued ex parte. Otherwise stated, a trial court may issue a temporary restraining
order even without a prior hearing for a limited period of 72 hours "if the matter is of extreme urgency and the applicant will
suffer grave injustice and irreparable injury." In this instance, a summary hearing, separate from the application of the
preliminary injunction, is required only to determine if a 72-hour TRO should be extended. A trial court may also issue ex
parte a TRO for 20 days "[i]f it shall appear from facts shown by affidavits or by the verified application that great or
irreparable injury would result to the applicant before the matter can be heard on notice." The trial court has twenty (20)
days from its issuance to resolve the application for preliminary injunction. If no action is taken on the application for
preliminary injunction during this period, the temporary restraining order is deemed to have expired. (Philippine Investment
Two (SPV-AMC), Inc. v. Hon. Mendoza, A.M. No. RTJ-18-2538, November 21, 2018)

V. SPECIAL CIVIL ACTIONS

72. What are the two types of actions referred to under Sec. 1 of Rule 63?
Declaratory Relief Similar Remedies
Quieting of title to real Reformation of an instrument
property or consolidation of ownership
RTC (action is incapable of pecuniary MTC - if assessed value is RTC (action is incapable of
estimation) 400k and below pecuniary estimation)
Jurisdiction
RTC - if assessed value is
more than 400k
Court’s Court has discretion to act or not to act on Court cannot refuse to act on the petition.
discretion the petition.

Grant of As a rule, not granted, unless warranted Affirmative reliefs are granted.
affirmative by evidence and the adverse did not raise
reliefs an issue to challenge the same.

12
 (Rule 63, Revised Rules of Court; Adlawan vs. IAC, GR. 70322, 1989)

73. Who determines just compensation?

The courts. The valuation of property in eminent domain is essentially a judicial function which cannot be vested in
administrative agencies. "The executive department or the legislature may make the initial determination, but when a party
claims a violation of the guarantee in the Bill of Rights that private property may not be taken for public use without just
compensation, no statute, decree, or executive order can mandate that its own determination shall prevail over the court's
findings. Much less can the courts be precluded from looking into the 'just-ness' of the decreed compensation." (Land Bank
of the Philippines vs. Dalauta, G.R. No. 190004, August 08, 2017)

74. Can motion for issuance of a status quo order be issued to prevent a bank from proceeding with consolidation in
extra-judicial foreclosure?
No. Upon the expiration of the period for redemption, without the mortgagor or his or her successor-in-interest redeeming
the property, consolidation becomes a matter of right. (Land Bank of the Philippines vs. Spouses de Jesus, G.R. No. 221133, June
28, 2021 J. Hernando)

75. Is the judgment in forcible entry and unlawful detainer immediately executory? How can it be stayed?
Yes. A judgment on a forcible entry and detainer action is immediately executory to avoid further injustice to a lawful
possessor, and the court’s duty to order the execution is practically ministerial. The defendant may stay it only by (a)
perfecting an appeal; (b) filing a supersedeas bond; and (c) making a periodic deposit of the rental or reasonable
compensation for the use and occupancy of the property during the pendency of the appeal. (Bugarin v. Palisoc, G.R. No.
157985 December 2, 2005)

76. WIll issue of ownership divest the trial court of jurisdiction over the ejectment case?
No. While an ejectment case merely settles the issue of the right of actual possession, the issue of ownership may be
provisionally passed upon if the issue of possession cannot be resolved without it. Any final disposition on the issue of
ownership, however, must be resolved in the proper forum. (Eversley Child Sanitarium vs. Aquino, G.R. No. 195814. 2018)

VI. SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS AND SPECIAL WRITS

77. Where should the estate of deceased persons be settled?
If the decedents is an inhabitant of the Philippines at the time of his death, whether a citizen or an alien, his will shall be
proved, or letters of administration granted, and his estate settled, in the RTC in the province in which he resides at the time
of his death, and if he is an inhabitant of a foreign country, the RTC of any province in which he had estate. The court first
taking cognizance of the settlement of the estate of a decedent, shall exercise jurisdiction to the exclusion of all other courts.
The jurisdiction assumed by a court, so far as it depends on the place of residence of the decedent, or of the location of his
estate, shall not be contested in a suit or proceeding, except in an appeal from that court, in the original case, or when the
want of jurisdiction appears on the record. (Sec. 1, Rule 73, Rules of Court)

78. Differentiate Summary Settlement and Extrajudicial Settlement of estate.

Summary Settlement Extrajudicial Settlement

Nature Judicial adjudication although summary No court intervention required

Gross Value of the Estate Must not exceed P10,000 Immaterial

When allowed In both testate and intestate succession Only in intestate succession

Debts Available even if there are are debts; it is the There must be no outstanding debts at
court which will make provision for its payment the time of the settlement of the estate

Who may institute Any interested party, even a creditor of the At the instance of and by agreement of all
estate without the consent of all the heirs heirs

Amount of Bond To be determined by the court Equivalent to the value of the personal
property
(Rule 74, Rules of Court)

79. What are the claims which may be filed against the decedent?
1. All claims for money against the decedent, arising from contract, express or implied, whether the same be due, not
due, or contingent;
2. All claims for funeral expenses;
3. Expense for the last sickness of the decedent; and
4. Judgment for money against the decedent. (Sec. 5, Rule 86, Rules of Court)

80. What is the order of preference in the award of custody of minors in habeas corpus cases?
As far as practicable, the following order of preference shall be observed in the award of custody:
a. Both parents jointly;
b. Either parent, taking into account all relevant considerations, especially the choice of the minor over seven years of
age and of sufficient discernment, unless the parent chosen is unfit;
c. The grandparent, or if there are several grandparents, the grandparent chosen by the minor over seven years of age
and of sufficient discernment, unless the grandparent chosen is unfit or disqualified;
d. The eldest brother or sister over twenty-one years of age, unless he or she is unfit or disqualified;
e. The actual custodian of the minor over twenty-one years of age, unless the former is unfit or disqualified; or
f. Any other person or institution the court may deem suitable to provide proper care and guidance for the minor. (Sec. 13,
A.M. No. 03-04-04-SC)

13
81. What are the elements constituting enforced disappearance under R.A. No. 9851?
The elements constituting enforced disappearance under R.A. No. 9851 are:
a. There is an arrest, detention, abduction, or any form of deprivation liberty;
b. It is carried out by, or with the authorization, support or acquiescence of, the State or a political organization;
c. It is followed by the State or political organization’s refusal to acknowledge or give information on the fate or
whereabouts of the person subject of the amparo petition; and
d. The intention for such refusal is to remove subject person from the protection of the law for a prolonged period of time.
(Morada v. Rias, G.R. No. 222226, February 14, 2022, J. Hernando)

82. Distinguish a Writ of Continuing Mandamus from a Writ of Kalikasan.

Writ of Kalikasan Writ of Continuing Mandamus

Venue SC and CA only RTC, CA and SC

Respondents Includes private individuals or entities Only the Government or its officers

Petitioners Any citizen Only those who are aggrieved

Subject Matter Unlawful act or omission involving Unlawful neglect in the performance of duty;
environmental damage affecting two or more unlawful exclusion from use or enjoyment of a
cities or provinces right

Docket Fees Exempt Exempt

Discovery Ocular inspection & production of documents None

Damages Award not available to individual petitioners Personal damages may be awarded.
Must file separate action for damages
(A.M. No. 09-6-8-SC, p. 142)

VII. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

83. Is the lack of authority of an officer to file an information a jurisdictional defect?
No. Lack of authority of an officer to file an Information, while a ground for quashal, is not a jurisdictional defect. Intentional
or not, this deficiency remains formal, non-jurisdictional, and curable at any stage of the criminal proceedings. As it always
is, jurisdiction springs from substantive law, whereas a government officer's authority to sue is a matter of mere form and
procedure. Purely technical infirmities are never determinative of a court's jurisdiction. In no case shall it prevent the court
from acquiring jurisdiction over the offense or the person of the accused. The lack of prior written authority or approval on
the part of the handling prosecutor is inconsequential in terms of jurisdiction and efficacy of the Information filed against the
accused. (Radaza v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 201380, August 4, 2021, J. Hernando)

84. What is the effect of failure to allege aggravating and qualifying circumstances in the Information?
Even if they are proven, they cannot be appreciated in determining the nature of the crime and imposing the penalty. (People
v. Paragas, G.R. No. 146308, July 18, 2002)

85. What is the effect of acquittal on the civil liability of the accused?
Acquittal on the ground of reasonable doubt Acquittal on the ground that the accused is not the
perpetrator of the crime

Accused may still be held civilly liable. No civil liability.

(People v. Ritter, G.R. No. 88582. March 5, 1991)

86. What are the rules on the effect of death to the civil liability of the accused?
The Court summarized the rules in case the accused dies prior to final judgment:
a. Death of the accused pending appeal of his conviction extinguishes his criminal liability as well as the civil liability based
solely thereon.
b. Corollarily, the claim for civil liability survives notwithstanding the death of accused, if the same may also be predicated
on a source of obligation other than delict.
c. Where the civil liability survives, as explained in Number 2 above, an action for recovery therefor may be pursued but
only by way of filing a separate civil action and subject to Section 1, Rule III of the 1985 Rules on Criminal Procedure
as amended. This separate civil action may be enforced either against the executor/administrator or the estate of the
accused, depending on the source of obligation upon which the same is based as explained above.
d. Finally, the private offended party need not fear a forfeiture of his right to file this separate civil action by prescription,
in cases where, during the prosecution of the criminal action and prior to its extinction, the private offended party
instituted together therewith the civil action. In such case, the statute of limitations on the civil liability is deemed
interrupted during the pendency of the criminal case, conformably with the provisions of Article 1155 of the Civil Code,
that should thereby avoid any apprehension on a possible privation of right by prescription. (Martel, et al. vs. People, G.R.
No. 224720-23, February 02, 2021)

87. Will the failure of the counsel to comply with his duty to inform the court of the death of his client, such that no
substitution is effected, invalidate the proceedings and the judgment rendered thereon?
No. Mere failure to substitute a deceased party is not sufficient ground to nullify a trial court's decision. The party alleging
nullity must prove that there was an undeniable violation of due process. Strictly speaking, the rule on substitution by heirs
is not a matter of jurisdiction, but a requirement of due process. Thus, it is only when there is a denial of due process, as
when the deceased is not represented by any legal representative or heir, that the court nullifies the trial proceedings and

14
 the resulting judgment therein. (Napere v. Barbarona, G.R. No. 160426, January 31, 2008; Sps. Rebamonte v. Sps. Lucero, G.R. No.
237812, Oct. 2, 2019)

88. What are the valid warrantless arrests?

Definition Requisites

In Flagrante When, in his presence, the person to be 1. The person arrested must execute an overt act
Delicto arrested has committed, is actually indicating that he or she has just committed, is actually
Arrest committing, or is attempting to commit an committing, or is attempting to commit a crime; and
offense. 2. The overt act was just done in the presence or within
the view of the arresting officer.

Hot Pursuit When an offense has just been committed, 1. An offense has just been committed; and
Arrest and has probable cause to believe, based on 2. The arresting officer has probable cause to believe
personal knowledge of facts or based on personal knowledge of facts or
circumstances, that the person to be arrested circumstances that the person to be arrested has
has committed it. committed it.

Escaped When the person to be arrested is prisoner

Prisoner who has escaped from a penal establishment
Arrest or place where he is serving final judgment or
is temporarily confined while his case is
pending, or has escaped while being
transferred from one confinement to another
(Sec. 5, Rule 113)

89. How is Probable Cause for Issuance of Warrant of Arrest determined?

This requires neither absolute certainty nor clear and convincing evidence of guilt. The test for issuing a warrant of arrest is
less stringent than that used for establishing the guilt of the accused. As long as the evidence shows prima facie case
against the accused, the trial court has sufficient ground to issue a warrant for his arrest. (People v. Tan, 608 SCRA 85, 95)

90. Is the power of ATC to authorize arrest and detention without judicial warrant unconstitutional?
No. Section 29, properly construed, does not provide for an "executive warrant of arrest" nor warrantless arrest on mere
suspicion. Without a doubt, when the circumstances for a warrantless arrest under Section 5, Rule 113 or Rule 9.2 are not
present, the government must apply for a warrant of arrest with the proper court. Section 5, Rule 113 gives the officer license
to already arrest the offender, since the said provision allows warrantless arrests when an offense was committed or being
committed in his presence or that he has probable cause to believe that an offense has just been committed, and that the
person to be arrested has committed it based on the arresting officer's personal knowledge of facts or circumstances. If,
however, there is probable cause to believe that the crime committed was no ordinary crime, but rather a terrorist act under
Sections 4 to 12 of the ATA, a written authorization may be issued by the ATC in order to detain the suspect for a period
longer than that which is allowed under Article 125 of the RPC. Without such written authorization duly issued by the ATC
itself, the general rule under Article 125 of the RPC operates. On this understanding, which the Court holds is the correct
one, the ATC's written authorization does not operate as a warrant of arrest. Since Section 29 applies to warrantless arrests,
the processes, requisites, and rigorous standards applicable to such kind of arrests, as developed by rules and
jurisprudence also apply to Section 29. Among other things, these include the requirement of personal knowledge and the
existence of probable cause. Thus, it is important to clarify that, contrary to the concerns of petitioners, Section 29 does not
allow warrantless arrests for violations of the relevant provisions of ATA based on mere suspicion. (Calleja v. Executive
Secretary, G.R. No. 252578, December 07, 2021 [Landmark Case Q&A])

91. Distinguish between Bail as a Matter of Right and as a Matter of Discretion.

As a Matter of Right
a. Before or after conviction by the MeTC
and MTC; and
b. Before conviction by the RTC of an
offense not punishable by death,
reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment.
(Sections 4 and 5, Rule 114)
As a Matter of Discretion
a. Before conviction, in cases, where the offense charged is punishable by
reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, when evidence of guilt is not
strong; and
b. After the accused's conviction by the Regional Trial Court of an offense
not punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment.

92. May humanitarian grounds justify an accused’s admission to bail?

Yes, provided that there is a clear and convincing showing that the detainee will not be a flight risk or a danger to the
community. (Enrile vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 213847, August 18, 2015)

93. What is a Searching Inquiry? What are the guidelines on how to conduct a Searching Inquiry?
The searching inquiry requirement means more than informing cursorily the accused that he faces a jail term but also, the
exact length of imprisonment under the law and the certainty that he will serve time at the national penitentiary or a penal
colony. Although there is no definite and concrete rule as to how a trial judge must conduct a "searching inquiry," we have
held that the following guidelines should be observed:
a. Ascertain from the accused himself: (a) how he was brought into the custody of the law; (b) whether he had the
assistance of a competent counsel during the custodial and preliminary investigations; and (c) under what conditions he
was detained and interrogated during the investigations. This is intended to rule out the possibility that the accused has
been coerced or placed under a state of duress either by actual threats of physical harm coming from malevolent quarters
or simply because of the judge's intimidating robes.
b. Ask the defense counsel a series of questions as to whether he had conferred with, and completely explained to,the
accused the meaning and consequences of a plea of guilty.
c. Elicit information about the personality profile of the accused, such as his age, socio-economic status, and educational
background, which may serve as a trustworthy index of his capacity to give a free and informed plea of guilty.

15
 d. Inform the accused the exact length of imprisonment or nature of the penalty under the law and the certainty that he will
serve such sentence. For not infrequently, an accused pleads guilty in the hope of a lenient treatment upon bad advice
or because of promises of the authorities or parties of a lighter penalty should he admit guilt or express remorse. It is
the duty of the judge to ensure that the accused does not labor under these mistaken impressions because a plea of
guilty carries with it not only the admission of authorship of the crime proper but also of the aggravating circumstances
attending it, that increase punishment.
e. Inquire if the accused knows the crime with which he is charged and fully explain to him the elements of the crime which
is the basis of his indictment. Failure of the court to do so would constitute a violation of his fundamental right to be
informed of the precise nature of the accusation against him and a denial of his right to due process.
f. All questions posed to the accused should be in a language known and understood by the latter.
g. The trial judge must satisfy himself that the accused, in pleading guilty, is truly guilty. The accused must be required to
narrate the tragedy or reenact the crime or furnish its missing details. (People v. Pagal, G.R. No. 241257, September 29, 2020)

94. What is an improvident plea of guilty and its effects?

A plea of guilty to a capital offense without the benefit of a searching inquiry or an ineffectual inquiry, as required by Sec. 3,
Rule 116 of the 2000 Revised Rules, results to an improvident plea of guilty. The conviction of the accused simply depends
on whether the plea of guilty to a capital offense was improvident or not. An indubitable admission of guilt automatically
results to a conviction. Otherwise, a conviction on the basis of an improvident plea of guilt, on appeal, would be set aside
and the case would be remanded for presentation of evidence. An exception to this is when, despite the existence of an
improvident plea, a conviction will not be disturbed when the prosecution presented sufficient evidence during trial to prove
the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. The existing rules, however, shifted the focus from the nature of the plea
to whether evidence was presented during the trial to prove the guilt of the accused. The conviction of the accused shall be
based principally on the evidence presented by the prosecution. The improvident plea of guilty by the accused becomes
secondary. Accordingly, convictions involving improvident pleas are affirmed if the same are supported by proof beyond
reasonable doubt. Otherwise, the conviction is set aside and the case remanded for re-trial when the conviction is predicated
solely on the basis of the improvident plea of guilt, meaning that the prosecution was unable to prove the accused's guilt
beyond reasonable doubt. (People v. Pagal, G.R. No. 241257, September 29, 2020)

95. What are the rules concerning pleas of guilty to capital offenses?
At the Trial Stage At the Appeal Stage

When the accused makes a plea of guilty to a capital offense,
the trial court must strictly abide by the provisions of Sec. 3,
Rule 116 of the 2000 Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure. In
particular, it must afford the prosecution an opportunity to
present evidence as to the guilt of the accused and the precise
degree of his culpability. Failure to comply with these mandates
constitute grave abuse of discretion.
a. In case the plea of guilty to a capital offense is supported
by proof beyond reasonable doubt, the trial court shall enter
a judgment of conviction.
b. In case the prosecution presents evidence but fails to prove
the accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt, the trial court
shall enter a judgment of acquittal in favor of the accused.
c. In case the prosecution fails to present any evidence
despite opportunity to do so, the trial court shall enter a
judgment of acquittal in favor of the accused.
In the above instance, the trial court shall require the
prosecution to explain in writing within ten (10) days from
receipt its failure to present evidence. Any instance of collusion
between the prosecution and the accused shall be dealt with to
the full extent of the law.
(People v. Pagal, G.R. No. 241257, September 29, 2020)
a. When the accused is convicted of a capital offense
on the basis of his plea of guilty, whether improvident
or not, and proof beyond reasonable doubt was
established, the judgment of conviction shall be
sustained.
b. When the accused is convicted of a capital offense
solely on the basis of his plea of guilty, whether
improvident or not, without proof beyond reasonable
doubt because the prosecution was not given an
opportunity to present its evidence, or was given the
opportunity to present evidence but the improvident
plea of guilt resulted to an undue prejudice to either
the prosecution or the accused, the judgment of
conviction shall be set aside and the case remanded
for re-arraignment and for reception of evidence
pursuant to Sec. 3, Rule 116 of the 2000 Revised
Rules of Criminal Procedure.
c. When the accused is convicted of a capital offense
solely on the basis of a plea of guilty, whether
improvident or not, without proof beyond reasonable
doubt because the prosecution failed to prove the
accused's guilt despite opportunity to do so, the
judgment of conviction shall be set aside and the
accused acquitted.

96. Distinguish Motion to Quash from Demurrer to Evidence.

Motion to Quash Demurrer to Evidence

When Filed Before the accused enters a plea. After the prosecution rests its case.
Leave of May be filed either with or without
Prior leave of court not required.
Court leave of court.
a. The facts charged do not constitute an offense;
b. The court trying the case has no jurisdiction over the offense
charged;
c. The court trying the case has no jurisdiction over the person of
the accused;
d. The officer who filed the information had no authority to do so; Based solely on the insufficiency of
Grounds
e. It does not conform substantially to the prescribed form; evidence.
f. More than one offense is charged except when a single
punishment for various offenses is prescribed by law;
g. The criminal action or liability has been extinguished;
h. It contains averments which, if true, would constitute a legal
excuse or justification; and

16
 i. The accused has been previously convicted or acquitted of the
offense charged, or the case against him was dismissed or
otherwise terminated without his express consent.

The order granting demurrer to

The order granting motion to quash generally does not bar another
When evidence is a resolution of the case on
prosecution of the case, hence, does not follow a dismissal of the
Granted the merits amounting to acquittal.
case.
When filed without leave of court, the
accused waives the right to present
evidence and submits the case for
judgment based on the evidence for
the prosecution.
When The appropriate recourse is to proceed to trial and in case of
Denied conviction, to appeal such conviction.
When filed without leave of court, the
accused waives the right to present
evidence and submits the case for
judgment based on the evidence for
the prosecution.
(Rules 33, 117, & Sec. 23, Rule 119, Revised Rules of Court)

97. What are the elements of double jeopardy and its exceptions?
The accused's constitutional right against double jeopardy attaches when the following elements concur:
1. The accused is charged under a complaint or information sufficient in form and substance to sustain their conviction;
2. The court has jurisdiction;
3. The accused has been arraigned and has pleaded; and
4. The accused is convicted or acquitted, or the case is dismissed without his/her consent.
The rule on double jeopardy will not apply where:
a. There has been deprivation of due process and where there is a finding of a mistrial, or
b. There has been a grave abuse of discretion under exceptional circumstances. (Austria v. AAA and BBB, G.R. No. 205275,
June 28, 2022 [Landmark Case Q&As]; People v. Pimentel, G.R. No. 223099, January 11, 2018)

98. Is the accused’s right against double jeopardy violated when the complainant assailed his acquittal before the CA
considering that the RTC’s order of acquittal is a mere recital of facts with a dispositive portion?
No, the accused’s right against double jeopardy was not violated because it stemmed from a void judgment which cannot
be the source of legal rights and has no binding effect. RTC’s order is void because it contained neither an analysis of the
evidence nor a reference to any legal basis for the conclusion. It is settled that a void judgment of acquittal has no legal
effect and does not terminate the case. In contemplation of law, it is non-existent as if no judgment had been rendered at
all. (Austria vs. AAA and BBB, G.R. No. 205275, June 28, 2022 [Landmark Case Q&As])

99. What are the requirements for provisional dismissal?

a. The prosecution with the express conformity of the accused, the accused, or both the prosecution and the accused,
shall move for the provisional dismissal of the case;
b. Notice to the offended party;
c. Order of the court granting the motion and dismissing the case provisionally; and
d. Service of a copy of the order of provisional dismissal to the public prosecutor. (People v. Lacson, G.R. No. 149453,
October 7, 2003)

100. What are the instances when a witness for the prosecution may be conditionally examined before the court where
the case is pending?
In order for the testimony of the prosecution witness be taken before the court where the case is being heard, it must be
shown that the said prosecution witness is either: (a) too sick or infirm to appear at the trial as directed by the order of the
court, or; (b) has to leave the Philippines with no definite date of returning . (People v. Sergio, G.R. No. 240053, 2019)

101. Distinguish between a demurrer to evidence in civil and criminal cases.

Civil Cases Criminal Cases

After the plaintiff has completed the

When Filed After the prosecution rests its case.
presentation of his or her evidence.
When upon the facts and the law, the
Grounds Insufficiency of evidence.
plaintiff has shown no right to relief.
Case is dismissed.

Effect if If the motion is granted but on appeal Acquittal of the accused.

granted the order of dismissal is reversed, he
or she shall be deemed to have
waived the right to present evidence.
If filed with leave of court, the accused may adduce evidence
Defendant shall have the right to in his defense.
Effect if present evidence.
denied If filed without leave of court, the accused waives the right to
present evidence and submits the case for judgment on the
basis of the evidence for the prosecution.
(Rule 33, Civil Procedure and Sec. 23, Rule 119, Criminal Procedure, Revised Rules of Court)

17
102. What are the prohibited motions under the Revised Guidelines for Continuous Trial of Criminal Cases?
The following prohibited motions shall be denied outright before the scheduled arraignment without need of comment
and/or opposition:
a. Motion for judicial determination of probable cause.
b. Motion for preliminary investigation filed beyond the five (5)-day reglementary period in inquest proceedings under
Sec. 6, Rule 112, or when preliminary investigation is required under Sec. 8, Rule 112, or allowed in inquest
proceedings and the accused failed to participate in the preliminary investigation despite due notice.
c. Motion for reinvestigation of the prosecutor recommending the filing of information once the information has been filed
before the court (1) if the motion is filed without prior leave of court; (2) when preliminary investigation is not required
under Sec. 8, Rule 112; and (3) when the regular preliminary investigation is required and has been actually conducted,
and the grounds relied upon in the motion are not meritorious, such as issues of credibility, admissibility of evidence,
innocence of the accused, or lack of due process when the accused was actually notified, among others.
d. Motion to quash information when the ground is not one of those stated in Sec. 3, Rule 117 .
e. Motion for bill of particulars that does not conform to Sec. 9, Rule 116.
f. Motion to suspend the arraignment based on grounds not stated under Sec. 11, Rule 116.
g. Petition to suspend the criminal action on the ground of prejudicial question, when no civil case has been filed, pursuant
to Sec. 7, Rule 111. (III. 2 (b), A.M. No. 15-06-10-SC)

103. What are the rules on the private complainant's legal standing to question judgments or orders in criminal
proceedings?
Civil Aspect Criminal Aspect

The private complainant has the legal personality to appeal the
civil liability of the accused or file a petition for certiorari to
preserve his or her interest in the civil aspect of the criminal case.
The appeal or petition for certiorari must allege the specific
pecuniary interest of the private offended party. The failure to
comply with this requirement may result in the denial or dismissal
of the remedy.
The reviewing court shall require the OSG to file comment within
a non-extendible period of thirty (30) days from notice if it appears
that the resolution of the private complainant's appeal or petition
for certiorari will necessarily affect the criminal aspect of the case
or the right to prosecute (i.e., existence of probable cause, venue
or territorial jurisdiction, elements of the offense, prescription,
admissibility of evidence, identity of the perpetrator of the crime,
modification of penalty, and other questions that will require a
review of the substantive merits of the criminal proceedings, or
the nullification/reversal of the entire ruling, or cause the
reinstatement of the criminal action or meddle with the
prosecution of the offense, among other things).
The comment of the OSG must state whether it conforms or
concurs with the remedy of the private offended party. The
judgment or order of the reviewing court granting the private
complainant's relief may be set aside if rendered without affording
the People, through the OSG, the opportunity to file a comment.
(Austria v. AAA and BBB, G.R. No. 205275, June 28, 2022; OCA Circular No. 56-2023)
The private complainant has no legal personality to
appeal or file a petition for certiorari to question the
judgments or orders involving the criminal aspect of
the case or the right to prosecute, unless made with
the OSG's conformity.
The private complainant must request the OSG's
conformity within the reglementary period to appeal
or file a petition for certiorari. The private complainant
must attach the original copy of the OSG's conformity
as proof in case the request is granted within the
reglementary period. Otherwise, the private
complainant must allege in the appeal or petition for
certiorari the fact of pendency of the request. If the
OSG denied the request for conformity, the Court
shall dismiss the appeal or petition for certiorari for
lack of legal personality of the private complainant.
The reviewing court shall require the OSG to file
comment within a non-extendible period of thirty (30)
days from notice on the private complainant's petition
for certiorari questioning the acquittal of the accused,
the dismissal of the criminal case, and the
interlocutory orders in criminal proceedings on the
ground of grave abuse of discretion or denial of due
process.

104. Explain the plain view doctrine.

Under the plain view doctrine, objects falling within the plain view of a law enforcement officer, who has a right to be in a
position to have that view, may be validly seized by such officer without a warrant and, thus, may be introduced in evidence.
An object is deemed in plain view when it is "open to eye and hand" or is "plainly exposed to sight." The "plain view"
doctrine applies when the following requisites concur:
1. The law enforcement officer in search of the evidence has a prior justification for an intrusion or is in a position from
which he can view a particular area;
2. The discovery of evidence in plain view is inadvertent; and
3. It is immediately apparent to the officer that the item he observes may be evidence of a crime, contraband or otherwise
subject to seizure. (Pilapil vs. People, G.R. No. 228608, August 27, 2020)

105. What is the proper venue for Cyber Libel cases?

Cyber Libel cases shall be filed at the RTC which has jurisdiction over the place where the complainant actually resides at
the time of the commission of the offense. (Bonifacio v. RTC of Makati, G.R. No. 184800, May 5, 2010)

18
106. Where is the proper venue to file an application for warrant for cybercrime offenses?
Offense Who Can File Where to File

Violation of Section 4 (Cybercrime
Offenses) and/or Section 5 (Other
Offense), Chapter II of RA 10175.
Law Before any of the designated cybercrime courts of the province
enforcement or the city where the offense or any of its elements has been
authorities. committed, is being committed, or is about to be committed, or
where any part of the computer system used is situated, or
where any of the damage caused to a natural or juridical person
took place. However, the cybercrime courts in Quezon City, the
City of Manila, Makati City, Pasig City, Cebu City, Iloilo City,
Davao City and Cagayan De Oro City shall have the special
authority to act on applications and issue warrants which shall
be enforceable nationwide and outside the Philippines.

Violation of Section 6, Chapter II of With the regular or other specialized regional trial courts, as the
RA 10175 (all crimes defined and case may be, within its territorial jurisdiction in the places above-
penalized by the Revised Penal described.
Code, as amended, and other
special laws, if committed by,
through, and with the use of ICT).
(Section 2, A.M. No. 17-11-03-SC)

107. What is the effectivity period of cybercrime warrants?

It shall be effective for the length of time as determined by the court, which shall not exceed a period of ten (10) days from
its issuance. The court issuing the warrant may, upon motion, extend its effectivity based only on justifiable reasons for a
period not exceeding ten (10) days from the expiration of the original period . (Section 2, A.M. No. 17-11-03-SC)

108. Can cybercrime warrants be executed outside the Philippines?

Yes, for persons or service providers situated outside of the Philippines, service of warrants and/or other court processes
shall be coursed through the Department of Justice – Office of Cybercrime, in line with all relevant international instruments
and/or agreements on the matter. (Section 2, A.M. No. 17-11-03-SC)

VIII. EVIDENCE

109. What are the requisites for circumstantial evidence to be sufficient?

a. There is more than one circumstance;
b. The facts from which the inferences are derived are proven; and
c. The combination of all the circumstances is such as to produce a conviction beyond reasonable doubt. (Rule 133, Section
4; People v. Al-Saad, G.R. No. 242414, March 15, 2021, J. Hernando)

110. When is judicial notice mandatory and when is it discretionary?

Mandatory Discretionary
1. existence and territorial extent of states, their political history, 1. matters which are of public knowledge, or
forms of government and symbols of nationality, 2. are capable to unquestionable demonstration,
2. the law of nations, or
3. the admiralty and maritime courts of the world and their 3. ought to be known to judges because of their
seals, judicial functions.
4. the political constitution and history of the Philippines,
5. the official acts of legislative, executive and judicial
departments of the Philippines,
6. the laws of nature,
7. the measure of time,
8. and the geographical divisions.
(Sections 1 and 2, Rule 129, Rules of Court)

111. What is ‘chain of custody’ in cases involving Illegal Sale and/or Illegal Possession of Dangerous Drugs and what
is the effect of failure to comply with the chain of custody?
It is essential that the identity of the dangerous drug be established with moral certainty, considering that it is the corpus
delicti of the crime. To ensure the integrity of the seized drugs, the prosecution must account for each link in the chain of
custody, as follows: (1) the seizure and marking, if practicable, of the illegal drug recovered from the accused by the
apprehending officer; (2) the tum-over of the seized illegal drug to the investigating officer; (3) the tum-over by the
investigating officer of the illegal drug to the forensic chemist for laboratory examination; and ( 4) the tum-over and
submission of the illegal drug from the forensic chemist to the court. Section 21 of RA 9165, as amended by RA 10640,
requires two witnesses to be present during the conduct of the physical inventory and taking of photograph of the seized
items, namely: (a) an elected public official; and (b) either a representative from the National Prosecution Service or the
media. Lapses in the chain of custody and ultimately, lack of compliance with Section 21, Article II of RA 9165, warrants
the acquittal of the accused. Serious uncertainty hangs over the identity and integrity of the corpus delicti introduced into
evidence by the prosecution. However failure to strictly comply with the chain of custody does not, ipso facto, render the
seizure and custody over the illegal drugs as void and invalid if: (a) there is justifiable ground for such noncompliance; and
(b) the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized evidence were preserved. While deviations may be allowed, the same
however (1) must be satisfactorily explained by the prosecution; (2) the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized
evidence had been preserved; and (3) the justifiable ground for noncompliance is proven as a fact. Moreover, it must be
alleged and proved that earnest efforts were made to secure the attendance of the necessary witnesses. (People vs.
Hernandez, G.R. No. 258077, 2022; People vs. Ortega, G.R. No. 240224. 2022; Uy y Sayan vs. People, G.R. No. 217097. 2022; People
vs. Castillo y Galang, G.R. No. 242520. 2021, J. Hernando)

19
112. What are the distinctions between the parol evidence rule and the Original Document Rule?
Parol Evidence Rule Original Document Rule
When the terms of an agreement have been reduced to The Original Document Rule requires that when the
writing, it is considered as containing all the terms agreed subject of inquiry is the contents of the document, no
upon and there can be, between the parties and their evidence is admissible other than the original document
successors in interest, no evidence of such terms other itself except in the instances mentioned in Section 3, Rule
than the contents of the written agreement. 130 of the Revised Rules of Court. Nevertheless,
evidence not objected to is deemed admitted and may be
validly considered by the court in arriving at its judgment.
Courts are not precluded from accepting in evidence a
mere photocopy of a document when no objection was
raised when it was formally offered.
The parol evidence rule forbids any addition to or Prohibits the introduction of secondary evidence in lieu of
contradiction of the terms of a written instrument by the original document regardless of whether it varies the
testimony or other evidence purporting to show that, at or contents of the original.
before the execution of the parties' written agreement,
other or different terms were agreed upon by the parties,
varying the purport of the written contract.
Applies only to written agreements and wills. Applies to all kinds of writings.
(Section 10, Rule 130 of the Rules of Court; Bacala vs. Heirs of Spouses Poliño, G.R. No. 200608. February 10, 2021, J. Hernando)

113. Is a child qualified to be a witness?

Yes. Every child is presumed qualified to be a witness. (Sec. 6, Rule on Examination of a Child Witness)

114. Explain the sexual abuse rule.

GR: The following evidence is not admissible in any criminal proceeding involving alleged child sexual abuse:
a. Evidence offered to prove that the alleged victim engaged in other sexual behavior; and
b. Evidence offered to prove the sexual predisposition of the alleged victim.
XPN: Evidence of specific instances of sexual behavior by the alleged victim to prove that a person other than the accused
was the source of semen, injury, or other physical evidence shall be admissible. (Sec. 30, Rule on Examination of a Child
Witness)

115. Are lawyer-client communications through electronic means also considered privileged?
Yes, matters disclosed by a prospective client to a lawyer are protected by the rule on privileged communication. The
Rules on Electronic Evidence provides that the confidential character of a privileged communications is not solely on the
ground that it is in the form of an electronic document. (Mercado v. Vitriolo, A.C. NO. 5108, May 26, 2005; Sec. 3, Rule 3, Rules
on Electronic Evidence)

116. Enumerate the disqualifications as a witness by reason of privileged communication.

a. A husband or wife as to their spouse;
b. An attorney, a person reasonably believed to be licensed to engage in the practice of law and the attorney's secretary,
stenographer, clerk or other persons assisting the attorney as to their client;
c. A physician, psychotherapist or person reasonably believed by the patient to be authorized to practice medicine or
psychotherapy as to their patient;
d. A minister, priest or person reasonably believed to be as to the affected person;
e. A public officer as to communications made to him or her in official confidence; and
f. A law student acting for the legal clinic under Rule 138-A of the Rules of Court. (Section 24, Rule 130 C, Rules of Court;
Rule 138-A, Rules of Court)

117. Distinguish Marital Disqualification and Marital Privilege.

Marital Disqualification Marital Privilege
One of the spouses is a party. The spouse/s may or may not be a party.
During marriage During or after marriage
Ceases upon the death of either spouse Continues even after the termination of the marriage
Total prohibition against any testimony for or against the Applies only to any communication received in
spouse of the witness. confidence.
Exceptions:
a. A civil case by one against the other;
b. A criminal case for a crime committed by one against the other or the latter's direct descendants or ascendants
(Sections 22 & 24, Rule 130 C, Rules of Court)

118. What is the doctrine of independently relevant statements?

While the testimony of a witness regarding a statement made by another person given for the purpose of establishing the
truth of the fact asserted in the statement is clearly hearsay evidence, it is otherwise if the purpose of placing the statement
on the record is merely to establish the fact that the statement, or the tenor of such statement, was made. Regardless of
the truth or falsity of a statement, when what is relevant is the fact that such statement has been made, the hearsay rule
does not apply and the statement may be shown. As a matter of fact, evidence as to the making of the statement is not
secondary but primary, for the statement itself may constitute a fact in issue or is circumstantially relevant as to the
existence of such a fact. This is the doctrine of independently relevant statements. (Arriola vs. People, [G.R. No. 199975.
February 24, 2020, J. Hernando)

119. What are the ways to impeach a witness?

A witness may be impeached by the party against whom he or she was called, by contradictory evidence, by evidence that
his or her general reputation for truth, honesty, or integrity is bad, or by evidence that he or she has made at other times
statements inconsistent with his or her present testimony, but not by evidence of particular wrongful acts, except that it
may be shown by the examination of the witness, or record of the judgment, that he or she has been convicted of an
offense. (Sec. 11, Rule 132, Rules on Evidence)

20
120. What is the process for a private document to be admitted in evidence?
It must be authenticated either by the person who executed it, the person before whom its execution was acknowledged,
any person who was present and saw it executed, or who after its execution, saw it and recognized the signatures, or the
person to whom the parties to the instruments had previously confessed execution thereof. For private electronic
documents, authenticity must be proved by any of the following means: (a) by evidence that it had been digitally signed by
the person purported to have signed the same; (b) by evidence that other appropriate security procedures or devices as
may be authorized by the Supreme Court or by law for authentication of electronic documents were applied to the
document; or (c) by other evidence showing its integrity and reliability to the satisfaction of the judge. During authentication
in court, a witness positively testifies that a document presented as evidence is genuine and has been duly executed or
that the document is neither spurious nor counterfeit nor executed by mistake or under duress. (Salas v. Sta. Mesa Market
Corp, G.R. No, 157766; Seming v. Alamag, G.R. No. 202284, March 17, 2021, J. Hernando; Section 2, Rule 5, Rules on Electronic
Evidence)

PART II. LEGAL ETHICS

121. State the Lawyer’s Oath.
“I,________________________, do solemnly swear that I will maintain allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines, I will
support the Constitution and obey the laws as well as the legal orders of the duly constituted authorities therein; I will do
no falsehood, nor consent to the doing of any in court; I will not wittingly or willingly promote or sue any groundless, false
or unlawful suit, or give aid nor consent to the same; I will delay no man for money or malice, and will conduct myself as
a lawyer according to the best of my knowledge and discretion, with all good fidelity as well to the courts as to my clients;
and I impose upon myself these voluntary obligations without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion. So help me
God.”
Note: Leave the name blank, filling out the blank with your name is considered a marking.

122. Define practice of law.

Practice of law means any activity, in or out of court, done by a lawyer, which requires the application of law, legal
procedure, knowledge, training and experience. “To engage in the practice of law is to perform those acts which are
characteristics of the profession. Generally, to practice law is to give notice or render any kind of service, which device or
service requires the use in any degree of legal knowledge or skill.” (Cayetano v. Monsod, G.R. No. 100113, September 3, 1991)

123. Can a lawyer promote his services through commercial advertisements?

No, a lawyer is prohibited to promote his services through commercial advertisements because lawyering is not primarily
meant to be a money-making venture, and law advocacy is not a capital that necessarily yields profits. The gaining of a
livelihood is not a professional but a secondary consideration. Duty to public service and to the administration of justice
should be the primary consideration of lawyers, who must subordinate their personal interests or what they owe to
themselves. The practice of law is a noble calling in which emolument is a by-product, and the highest evidence may be
attained without making much money. (Burbe v. Maguita, A.C. No. 99-634, June 10, 2002)

124. What are the qualifications for admission to the Bar?

a. Good moral character (This is not only a condition precedent to admission into the practice of law, but is also a
continuing imposition in order to maintain the membership in the bar.);
b. Resident of the Philippines;
c. At least 21 years of age;
d. Citizen of the Philippines;
e. Must produce before the Supreme Court satisfactory evidence of good moral character;
f. No charges involving moral turpitude have been filed or are pending in any court in the Philippines;
g. Must present a certificate issued by the university/college that before commencing the study of law, he or she completed
a four-year high school course and thereafter, bachelor’s degree in arts or sciences. A Filipino citizen who completed
and obtained his or her Bachelor of Laws degree or its equivalent in a foreign law school must present proof of having
completed a separate bachelor's degree course;
h. Must have successfully completed all the prescribed courses, particularly, civil law, commercial law, remedial law,
criminal law, public and private international law, political law, labor and social legislation, medical jurisprudence,
taxation and legal ethics; and
i. A Filipino citizen who graduated from a foreign law school shall submit to the Supreme Court of certifications showing:
(a) completion of all courses leading to the degree of Bachelor of Laws or its equivalent degree; (b) recognition or
accreditation of the law school by the proper authority; and (c) completion of all the fourth year subjects in the Bachelor
of Laws academic program in a law school duly recognized by the Philippine Government. (Rules of Court, Rule 138 Sec.
1, 2, 5, 6, Rule 138-A, B.M. No. 1153: Re: Letter of Atty. Estelito P. Mendoza Proposing Reforms in the Bar Examinations Through
Amendments to Rule 138 of the Rules of Court)

125. Give instances where non-lawyers may appear in court.

In the court of a justice of the peace a party may conduct his litigation in person, with the aid of an agent or friend appointed
by him for the purpose, or with the aid of an attorney. In any other court, a party may conduct his litigation personally or by
aid of an attorney, and his appearance must be either personal or by a duly authorized member of the bar. Certified law
student practitioners are also authorized with limited practice of law. The limited practice of law covers appearances,
drafting and submission of pleadings and documents before trial and appellate courts and quasi-judicial and administrative
bodies, assistance in mediation and other alternative modes of dispute resolution, legal counselling and advice, and such
other activities that may be covered by the Clinical Legal Education Program of the law school as herein provided. (Sec. 34
Rule 138; Sec. 1 Rule 138-A)

126. Can law student practitioners level 1 represent party litigants in any court?
No, they are not allowed to represent party litigants in any court. However, they are allowed to represent eligible parties
before quasi-judicial or administrative bodies, subject to the supervision and approval of a supervising lawyer. Lawyers
who supervise student practitioners should know that the unauthorized practice of law by the student shall be a ground for
revocation of the law student practitioner’s certification and/or the disqualification of the law student from taking the bar

21
 examination for a period to be determined by the Supreme Court. (Sec. 4, Rule 138-A) (Sec 13 of the Revised Student Practice
Rule, A.M. No. 19-03-24-SC)

127. Is a lawyer who issued worthless checks guilty of violating the Code of Professional Responsibility?
Yes. Lawyers, as guardians of the law, are mandated to obey and respect the laws of the land and to uphold the integrity
and dignity of the legal profession. Thus, they should not engage in any unlawful, dishonest, immoral, or deceitful conduct.
Atty. Tumanda, as a lawyer, should know that issuing a worthless check is a violation of BP 22 for which he may be
disciplined under Rule 138, Section 27 of the Rules of Court. (Andaya vs. Tumanda, A.C. No. 12209. 2020, J. Hernando)

128. Atty. AAA allegedly criticized the NLRC Commissioners in his petition for review before the NLRC for their inability
to correctly interpret the evidence presented. An administrative complaint was filed against Atty. AAA due to use
of offensive language. Is Atty. AAA liable for violation of the Code of Professional Responsibility even though
NLRC is not a court and its Commissioners are not justices or judges?
Yes. Atty. AAA has evidently breached Canons 8 and 11 of the Code of Professional Responsibility and is subject to
administrative liability. A lawyer shall not, in his professional dealings, use language which is abusive, offensive or
otherwise improper. He became became unmindful of the fact that in addressing the NLRC, he nonetheless remained a
member of the Bar, an oath-bound servant of the law, whose first duty is not to his client but to the administration of justice
and whose conduct ought to be and must be scrupulously observant of law and ethics. (Rule 8.01, CPR, Ng v. Atty. Alar Adm.
Case No. 7252, November 22, 2006)

129. Atty. AAA filed a civil suit by allowing a disbarred lawyer to use his signature and other details in the preparation
of pleadings and filing the same before the court. Did Atty. AAA violate the Code of Professional Responsibility?
Yes. The preparation and signing of a pleading constitute legal work involving practice of law which is reserved exclusively
for the members of the legal profession. Atty. AAA not only willingly allowed a non-lawyer to practice law; worse, he allowed
one to continue to practice law notwithstanding that this Court already stripped him of his license to practice law. Clearly,
the acts of Atty. AAA constituted violations of the Code of Professional Responsibility, particularly Rule 9.01, Canon 9,
Rule 1.10, Canon 1 and Rule 10.01, Canon 10. (Petelo vs. Rivera, A.C. No. 10408. October 16, 2019, J. Hernando)

130. Will a lawyer who was found guilty of forum shopping be held administratively liable?
Yes. Rule 10.3, Canon 10 of the CPR mandates lawyers to observe the rules of procedures and to not misuse them to
defeat the ends of justice. The filing of multiple cases constitutes abuse of the court's processes and improper conduct
that tends to impede, obstruct and degrade the administration of justice. The filing of another action concerning the same
subject matter likewise runs contrary to Canon 1 and Rules 12.02 and 12.04 of Canon 12 of the CPR. Canon 1 of the CPR
requires a lawyer to exert every effort and consider it his/her duty to assist in the speedy and efficient administration of
justice. Rule 12.02 prohibits a lawyer from filing multiple cases arising from the same cause, and Rule 12.04 of Canon 12
prohibits the undue delay of a case by misusing court processes . (Villanueva vs. Alentajan, A.C. No. 12161. June 8, 2020, J.
Hernando; Go vs. Teruel, A.C. No. 11119, November 4, 2020, J. Hernando)

131. Can a lawyer refuse an appointment as counsel de oficio?

No, a lawyer shall not refuse an appointment as counsel de oficio, amicus curiae, or a request for free legal aid from the
Integrated Bar of the Philippines or any of its chapters, unless there is a valid and significant reason for doing so as
expressly stated in Rule 14.02 of the Code of Professional Conduct. (Rule 14.02, CPR).

132. What are the essential factors to establish the existence of the attorney-client privilege communication?
A lawyer-client relationship begins from the moment a client seeks the lawyer's advice upon a legal concern. From that
moment on, the lawyer is bound to respect the relationship and to maintain the trust and confidence of his client. The
essential factors to establish the existence of the attorney-client privilege communication are as follows:
1. Where legal advice of any kind is sought
2. from a professional legal adviser in his capacity as such,
3. the communication relating to that purpose,
4. made in confidence,
5. by the client,
6. are at his instance permanently protected
7. from disclosure by himself or by legal advisor,
8. except the protection be waived. (Constantino vs. Aransazo, Jr., A.C. No. 9701, February 10, 2021, J. Hernando; Hadjula vs.
Madianda, July 3, 2007, A.C. No. 6711)

133. When is there conflict of interest?

In determining whether a lawyer is guilty of violating the rules on conflict of interest under the CPR, it is essential to establish
that:
a. a lawyer is duty-bound to fight for an issue or claim in behalf of one client and, at the same time, to oppose that claim
for the other client;
b. the acceptance of a new relation would prevent the full discharge of a lawyer's duty of undivided fidelity and loyalty to
the client or invite suspicion of unfaithfulness or double-dealing in the performance of that duty; and
c. a lawyer would be called upon in the new relation to use against a former client any confidential information acquired
through their connection or previous employment.
Moreover, a lawyer can be said to be representing conflicting interests specifically in circumstances when he, having been
engaged as counsel for a corporation, subsequently represents the members of the same corporation's board of directors
in a derivative suit filed against them. (Burgos vs. Bereber, A.C. No. 12666. March 4, 2020, J. Hernando)

134. Atty. AAA was engaged by BBB to represent her in an annulment case. After receipt of Php 57,000, Atty. AAA
avoided BBB’s phone calls and canceled her appointments. Six months have lapsed and Atty. AAA failed to file
anything in court in connection with the complainant’s annulment case. May AAA be held liable?
Yes. Atty. AAA is guilty of professional misconduct for violating the following provisions of the Code of Professional
Responsibility. Rule 18.03 — A lawyer shall not neglect a legal matter entrusted to him, and his negligence in connection
therewith shall render him liable; Rule 16.01 — A lawyer shall account for all money or property collected or received for
or from the client.; Rule 16.03 — A lawyer shall deliver the funds and property of his client when due or upon demand; and
Canon 17 – A lawyer shall hold in trust all moneys and properties of his client that may come into his possession. Once a

22
 lawyer agrees to represent a client, he/she is duty-bound to exert his/her best effort and to serve the latter with utmost
diligence and competence. A lawyer's neglect of a legal matter entrusted to him/her by his/her client constitutes inexcusable
negligence for which he/she must be held administratively liable. In this case, Atty. AAA breached his duties to his client
when he failed to exercise due diligence in handling the annulment case of complainant. In fact, to the detriment of
complainant, he failed to render any legal service to her despite receipt of fees in the total amount of Php 57,000.00.
Hence, Atty. AAA clearly fell short of the demands required of him as a member of the Bar. (Francia vs. Sagario, A.C. No.
10938. 2019, J. Hernando; Home Guaranty Corporation vs. Tagayuna, A.C. No. 13131. 2022, J. Hernando)

135. Distinguish retaining lien from charging lien.

Retaining Lien
Lawful possession of papers, documents, property belonging to
the client
Covers papers, documents, and properties in the lawful
possession of the attorney by reason of his professional
employment.
Takes effect as soon as the attorney gets possession of papers,
documents, or property.
May be exercised before judgment or execution or regardless
thereof.
Extinguished when possession lawfully ends as when lawyer
voluntarily parts with funds documents, and papers of client or
offers them as evidence.
(Vda. De Caina v. Hon. Gustavo, G.R. No. L-12905, February 26, 1959)
Charging Lien
Securing of a favorable money judgment for client
Covers all judgments for the payment of money and
execution issued in pursuance of such judgment.
Takes effect as soon as the claim for attorney’s fees
had been entered into the records of the case.
Generally, exercised only when the attorney had
already secured a favorable judgment for his client.
Extinguished when client loses action as lien may
only be enforced against judgment awarded in favor
of client, proceeds thereof/executed thereon.

136. Champertous v. Contingency Contract

Champertous Contract Contingency Contract
Compensation of the lawyer is conditioned upon securing a favorable judgment.
Lawyers undertake to pay all expenses of litigation. Lawyers do not undertake to pay all expenses of
litigation.
Void Valid
(Carillo v. Atty. Angeles, A.C. No. 9899-9905,September 4, 2018; Masmud v. NLRC, G.R. No. 183385 February 13, 2009)

137. Will an administrative charge against a respondent be dismissed on the basis of an Affidavit of Desistance?
No. An affidavit of desistance executed by the complainant or the withdrawal of the complaint is not sufficient cause to
warrant the dismissal of an administrative complaint.. The main objective of disciplinary proceedings is to determine the
fitness of a member to remain in the Bar. It is conducted for the public welfare and the desistance of the complainant is
irrelevant. (Ang vs. Belaro, Jr., A.C. No. 12408. December 11, 2019, J. Hernando)

138. What is the quantum of proof in disciplinary cases involving members of the bar?
Substantial evidence is necessary to justify the imposition of administrative penalty. Substantial evidence means that
amount of relevant evidence which a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to justify a conclusion. It is more in
keeping with the primordial purpose of and essential considerations attending this type of case. Due to the gravity of the
consequences of the disbarment or suspension of a member of the bar, a lawyer enjoys the presumption of innocence,
and the burden of proof rests upon the complainant to satisfactorily prove the allegations in his complaint through
substantial evidence. (Partsch vs. Vitorillo, A.C. No. 10897. Jan. 4, 2022; Tablizo vs. Golangco, A.C. No. 10636. October 12, 2020; see
also Elanga vs. Pasok, A.C. No. 12030. September 29, 2020, J. Hernando)

139. Is an alleged failure to personally appear before the notary public fatal to the Complaint's validity in an
administrative proceeding against Atty. AAA who was able to fully participate in the proceedings?
No. Section 11, Rule 139-B of the Rules of Court states that no defect in a complaint, notice, answer, or in the proceeding
or the Investigator's Report shall be considered as substantial unless the Board of Governors, upon considering the whole
record, finds that such defect has resulted or may result in a miscarriage of justice, in which event the Board shall take
such remedial action as the circumstances may warrant, including invalidation of the entire proceedings. The alleged defect
in the notarization of the Complaint could not be considered substantial and did not result in a miscarriage of justice since
Atty. AAA was able to fully participate in the proceedings before the IBP. Additionally, there is a presumption of regularity
in the performance of duty by the notary public that he notarized the Complaint in accordance with the rules, absent clear
and convincing proof to the contrary. (Elanga vs. Pasok, A.C. No. 12030. September 29, 2020, J. Hernando)

140. What are the qualifications of a notary public?

To be eligible for commissioning as notary public, the petitioner:
a. must be a citizen of the Philippines;
b. must be over twenty-one (21) years of age;
c. must be a resident in the Philippines for at least one (1) year and maintains a regular place of work or business in the
city or province where the commission is to be issued;
d. must be a member of the Philippine Bar in good standing with clearances from the Office of the Bar Confidant of the
Supreme Court and the Integrated Bar of the Philippines; and
e. must not have been convicted in the first instance of any crime involving moral turpitude. (Sec. 1, Rule III A.M. No. 02-8-
13-SC 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice)

141. Can a notary public notarize a document to which he is a party?

No. The 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice clearly states that a notary public is disqualified from performing a notarial act if
he is a party to the instrument or document that is to be notarized. (Horca vs. People, G.R. No. 224316. November 10, 2021, J.
Hernando)

142. A complaint was filed against Atty. AAA for allegedly notarizing a document, a Secretary’s Certificate, despite the
fact that the party’s signature was merely printed. The signatory had signed the document elsewhere, scanned it,
and then sent it electronically to Atty. AAA for the latter to print, reproduce, notarize, and use for the designated

23
 purpose. Atty. AAA claimed that the party physically signed one copy that was subsequently reproduced when
notarized. Did Atty. AAA violate the Rules on Notarial Practice?
Yes. Atty. AAA failed to observe the requirement of physical presence when he notarized the Secretary's Certificate. A
notary public should not notarize a document unless the person who signed the same is the very same person who
executed and personally appeared before him to attest to the contents and the truth of what is stated therein. It goes
without saying that the signatory had signed the document elsewhere, scanned it, and then sent it electronically to Atty.
AAA for the latter to print, reproduce, notarize, and use for the designated purpose. If indeed the signatory had personally
appeared before him, he should have asked her right then and there to affix his/her signature to each and every copy of
the document, not just to one copy. (Kiener vs. Amores, A.C. No. 9417. November 18, 2020, J. Hernando)

JUDICIAL ETHICS
143. Give the 6 Canons of New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary.
Canon 1. Independence
Canon 2. Integrity
Canon 3. Impartiality
Canon 4. Propriety
Canon 5. Equality
Canon 6. Competence and diligence (New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary A.M. No. 03-05-01-SC)

144. What are the two aspects of independence under the Code of Judicial Conduct? Explain.
Individual Judicial Independence Institutional Judicial Independence
Focuses on each individual judge and ensures their ability to Focuses on the independence of the judiciary branch
decide cases free from external influence, with autonomy, and as a whole, and protects the judges as a class.
within the constraints of law.
(In Re: The Allegation Contained in the Columns of Mr. Amado P. Macasaet Published in Malaya, AM No 07-09- 13-SC)

145. Judge AAA's Facebook account was hacked, changing his privacy settings from private to public and exposing
his personal photos, showing him half-dressed and revealing tattoos on his upper body. These photos, intended
for his friends only, became accessible to a large number of Facebook friends who could also share them. Did
Judge AAA violate the New Code of Judicial Conduct?
Yes, particularly Canon 2 and Canon 4 of the New Code of Judicial Conduct. Canon 2 requires Integrity. Integrity is
essential not only to the proper discharge of the judicial office but also to the personal demeanor of judges. Canon 4, on
the other hand, requires Propriety. Propriety and the appearance of propriety are essential to the performance of all the
activities of a judge. As the visible personification of law and justice, judges are held to higher standards of conduct and
thus must accordingly comport themselves. By doing so, Judge AAA likewise failed to adhere to the standard of propriety
required of judges and court personnel under OCA Circular No. 173-2017, which mandates all members of the Judiciary
who participate in social media to be cautious and circumspect in posting photographs, liking posts, and making comments
in public on social networking sites like Facebook. Indeed, Judge AAA should have known better than to post highly
personal content on his Facebook account that was viewable not only by his family and close friends, but also, by his
"regular followers or, in other words, members of the general public. (Office Of The Court Administrator vs. Hon. Romeo M. Atillo,
Jr., A.M. No. Rtj-21-018, September 29, 2021 [Landmark Case Q&As])

146. Judge AAA posted a picture of her in Facebook wearing an "off-shouldered" attire. When complained of, she
alleged that is an acceptable social outfit under contemporary standards and is not forbidden. She further stated
that there is no prohibition against attractive ladies being judges; she is proud of her photo for having been
aesthetically made. Can Judge AAA be administratively liable?
Yes. Although Section 6, Canon 4 of the New Code of Judicial Conduct recognizes that judges, like any other citizen, are
entitled to freedom of expression, the same provision imposes a correlative restriction on judges: in the exercise of their
freedom of expression, they should always conduct themselves in a manner that preserves the dignity of the judicial office
and the impartiality and independence of the Judiciary. This rule reflects the general principle of propriety expected of
judges in all of their activities, whether it be in the course of their judicial office or in their personal lives. In particular,
Sections 1 and 2 of Canon 4 of the New Code of Judicial Conduct prohibit impropriety and even the appearance of
impropriety in all of their activities. While judges are not prohibited from becoming members of and from taking part in
social networking activities, we remind them that they do not thereby shed off their status as judges. They carry with them
in cyberspace the same ethical responsibilities and duties that every judge is expected to follow in his/her everyday
activities. (Lorenzana v. Judge Austria, A.M. No. RTJ-09-2200 April 2, 2014)

147. What are the grounds for compulsory inhibition of a judge?

It is possible that the respondent Judge might be influenced by his personal knowledge of the case
when he tries and decides the same on the merits, which would certainly constitute a denial of due
Actual Bias or
process to the party adversely affected by his judgment or decision. It is best that after some
Prejudice
reflection, the judge, on his own initiative, disqualifies himself from hearing the robbery case and
thereby rendering himself available as witness to any of the parties subject to cross-examination.
Economic The idea that a judge can preside over his own case is anathema to the notion of impartiality and that
Interest of his subsequent inhibition from the three cases does not detract from his culpability for he should not
Judge or his have taken cognizance of the cases in the first place.
Family
The Supreme Court found that an Associate Justice who only partly presided over a case in the trial
court and who did not render the final decision cannot be said to have been placed in a position where
Reviewing
he had to review his own decision and, as such, was not legally bound, on this ground, to inhibit
Own Cases
himself as ponente of the case. Nevertheless, it was held that he should have voluntarily inhibited
himself for his earlier involvement in the case constitutes just or valid reason under Sec. 1, Rule 137.
Previously Bias and prejudice cannot be presumed, and must be proven with clear and convincing evidence.
Served as The mere imputation of bias or partiality is not sufficient for a judge to inhibit, especially when the
Counsel charge is without basis.

24
 (Umale v. Villaluz, G.R. No. L-33508, 1973; Oktubre v. Velasco, A.M. No. MTJ -02-1444, 2004; Sandoval v. CA, G.R. No. 106657, 1996;
Gochan v. Gochan, G.R. No. 143089, 2003; Soriano v. Angeles, G.R. No. 109920, 2000)

148. When can a judge voluntarily inhibit himself from a case?

A judge may, in the exercise of his sound discretion, disqualify himself from sitting in a case, for just or valid reasons other
than those in the first paragraph of Sec. 1, Rule 137 Disqualification of Judicial Officers. (Sec. 1, par. 2, Rule 137 Rules of
Court)

149. What are the grounds, offenses, and corresponding sanctions imposed to discipline justices and judges?
Serious Charges Less Serious Charges Light Charges

Grounds 1. Bribery, direct or indirect; 1. Undue delay in rendering a 1. Vulgar and

2. Dishonesty and violations of the Anti-Graft decision or order, or in unbecoming
and Corrupt Practices Law (R.A. No. 3019); transmitting the records of a conduct;
3. Gross misconduct constituting violations of case; 2. Gambling in
the Code of Judicial Conduct; 2. Frequently and unjustified public;
4. Knowingly rendering an unjust judgment or absences without leave or 3. Fraternizing
order as determined by a competent court in habitual tardiness; with lawyers
an appropriate proceeding; 3. Unauthorized practice of and litigants
5. Conviction of a crime involving moral law; with pending
turpitude; 4. Violation of Supreme Court case/cases
6. Willful failure to pay a just debt; rules, directives, and in his court;
7. Borrowing money or property from lawyers circulars; and
and litigants in a case pending before the 5. Receiving additional or 4. Undue delay
court; double compensation unless in the
8. Immorality; specifically authorized by submission
9. Gross ignorance of the law or procedure; law; of monthly
10. Partisan political activities; and 6. Untruthful statements in the reports.
11. Alcoholism and/or vicious habits certificate of service; and
7. Simple misconduct

Sanctions 1. Dismissal from the service, forfeiture of all or 1. Suspension from office 1. A fine of not
(Sec. 11) part of the benefits as the Court may without salary and other less than
determine, and disqualification from benefits for not less than one P1,000.00 but
reinstatement or appointment to any public nor more than three months; not exceeding
office, including government-owned or or P10,000.00;
controlled corporations. Forfeiture of benefits 2. A fine of more than and/or
does not include accrued leave credits; P10,000.00 but not exceeding 2. Censure;
2. Suspension from office without salary and P20,000.00 3. Reprimand;
other benefits for more than three but not 4. Admonition
exceeding six months; or with warning
3. A fine of more than P20,000.00 but not
exceeding P40,000.00
(A.M. No. 01-8-10-SC which amended Rule 140 of the Rules of Court, September 11, 2001)

150. Judge AAA was found guilty of Gross Ignorance of the Law and was dismissed from service. In his four motions
for reconsideration, Judge AAA maintained his innocence, and alternatively, posited that the penalty of dismissal
was not commensurate to the offense committed. Judge AAA then filed a Petition for Judicial Clemency, asking
to retire with full benefits and have his disqualification from reemployment lifted. He cited his long service record,
financial debt, and health conditions as reasons. He also mentioned providing free legal advice and assisting a
community with their socio-civic legal services after his dismissal. The petition for Judicial Clemency complied
with the required five-year minimum period before clemency can be considered. Should the petition for judicial
clemency be granted?
No. Although the instant petition was filed after the five (5)-year minimum period, there is a lack of prima facie showing of
petitioner's genuine repentance and remorse for his past infractions. The petitioner only recently admitted remorse and
accepted the verdict of dismissal. His claim of providing “free legal advice” and assisting in socio-civic legal services lacks
specific details and proof. While the determination of whether a prima facie case exists is to be conducted on a case-to-
case basis, it is essential that the allegations contained in the petition are duly supported by proof, else they be regarded
as conveniently self-serving. The Court cannot simply allow clemency cases to proceed without first thoroughly sifting
through the petition and uncovering, at least, ostensible proof of a prima facie case. It is only when such prima facie case
exists that this Court would refer the case to a fact-finding commission, whose role is to receive the evidence and render
a report thereon on the authenticity/probative value of such evidence in support of the petitioner's claims. Once the
commission renders its report containing its factual findings on the case, the Court can then proceed to render its verdict
on the clemency plea. (DOJ vs. Mislang A.M. No. RTJ-14-2369, February 15, 2022; HDMF vs. Mislang, A.M. No. RTJ-14-2372,
February 15, 2022 [Landmark Case Q&As])

151. Does the death of a respondent judge in an administrative case for grave misconduct, which is a form of cessation
from public service, pending its final resolution, cause the dismissal of the proceeding?
No. The death of a respondent in an administrative case before its final resolution is a cause for its dismissal. Otherwise
stated, the non-dismissal of a pending administrative case in view of the death of the respondent public servant is a
transgression of his or her Constitutional rights to due process and presumption of innocence. Simply put, upon the death
of the respondent public servant awaiting final judgment, the dismissal of the administrative case against him/her should
necessarily follow. (Re: Investigation Report on the Alleged Extortion Activities of Presiding Judge Godofredo B. Abul, Jr., A.M. No.
RTJ-17-2486. September 8, 2020, J. Hernando)

25
TABLE 1: PROVISIONAL REMEDIES
Preliminary Attachment
Nature and Issued upon order of the court where an action is pending to
Purpose be levied upon the property or properties of the defendant
therein, the same to be held thereafter by the Sheriff as
security for the satisfaction of whatever judgment might be
secured in said action by the attaching creditor against the
defendant.
Where to Court in which the principal action is pending, or the Court of Appeals, or Supreme Court.
file
When At any stage of the action or proceeding but prior to the judgment or final order.
available
Grounds a. Action for the recovery of a specified amount of money or
damages, other than moral and exemplary, on a cause of
action arising from law, contract, quasi-contract, delict or
quasi-delict against a party who is about to depart from the
Philippines with intent to defraud his creditors;
b. Action for money or property embezzled or fraudulently
misapplied or converted to his own use by a public officer,
or an officer of a corporation, or an attorney, factor, broker,
agent, or clerk, in the course of his employment as such, or
by any other person in a fiduciary capacity, or for a willful
violation of duty;
c. Action to recover the possession of property unjustly or
fraudulently taken, detained or converted, when the
property, or any part thereof, has been concealed, removed,
or disposed of to prevent its being found or taken by the
applicant or an authorized person;
d. Action against a party who has been guilty of a fraud in
contracting the debt or incurring the obligation upon which
the action is brought, or in the performance thereof;
e. Action against a party who has removed or disposed of his
property, or is about to do so, with intent to defraud his
creditors; or
f. Action against a party who does not reside and is not found
in the Philippines, or on whom summons may be served by
publication.
Requisites a. Applicant files an affidavit and must establish that a
sufficient cause of action exists and that the case is one of
those mentioned in section 1 hereof;
b. There is no other sufficient security for the claim sought to
be enforced by the action;
c. The amount due to the applicant, or the value of the
property the possession of which he is entitled to recover,
is as much as the sum for which the order is granted above
all legal counterclaims; and
d. The affidavit and the bond must be duly filed with the court
before the order issues.
Preliminary Injunction
Adjunct to a main suit that is granted at
any stage of an action or proceeding
prior to the judgment or final order,
requiring a party or a court, agency or a
person to refrain from a particular act or
acts; it may also require the
performance of a particular act or acts,
in which case it shall be known as a
preliminary mandatory injunction.
a. That the applicant is entitled to the
relief demanded, and the whole or
part of such relief consists in
restraining the commission or
continuance of the act or acts
complained of, or in requiring the
performance of an act or acts either
for a limited period or perpetually;
b. That the commission, continuance or
non-performance of the act or acts
complained of during the litigation
would probably work injustice to the
applicant; or
c. That a party, court, agency or a
person is doing, threatening, or is
attempting to do, or is procuring or
suffering to be done some act or acts
probably in violation of the rights of
the applicant respecting the subject of
the action or proceeding, and tending
to render the judgment ineffectual.
a. The applicant must have a clear and
unmistakable right to be protected,
that is a right in esse;
b. There is a material and substantial
invasion of such right;
c. There is an urgent need for the writ to
prevent irreparable injury to the
applicant; and,
d. No other ordinary, speedy, and
adequate remedy exists to prevent
the infliction of irreparable injury.
Receivership Replevin
One by which the court appoints a receiver as its An action for the recovery of personal property. When sought as a
representative and in behalf of all parties to an action for provisional relief, it allows a plaintiff to retain the contested property
the purpose of preserving and conserving the property in during the pendency of the action.
litigation to prevent possible dissipation or to carry the .
judgment into effect.
Metropolitan or Municipal Trial Court or Regional Trial Court
At any stage of the action or proceeding and even after At the commencement of the action or at any time before the
final judgment. defendant file his answer.
a. When it appears from the verified application, and When personal property is wrongfully detained by an adverse party
such other proof as the court may require, that the
party applying for the appointment of a receiver has
an interest in the property or fund which is the
subject of the action or proceeding, and that such
property or fund is in danger of being lost, removed,
or materially injured unless a receiver be appointed
to administer and preserve it;
b. When it appears in an action by the mortgagee for
the foreclosure of a mortgage that the property is in
danger of being wasted or dissipated or materially
injured, and that its value is probably insufficient to
discharge the mortgage debt, or that the parties
have so stipulated in the contract of mortgage;
c. After judgment, to preserve the property during the
pendency of an appeal, or to disposeof it according
to the judgment, or to aid execution when the
execution has been returned unsatisfied or the
judgment obligor refuses to apply his property in
satisfaction of the judgment, or otherwise to carry
the judgment into effect;
d. Whenever in other cases it appears that the
appointment of a receiver is the most convenient
and feasible means of preserving, administering, or
disposing of the property in litigation.
a. Party applying for receivership has an existing interest a. The application for the writ must be filed at the commencement of
in the property or funds subject of the action and the the action or at any time before the defendant answers;
property or funds is in danger of being lost, wasted or b. He must show by affidavit that:
dissipated; (a) He is the owner of the property claimed or is entitled to the
b. Verified application filed at any stage of the possession thereof;
proceedings even after final judgment, prior to the (b) The property is wrongfully detained by the adverse party;
satisfaction of judgment; (c) The property has not been distrained or taken for a tax
c. The application must be with notice and hearing; assessment or a fine pursuant to law, or seized under a writ of
d. The application must post a bond executed to the execution or preliminary attachment, or otherwise placed under
party against whom the application is presented; and custodia legis, or if so seized, that it is exempt from such seizure
or custody; and
26
 e. Receivership must be sworn to perform his duties c. The application must give a bond, executed to the adverse party
faithfully and shall file a bond. in double the value of the property as stated in the affidavit.

TABLE 2: RULES 103, 108, AND R.A. 9048

Rule 103 Rule 108 R.A. 9048

Scope Change of full name or surname (substantial corrections) Correction of substantial errors or cancellation of entries in the Civil Registry Change of first name or nickname and correction of clerical errors of entries in
the Civil Registry

Nature 1. Judicial 1. Judicial 1. Administrative

of 2. Hearing is necessary 2. Hearing is necessary 2. No hearing required
Proceedi 3. Adversarial in nature because it involves substantial changes and
ngs affects the status of an individual

Coverag 1. Correction of clerical or typographical errors in any entry in civil 1. Births 1. Correction of clerical or typographical errors in the civil registry, including
e registry documents, except corrections involving the change in sex, 2. Marriages correction of date of birth and sex; and
age, nationality and status of a person; and 3. Deaths 2. Change of first name or nickname in the civil registry
2. Change of a person’s first name or nickname in his or her civil 4. Legal separations
registry 5. Judgments of annulments of marriage
6. Judgments declaring marriages void from the beginning
7. Legitimations
8. Adoptions
9. Acknowledgments of natural children
10. Naturalization
11. Election, loss or recovery of citizenship
12. Civil Interdiction
13. Judicial determination of filiation
14. Change of name

Who A person desiring to change one’s name Any person interested in any act, event, order or decree concerning the civil Any person having direct and personal interested in the correction of a clerical
may file status of persons which has been recorded in the civil register or typographical error in an entry and/or change of first name or nickname

Where to RTC of the province in which petitioner resided for 3 years prior to filing RTC of the city or province where the corresponding civil registry is located a. Local civil registry office of the city or municipality where the record being
file sought to be corrected or changed is kept;
b. Local civil registrar of the place where the interested party is presently
residing or domiciled;
c. Philippine Consulate

Grounds 1. Name is ridiculous, tainted with dishonor and extremely difficult to
write or pronounce
2. Consequence of change of status
3. Necessity to avoid confusion
4. Having continuously used and been known since childhood by a
Filipino name, unaware of her alien parentage
5. A sincere desire to adopt a Filipino name to erase signs of former
alienage, all in good faith and without prejudicing anybody
(Rules 103 and 108, Rules of Court; Republic Act No. 9048)
Upon good and valid grounds 1. Petitioner finds the first name or nickname to be ridiculous, tainted with
dishonor or extremely difficult to write or pronounce;
2. The new first name or nickname has been habitually and continuously
used by the petitioner and he has been publicly known by that first name
or nickname in the community
3. The change will avoid confusion

27
TABLE 3: SPECIAL WRITS
Writ of Habeas Corpus
Definition Literally means “you have the body” in Latin
Coverage 1. All cases of illegal
confinement or detention
by which any person is
deprived of his liberty; and
2. The rightful custody of any
person is withheld from
the person entitled thereto
Requisites
Who may Party for whose relief it is
file intended or by some person
on his behalf
(Rule 102, Rules of Court; A.M. No. 03-04-04-SC; A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC; A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC; A.M. No. 09-6-8-SC
Writ of Habeas Corpus Writ of Amparo Writ of Habeas Data Writ of Kalikasan
in relation to custody
of minors
From the Spanish word “amparer” which means “to Translates to “you have the data”
protect”
1. Petitions for custody of 1. Extrajudicial killings; and 1. Gathering, Environmental damage of such magnitude as to
minors; and 2. Enforced disappearances 2. Collecting, prejudice the life, health, or property of inhabitants
2. Writs of habeas corpus 3. Storing of data or information regarding: in two or more cities or provinces
in relation thereto a. Person,
b. Family,
c. Home, and
d. Correspondence
1. That the petitioner has Extralegal killings - killing committed without due process 1. There is an actual or threatened violation of the
the right of custody of law (i.e. without legal safeguards or judicial constitutional right to a balanced and healthful
over the minor; proceedings) ecology;
2. That the rightful 2. The actual or threatened violation arises from an
custody of the minor is Enforced Disappearances: unlawful act or omission of a public official or
being withheld from the 1. Arrest/detention/ abduction of a person by a employee, or private individual or entity;
petitioner by the government official or organized groups or private 3. The actual or threatened violation involves or will
respondents; and individuals acting with the in/direct acquiescence of the lead to an environmental damage of such
3. That it is to the best State; magnitude as to prejudice the life, health or
interest of the minor 2. Carried out by or with the authorization, support or property of inhabitants in two or more cities or
concerned to be in the acquiescence of the State or a political organization; provinces
custody of petitioner 3. Refusal of the State to disclose the fate or whereabouts
and not that of the of the person concerned, or refusal to acknowledge the
respondents deprivation of liberty, which places such persons
outside the protection of the law; and
4. Intention is to remove the person from the protection of
law for a prolonged period of time.
Any person claiming such Aggrieved party, or any qualified person or entity in the GR: Aggrieved party 1. Natural or juridical person
right following order: 2. Entity authorized by law
1. Any member of the immediate family: spouse, children, XPN: In cases of extralegal killings and enforced 3. People’s organization, non-governmental
parents of the aggrieved; disappearances, the petition may be filed by: Any organization or any public interest group
2. Any ascendant, descendant, or collateral relative of the member of the immediate family of the aggrieved party: accredited by or registered with any government
aggrieved party within the 4th civil degree of spouse, children, and parents agency, on behalf of persons whose
consanguinity or affinity, in default of those mentioned constitutional right to a balanced and healthful
in the preceding paragraph; ecology is violated or threatened with violation.
3. Any concerned citizen, organization, association, or
institution, if there is no known member of the
intermediate family or relative of the aggrieved party.
28
TABLE 4: EXCEPTIONS TO THE HEARSAY RULE
Definition
(1) Dying The declaration of a dying person, made under the consciousness of an impending death, may be
declaration received in any case wherein his death is the subject of inquiry, as evidence of the cause and
surrounding circumstances of such death.
(2) Declaration The declaration made by a person deceased, or unable to testify, against the interest of the declarant,
against interest if the fact is asserted in the declaration was at the time it was made so far contrary to declarant's own
interest, that a reasonable man in his position would not have made the declaration unless he believed
it to be true, may be received in evidence against himself or his successors in interest and against third
persons.
(3) Act or The act or declaration of a person deceased, or unable to testify, in respect to the pedigree of another
declaration about person related to him by birth or marriage, may be received in evidence where it occurred before the
pedigree controversy, and the relationship between the two persons is shown by evidence other than such act
or declaration. The word "pedigree" includes relationship, family genealogy, birth, marriage, death, the
dates when and the places where these facts occurred, and the names of the relatives. It embraces
also facts of family history intimately connected with pedigree.
(4) Family The reputation or tradition existing in a family previous to the controversy, in respect to the pedigree of
reputation or any one of its members, may be received in evidence if the witness testifying thereon be also a member
tradition of the family, either by consanguinity or affinity. Entries in family bibles or other family books or charts,
regarding engravings on rings, family portraits and the like, may be received as evidence of pedigree.
pedigree
(5) Common Common reputation existing previous to the controversy, respecting facts of public or general interest
reputation more than thirty years old, or respecting marriage or moral character, may be given in evidence.
Monuments and inscriptions in public places may be received as evidence of common reputation.
(6) Part of res Statements made by a person while a startling occurrence is taking place or immediately prior or
gestae subsequent thereto with respect to the circumstances thereof, may be given in evidence as part of res
gestae. So, also, statements accompanying an equivocal act material to the issue, and giving it a legal
significance, may be received as part of the res gestae.
(7) Entries in the Entries made at, or near the time of transactions to which they refer, by a person deceased, or unable
ordinary course of to testify, who was in a position to know the facts therein stated, may be received as prima facie
business evidence, if such person made the entries in his professional capacity or in the performance of duty
and in the ordinary or regular course of business or duty.
(8) Entries in Entries in official records made in the performance of his duty by a public officer of the Philippines, or
official records by a person in the performance of a duty specially enjoined by law, are prima facie evidence of the
facts therein stated.
(9) Commercial Evidence of statements of matters of interest to persons engaged in an occupation contained in a list,
lists and the like register, periodical, or other published compilation is admissible as tending to prove the truth of any
relevant matter so stated if that compilation is published for use by persons engaged in that occupation
and is generally used and relied upon by them therein.
(10) Learned A published treatise, periodical or pamphlet on a subject of history, law, science, or art is admissible as
treatises tending to prove the truth of a matter stated therein if the court takes judicial notice, or a witness expert
in the subject testifies, that the writer of the statement in the treatise, periodical or pamphlet is
recognized in his profession or calling as expert in the subject.
(11) Testimony or The testimony or deposition of a witness deceased or unable to testify, given in a former case or
deposition at a proceeding, judicial or administrative, involving the same parties and subject matter, may be given in
former proceeding evidence against the adverse party who had the opportunity to cross-examine him.
Requisites
1. The declaration must concern the cause and surrounding circumstances of the declarant's death;
2. At the time the declaration was made, the declarant must be under the consciousness of an impending death;
3. The declarant is competent as a witness; and
4. The declaration must be offered in a criminal case for homicide, murder, or parricide, in which the declarant is the
victim
1. The declarant must not be available to testify;
2. The declaration must concern a fact cognizable by the declarant; and
3. The circumstances must render it improbable that a motive to falsify existed
1. The declarant is dead or unable to testify;
2. The declarant be related to the person whose pedigree is the subject of inquiry;
3. Such relationship be shown by evidence other than the declaration; and
4. The declaration was made ante litem motam, that is not only before the commencement of the suit involving the
subject matter of the declaration, but before any controversy has arisen thereon
1. There is a controversy in respect to the pedigree of any of the members of a family;
2. The reputation or tradition of the pedigree existed previous to the controversy; and
3. The witness testifying to the reputation or tradition regarding the pedigree of the person must be a member of the
family of said person
1. The principal act, the res gestae, be a startling occurrence;
2. The statements were made before the declarant had the time to contrive or devise a falsehood; and
3. The statements must concern the occurrence in question and its immediate attending circumstances
1. The person who made the entry is dead, outside the country, or unable to testify;
2. The entries were made at or near the time of the transactions to which they refer;
3. The person who made the entry was in a position to know the facts stated in the entries;
4. The entries were made in a professional capacity or in the performance of a duty; and
5. The entries were made in the ordinary or regular course of business or duty
1. The entry was made by a public officer or by another person specially enjoined by law to do so;
2. It was made by the public officer in the performance of his duties, or by such other person in the performance of a
duty specially enjoined by law; and
3. The public officer or other person had sufficient knowledge of the facts by him stated, which must have been
acquired by him personally or through official information
1. It is a statement of matters of interest to persons engaged in an occupation;
2. Such statement is contained in a list, register, periodical or other published compilation;
3. Said compilation is published for the use of persons engaged in that occupation, and
4. It is generally used and relied upon by persons in the same occupation
1. The court takes judicial notice, or
2. A witness expert in the subject testifies, that the writer of the statement in the treatise, periodical or pamphlet is
recognized in his profession or calling as expert in the subject
1. The witness is dead or unable to testify;
2. His testimony or deposition was given in a former case or proceeding, judicial or administrative, between the same
parties or those representing the same interests;
3. The former case involved the same subject as that in the present case, although on different causes of action;
4. The issue testified to by the witness in the former trial is the same issue involved in the present case; and
5. The adverse party had an opportunity to cross-examine the witness in the former case
29
III. PRACTICAL EXERCISES

30
31
32
SOAH HIGH, HERON!

33