Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
G.R. No. 181571. December 16, 2009 h. Where the proceedings were ex parte or in which the
petitioner had no opportunity to object; and
The factual findings of the RTC, its calibration of the i. Where the issue raised is one purely of law or where
testimonies of the witnesses, and its assessment of their public interest is involved.
probative weight are given high respect, if not conclusive
effect, unless cogent facts and circumstances of substance,
which if considered, would alter the outcome of the case, G.R. No. 182380 [2009]
were ignored, misconstrued or misinterpreted.
The distinctions between a question of law and a question
To accord with the established doctrine of finality and of fact are well known. There is a question of law when the
bindingness of the trial court's findings of fact, we do not doubt or difference arises as to what the law is on a certain
disturb such findings of fact of the RTC, particularly after state of facts. Such a question does not involve an
their affirmance by the CA, for Batistis, as appellant, did not examination of the probative value of the evidence
sufficiently prove any extraordinary circumstance justifying presented by the litigants or any of them. But there is a
a departure from such doctrine. question of fact when the doubt arises as to the truth or
falsehood of the alleged facts or when the query
necessarily invites calibration of the whole evidence,
G.R. No. 182380. August 28, 2009 considering mainly the credibility of witnesses, existence
and relevancy of specific surrounding circumstances, their
The indispensable elements of a petition for certiorari are: relation to one another and to the whole, and the
(a) that it is directed against a tribunal, board or officer probabilities of the situation.
exercising judicial or quasi -judicial functions;
(b) that such tribunal, board or officer has acted without or
in excess of jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion; G.R. No. 183366. August 19, 2009
and
(c) that there is no appeal or any plain, speedy and A case is not deemed duly registered and docketed until full
adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law. payment of the filing fee.
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
The petitioner cannot now insist that the RTC did not settle
Respondent Judge's excuse, that he had lost jurisdiction the question of the respondents' qualifications to own land
over the case by virtue of the defendant's appeal, was due to non-citizenship. It is fundamental that the judgment
unacceptable in light of the clear and explicit text of the or final order is, with respect to the matter directly
aforequoted rule. To begin with, the perfection of the adjudged or as to any other matter that could have been
appeal by the defendant did not forbid the favorable action raised in relation thereto, conclusive between the parties
on the plaintiff's motion for immediate execution. The and their successors in interest by title subsequent to the
execution of the decision could not be stayed by the mere commencement of the action or special proceeding,
taking of the appeal. Only the filing of the sufficient litigating for the same thing and under the same title and in
supersedeas bond and the deposit with the appellate court the same capacity.
of the amount of rent due from time to time, coupled with
the perfection of the appeal, could stay the execution.
G.R. No. 153142. March 29, 2010
G.R. No. 153142. March 29, 2010 For res judicata to bar the institution of a subsequent
action, the following requisites must concur: (a) the former
The petitioner did not raise any issue against Ramona's judgment must be final; (b) it must have been rendered by
qualifications to own land in the Philippines during the trial a court having jurisdiction of the subject matter and the
or, at the latest, before the finality of the RTC judgment. parties; (c) it must be a judgment on the merits; and (d)
The petitioner was thereby deemed to have waived the there must be between the first and second actions identity
objection, pursuant to Section 1, Rule 9 of the Rules of of parties, identity of the subject matter, and identity of
Court, to wit: cause of action.
Section 1. Defenses and objections not pleaded. The purpose of the doctrine is two-fold to prevent
unnecessary proceedings involving expenses to the parties
Defenses and objections not pleaded either in a motion to and wastage of the court's time which could be used by
dismiss or in the answer are deemed waived. However, others, and to avoid stale litigations as well as to enable the
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
defendant to know the extent of the claims being made issues actually and directly resolved in a former suit cannot
arising out of the same single incident. again be raised in any future case between the same
parties involving a different cause of action and has the
Under the doctrine of res judicata, therefore, a final effect of preclusion of issues only.
judgment or decree on the merits rendered by a court of
competent jurisdiction is conclusive of the rights of the Based on the foregoing standards, this action is not barred
parties or their privies in all later suits and on all points and by the doctrine of res judicata.
matters determined in the previous suit. The foundation
principle upon which the doctrine rests is that the parties First of all, bar by prior judgment, the first aspect of the
ought not to be permitted to litigate the same issue more doctrine, is not applicable, because the causes of action in
than once; that when a right or fact has been judicially tried the civil and the criminal actions were different and distinct
and determined by a court of competent jurisdiction, so from each other. The civil action is for the recovery of
long as it remains unreversed, should be conclusive upon ownership of the land led by the petitioners, while the
the parties and those in privity with them in law or estate. criminal action was to determine whether the act of the
respondents of taking the coconut fruits from the trees
growing within the disputed land constituted the crime of
G.R. No. 153142. March 29, 2010 qualified theft. In the former, the main issue is the legal
ownership of the land, but in the latter, the legal ownership
of the land was not the main issue. The issue of guilt or
RULE 39 EXECUTION, SATISFACTION AND EFFECT OF innocence was not dependent on the ownership of the
JUDGMENTS land, inasmuch as a person could be guilty of theft of the
growing fruits even if he were the owner of the land.
Sec. 10. Execution of judgments for specific act. Conclusiveness of judgment is not also applicable. The
petitioners themselves commenced both actions, and fully
(a) Conveyance, delivery of deeds, or other specific acts; and directly participated in the trial of both actions. Any
vesting title. - If a judgment directs a party who execute a estoppel from assailing the authority of the CA to
conveyance of land or personal property, or to deliver determine the ownership of the land based on the evidence
deeds or other documents, or to perform any other specific presented in the civil action applied only to the petitioners,
act in connection therewith, and the party fails to comply who should not be allowed to assail the outcome of the civil
within the time specified, the court may direct the act to be action after the CA had ruled adversely against them.
done at the cost of the disobedient party by some other
person appointed by the court and the act when so done Moreover, the doctrine of conclusiveness of judgment is
shall have like effect as if done by the party. If real or subject to exceptions, such as where there is a change in
personal property is situated within the Philippines, the the applicable legal context, or to avoid inequitable
court in lieu of directing a conveyance thereof may be an administration of justice. Applying the doctrine of
order divest the title of any party and vest it in others, conclusiveness of judgments to this case will surely be
which shall have the force and effect of a conveyance iniquitous to the respondents who have rightly relied on
executed in due form of law. the civil case, not on the criminal case, to settle the issue of
ownership of the land. This action for recovery of
ownership was brought precisely to settle the issue of
G.R. No. 153736. August 4, 2010 ownership of the property. In contrast, the pronouncement
on ownership of the land made in the criminal case was
For res judicata to bar the institution of a subsequent only the response to the respondents having raised the
action, the following requisites must concur: ownership as a matter of defense.
(1) the former judgment must be final;
(2) it must have been rendered by a court having
jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties; G.R. No. 154094. March 9, 2010
(3) it must be a judgment on the merits; and
(4) there must be between the first and second actions (a) The remedy of an aggrieved party from a resolution issued
identity of parties, (b) identity of the subject matter, and (c) by the CSC is to file a petition for review thereof under Rule
identity of cause of action. 43 of the Rules of Court within fifteen days from notice of
the resolution.
G.R. No. 153736. August 4, 2010 Recourse to a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 renders
the petition dismissible for being the wrong remedy.
The doctrine of res judicata has two aspects: the first, Nonetheless, there are exceptions to this rule, to wit: (a)
known as bar by prior judgment, or estoppel by verdict, is when public welfare and the advancement of public policy
the effect of a judgment as a bar to the prosecution of a dictates; (b) when the broader interest of justice so
second action upon the same claim, demand, or cause of requires; (c) (c) when the writs issued are null and void
action; the second, known as conclusiveness of judgment, when the writs issued are null and void; or (d) when the
also known as the rule of auter action pendant, ordains that questioned order amounts to an oppressive exercise of
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
judicial authority. As will be shown forthwith, exception (c) the possibility that the real property may be co-owned with
applies to the present case. persons not named in the certificate, or that it may be held
in trust for another person by the registered owner.
G.R. No. 154270. March 9, 2010 G.R. No. 156797. July 6, 2010
The Court cannot anymore review the evaluation and Forum shopping is the act of a party litigant against whom
appreciation of the evidence, because the Court is not a an adverse judgment has been rendered in one forum
trier of facts. Although this rule admits of certain seeking and possibly getting a favorable opinion in another
exceptions, viz.: forum, other than by appeal or the special civil action of
(1) when the conclusion is a finding grounded entirely on certiorari, or the institution of two or more actions or
speculation, surmises, or conjecture; proceedings grounded on the same cause or supposition
(2) when the inference made is manifestly mistaken; that one or the other court would make a favorable
(3) where there is a grave abuse of discretion; disposition. Forum shopping happens when, in the two or
(4) when the judgment is based on a misapprehension of more pending cases, there is identity of parties, identity of
facts; rights or causes of action, and identity of reliefs sought.
(5) when the findings of fact are conflicting; Where the elements of litis pendentia are present, and
(6) when the Court of Appeals, in making its findings, went where a final judgment in one case will amount to res
beyond the issues of the case, and the findings are contrary judicata in the other, there is forum shopping.
to the admissions of both appellant and appellee;
(7) when the findings of the Court of Appeals are contrary For forum shopping to exist, both actions must involve the
to those of the trial court; same transaction, same essential facts and circumstances
(8) when the findings of fact are conclusions without and must raise identical causes of action, subject matter
specific evidence on which they are based; and issues. Clearly, it does not exist where different orders
(9) when the facts set forth in the petition as well in the were questioned, two distinct causes of action and issues
petitioners' main and reply briefs are not disputed by the were raised, and two objectives were sought.
respondents; and,
(10) when the findings of fact of the Court of Appeals are Lim was not guilty of forum shopping, because the factual
premised on the supposed absence of evidence and are bases of his application for the administrative
contradicted by the evidence on record, it does not appear reconstitution of the TCTs and of his petition for their
now that any of the exceptions is present herein. We thus judicial reconstitution, and the reliefs thereby sought were
apply the rule without hesitation, and reject the appeal for not identical.
that reason.
In civil cases, the party having the burden of proof must The submission of a false certification of non-forum
establish his case by a preponderance of evidence. shopping did not automatically warrant the dismissal of the
Preponderance of evidence is the weight, credit, and value proceeding, even if it might have constituted contempt of
of the aggregate evidence on either side, and is usually court, for Section 5, Rule 7, of the 1997 Rules of Civil
considered to be synonymous with the term greater weight Procedure, has been clear and forthright, to wit:
of the evidence or greater weight of the credible evidence.
Preponderance of evidence is a phrase that means, in the RULE 7 PARTS OF A PLEADING
last analysis, probability of the truth. It is evidence that is
more convincing to the court as worthy of belief than that Sec. 5. Certification against forum shopping. The plaintiff or
which is offered in opposition thereto. principal party shall certify under oath in the complaint or
other initiatory pleading asserting a claim for relief, or in a
Lim successfully discharged his burden of proof as the sworn certification annexed thereto and simultaneously
plaintiff. He established by preponderant evidence that he filed therewith: (a) that he has not theretofore commenced
had a superior right and title to the property. In contrast, any action or filed any claim involving the same issues in
the petitioners did not present any proof of their better any court, tribunal or quasi-judicial agency and, to the best
title other than their copy of the reconstituted certificate of of his knowledge, no such other action or claim is pending
title. Such proof was not enough, because the registration therein; (b) if there is such other pending action or claim, a
of a piece of land under the Torrens system did not create complete statement of the present status thereof; and (c) if
or vest title, such registration not being a mode of acquiring he should thereafter learn that the same or similar action
ownership. The petitioners need to be reminded that a or claim has been filed or is pending, he shall report that
certificate of title is merely an evidence of ownership or fact within five (5) days therefrom to the court wherein his
title over the particular property described therein. Its aforesaid complaint or initiatory pleading has been filed.
issuance in favor of a particular person does not foreclose
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
Failure to comply with the foregoing requirements shall not by statute. Indeed, a right, to be protected by injunction,
be curable by mere amendment of the complaint or other means a right clearly founded on or granted by law or is
initiatory pleading but shall be cause for the dismissal of the enforceable as a matter of law.
case without prejudice, unless otherwise provided, upon
motion and after hearing. The submission of a false
certification or non-compliance with any of the G.R. No. 157315. December 1, 2010
undertakings therein shall constitute indirect contempt of
court, without prejudice to the corresponding Rule 58 of the Rules of Court clearly lays the burden on the
administrative and criminal actions. If the acts of the party shoulders of the petitioners, as the parties against whom
or his counsel clearly constitute willful and deliberate forum the TRO was issued, to show cause why the application for
shopping, the same shall be ground for summary dismissal the writ of preliminary injunction should not issue, thus:
with prejudice and shall constitute direct contempt, as well
as a cause for administrative sanctions. Sec. 5. Preliminary injunction not granted without notice;
exception. No preliminary injunction shall be granted
without hearing and prior notice to the party or person
G.R. No. 156797. July 6, 2010 sought to be enjoined. If it shall appear from facts shown by
affidavits or by the verified application that great or
For litis pendentia to be a ground for the dismissal of an irreparable injury would result to the applicant before the
action, there must be: (a) identity of the parties or at least matter can be heard on notice, the court to which the
such as to represent the same interest in both actions; (b) application for preliminary injunction was made, may issue
identity of rights asserted and relief prayed for, the relief ex parte a temporary restraining order to be effective only
being founded on the same acts; and (c) the identity in the for a period of twenty (20) days from service on the party
two cases should be such that the judgment which may be or person sought to be enjoined, except as herein provided.
rendered in one would, regardless of which party is Within the said twenty-day period, the court must order
successful, amount to res judicata in the other. said party or person to show cause, at a specified time and
place, why the injunction should not be granted, determine
within the same period whether or not the preliminary
G.R. No. 157315. December 1, 2010 injunction shall be granted, and accordingly issue the
corresponding order.
A preliminary injunction is an order granted at any stage of
an action or proceeding prior to the judgment or final order
requiring a party or a court, an agency, or a person to G.R. No. 157479. November 24, 2010
refrain from a particular a particular act or acts. It may also
require the performance of a particular act or acts, in which Section 1, Rule 2, of the Rules of Court requires that every
case it is known as a preliminary mandatory injunction. ordinary civil action must be based on a cause of action.
Thus, a prohibitory injunction is one that commands a party
to refrain from doing a particular act, while a mandatory A cause of action is the act or omission by which a party
injunction commands the performance of some positive act violates a right of another. The essential elements of a
to correct a wrong in the past. cause of action are: (a) the existence of a legal right in favor
of the plaintiff; (b) a correlative legal duty of the defendant
As with all equitable remedies, injunction must be issued to respect such right; and (c) an act or omission by such
only at the instance of a party who possesses sufficient defendant in violation of the right of the plaintiff with a
interest in or title to the right or the property sought to be resulting injury or damage to the plaintiff for which the
protected. It is proper only when the applicant appears to latter may maintain an action for the recovery of relief from
be entitled to the relief demanded in the complaint, which the defendant. Although the first two elements may exist, a
must aver the existence of the right and the violation of the cause of action arises only upon the occurrence of the last
right, or whose averments must in the minimum constitute element, giving the plaintiff the right to maintain an action
a prima facie showing of a right to the final relief sought. in court for recovery of damages or other appropriate
relief.
Accordingly, the conditions for the issuance of the
injunctive writ are:
(a) that the right to be protected exists prima facie; G.R. No. 157479. November 24, 2010
(b) that the act sought to be enjoined is violative of that
right; and Subject to certain qualification, and except as otherwise
(c) that there is an urgent and paramount necessity for the provided by law, an action commenced before the cause of
writ to prevent serious damage. action has accrued is prematurely brought and should be
dismissed. The fact that the cause of action accrues after
An injunction will not issue to protect a right not in esse, or the action is commenced and while the case is pending is of
a right which is merely contingent and may never arise; or no moment. It is a rule of law to which there is, perhaps no
to restrain an act which does not give rise to a cause of exception, either in law or in equity, that to recover at all
action; or to prevent the perpetration of an act prohibited there must be some cause of action at the commencement
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
of the suit. There are reasons of public policy why there year from the date of the registration of the certificate of
should be no needless haste in bringing up litigation, and sale.
why people who are in no default and against whom there
is as yet no cause of action should not be summoned
before the public tribunals to answer complaints which are G.R. No. 157659. January 25, 2010
groundless. An action prematurely brought is a groundless
suit. Unless the plaintiff has a valid and subsisting cause of The court can neither halt nor hesitate to issue the writ of
action at the time his action is commenced, the defect possession. It cannot exercise any discretion to determine
cannot be cured or remedied by the acquisition or accrual whether or not to issue the writ, for the issuance of the writ
of one while the action is pending, and a supplemental to the purchaser in an extrajudicial foreclosure sale
complaint or an amendment setting up such after-accrued becomes a ministerial function. Verily, a marked distinction
cause of action is not permissible. exists between a discretionary act and a ministerial one. A
purely ministerial act or duty is one that an officer or
tribunal performs in a given state of facts, in a prescribed
G.R. No. 157659. January 25, 2010 manner, in obedience to the mandate of a legal authority,
without regard to or the exercise of his own judgment upon
A writ of possession, which commands the sheriff to place a the propriety or impropriety of the act done. If the law
person in possession of real property, may be issued in: (1) imposes a duty upon a public officer and gives him the right
land registration proceedings under Section 17 of Act No. to decide how or when the duty shall be performed, such
496; (2) judicial foreclosure, provided the debtor is in duty is discretionary, not ministerial. The duty is ministerial
possession of the mortgaged property, and no third person, only when its discharge requires neither the exercise of
not a party to the foreclosure suit, had intervened; (3) official discretion nor the exercise of judgment.
extrajudicial foreclosure of a real estate mortgage, pending
redemption under Section 7 of Act No. 3135, as amended
by Act No. 4118; and (4) execution sales, pursuant to the G.R. No. 157659. January 25, 2010
last paragraph of Section 33, Rule 39 of the Rules of Court.
First of all, Section 4, Rule 71, 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure,
Anent the redemption of property sold in an extrajudicial provides as follows:
foreclosure sale made pursuant to the special power
referred to in Section 1 of Act No. 3135, as amended, the Sec. 4. How proceedings commenced. Proceedings for
debtor, his successor-in-interest, or any judicial creditor or indirect contempt may be initiated motu proprio by the
judgment creditor of said debtor, or any person having a court against which the contempt was committed by an
lien on the property subsequent to the mortgage or deed of order or any other formal charge requiring the respondent
trust under which the property is sold has the right to to show cause why he should not be punished for
redeem the property at any time within the term of one contempt.
year from and after the date of the sale, such redemption
to be governed by the provisions of Section 464 to Section In all other cases, charges for indirect contempt shall be
466 of the Code of Civil Procedure, to the extent that said commenced by a verified petition with supporting
provisions were not inconsistent with the provisions of Act particulars and certified true copies of documents or papers
3135. In this regard, we clarify that the redemption period involved therein, and upon full compliance with the
envisioned under Act 3135 is reckoned from the date of the requirements for filing initiatory pleadings for civil actions
registration of the sale, not from and after the date of the in the court concerned. If the contempt charges arose out
sale, as the text of Act 3135 shows. of or are related to a principal action pending in the court,
the petition for contempt shall allege that fact but said
petition shall be docketed, heard and decided separately,
G.R. No. 157659. January 25, 2010 unless the court in its discretion orders the consolidation of
the contempt charge and the principal action for joint
Desiring to avoid any confusion arising from the conflict hearing and decision.
between the texts of the Rules of Court (1940 and 1964)
and Act No. 3135, on one hand, and the jurisprudence Indeed, a person may be charged with indirect contempt
clarifying the reckoning of the redemption period in judicial only by either of two alternative ways, namely: (1) by a
sales of real property, on the other hand, the Court has verified petition, if initiated by a party; or (2) by an order or
incorporated in Section 28 of Rule 39 of the current Rules any other formal charge requiring the respondent to show
of Court the foregoing judicial construction of reckoning the cause why he should not be punished for contempt, if
redemption period from the date of the registration of the made by a court against which the contempt is committed.
certificate of sale, to wit: In short, a charge of indirect contempt must be initiated
through a verified petition, unless the charge is directly
Sec. 28. Time and manner of, and amounts payable on, made by the court against which the contemptuous act is
successive redemptions; notice to be given and filed. The committed.
judgment obligor, or redemptioner, may redeem the
property from the purchaser, at any time within one (1)
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
G.R. No. 158708. August 10, 2010 be allowed. Upon proper motion and the payment of the
full amount of the docket fee before the expiration of the
Indeed, Section 6, Rule 43 of the Rules of Court expressly reglementary period, the Court of Appeals may grant an
lists down the pleadings and other matters that a petition additional period of fifteen (15) days only within which to
for review should contain, thus: file the petition for review. No further extension shall be
granted except for the most compelling reason and in no
Sec. 6. Contents of the petition. The petition for review case to exceed fifteen (15) days.
shall (a) state the full names of the parties to the case,
without impleading the court or agencies either as
petitioners or respondents; (b) contain a concise statement RULE 52 MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
of the facts and issues involved and the grounds relied
upon for the review; (c) be accompanied by a clearly legible Sec. 2. Second motion for reconsideration. No second
duplicate original or a certified true copy of the award, motion for reconsideration of a judgment or final resolution
judgment, final order or resolution appealed from, together by the same party shall be entertained.
with certified true copies of such material portions of the
record referred to therein and other supporting papers; Nonetheless, we point out that even in her prohibited
and (d) contain a sworn certification against forum second motion for reconsideration, the petitioner did not
shopping as provided in the last paragraph of section 2, tender any explanation for her failure to make good her
Rule 42. The petition shall state the specific material dates undertaking to furnish to the CA the required certified or
showing that it was filed within the period fixed herein. legible copies of the material portions of the record.
Instead, she contented herself with merely reiterating the
The rule clearly requires the petition for review to be grounds previously used in her first motion for
accompanied by "a clearly legible duplicate original or a reconsideration, adding only that any further documents
certified true copy of the award, judgment, final order or needed by the CA could be made available once the records
resolution appealed from, together with certified true of the case were transmitted by the CSC to the CA, as
copies of such material portions of the record referred to provided in Section 11, Rule 43 of the Rules of Court.
therein and other supporting papers." The requirement is Contrary to the petitioner's position, the transmittal of the
intended to immediately enable the CA to determine records was not mandatory but only discretionary upon the
whether to give due course to the appeal or not by having CA.
all the material necessary to make such determination
before it. This is because an appeal under Rule 43 is a Evidently, the petitioner repeatedly disregarded the rules
discretionary mode of appeal, which the CA may either too many times to merit any tolerance by the Court,
dismiss if it finds the petition to be patently without merit, thereby exhibiting a deplorable tendency to trivialize the
or prosecuted manifestly for delay, or that the questions rules of procedure. Yet, such rules were not to be belittled
raised therein are too unsubstantial to require or dismissed simply because their non-observance might
consideration; or may process by requiring the respondent have resulted in prejudicing a party's substantive rights.
to le a comment on the petition, not a motion to dismiss,
within 10 days from notice. The bare invocation of substantial justice was not a magic
wand that would compel the suspension of the rules of
procedure. Of necessity, the reviewing court had also to
G.R. No. 158708. August 10, 2010 assess whether the appeal was substantially meritorious on
its face, or not, for only after such finding could the review
The petitioner next filed a second motion for court ease the often stringent rules of procedure.
reconsideration after the issuance of the resolution dated Otherwise, the rules of procedure would be reduced to
January 8, 2003. The CA regarded her doing so as a blatant mere trifles.
contravention of the Rules of Court. Indeed, her act directly
violated Section 4, Rule 43, and Section 2, Rule 52, both of
the Rules of Court, viz. : G.R. No. 173822. October 13, 2010
RULE 43 APPEALS FROM THE COURT OF TAX APPEALS AND It is a basic rule of appellate adjudication in this jurisdiction
QUASI-JUDICIAL AGENCIES TO THE COURT OF APPEALS that the trial judge's evaluation of the credibility of a
witness and of the witness' testimony is accorded the
Sec. 4. Period of appeal. highest respect because the trial judge's unique
opportunity to observe directly the demeanor of the
The appeal shall be taken within fifteen (15) days from witness enables him to determine whether the witness is
notice of the award, judgment, final order or resolution, or telling the truth or not. Such evaluation, when afrmed by
from the date of its last publication, if publication is the CA, is binding on the Court unless facts or
required by law for its effectivity, or of the denial of circumstances of weight have been overlooked,
petitio e s otio fo e t ial o e o side atio dul misapprehended, or misinterpreted that, if considered,
filed in accordance with the governing law of the court or would materially affect the disposition of the case. We thus
agency a quo. Only one (1) motion for reconsideration shall apply the rule, considering that the petitioners have not
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
called attention to and proved any overlooked, The petitioner shall also submit together with the petition a
misapprehended, or misinterpreted circumstance. certification under oath that he has not theretofore
Fortifying the application of the rule is that Mirandilla's commenced any other action involving the same issues in
positive declarations on the identities of the assailants the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals or different
prevailed over the petitioners' denials and alibi. divisions thereof, or any other tribunal or agency; if there is
such other action or proceeding, he must state the status of
the same; and if he should thereafter learn that a similar
G.R. No. 179709. July 6, 2010 action or proceeding has been filed or is pending before the
Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or different divisions
It is fundamental that the determination by the trial court thereof, or any other tribunal or agency, he undertakes to
of the credibility of witnesses, when affirmed by the promptly inform the aforesaid courts and other tribunal or
appellate court, is accorded full weight and credit as well as agency thereof within five (5) days therefrom.
great respect, if not conclusive effect. Such determination
made by the trial court proceeds from its first-hand Only petitioner Tomas V. Alonso has executed and signed
opportunity to observe the demeanor of the witnesses, the sworn certification against forum shopping attached to
their conduct and attitude under grilling examination, the petition. Although neither of his co-petitioners
thereby placing the trial court in the unique position to Mercedes V. Alonso and Asuncion V. Alonso has joined
assess the witnesses' credibility and to appreciate their the certification, Tomas did not present any written express
truthfulness, honesty and candor. authorization in his favor authorizing him to sign the
certification in their behalf. The signing of the certification
by only one of the petitioners could not be presumed to
G.R. No. 179709. July 6, 2010 reflect the personal knowledge by his co-petitioners of the
ling or non-filing of any similar action or claim. Hence, the
Alibi is an inherently weak and unreliable defense, because failure of Mercedes and Asuncion to sign and execute the
it is easy to fabricate and difficult to disprove. To establish certification along with Tomas warranted the dismissal of
alibi, the accused must prove: (a) that he was actually in their petition.
another place at the time of the perpetration of the crime;
and (b) that it was physically impossible for him to be at the
scene of the crime when the crime was perpetrated. G.R. No. 188471. April 20, 2010
Physical impossibility refers to the distance between the
place where the accused was when the crime transpired Every action must be prosecuted or defended in the name
and the place where the crime was committed, as well as to of the real party in interest, unless otherwise authorized by
the facility of access between the two places. law or the rules. A real party in interest is one who stands
to be benefited or injured by the judgment in the suit, or
the party entitled to the avails of the suit. "Interest" within
G.R. No. 187231. June 22, 2010 the meaning of the rule means material interest, an interest
in issue and to be affected by the decree, as distinguished
The Rules of Court does not dene jurisdictional boundaries from mere interest in the question involved, or a mere
of the courts. In promulgating the Rules of Court, the incidental interest. The rule refers to a real or present
Supreme Court is circumscribed by the zone properly substantial interest, as distinguished from a mere
denominated as the promulgation of rules concerning expectancy; or from a future, contingent, subordinate, or
pleading, practice, and procedure in all courts; consequential interest. One having no right or interest to
consequently, the Rules of Court can only determine the protect cannot invoke the jurisdiction of the court as a
means, ways or manner in which said jurisdiction, as fixed party-plaintiff in an action.
by the Constitution and acts of Congress, shall be exercised.
The Rues of Court yields to the substantive law in Thus, an appeal, like this one, is an action to be prosecuted
determining jurisdiction. by a party in interest before a higher court. In order for the
appeal to prosper, the litigant must of necessity continue to
hold a real or present substantial interest that entitles him
G.R. No. 188471. April 20, 2010 to the avails of the suit on appeal. If he does not, the
appeal, as to him, is an exercise in futility. So it is with the
Section 4, Rule 45 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure petitioners.
requires that the petition for review should contain, among
others, the sworn certification on the undertakings In contrast, the Government, being the legal owner of Lot
provided in the last paragraph of Section 2, Rule 42 of the No. 727-D-2, is the only party adversely affected by the
1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, viz.: denial, and is the proper party entitled to assail the denial.
However, its manifest desistance from the execution of the
Sec. 2. Form and contents. decision effectively barred any challenge against the denial,
for its non-appeal rendered the denial final and immutable.
xxx xxx xxx
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
Lokin has correctly brought this special civil action for A formal or trial-type hearing is not at all times and in all
certiorari against the COMELEC to seek the review of the instances essential. The requirements are satisfied where
September 14, 2007 resolution of the COMELEC in the parties are afforded fair and reasonable opportunity to
accordance with Section 7 of Article IX-A of the 1987 explain their side of the controversy at hand. What is
Constitution, notwithstanding the oath and assumption of frowned upon is absolute lack of notice and hearing.
office by Cruz-Gonzales. The constitutional mandate is now
implemented by Rule 64 of the 1997 Rules of Civil
Procedure, which provides for the review of the judgments, G.R. No. 165025
final orders or resolutions of the COMELEC and the The filing of the complaint or other initiatory pleading and
Commission on Audit. As Rule 64 states, the mode of the payment of the prescribed docket fee are the acts that
review is by a petition for certiorari in accordance with Rule vest a trial court with jurisdiction over the claim. In an
65 to be led in the Supreme Court within a limited period of action where the reliefs sought are purely for sums of
30 days. Undoubtedly, the Court has original and exclusive money and damages, the docket fees are assessed on the
jurisdiction over Lokin's petitions for certiorari and for basis of the aggregate amount being claimed. Ideally,
mandamus against the COMELEC. therefore, the complaint or similar pleading must specify
the sums of money to be recovered and the damages being
sought in order that the clerk of court may be put in a
G.R. Nos. 179431-32. June 22, 2010 position to compute the correct amount of docket fees.
What is truly important to consider in determining whether If the amount of docket fees paid is insufficient in relation
forum shopping exists or not is the vexation caused to the to the amounts being sought, the clerk of court or his duly
courts and the litigants by a party who accesses different authorized deputy has the responsibility of making a
courts and administrative agencies to rule on the same or deficiency assessment, and the plaintiff will be required to
related causes or to grant the same or substantially the pay the deficiency. The non-specification of the amounts of
same reliefs, in the process creating the possibility of damages does not immediately divest the trial court of its
conflicting decisions being rendered by the different fora jurisdiction over the case, provided there is no bad faith or
upon the same issue. intent to defraud the Government on the part of the
plaintiff.
G.R. Nos. 187958, 187961, and 187962. April 7, 2010 The prevailing rule is that if the correct amount of docket
fees is not paid at the time of filing, the trial court still
The Court enunciated the cardinal rules for procedural due acquires jurisdiction upon full payment of the fees within a
process in administrative or quasi-judicial tribunal, to wit: reasonable time as the court may grant, barring
prescription. The "prescriptive period" that bars the
1. The right to notice, be it actual or constructive, of the payment of the docket fees refers to the period in which a
institution of the proceedings that may affect a person's specific action must be filed, so that in every case the
legal right; docket fees must be paid before the lapse of the
prescriptive period, as provided in the applicable laws,
2. The right to a reasonable opportunity to appear and particularly Chapter 3, Title V, Book III, of the Civil Code, the
defend his rights and to introduce witnesses and relevant principal law on prescription of actions.
evidence in his favor;
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
If two or more suits are instituted on the basis of the same A.M. OCA IPI No. 04-1606-MTJ
cause of action, the filing of one or a judgment upon the
merits in any one is available as a ground for the dismissal A case is considered submitted for decision upon the
of the others. admission of the evidence of the parties at the termination
of the trial. The ninety (90) day period for deciding the case
shall commence to run from submission of the case for
A.M. No. RTJ-04-1845 decision without memoranda; in case the court requires or
allows its filing, the case shall be considered submitted for
It is axiomatic that bail cannot be allowed to a person decision upon the filing of the last memorandum or upon
charged with a capital offense, or an offense punishable the expiration of the period to do so, whichever is earlier.
with reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, without a Lack of transcript of stenographic notes shall not be a valid
hearing upon notice to the Prosecution. Any judge who so reason to interrupt or suspend the period for deciding the
allows bail is guilty of gross ignorance of the law and the case unless the case was previously heard by another judge
rules, and is subject to appropriate administrative not the deciding judge in which case the latter shall have
sanctions. the full period of ninety (90) days for the completion of the
transcripts within which to decide the same.
The fact that the public prosecutor recommended bail for
Ancheta did not warrant dispensing with the hearing. The
public prosecutor's recommendation of bail was not A.M. OCA IPI No. 11-184-CA-J
material in deciding whether to conduct the mandatory
hearing or not. For one, the public prosecutor's
recommendation, albeit persuasive, did not necessarily Section 14, Article VIII of the Constitution, which provides
bind the trial judge, in whom alone the discretion to as follows:
determine whether to grant bail or not was vested.
Whatever the public prosecutor recommended, including Section 14. No decision shall be rendered by any court
the amount of bail, was non-binding. Nor did such without expressing therein clearly and distinctly the facts
recommendation constitute a showing that the evidence of and the law on which it is based.
guilt was not strong. If it was otherwise, the trial judge
could become unavoidably controlled by the Prosecution. No petition for review or motion for reconsideration of a
decision of the court shall be refused due course or denied
without starting the legal basis therefor.
G.R. No. 155227-28
The essential purpose of the constitutional provision is to
The settled rule is that defenses not pleaded in the answer require that a judicial decision be clear on why a party has
may not be raised for the first time on appeal. A party prevailed under the law as applied to the facts as proved;
cannot, on appeal, change fundamentally the nature of the
issue in the case. When a party deliberately adopts a
certain theory and the case is decided upon that theory in A.M. OCA IPI No. 11-184-CA-J
the court below, he will not be permitted to change the
same on appeal, because to permit him to do so would be
unfair to the adverse party. It is well settled that in administrative proceedings, the
complainant has the burden of proving, by substantial
evidence, the allegations in his complaint. Section 27 of the
A.M. No. RTJ-09-2182 (Formerly A.M. No. 08-3007-RTJ) Ombudsman Act is unequivocal. Findings of fact by the
Office of the Ombudsman, when supported by substantial
We have always regarded as a fundamental precept that an evidence, are conclusive. Conversely, when the findings of
administrative complaint against a judge is inappropriate as fact by the Ombudsman are not adequately supported by
a remedy for the correction of an act or omission substantial evidence, they shall not be binding upon the
complained of where the remedy of appeal or certiorari is a courts.
recourse available to an aggrieved party. Two reasons
underlie this fundamental precept, namely: (a) to hold
otherwise is to render judicial office untenable, for no one A.M. OCA IPI No. 11-184-CA-J
called upon to try the facts or to interpret the law in the
process of administering justice can be infallible in his
judgment; and (b) to follow a different rule can mean a Time and again, it has been held, no less than by the
deluge of complaints, legitimate or otherwise, and our Supreme Court, that mere suspicions and speculations can
judges will then be immersed in and be ceaselessly never be the basis of conviction in a criminal case. Guided
occupied with answering charges brought against them by the same doctrinal rule, this Office is not duty-bound to
instead of performing their judicial functions. proceed with the indictment of the public respondents as
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
charged. Indeed well entrenched is the rule that "(t)he injunction commands the performance of some positive act
purpose of a preliminary investigation is to secure the to correct a wrong in the past.
innocent against hasty, malicious and oppressive
prosecution and to protect him from an open and public
accusation of crime, from the trouble, expense and anxiety G.R. No. 153852
of a public trial, and also to protect the state from useless
and expensive trials. As with all equitable remedies, injunction must be issued
only at the instance of a party who possesses sufficient
Moreover, petitioners failed to rebut the presumption of interest in or title to the right or the property sought to be
regularity in the performance of the official duties of protected. It is proper only when the applicant appears to
respondents by affirmative evidence of irregularity or be entitled to the relief demanded in the complaint, which
failure to perform a duty. The presumption prevails and must aver the existence of the right and the violation of the
becomes conclusive until it is overcome by no less than right, or whose averments must in the minimum constitute
clear and convincing evidence to the contrary. Every a prima facie showing of a right to the final relief sought.
reasonable intendment will be made in support of the
presumption and in case of doubt as to a offi e s a t Accordingly, the conditions for the issuance of the
being lawful or unlawful, construction should be in favor of injunctive writ are: (a) that the right to be protected exists
its lawfulness. prima facie; (b) that the act sought to be enjoined is
violative of that right; and (c) that there is an urgent and
paramount necessity for the writ to prevent serious
G.R. No. 153511 damage. An injunction will not issue to protect a right not in
esse, or a right which is merely contingent and may never
There is no longer any doubt that a petition for certiorari arise; or to restrain an act which does not give rise to a
brought to assail the decision of the NLRC may raise factual cause of action; or to prevent the perpetration of an act
issues, and the CA may then review the decision of the prohibited by statute. Indeed, a right, to be protected by
NLRC and pass upon such factual issues in the process. The injunction, means a right clearly founded on or granted by
power of the CA to review factual issues in the exercise of law or is enforceable as a matter of law.
its original jurisdiction to issue writs of certiorari is based on
Section 9 of Batas Pambansa Blg. 129, which pertinently
provides that the CA "shall have the power to try cases and G.R. No. 155830
conduct hearings, receive evidence and perform any and all
acts necessary to resolve factual issues raised in cases The adjudication of the question of ownership in an action
falling within its original and appellate jurisdiction, including for the recovery of possession of realty would only be
the power to grant and conduct new trials or further provisional and would not even be a bar to an action
proceedings." between the same parties involving the ownership of the
same property.
A preliminary injunction is an order granted at any stage of A decision that has acquired finality becomes immutable
an action or proceeding prior to the judgment or final order and unalterable and may no longer be modified in any
requiring a party or a court, an agency, or a person to respect even if the modification is intended to correct
refrain from a particular act or acts. It may also require the erroneous conclusions of fact or law and whether it will be
performance of a particular act or acts, in which case it is made by the court that rendered it or by the highest court
known as a preliminary mandatory injunction. Thus, a of the land. This doctrine of finality and immutability of
prohibitory injunction is one that commands a party to judgments is grounded on fundamental considerations of
refrain from doing a particular act, while a mandatory public policy and sound practice to the effect that, at the
risk of occasional error, the judgments of the courts must
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
Based on such definition and characterization, the Indeed, the Court has held that an appeal from an order
petitio e s situatio did ot fall ithi the s ope of a u denying a motion for reconsideration of a final order or
pro tunc amendment, considering that what they were judgment is effectively an appeal from the final order or
seeking was not mere clarification, but the complete judgment itself; and has expressly clarified that the
reversal in their favor of the final judgment and the prohibition against appealing an order denying a motion for
reinstatement of the DARAB decision. reconsideration referred only to a denial of a motion for
reconsideration of an interlocutory order.
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
The period of appeal shall be interrupted by a timely Forum shopping is the act of a party litigant against whom
motion for new trial or reconsideration. No motion for an adverse judgment has been rendered in one forum
extension of time to file a motion for new trial or seeking and possibly getting a favorable opinion in another
reconsideration shall be allowed. forum, other than by appeal or the special civil action
of certiorari, or the institution of two or more actions or
proceedings grounded on the same cause or supposition
G.R. No. 158239 that one or the other court would make a favorable
disposition. Forum shopping happens when, in the two or
The Supreme Court may promulgate procedural rules in all more pending cases, there is identity of parties, identity of
courts. It has the sole prerogative to amend, repeal or even rights or causes of action, and identity of reliefs sought.
establish new rules for a more simplified and inexpensive Where the elements of litis pendentia are present, and
process, and the speedy disposition of cases. In the rules where a final judgment in one case will amount to res
governing appeals to it and to the Court of Appeals, judicata in the other, there is forum shopping.
particularly Rules 42, 43 and 45, the Court allows
extensions of time, based on justifiable and compelling For forum shopping to exist, both actions must involve the
reasons, for parties to file their appeals. These extensions same transaction, same essential facts and circumstances
may consist of 15 days or more. and must raise identical causes of action, subject matter
and issues. Clearly, it does not exist where different orders
To standardize the appeal periods provided in the Rules and were questioned, two distinct causes of action and issues
to afford litigants fair opportunity to appeal their cases, the were raised, and two objectives were sought.
Court deems it practical to allow a fresh period of 15 days
within which to file the notice of appeal in the Regional
Trial Court, counted from receipt of the order dismissing a G.R. No. 158239
motion for a new trial or motion for reconsideration.
Henceforth, this "fresh period rule" shall also apply to Rule The remedies of appeal and certiorari under Rule 65 are
40 governing appeals from the Municipal Trial Courts to the mutually exclusive and not alternative or cumulative. This is
Regional Trial Courts; Rule 42 on petitions for review from a firm judicial policy. The petitioner cannot hedge her case
the Regional Trial Courts to the Court of Appeals; Rule 43 by wagering two or more appeals, and, in the event that
on appeals from quasi-judicial agencies to the Court of the ordinary appeal lags significantly behind the others, she
Appeals and Rule 45 governing appeals by certiorari to the cannot post facto validate this circumstance as a
Supreme Court. The new rule aims to regiment or make the demonstration that the ordinary appeal had not been
appeal period uniform, to be counted from receipt of the speedy or adequate enough, in order to justify the recourse
order denying the motion for new trial, motion for to Rule 65. This practice, if adopted, would sanction the
reconsideration (whether full or partial) or any final order filing of multiple suits in multiple fora, where each one, as
or resolution. the petitioner couches it, becomes a "precautionary
measure" for the rest, thereby increasing the chances of a
favorable decision. This is the very evil that the proscription
G.R. No. 158239 on forum shopping seeks to put right.
Procedural law refers to the adjective law which prescribes The grave evil sought to be avoided by the rule against
rules and forms of procedure in order that courts may be forum shopping is the rendition by two competent tribunals
able to administer justice. Procedural laws do not come of two separate and contradictory decisions. Unscrupulous
within the legal conception of a retroactive law, or the party litigants, taking advantage of a variety of competent
ge e al ule agai st the et oa ti e ope atio of statues tribunals, may repeatedly try their luck in several different
they may be given retroactive effect on actions pending fora until a favorable result is reached. To avoid the
and undetermined at the time of their passage and this will resultant confusion, the Court adheres strictly to the rules
not violate any right of a person who may feel that he is against forum shopping, and any violation of these rules
adversely affected, insomuch as there are no vested rights results in the dismissal of the case.
in rules of procedure.
The "fresh period rule" is a procedural law as it prescribes a G.R. No. 158597
fresh period of 15 days within which an appeal may be
made in the event that the motion for reconsideration is Doctrinally entrenched is that the right of appeal is a
denied by the lower court. Following the rule on statutory right and the one who seeks to avail that right
retroactivity of procedural laws, the "fresh period rule" must comply with the statute or rules. The Rules,
should be applied to pending actions, such as the present particularly the requirements for perfecting an appeal
case. within the reglementary period specified in the law, must
be strictly followed as they are considered indispensable
interdictions against needless delays and appeal in the
G.R. No. 158239 manner and within the period permitted by law is not only
mandatory but also jurisdictional and the failure to perfect
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
Accordingly, a counterclaim is compulsory if: (a) it arises out Section 1, Rule 9 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, which
of or is necessarily connected with the transaction or provides:
occurrence which is the subject matter of the opposing
pa t s lai ; it does not require for its adjudication the Section 1. Defenses and objections not pleaded.
presence of third parties of whom the court cannot acquire Defenses and objections not pleaded either in a motion to
jurisdiction; and (c) the court has jurisdiction to entertain dismiss or in the answer are deemed waived. However,
the claim both as to its amount and nature, except that in when it appears from the pleadings or the evidence on
an original action before the RTC, the counterclaim may be record that the court has no jurisdiction over the subject
considered compulsory regardless of the amount. matter, that there is another action pending between the
same parties for the same cause, or that the action is
A compulsory counterclaim that a defending party has at barred by a prior judgment or by statute of limitations, the
the time he files his answer shall be contained therein. court shall dismiss the claim.
Pursuant to Section 2, Rule 9 of the 1997 Rules of Civil
Procedure, a compulsory counterclaim not set up shall be
barred. G.R. No. 161122
Of the four, the one compelling test of compulsoriness is G.R. No. 161122
the logical relation between the claim alleged in the
complaint and that in the counterclaim. Such relationship It is elementary that a judgment of a court is conclusive and
exists when conducting separate trials of the respective binding only upon the parties and those who are their
claims of the parties would entail substantial duplication of successors in interest by title after the commencement of
time and effort by the parties and the court; when the the action in court. Section 47(b) of Rule 39 of the Rules of
multiple claims involve the same factual and legal issues; or Court explicitly so provides, to wit:
when the claims are offshoots of the same basic
controversy between the parties. If these tests result in Section 47. Effect of judgments or final orders .The effect
affirmative answers, the counterclaim is compulsory. of a judgment or final order rendered by a court of the
Philippines, having jurisdiction to pronounce the judgment
or final order, may be as follows:
G.R. No. 159746 xxxx
Venue related only to the place of trial or the geographical (b) In other cases, the judgment or final order is, with
location in which an action or proceeding should be respect to the matter directly adjudged or as to any other
brought and does not equate to the jurisdiction of the matter that could have been raised in relation
court. It is intended to accord convenience to the parties, thereto, conclusive between the parties and their successors
as it relates to the place of trial, and does not restrict their in interest by title subsequent to the commencement of the
access to the courts. In contrast, jurisdiction refers to the action or special proceeding, litigating for the same thing
power to hear and determine a cause, and is conferred by and under the same title and in the same capacity; xxx.
law and not by the parties.
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
been made a party conforms to the constitutional of a claim under section 12 of Rule 6, is that the original
guarantee of due process of law. The operation of this "defendant is attempting to transfer to the third-party
principle was illustrated where the Court declared that a defendant the liability asserted against him by the original
person not impleaded and given the opportunity to take plaintiff."
part in the proceedings was not bound by the decision
declaring as null and void the title from which his title to
the property had been derived. We said there that the G.R. No. 161909
effect of a judgment could not be extended to non-parties
by simply issuing an alias writ of execution against them, The requisites for a third-party action are, firstly, that the
for no man should be prejudiced by any proceeding to party to be impleaded must not yet be a party to the
which he was a stranger. In the same manner, a writ of action; secondly, that the claim against the third-party
execution could be issued only against a party, not against a defendant must belong to the original defendant; thirdly,
person who did not have his day in court. the claim of the original defendant against the third-party
defe da t ust e ased upo the plai tiffs lai agai st
the original defendant; and, fourthly, the defendant is
G.R. No. 161909 attempting to transfer to the third-party defendant the
liability asserted against him by the original plaintiff.
The device of the third-party action, also known as
impleader, was in accord with Section 12, Rule 6 of the
Revised Rules of Court, the rule then applicable, viz: G.R. No. 161909
Section 12. Third-party complaint. A third-party complaint Under this Rule, a person not a party to an action may be
is a claim that a defending party may, with leave of court, impleaded by the defendant either (a) on an allegation of
file against a person not a party to the action, called the liability to the latter; (b) on the ground of direct liability to
third-party defendant, for contribution, indemnity, the plaintiff-; or, (c) both (a) and (b). The situation in (a) is
su ogatio o a othe elief, i espe t of his oppo e ts covered by the phrase "for contribution, indemnity or
claim. subrogation;" while (b) and (c) are subsumed under the
at h all "o a othe elief, i espe t of his oppo e ts
Explaining the application of Section 12, Rule 6, supra, the claim."
Court said to wit:
Section 12 of Rule 6 of the Revised Rules of Court
authorizes a defendant to bring into a lawsuit any person G.R. No. 164457
"not a party to the action . . . for contribution, indemnity,
subrogation or any other relief in respect of his opponent's
claim." From its explicit language it does not compel the Rule 110 of the Revised Rules of Court, the rule then in
defendant to bring the third-parties into the litigation, effect when the information was filed in the RTC, contained
rather it simply permits the inclusion of anyone who meets the following provisions on the proper manner of alleging
the standard set forth in the rule. The secondary or the nature and cause of the accusation in the information,
derivative liability of the third-party is central whether to wit:
the basis is indemnity, subrogation, contribution, express or
implied warranty or some other theory. The impleader of Section 8.Designation of the offense. Whenever possible,
new parties under this rule is proper only when a right to a complaint or information should state the designation
relief exists under the applicable substantive law. This rule given to the offense by the statute, besides the statement
is merely a procedural mechanism, and cannot be utilized of the acts or omissions constituting the same, and if there
unless there is some substantive basis under applicable law. is no such designation, reference should be made to the
section or subsection of the statute punishing it. (7)
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
an offense other than that charged in the complaint or Section 6, Rule 132 of the Rules of Court ensures this
information would be violative of the Constitutional right to solution thusly:
be informed of the nature and cause of the Section 6. Cross-examination; its purpose and extent.
accusation. Indeed, the accused cannot be convicted of a Upon the termination of the direct examination, the
crime, even if duly proven, unless the crime is alleged or witness may be cross-examined by the adverse party as to
necessarily included in the information filed against him. any matters stated in the direct examination, or connected
therewith, with sufficient fullness and freedom to test his
accuracy and truthfulness and freedom from interest or
G.R. No. 164457 bias, or the reverse, and to elicit all important facts bearing
upon the issue. (8a)
Nonetheless, in all criminal prosecutions, the Prosecution
bears the burden to establish the guilt of the accused Although the second solution traces its existence to a
beyond reasonable doubt. In discharging this burden, the Constitutional precept relevant to criminal cases, i.e.,
Prose utio s dut is to p o e ea h a d e e ele e t of Section 14, (2), Article III, of the 1987 Constitution, which
the crime charged in the information to warrant a finding of guarantees that: "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused
guilt for that crime or for any other crime necessarily shall xxx enjoy the right xxx to meet the witnesses face to
included therein. The Prosecution must further prove the face xxx," the rule requiring the cross-examination by the
participation of the accused in the commission of the adverse party equally applies to non-criminal proceedings.
offense.
In doing all these, the Prosecution must rely on the G.R. No. 164457
strength of its own evidence, and not anchor its success
upon the weakness of the evidence of the accused. The Section 19, Rule 132 of the Rules of Court distinguishes
burden of proof placed on the Prosecution arises from the between a public document and a private document for the
presumption of innocence in favor of the accused that no purpose of their presentation in evidence, viz:
less than the Constitution has guaranteed. Conversely, as to
his innocence, the accused has no burden of proof, that he Section 19. Classes of documents. For the purpose of their
must then be acquitted and set free should the Prosecution presentation in evidence, documents are either public or
not overcome the presumption of innocence in his favor. private.
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
Section 1. Rendition of judgments and final orders. A A declaration or an utterance is deemed as part of the res
judgment or final order determining the merits of the case gestae and thus admissible in evidence as an exception to
shall be in writing personally and directly prepared by the the hearsay rule when the following requisites concur, to
judge, stating clearly and distinctly the facts and the law on wit:
which it is based, signed by him, and filed with the clerk of (a) the principal act, the res gestae, is a startling
the court. occurrence;
(b) the statements are made before the declarant had time
The Constitution and the Rules of Court apparently to contrive or devise; and
delineate two main essential parts of a judgment, namely: (c) the statements must concern the occurrence in question
the body and the decretal portion. Although the latter is and its immediately attending circumstances.
the controlling part, the importance of the former is not to
be lightly regarded because it is there where the court
clearly and distinctly states its findings of fact and of law on G.R. No. 173476
which the decision is based. To state it differently, one
without the other is ineffectual and useless. The omission The term res gestae has been defined as "those
of either inevitably results in a judgment that violates the circumstances which are the undesigned incidents of a
letter and the spirit of the Constitution and the Rules of particular litigated act and which are admissible when
Court. illustrative of such act."
In every criminal prosecution for possession of illegal drugs, G.R. No. 175602
the Prosecution must account for the custody of the
incriminating evidence from the moment of seizure and No information for a crime will be sufficient if it does not
confiscation until the moment it is offered in evidence. That accurately and clearly allege the elements of the crime
account goes to the weight of evidence. It is not enough charged. Every element of the offense must be stated in the
that the evidence offered has probative value on the issues, information. What facts and circumstances are necessary to
for the evidence must also be sufficiently connected to and be included therein must be determined by reference to the
tied with the facts in issue. The evidence is not relevant definitions and essentials of the specified crimes. The
merely because it is available but that it has an actual requirement of alleging the elements of a crime in the
connection with the transaction involved and with the information is to inform the accused of the nature of the
parties thereto. This is the reason why authentication and accusation against him so as to enable him to suitably
laying a foundation for the introduction of evidence are prepare his defense. The presumption is that the accused
important. has no independent knowledge of the facts that constitute
the offense.
G.R. No. 173476
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
122 of the Rules of Court provides that "an appeal taken by G.R. No. 181042
one or more of several accused shall not affect those who
did not appeal, except insofar as the judgment of the It is basic under the Rules of Court, indeed, that evidence,
appellant court is favorable and applicable to the latter." As to be relevant, must throw light upon, or have a logical
we have elucidated, the evidence against and the relation to, the facts in issue to be established by one party
conviction of both appellant and Rodriguez are inextricably or disproved by the other.
li ked. He e, appella ts a uittal, hi h is fa o a le a d
applicable to Rodriguez, should benefit the latter. The test of relevancy is whether an item of evidence will
have any value, as determined by logic and experience, in
proving the proposition for which it is offered, or whether it
G.R. No. 177780 would reasonably and actually tend to prove or disprove
any matter of fact in issue, or corroborate other relevant
A preliminary investigation is designed to secure the evidence. The test is satisfied if there is some logical
respondent involved against hasty, malicious and connection either directly or by inference between the fact
oppressive prosecution. A preliminary investigation is an offered and the fact to be proved.
inquiry to determine whether (a) a crime has been
committed, and (b) whether there is probable cause to
believe that the accused is guilty thereof. It is a means of G.R. No. 182230
discovering the person or persons who may be reasonably
charged with a crime. Prescindingly, under Section 3 of Rule Circumstantial evidence would also be the reliable means
112 of the Rules of Criminal Procedure, the respondent to do so, provided that
must be informed of the accusation against him and shall (a) there was more than one circumstance;
have the right to examine the evidence against him and (b) the facts from which the inferences were derived were
submit his counter-affidavit to disprove criminal liability. By proved; and
far, respondent in a criminal preliminary investigation is (c) the combination of all the circumstances was such as to
legally entitled to explain his side of the accusation. produce a conviction beyond reasonable doubt.
There is no definitive standard by which probable cause is Section 42. Part of the res gestae. Statements made by a
determined except to consider the attendant conditions; person while a startling occurrence is taking place or
the existence of probable cause depends upon the finding immediately prior or subsequent thereto with respect to
of the public prosecutor conducting the examination, who the circumstances thereof, may be given in evidence as part
is called upon not to disregard the facts presented, and to of the res gestae. So, also, statements accompanying an
ensure that his finding should not run counter to the clear equivocal act material to the issue, and giving it a legal
dictates of reason. significance, may be received as part of the res gestae.
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
difficult to quickly comprehend what the victim was then weight of the credible evidence. It is proof that is more
saying. convincing to the court as worthy of belief than that which
is offered in opposition thereto.
G.R. No. 184926 Under the rule on preponderance of evidence, the court is
Direct evidence proves a fact in issue directly without any instructed to find for and to dismiss the case against the
reasoning or inferences being drawn on the part of the fact defendant should the scales hang in equipoise and there is
finder; in contrast, circumstantial evidence indirectly proves nothing in the evidence that tilts the scales to one or the
a fact in issue, such that the fact finder must draw an other side. The plaintiff who had the burden of proof has
inference or reason from circumstantial evidence. To be failed to establish its case, and the parties are no better off
clear, then, circumstantial evidence may be resorted to than before they proceeded upon their litigation. In that
when to insist on direct testimony would ultimately lead to situation, the court should leave the parties as they are.
setting a felon free.
Moreover, although the evidence of the plaintiff may be
stronger than that of the defendant, there is no
G.R. No. 189330 preponderance of evidence on the plaintiff's side if its
evidence alone is insufficient to establish its cause of
The presumption of regularity in the performance of duty action. Similarly, when only one side is able to present its
could not prevail over the stronger presumption of evidence, and the other side demurs to the evidence, a
innocence favoring the accused. Otherwise, the preponderance of evidence can result only if the plaintiff's
constitutional guarantee of the accused being presumed evidence is sufficient to establish the cause of action. For
innocent would be held subordinate to a mere rule of this purpose, the sheer volume of the evidence presented
evidence allocating the burden of evidence. Where, like by one party cannot tip the scales in its favor. Quality, not
here, the proof adduced against the accused has not even quantity, is the primordial consideration in evaluating
overcome the presumption of innocence, the presumption evidence.
of regularity in the performance of duty could not be a
factor to adjudge the accused guilty of the crime charged.
G.R. No. 180418
G.R. No. 189998 Section 34, Rule 132 of the Rules of Court explicitly states:
The Revised Rules of Court provides that public documents Section 34. Offer of evidence. The court shall consider no
may be evidenced by a copy attested by the officer having evidence which has not been formally offered. The purpose
the legal custody of the record. The attestation must state, for which the evidence is offered must be specified.
in substance, that the copy is a correct copy of the original,
or a specific part thereof, as the case may be. The The need to formally offer evidence by specifying the
attestation must be under the official seal of the attesting purpose of the offer cannot be overemphasized. This need
officer, if there be any, or if he be the clerk of a court is designed to meet the demand for due process by
having a seal, under the seal of such court. apprising the adverse party as well as the trial court on
what evidence the court would soon be called upon to
If the record is not kept in the Philippines, the attested copy decide the litigation. The offer and purpose will also put the
must be accompanied with a certificate that such officer trial court in the position to determine which rules of
has the custody. If the office in which the record is kept is in evidence it shall apply in admitting or denying admission to
a foreign country, the certificate may be made by a the evidence being offered.
secretary of the embassy or legation, consul general,
consul, vice consul, or consular agent or by any officer in A formal offer is necessary because judges are mandated to
the foreign service of the Philippines stationed in the rest their findings of facts and their judgment only and
foreign country in which the record is kept, and strictly upon the evidence offered by the parties at the trial.
authenticated by the seal of his office. It has several functions:
(1) to enable the trial judge to know the purpose or
purposes for which the proponent is presenting the
G.R. No. 180418 evidence;
(2) to allow opposing parties to examine the evidence and
By preponderance of evidence is meant that the evidence object to its admissibility; and
adduced by one side is, as a whole, superior to that of the (3) to facilitate review by the appellate court, which will not
other side. Essentially, preponderance of evidence refers to be required to review documents not previously scrutinized
the comparative weight of the evidence presented by the by the trial court.
opposing parties. As such, it has been defined as "the
weight, credit, and value of the aggregate evidence on G.R. No. 154083
either side," and is usually considered to be synonymous
with the term greater weight of the evidence or greater
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
fundamental objectives, namely: (a) to vest in the court for any other purpose. Fairness to the adverse party
jurisdiction over the person of the defendant; and (b) to demands such exclusivity.
afford to the defendant the opportunity to be heard on the
claim brought against him.
G.R. No. 157943
As to the former, when jurisdiction in personam is not
acquired in a civil action through the proper service of the It is a fundamental rule in criminal procedure that the State
summons or upon a valid waiver of such proper service, the carries the onus probandi in establishing the guilt of the
ensuing trial and judgment are void. accused beyond a reasonable doubt, as a consequence of
the tenet ei incumbit probation, qui dicit, non qui negat,
which means that he who asserts, not he who denies, must
G.R. No. 156759 prove, and as a means of respecting the presumption of
innocence in favor of the man or woman on the dock for a
crime.
If, for justifiable reasons, the defendant cannot be served in
person within a reasonable time, the service of the Accordingly, the State has the burden of proof to show: (1)
summons may then be effected either (a) by leaving a copy the correct identification of the author of a crime, and (2)
of the summons at his residence with some person of the actuality of the commission of the offense with the
suitable age and discretion then residing therein, or (b) by participation of the accused. All these facts must be proved
leaving the copy at his office or regular place of business by the State beyond reasonable doubt on the strength of its
with some competent person in charge thereof. The latter evidence and without solace from the weakness of the
mode of service is known as substituted service because defense.
the service of the summons on the defendant is made
through his substitute.
G.R. No. 158649
G.R. No. 156759 The person who had prepared the document was
competent to testify on the due execution and authenticity
Only when the defendant cannot be served personally of Exhibit V. Such authentication was done in accordance
within a reasonable time may substituted service be with Rule 132 of the Rules of Court, whose Section 20
resorted to. Hence, the impossibility of prompt personal states:
service should be shown by stating the efforts made to find
the defendant himself and the fact that such efforts failed, Section 20. Proof of private document. Before any private
which statement should be found in the proof of service or document offered as authentic is received in evidence, its
she iffs etu . Nonetheless, the requisite showing of the due execution and authenticity must be proved either:
impossibility of prompt personal service as basis for (a)By anyone who saw the document executed or written;
resorting to substituted service may be waived by the or
defendant either expressly or impliedly. (b)By evidence of the genuineness of the signature or
handwriting of the maker.
Any other private document need only be identified as that
G.R. No. 157445 which it is claimed to be.
Section 3. Effect of failure to comply with requirements. Section 43, Rule 130 of the Rules of Court, to wit:
The failure of the petitioner to comply with any of the Section 43. Entries in the course of business. Entries made
foregoing requirements regarding the payment of the at, or near the time of the transactions to which they refer,
docket and other lawful fees, the deposit for costs, proof of by a person deceased, or unable to testify, who was in a
service of the petition, and the contents of and the position to know the facts therein stated, may be received
documents which should accompany the petition shall be as prima facie evidence, if such person made the entries in
sufficient ground for the dismissal thereof. his professional capacity or in the performance of duty and
in the ordinary or regular course of business.
G.R. No. 157943 The invocation of the rule is misplaced, however, because
the rule speaks of a situation where the person who made
the entries is dead or unable to testify, which was not the
situation here. Regardless, we have to point out that entries
Under the law of evidence, the court shall consider made in the course of business enjoy the presumption of
evidence solely for the purpose for which it is offered, not regularity. If properly authenticated, the entries serve as
evidence of the status of the account of the petitioners.
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
Section 4, Rule 102 of the Rules of Court explicitly states: G.R. No. 160932
Section 4.When writ not allowed or discharge authorized. A key principle to be observed in dealing with petitions for
If it appears that the person alleged to be restrained of mandamus is that such extraordinary remedy lies to compel
his liberty is in the custody of an officer under process the performance of duties that are purely ministerial in
issued by a court or judge or by virtue of a judgment or nature, not those that are discretionary.
order of a court of record, and that the court or judge had
jurisdiction to issue the process, render the judgment, or A purely ministerial act or duty is one that an officer or
make the order, the writ shall not be allowed; or if the tribunal performs in a given state of facts, in a prescribed
jurisdiction appears after the writ is allowed, the person manner, in obedience to the mandate of a legal authority,
shall not be discharged by reason of any informality or without regard to or the exercise of its own judgment upon
defect in the process, judgment, or order. Nor shall the propriety or impropriety of the act done. The duty is
anything in this rule be held to authorize the discharge of a ministerial only when its discharge requires neither the
person charged with or convicted of an offense in the exercise of official discretion or judgment.
Philippines, or of a person suffering imprisonment under
lawful judgment.
G.R. No. 161075
G.R. No. 160786 Article 33. In cases of defamation, fraud, and physical
injuries a civil action for damages, entirely separate and
A supervening event consists of facts that transpire after distinct from the criminal action, may be brought by the
the judgment became final and executory, or of new injured party. Such civil action shall proceed independently
circumstances that develop after the judgment attained of the criminal prosecution, and shall require only a
finality, including matters that the parties were not aware preponderance of evidence.
of prior to or during the trial because such matters were
not yet in existence at that time. In that event, the It is well settled that a civil action based on defamation,
interested party may properly seek the stay of execution or fraud and physical injuries may be independently instituted
the quashal of the writ of execution, or he may move the pursuant to Article 33 of the Civil Code, and does not
court to modify or alter the judgment in order to harmonize operate as a prejudicial question that will justify the
it with justice and the supervening event. The party who suspension of a criminal case.
alleges a supervening event to stay the execution should
necessarily establish the facts by competent evidence; Moreover, neither is there a prejudicial question if the civil
otherwise, it would become all too easy to frustrate the and the criminal action can, according to law, proceed
conclusive effects of a final and immutable judgment. independently of each other. Under Rule 111, Section 3 of
the Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure, in the cases
provided in Articles 32, 33, 34 and 2176 of the Civil Code,
G.R. No. 160786 the independent civil action may be brought by the
offended party. It shall proceed independently of the
criminal action and shall require only a preponderance of
According to Section 10( d) of Rule 39, Rules of Court, when evidence. In no case, however, may the offended party
the property subject of the execution contains recover damages twice for the same act or omission
improvements constructed or planted by the judgment charged in the criminal action.
obligor or his agent, the officer shall not destroy, demolish
or remove said improvements except upon special order of
the court issued upon motion of the judgment obligee after G.R. No. 161211
due hearing and after the judgment obligor or his agent has
failed to remove the improvements within a reasonable Section l, Rule 9 of the Rules of Court, which provides as
time fixed by the court. follows:
Section 1. Defenses and objections not pleaded.- Defenses
and objections not pleaded either in a motion to dismiss or
G.R. No. 160932 in the answer are deemed waived. However, when it
appears from the pleadings or the evidence on record that
Mandamus will issue only when the petitioner has a clear the court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter, that
legal right to the performance of the act sought to be there is another action pending between the same parties
compelled and the respondent has an imperative duty to for the same cause, or that the action is barred by a prior
perform the same. The petitioner bears the burden to show judgment or by statute of limitations, the court shall dismiss
that there is such a clear legal right to the performance of the claim. (2a)
the act, and a corresponding compelling duty on the part of
the respondent to perform the act. Under the rule, the defenses of lack of jurisdiction over the
subject matter, litis pendentia, res judicata, and
prescription of action may be raised at any stage of the
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
until after the matters within the competence of the The amended complaint filed by the Republic to implead
administrative body are threshed out and determined. Asian Bank prays for reversion, reconveyance,
reconstitution, accounting and damages. In other words,
the Republic would recover ill-gotten wealth, by virtue of
G.R. No. 169677 which the properties in question came under sequestration
and are now, for that reason, in custodia legis.
The rule on separate trials in civil actions is found in Section
2, Rule 31 of the Rules of Court, which reads: Although the Republic has not imputed any responsibility to
Asian Bank for the illegal accumulation of wealth by the
Section 2. Separate trials. The court, in furtherance of original defendants, or has not averred that Asian Bank was
convenience or to avoid prejudice, may order a separate a business associate, dummy, nominee, or agent of the
trial of any claim, cross-claim, counterclaim, or third-party Marcoses, the allegation in its amended complaint in Civil
complaint, or of any separate issue or of any number of Case No. 0004 that Asian Bank acted with bad faith for
claims, cross-claims, counterclaims, third-party complaints ignoring the sequestration of the properties as ill-gotten
or issues. wealth has made the cause of action against Asian Bank
The text of the rule grants to the trial court the discretion incidental or necessarily connected to the cause of action
to determine if a separate trial of any claim, cross-claim, against the original defendants.
counterclaim, or third-party complaint, or of any separate
issue or of any number of claims, cross-claims,
counterclaims, third-party complaints or issues should be G.R. No. 170598
held, provided that the exercise of such discretion is in
furtherance of convenience or to avoid prejudice to any Burden of proof is a term that refers to two separate and
party. quite different concepts, namely:
(a) the risk of non-persuasion, or the burden of persuasion,
or simply persuasion burden; and
G.R. No. 169677 (b) the duty of producing evidence, or the burden of going
forward with the evidence, or simply the production
burden or the burden of evidence.
Exceptions to the general rule are permitted only when
there are extraordinary grounds for conducting separate In its first concept, it is the duty to establish the truth of a
trials on different issues raised in the same case, or when given proposition or issue by such a quantum of evidence
separate trials of the issues will avoid prejudice, or when as the law demands in the case at which the issue arises. In
separate trials of the issues will further convenience, or its other concept, it is the duty of producing evidence at the
when separate trials of the issues will promote justice, or beginning or at any subsequent stage of trial in order to
when separate trials of the issues will give a fair trial to all make or meet a prima facie case. Generally speaking,
parties. Otherwise, the general rule must apply. burden of proof in its second concept passes from party to
party as the case progresses, while in its first concept it
rests throughout upon the party asserting the affirmative of
G.R. No. 169677 the issue.
Executive Order No. 1 refers to cases of recovery and Section 1. In civil cases, the party having the burden of
sequestration of ill-gotten wealth amassed by the Marcoses proof must establish his case by a preponderance of
their relatives, subordinates, and close associates, directly evidence. In determining where the preponderance or
or through nominees, by taking undue advantage of their superior weight of evidence on the issues involved lies, the
public office and/or by using their powers, authority, court may consider all the facts and circumstances of the
influence, connections or relationships. Executive Order No. case, the it esses a e of testif i g, thei i tellige e,
2 states that the ill-gotten wealth includes assets and their means and opportunity of knowing the facts to which
properties in the form of estates and real properties in the they are testifying, the nature of the facts to which they
Philippines and abroad. Executive Orders No. 14 and No. testify, the probability or improbability of their testimony,
14-A pe tai to the Sa diga a a s ju isdi tio o e their interest or want of interest, and also their personal
criminal and civil cases relative to the ill-gotten wealth of credibility so far as the same may legitimately appear upon
the Marcoses and their cronies. the trial. The court may also consider the number of
witnesses, though the preponderance is not necessarily
with the greater number. (Emphasis supplied)
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
more likely than not a crime has been committed, and that subsequently be included in the criminal information
it was committed by the accused. Probable cause, although except when he fails or refuses to testify. The immunity for
it requires less than evidence justifying a conviction, the state witness is granted by the DOJ, not by the trial
demands more than bare suspicion. court. Should such witness be meanwhile charged in court
as an accused, the public prosecutor, upon presentation to
him of the certification of admission into the Witness
G.R. No. 191567 Protection Program, shall petition the trial court for the
discharge of the witness. The Court shall then order the
Courts do not reverse the Secretary of Justices fi di gs a d discharge and exclusion of said accused from the
conclusions on the matter of probable cause except in clear information.
cases of grave abuse of discretion.
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
Section 19. Jurisdiction in civil cases. Regional Trial G.R. No. 161589
Courts shall exercise exclusive original jurisdiction:
The settled rule is that the nature of the action as
xxx xxx xxx appearing from the averments in the complaint or other
initiatory pleading determines the jurisdiction of a court;
(2) In all civil actions which involve the title to, or hence, such averments and the character of the relief
possession of, real property, or any interest therein, where sought are to be consulted. The court must interpret and
the assessed value of the property involved exceeds Twenty apply the law on jurisdiction in relation to the averments of
thousand pesos (P20,000.00) or, for civil actions in Metro ultimate facts in the complaint or other initiatory pleading
Manila, where such value exceeds Fifty thousand pesos regardless of whether or not the plaintiff or petitioner is
(P50,000.00) except actions for forcible entry into and entitled to recover upon all or some of the claims asserted
unlawful detainer of lands or buildings, original jurisdiction therein. The reliefs to which the plaintiff or petitioner is
over which is conferred upon the Metropolitan Trial Courts, entitled based on the facts averred, although not the reliefs
Municipal Trial Courts, and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts; demanded, determine the nature of the action. The
defense contained in the answer of the defendant is
xxx xxx xxx generally not determinant.
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
resolved only provisionally for the purpose of determining year from the unlawful deprivation or withholding of
the principal issue of possession. On the other hand, possession.
regardless of the actual condition of the title to the
property and whatever may be the character of the
plaintiff's prior possession, if it has in its favor priority in G.R. No. 161589
time, it has the security that entitles it to remain on the
property until it is lawfully ejected through an accion A defendant's claim of possession de jure or his averment of
publiciana or accion reivindicatoria by another having a ownership does not render the ejectment suit either accion
better right. publiciana or accion reivindicatoria. The suit remains an
accion interdictal, a summary proceeding that can proceed
independently of any claim of ownership. Even when the
G.R. No. 161589 question of possession cannot be resolved without deciding
the issue of ownership, the issue of ownership is to be
In unlawful detainer, the complaint must allege the cause resolved only to determine the issue of possession.
of action according to the manner set forth in Section 1,
Rule 70 of the Rules of Court, to wit:
G.R. No. 166944
Section 1. Who may institute proceedings, and when.
Subject to the provisions of the next succeeding section, a The right to appeal is not a natural right and is not part of
person deprived of the possession of any land or building due process, but merely a statutory privilege to be
by force, intimidation, threat, strategy, or stealth, or a exercised only in accordance with the law. Being the party
lessor, vendor, vendee, or other person against whom the who sought to appeal, he must comply with the
possession of any land or building is unlawfully withheld requirements of the relevant rules; otherwise, he would
after the expiration or termination of the right to hold lose the statutory right to appeal. It cannot be over-
possession, by virtue of any contract, express or implied, or emphasized, indeed, that the procedures regulating
the legal representatives or assigns of any such lessor, appeals as laid down in the Rules of Court must be followed
vendor, vendee, or other person, may, at any time within because strict compliance with them was indispensable for
one (1) year after such unlawful deprivation or withholding the orderly and speedy disposition of justice.
of possession, bring an action in the proper Municipal Trial
Court against the person or persons unlawfully withholding
or depriving of possession, or any person or persons Section 2 (d), Rule 42 of the Rules of Court requires the
claiming under them, for the restitution of such possession, petition for review to be accompanied by clearly legible
together with damages and costs. (Emphasis supplied) duplicate originals or true copies of the judgments or final
orders of both lower courts, certified correct by the clerk of
The complaint must further allege the plaintiff's compliance court of the Regional Trial Court, and the requisite number
with the jurisdictional requirement of demand as of plain copies thereof and of the pleadings and other
prescribed by Section 2, Rule 70 of the Rules of Court, viz.: material portions of the record as would support the
allegations of the petition. The failure of the petitioner to
Section 2. Lessor to proceed against lessee only after comply with the requirement shall be a sufficient ground
demand . Unless otherwise stipulated, such action by the for the dismissal of the petition for review.
lessor shall be commenced only after demand to pay or
comply with the conditions of the lease and to vacate is
made upon the lessee, or by serving written notice of such G.R. No. 161380
demand upon the person found on the premises, or by
posting such notice on the premises if no person be found Laches is the failure or neglect for as unreasonable and
thereon, and the lessee fails to comply therewith after unexplained length of time to do that which by exerting due
fifteen (15) days in the case of land or five (5) days in the diligence a party could and should have done earlier. A suit
case of buildings. that is barred on the ground of laches is also called a stale
demand. Laches is based on grounds of public policy that
For the action to come under the exclusive original requires, for the peace of society, the discouragement of
jurisdiction of the MTC, therefore, the complaint must stale claims and, unlike the statute of limitations, is not a
allege that: (a) the defendant originally had lawful mere question of time but is principally a question of the
possession of the property, either by virtue of a contract or inequity or unfairness of permitting a right or claim to be
by tolerance of the plaintiff; (b) the defendant's possession enforced or asserted. Tempus enim modus tollendi
of the property eventually became illegal or unlawful upon obligationes et actiones, quia tempus currit contra desides
notice by the plaintiff to the defendant of the expiration or et sui juris contemptores (For time is a means of dissipating
the termination of the defendant's right of possession; (c) obligations and actions, because time runs against the
the defendant thereafter remained in possession of the slothful and careless of their own rights). Truly, the law
property and thereby deprived the plaintiff the enjoyment serves those who are vigilant and diligent, not those who
thereof; and (d) the plaintiff instituted the action within one sleep when the law requires them to act.
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
(a) Allows or disallows a will; liabilities of the executor or the administrator, and in
making a final and equitable distribution (partition) of the
(b) Determines who are the lawful heirs of a deceased estate and otherwise to facilitate the administration of the
person, or the distributive share of the estate to which such estate. Hence, the RTC that presides over the
person is entitled; administration of an estate is vested with wide discretion
on the question of what properties should be included in
(c) Allows or disallows, in whole or in part, any claim against the inventory.
the estate of a deceased person, or any claim presented on
behalf of the estate in offset to a claim against it;
G.R. No. 156407
(d) Settles the account of an executor, administrator,
trustee or guardian; The jurisdiction of the trial court as an intestate court is
special and limited. The trial court cannot adjudicate title to
(e) Constitutes, in proceedings relating to the settlement of properties claimed to be a part of the estate but are
the estate of a deceased person, or the administration of a claimed to belong to third parties by title adverse to that of
trustee or guardian, a final determination in the lower court the decedent and the estate, not by virtue of any right of
of the rights of the party appealing, except that no appeal inheritance from the decedent. All that the trial court can
shall be allowed from the appointment of a special do regarding said properties is to determine whether or not
administrator; and they should be included in the inventory of properties to be
administered by the administrator. Such determination is
(f) Is the final order or judgment rendered in the case, and provisional and may be still revised.
affects the substantial rights of the person appealing,
unless it be an order granting or denying a motion for a
new trial or for reconsideration. G.R. No. 156407
Clearly, the assailed orders of the RTC, being interlocutory, The general rule is that the jurisdiction of the trial court,
did not come under any of the instances in which multiple either as a probate court or an intestate court, relates only
appeals are permitted. to matters having to do with the probate of the will and/or
settlement of the estate of deceased persons, but does not
extend to the determination of questions of ownership that
G.R. No. 156407 arise during the proceedings.
Under Section 6(a), Rule 78 of the Rules of Court, the letters However, this general rule is subject to exceptions as
of administration may be granted at the discretion of the justified by expediency and convenience.
court to the surviving spouse, who is competent and willing
to serve when the person dies intestate. First, the probate court may provisionally pass upon in an
intestate or a testate proceeding the question of inclusion in,
Upon issuing the letters of administration to the surviving or exclusion from, the inventory of a piece of property
spouse, the RTC becomes dutybound to direct the without prejudice to final determination of ownership in a
preparation and submission of the inventory of the separate action.
properties of the estate, and the surviving spouse, as the
administrator, has the duty and responsibility to submit the Second, if the interested parties are all heirs to the estate,
inventory within three months from the issuance of letters or the question is one of collation or advancement, or
of administration pursuant to Rule 83 of the Rules of Court, the parties consent to the assumption of jurisdiction by the
viz: probate court and the rights of third parties are not
impaired, then the probate court is competent to resolve
Section 1. Inventory and appraisal to be returned within issues on ownership.
three months. Within three (3) months after his
appointment every executor or administrator shall return Verily, its jurisdiction extends to matters incidental or
to the court a true inventory and appraisal of all the real and collateral to the settlement and distribution of the estate,
personal estate of the deceased which has come into his such as the determination of the status of each heir
possession or knowledge. In the appraisement of such and whether the property in the inventory is conjugal or
estate, the court may order one or more of the inheritance exclusive property of the deceased spouse.
tax appraisers to give his or their assistance.
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
Rule 90 thereby expanded the special and limited The requirements for the issuance of a writ of preliminary
jurisdiction of the RTC as an intestate court about the injunction or TRO are enumerated in Section 3, Rule 58 of
matters relating to the inventory of the estate of the the Rules of Court, to wit:
decedent by authorizing it to direct the inclusion of
properties donated or bestowed by gratuitous title to any Section 3. Grounds for issuance of preliminary injunction. -
compulsory heir by the decedent. A preliminary injunction may be granted when it is
established:
G.R. No. 157163 (a) That the applicant is entitled to the relief demanded,
and the whole or part of such relief consists in restraining
According to Section 1, Rule 4 of the Rules of Court, a real the commission or continuance of the act or acts
action is one that affects title to or possession of real complained of, or in requiring the performance of an act or
property, or an interest therein. Such action is to be acts, eitherfor a limited period or perpetually;
commenced and tried in the proper court having (b) That the commission, continuance or non-performance
jurisdiction over the area wherein the real property of the act or acts complained of during the litigation would
involved, or a portion thereof, is situated, which explains probably work injustice to the applicant; or
why the action is also referred to as a localaction. In (c) That a party, court, agency or a person is doing,
contrast, the Rules of Court declares all other actions as threatening, or is attempting to do, or is procuring or
personal actions. suffering to be done, some act or acts probably in violation
of the rights of the applicant respecting the subject of the
Such actions may include those brought for the recovery of action or proceeding, and tending to render the judgment
personal property, or for the enforcement of some contract ineffectual.
or recovery of damages for its breach, or for the recovery of
damages for the commission of an injury to the person or
property. The venue of a personal action is the place where G.R. No. 157163
the plaintiff or any of the principal plaintiffs resides, or
where the defendant or any of the principal defendants The conditions for the issuance of the injunctive writ are:
resides, or in the case of a non-resident defendant where (a) that the right to be protected exists prima facie;
he may be found, at the election of the plaintiff, for which (b) that the act sought to be enjoined is violative of that
reason the action is considered a transitory one. right; and
(c) that there is an urgent and paramount necessity for the
writ to prevent serious damage.
G.R. No. 157163
Well-settled is the rule that an action to annul a contract of G.R. No. 157163
loan and its accessory real estate mortgage is a personal
action. In a personal action, the plaintiff seeks the recovery As a general rule, the courts will not issue writs of
of personal property, the enforcement of a contractor the prohibition or injunction whether preliminary or final in
recovery of damages. order to enjoin or restrain any criminal prosecution.
In contrast, in a real action, the plaintiff seeks the recovery But there are extreme cases in which exceptions to the
of real property, or, as indicated in Section 2 (a), Rule 4 of general rule have been recognized, including:
the then Rules of Court, a real action is an action affecting
title to real property or for the recovery of possession, or (1) when the injunction is necessary to afford adequate
for partition or condemnation of, or foreclosure of protection to the constitutional rights of the accused;
mortgage on, real property. (2) when it is necessary for the orderly administration of
justice or to avoid oppression or multiplicity of actions;
(3) when there is a prejudicial question that is sub judice;
G.R. No. 157163 (4) when the acts of the officer are without or in excess of
authority;
Section 2 of Rule 4, to wit: (5) when the prosecution is under an invalid law, ordinance
SEC. 2. Venue of personal actions. All other actions may or regulation;
be commenced and tried where the plaintiff or any of the (6) when double jeopardy is clearly apparent;
principal plaintiffs resides, orwhere the defendant or any of (7) when the court has no jurisdiction over the offense;
the principal defendants resides, or in the case of a (8) when it is a case of persecution rather than prosecution;
nonresident defendant where he may be found, at the (9) when the charges are manifestly false and motivated by
election of the plaintiff. the lust for vengeance; and
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
(10) when there is clearly no prima faciecase against the G.R. No. 161308
accused and a motion to quash on that ground has been
denied. The non-identification and non-presentation of the weapon
actually used in the killing did not diminish the merit of the
conviction primarily because other competent evidence
G.R. No. 159926 and the testimonies of witnesses had directly and positively
identified and incriminated RRR as the assailant.
PPP must be mindful of and should closely comply with the
following statutory requirements for the remedy as set
forth in Rule 47 of the Rules of Court. G.R. No. 161380
The first requirement prescribes that the remedy is Section 5, Rule 10 of the Rules of Court, viz:
available only when the petitioner can no longer resort to
the ordinary remedies of new trial, appeal, petition for Section 5. Amendment to conform to or authorize
relief or other appropriate remedies through no fault of the presentation of evidence. When issues not raised by the
petitioner. This means that the remedy, although seen as "a pleadings are tried with the express or implied consent of
last remedy," is not an alternative to the ordinary remedies the parties, they shall be treated in all respects as if they
of new trial, appeal and petition for relief. The petition had been raised in the pleadings. Such amendment of the
must aver, therefore, that the petitioner failed to move for pleadings as may be necessary to cause them to conform to
a new trial, or to appeal, or to file a petition for relief the evidence and to raise these issues may be made upon
without fault on his part. motion of any party at any time, even after judgment; but
failure to amend does not affect the result of the trial of
The second requirement limits the ground for the action of these issues. If evidence is objected to at the trial on the
annulment of judgment to either extrinsic fraud or lack of ground that it is not within the issues made by the
jurisdiction. Not every kind of fraud justifies the action of pleadings, the court may allow the pleadings to be
annulment of judgment. Only extrinsic fraud does. amended and shall do so with liberality if the presentation
of the merits of the action and the ends of substantial
justice will be subserved thereby. The court may grant a
G.R. No. 159926 continuance to enable the amendment to be made.
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
G.R. No. 163109 accused or merely failed to prove his guilt beyond
reasonable doubt. In either case, the judgment shall
It is true that the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative determine if the act or omission from which the civil liability
remedies is not an ironclad rule, but recognizes exceptions, might arise did not exist."
specifically: (a) where there is estoppel on the part of the
party invoking the doctrine; (b) where the challenged
administrative act is patently illegal, amounting to lack of G.R. No. 164246
jurisdiction; (c) where there is unreasonable delay or official
inaction that will irretrievably prejudice the complainant; Section 19, Rule 70 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure
(d) where the amount involved is relatively so small as to reads:
make the rule impractical and oppressive; (e) where the Section 19. Immediate execution of judgment; how to stay
question involved is purely legal and will ultimately have to same. If judgment is rendered against the defendant,
be decided by the courts of justice; (f) where judicial execution shall issue immediately upon motion unless an
intervention is urgent; (g) where the application of the appeal has been perfected and the defendant to stay
doctrines may cause great and irreparable damage; (h) execution files a sufficient supersedeas bond, approved by
where the controversial acts violate due process; (i) where the Municipal Trial Court and executed in favor of the
the issue of non-exhaustion of administrative remedies has plaintiff to pay the rents, damages, and costs accruing
been rendered moot; (j) where strong public interest is down to the time of the judgment appealed from, and
involved; and (l) in quo warranto proceedings. unless, during the pendency of the appeal, he deposits with
the appellate court the amount of rent due from time to
time under the contract, if any, as determined by the
G.R. No. 163109 judgment of the Municipal Trial Court.
xxx
Section 3, Rule 9 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, to wit:
Section 3. Default; declaration of. If the defending party G.R. No. 164246
fails to answer within the time allowed therefore, the court
shall, upon motion of the claiming party with notice to the A judgment in favor of the plaintiff in an ejectment suit is
defending party, and proof of such failure, declare the immediately executory, but the defendant, to stay its
defending party in default. Thereupon, the court shall immediate execution, must: (1) perfect an appeal; (2) file a
proceed to render judgment granting the claimant such supersede s bond; and (3) periodically deposit the rentals
relief as his pleading may warrant, unless the court in its becoming due during the pendency of the appeal.
discretion requires the claimant to submit evidence. Such
reception of evidence may be delegated to the clerk of
court.cralawred G.R. No. 164277
The Rules of Court requires that in case of an acquittal, the Section 3, Rule 117 of the Rules of Court enumerates the
judgment shall state "whether the evidence of the grounds for the quashal of the complaint or information, as
prosecution absolutely failed to prove the guilt of the follows:
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
(a) the facts charged do not constitute an offense; pleadings, the court may allow the pleadings to be
(b) the court trying the case has no jurisdiction over the amended and shall do so with liberality if the presentation
offense charged; of the merits of the action and the ends of substantial
(c) the court trying the case has no jurisdiction over the justice will be subserved thereby. The court may grant a
person of the accused; continuance to enable the amendment to be made.
(d) the officer who filed the information had no authority to
do so;
(e) the complaint or information does not conform G.R. No. 176317
substantially to the prescribed form;
(f) more than one offense is charged except when a single Section 2, Rule 120 of the Rules of Court, the judgment, if it
punishment for various offenses is prescribed by law; was of conviction, must state:
(g) the criminal action or liability has been extinguished; (1) the legal qualification of the offense constituted by the
(h) the complaint or information contains averments which, acts committed by the accused and the aggravating or
if true, would constitute a legal excuse or justification; and mitigating circumstances which attended its commission;
(i) the accused has been previously convicted or acquitted (2) the participation of the accused in the offense, whether
of the offense charged, or the case against him was as principal, accomplice, or accessory after the fact;
dismissed or otherwise terminated without his express (3) the penalty imposed upon the accused; and
consent. (4) the civil liability or damages caused by his wrongful act
or omission to be recovered from the accused by the
offended party, if there is any, unless the enforcement of
G.R. No. 166414 the civil liability by a separate civil action has been reserved
or waived.
According to Section 6, Rule 110 of the Rules of Court, the
complaint or information is sufficient if it states the names
of the accused; the designation of the offense given by the G.R. No. 199139
statute; the acts or omissions complained of as constituting
the offense; the name of the offended party; the Section 7, Article IX-A of the Constitution states that unless
approximate date of the commission of the offense; and otherwise provided by the Constitution or by law, any
the place where the offense was committed. The decision, order, or ruling of each Commission may be
fundamental test in determining the sufficiency of the brought to the Court on certiorari by the aggrieved party
averments in a complaint or information is, therefore, within 30 days from receipt of a copy thereof. For this
whether the facts alleged therein, if hypothetically reason, the Rules of Court (1997) contains a separate rule
admitted, constitute the elements of the offense. (Rule 64) on the review of the decisions of the COMELEC
and the Commission on Audit. Rule 64 is generally identical
with certiorari under Rule 65, except as to the period of the
G.R. No. 173988 filing of the petition for certiorari, that is, in the former, the
period is 30 days from notice of the judgment or final order
Under Section 6, Rule 110 of the Rules of Court, the or resolution sought to be reviewed but, in the latter, not
information is sufficient if it states the name of the accused; later than 60 days from notice of the judgment, order or
the designation of the offense given by the statute; the acts resolution assailed.
or omissions complained of as constituting the offense; the
name of the offended party; the proximate date of the
commission of the offense; and the place where the G.R. No. 199139
offense was committed.
The well-established rule is that the motion for
reconsideration is an indispensable condition before an
G.R. No. 174433 aggrieved party can resort to the special civil action for
certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court. The filing of
Section 5, Rule 10 of the Rules of Court, which states: the motion for reconsideration before the resort to
certiorari will lie is intended to afford to the public
Section 5. Amendment to conform to or authorize respondent the opportunity to correct any actual or fancied
presentation of evidence. When issues not raised by the error attributed to it by way of re-examination of the legal
pleadings are tried with the express or implied consent of and factual aspects of the case.
the parties, they shall be treated in all respects as if they
had been raised in the pleadings. Such amendment of the The rule is not absolute, however, considering that
pleadings as may be necessary to cause them to conform to jurisprudence has laid down exceptions to the requirement
the evidence and to raise these issues may be made upon for the filing of a petition for certiorari without first filing a
motion of any party at any time, even after judgment; but motion for reconsideration.
failure to amend does not affect the result of the trial of .
these issues. If evidence is objected to at the trial on the
ground that it is not within the issues made by the G.R. No. 200454
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
The RTC, in an appeal of the judgment in an ejectment case, attorney, and that if he cannot afford an attorney one will
shall not conduct a rehearing or trial de novo. In this be appointed for him prior to any questioning.
connection, Section 18, Rule 70 of the Rules of Courtclearly
provides:
G.R. No. 175796
Sec. 18. Judgment conclusive only on possession; not
conclusive in actions involving title or ownership. x x x. According to Section 1, Rule 4 of the Rules of Court, a real
action is one that affects title to or possession of real
xxxx property, or an interest therein. Thus, an action for
partition or condemnation of, or foreclosure of mortgage
The judgment or final order shall be appealable to the on, real property is a real action. The real action is to be
appropriate Regional Trial Court which shall decide the commenced and tried in the proper court having
same on the basis of the entire record of the proceedings jurisdiction over the area wherein the real property
had in the court of origin and such memoranda and/or involved, or a portion thereof, is situated, which explains
briefs as may be submitted by the parties or required by why the action is also referred to as a local action.
the Regional Trial Court. (7a)
In contrast, the Rules of Court declares all other actions as
Hence, the RTC violated the foregoing rule by ordering the personal actions. Such actions may include those brought
conduct of the relocation and verification survey "in aid of for the recovery of personal property, or for the
its appellate jurisdiction" and by hearing the testimony of enforcement of some contract or recovery of damages for
the surveyor, for its doing so was tantamount to its holding its breach, or for the recovery of damages for the
of a trial de novo. commission of an injury to the person or property. The
venue of a personal action is the place where the plaintiff
or any of the principal plaintiffs resides, or where the
G.R. No. 156995 defendant or any of the principal defendants resides, or in
the case of a non-resident defendant where he may be
Unlawful detainer is an action filed by a lessor, vendor, found, at the election of the plaintiff, for which reason the
vendee, or other person against whom the possession of action is considered a transitory one.
any land or building is unlawfully withheld after the
expiration or termination of the right to hold possession by
virtue of any contract, express or implied. To vest in the G.R. No. 212865
MTC the jurisdiction to effect the ejectment from the land
of the respondents as the occupants in unlawful detainer, The Court has stressed that the People of the Philippines,
therefore, the complaint should embody such a statement being the real party in interest in every criminal
of facts clearly showing the attributes of unlawful detainer. proceedings, can be represented only by the OSG in
However, the allegations of the petitioners' complaint did criminal proceedings in the CA or in this Court. Yet, this rule
not show that they had permitted or tolerated the admits of exceptions:
occupation of the portion of their property by the
respondents; or how the respondents' entry had been A special civil action for certiorari may be filed by an
effected, or how and when the dispossession by the aggrieved party alleging grave abuse of discretion
respondents had started. All that the petitioners alleged amounting to excess or lack of jurisdiction on the part of
was the respondents' "illegal use and occupation" of the the trial court. In a long line of cases, this Court construed
property. As such, the action was not unlawful detainer. the term aggrieved parties to include the State and the
private offended party or complainant.
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
G.R. No. 212865 The right to bail is expressly afforded by Section 13, Article
III (Bill of Rights) of the Constitution, viz.:
The accused who fails to appear at the promulgation of the
judgment of conviction loses the remedies available under x x x All persons, except those charged with offenses
the Rules of Court against the judgment, specifically: punishable by reclusion perpetua when evidence of guilt is
(a) the filing of a motion for new trial or for reconsideration strong, shall, before conviction, be bailable by sufficient
(Rule 121), and sureties, or be released on recognizance as may be
(b) an appeal from the judgment of conviction (Rule 122). provided by law. The right to bail shall not be impaired even
when the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is
However, the Rules of Court permits him to regain his suspended. Excessive bail shall not be required.
standing in court in order to avail himself of these remedies This constitutional provision is repeated in Section 7, Rule
within 15 days from the date of promulgation of the 114 of the Rules of Court , as follows:
judgment conditioned upon: Section 7. Capital offense or an offense punishable by
(a) his surrender; and reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, not bailable. No
(b) his filing of a motion for leave of court to avail himself of person charged with a capital offense, or an offense
the remedies, stating therein the reason for his absence. punishable by reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, shall
be admitted to bail when evidence of guilt is strong,
Should the trial court find that his absence was for a regardless of the stage of the criminal prosecution.
justifiable cause, he should .be allowed to avail himself of
the remedies within 15 days from notice of the order A capital offense in the context of the rule refers to an
finding his absence justified and allowing him the available offense that, under the law existing at the time of its
remedies from the judgment of conviction. commission and the application for admission to bail, may
be punished with death.
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
The writ of execution should mirror the judgment that it judgment obligee or his authorized representative if present
enforces. The form and contents of the writ of execution at the time of payment. The lawful fees shall be handed
are specified in Section 8, Rule 39 of the Rules of Court, viz.: under proper receipt to the executing sheriff who shall turn
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary over the said amount within the same day to the clerk of
court of the court that issued the writ.
Section 8. Issuance, form and contents of a writ of
execution. The writ of execution shall: (1) issue in the xxx xxx xxx
name of the Republic of the Philippines from the court
which granted the motion; (2) state the name of the court,
the case number and title, the dispositive part of the (b) Satisfaction by levy. If the judgment obligor cannot
subject judgment or order; and (3) require the sheriff or pay all or part of the obligation in cash, certified bank check
other proper officer to whom it is directed to enforce the or other mode of payment acceptable to the judgment
writ according to its terms, in the manner herein after obligee, the officer shall levy upon the properties of the
provided: judgment obligor of every kind and nature whatsoever which
may be disposed of for value and not otherwise exempt
(a) If the execution be against the property of the judgment from execution giving the latter the option to immediately
obligor, to satisfy the judgment, with interest, out of the choose which property or part thereof may be levied upon,
real or personal property of such judgment obligor; sufficient to satisfy the judgment. If the judgment obligor
does not exercise the option, the officer shall first levy on
(b) If it be against real or personal property in the hands of the personal properties, if any, and then on the real
personal representatives, heirs, devisees, legatees, tenants, properties if the personal properties are insufficient to
or trustees of the judgment obligor, to satisfy the answer for the judgment.
judgment, with interest, out of such properties;
xxx xxx xxx
(c) If it be for the sale of real or personal property, to sell
such property, describing it, and apply the proceeds in (c) Garnishment of debts and credits. The officer may levy
conformity with the judgment, the material parts of which on debts due the judgment obligor and other credits,
shall be recited in the writ of execution; including bank deposits, financial interests, royalties,
commissions and other personal property not capable of
(d) If it be for the delivery of the possession of real or manual delivery in the possession or control of third parties.
personal property, to deliver the possession of the same, Levy shall be made by serving notice upon the person owing
describing it, to the party entitled thereto, and to satisfy such debts or having in his possession or control such credits
any costs, damages, rents, or profits covered by the to which the judgment obligor is entitled. The garnishment
judgment out of the personal property of the person shall cover only such amount as will satisfy the judgment and
against whom it was rendered, and if sufficient personal all lawful fees.
property cannot be found, then out of the real property; xxx xxx xxx
and
(e) In all cases, the writ of execution shall specifically state G.R. No. 158464
the amount of the interest, costs, damages, rents, or profits
due as of the date of the issuance of the writ, aside from The determination of just compensation is essentially a
the principal obligation under the judgment. For this judicial function, consistent with the Court's roles as the
purpose, the motion for execution shall specify the guardian of the fundamental rights guaranteed by the due
amounts of the foregoing reliefs sought by the movant. process and equal protection clauses, and as the final
arbiter over transgressions committed against
constitutional rights.
A.M. No. P-10-2793
The duty to exhaust all efforts to recover the balance was G.R. No. 159350
laid down in Section 9, Rule 39 of the Rules of Court, with
special attention to the highlighted portions, to wit: The doctrine of stare decisis enjoins adherence to judicial
precedents. When a court has laid down a principle of law
Section 9. Execution of judgments for money, how as applicable to a certain state of facts, it will adhere to that
enforced. (a) Immediate payment on demand. The principle and apply it to all future cases in which the facts
officer shall enforce an execution of a judgment for money are substantially the same; but when the facts are
by demanding from the judgment obligor the immediate essentially different, stare decisis does not apply because a
payment of the full amount stated in the writ of execution perfectly sound principle as applied to one set of facts
and all lawful fees. The judgment obligor shall pay in cash, might be entirely inappropriate when a factual variance is
certified bank check payable to the judgment obligee, or any introduced.
other form of payment acceptable to the latter, the amount
of the judgment debt under proper receipt directly to the
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
xxxx
G.R. No. 170192
G.R. No. 172682
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
On the one hand, Section 5, Rule 86 of the Rules of Admission to bail always involves the risk that the accused
Court lists the actions abated by death as including: will take flight. This is the reason precisely why the
(1) claims for funeral expenses and those for the last probability or the improbability of flight is an important
sickness of the decedent; factor to be taken into consideration in granting or denying
(2) judgments for money; and bail, even in capital cases. The exception to the
(3) all claims for money against the deceased, arising from fundamental right to bail should be applied in direct ratio to
contract, express or implied. the extent of the probability of evasion of prosecution.
Apparently, an accused's official and social standing and his
other personal circumstances arc considered and
G.R. No. 175592 appreciated as tending to render his flight improbable.
The petitioner has proven with more than sufficient
A child may be a competent witness, unless the trial court evidence that he would not be a flight risk. For one, his
determines upon proper showing that the child's mental advanced age and fragile state of health have minimized
maturity is such as to render him incapable of perceiving the likelihood that he would make himself scarce and
the facts respecting which he is to be examined and of escape from the jurisdiction of our courts.
relating the facts truthfully. The testimony of the child of
sound mind with the capacity to perceive and make known
the perception can be believed in the absence of any G.R. No. 192536
showing of an improper motive to testify. Once it is
established that the child fully understands the character Section 2, Rule 50 of the Rules of Court expressly states: "An
and nature of an oath, the testimony is given full credence. appeal erroneously taken to the Court of Appeals shall not
be transferred to the appropriate court but shall be
dismissed outright."
G.R. No. 183173
Section 1, Rule 63 of the Rules of Court expressly states that G.R. No. 194226
any person "whose rights are affected by a statute,
executive order or regulation, ordinance, or any other An indispensable party is one who has such an interest in
governmental regulation" may bring an action in the the controversy or subject matter that a final adjudication
appropriate Regional Trial Court "to determine any cannot be made in its absence without injuring or affecting
that interest.
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
Jurisdiction over the subject matter is conferred only by the 2. Review, revise, reverse, modify, or affirm on appeal
Constitution or the law; it cannot be acquired through a or certiorari, as the law or the Rules of Court may provide,
waiver; it cannot be enlarged by the omission of the final judgments and orders of lower courts in:
parties; it cannot be conferred by the acquiescence of the
court. Specifically, Batas Pambansa Blg. 129, as amended, xxxx
did not vest jurisdiction in the RTC over matters relating to
the Civil Service. Consequently, the RTC could not arrogate Implementing the limitation is Section 1 of Rule 45, to wit:
unto itself the hearing and decision of a subject matter
outside of its jurisdiction. Section 1. Filing of petition with Supreme Court.-A party
desiring to appeal by certiorari from a judgment, final order
or resolution of the Court of Appeals, the Sandiganbayan,
G.R. No. 202597 the Court of Tax Appeals, the Regional Trial Court or other
courts, whenever authorized by law, may file with the
Section 2(g), Rule 18 of the Rules of Court, to wit: Supreme Court a verified petition for review
Section 2. Nature and purpose. - The pre-trial is mandatory. on certiorari. The petition may include an application for a
The court shall consider: writ of preliminary injunction or other provisional remedies
and shall raise only questions of law, which must be
x x xx distinctly set forth. The petitioner may seek the same
provisional remedies by verified motion filed in the same
(g) The propriety of rendering judgment on the pleadings, action or proceeding at any time during its pendency.
or summary judgment, or of dismissing the action should a
valid ground therefor be found to exist; On the other hand, the review of the decisions, awards and
final orders or resolutions of quasi-judicial offices or bodies
x x xx is through the petition for review under Rule 43.
To be clear, the rule only spells out that unless the motion
for such judgment has earlier been filed the pre-trial may G.R. No. 211937
be the occasion in which the court considers the propriety
of rendering judgment on the pleadings or summary Section 7, Article IX of the 1987 Constitution governs the
judgment. If no such motion was earlier filed, the pre-trial review of the COA, in that the COA 's decisions, final orders
judge may then indicate to the proper party to initiate the or rulings may be brought to the Supreme Court
rendition of such judgment by filing the necessary on certiorari by the aggrieved pai1y within 30 days from
motion. Indeed, such motion is required by either Rule 34 receipt of a copy thereof. To differentiate this review from
(Judgment on the Pleadings) or Rule 35 (Summary the special civil action for certiorari under Rule 65, the
Judgment) of the Rules of Court. The pre-trial judge Court incorporated a new rule (Rule 64) in the 1997
cannot motu proprio render the judgment on the pleadings revision of the Rules of Court under the title Review of'
or summary judgment. In the case of the motion for Judgments and Final Orders or Resolutions of the
summary judgment, the adverse party is entitled to counter Commission on Elections and the Commission on
the motion. Audit. Except for the period for bringing the petition for
review, Rule 64 is a replication of the provisions of Rule 65
on the special civil action for certiorari.
G.R. No. 211504
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)
To have knowledge, you must first have reverence for the Lord. (Proverbs 1:7)