JOINDER OF CAUSES (RULE 2, SEC. 5)
CLASS SUIT;
vs. JOINDER OF PARTIES (RULE 3, SEC.
6)
(2004, p. 18)
One of the limitations is of course joinder of parties, and
if there is just one plaintiff and one defendant then this
limitation cannot conceivably arise because joinder of
parties is based on the assumption that there is plurality
of plaintiff or plurality of defendants or both.
LIMITATION TO JOINDER OF CAUSES
OF ACTION WITH JOINDER OF PARTIES
(2004, p. 20)
In joinder of causes which involves joinder of parties, the
limitations are that the joinder of parties should arise
from a situation where the transactions arise out of
the same contract or series of contracts. In joinder of
parties in Section 6 of Rule 3, the parties involved here
are not necessarily indispensable parties. There are
several causes of action and therefor if there are several
causes of action there is plurality of parties involved, but
the causes of action arise out of the same transactions or
a series of transactions.
Indispensable party v. Necessary party
(riano, p. 231)
RULE 17, SECTION 3 AS ANOTHER
GROUND FOR DISMISSAL vs. RULE 16
(FAILURE TO STATE A CAUSE OF
ACTION) (2004, p. 24)
A court on its own or upon motion of the adverse party
can dismiss a case if the plaintiff disobeys an order of the
court or he fails to comply with the provisions of rules of
court.
In fact, this recourse would be more advantageous to
the defendant because a dismissal under Rule 17 is a
dismissal with prejudice; it is adjudication upon the
merits.
If we compare the consequences of the granting of a
motion to dismiss founded solely on the ground of failure
to state a cause of action although the complaint could be
dismissed, the dismissal by reason of the complainant’s
failure to state a cause of action is not a dismissal with
prejudice.
A dismissal under Rule 16 on that ground that is failure
of the complaint to state a cause of action will be a
dismissal without prejudice; it will not preclude the
plaintiff from filing a similar complaint against the same
defendant founded on the same cause.
RULE 3, SECTION 12.
CLASS SUIT vis-à-vis RULE 3, SECTION
6 (2004, p. 25)
The main difference between permissive joinder of
parties in a class suit is that in permissive joinder of
parties, we are assuming that there are two or more
causes of action that are joined in one complaint and
there are plural parties who could claim or defend these
various causes of action.
In a class suit, we also have plural parties. In fact, the law
requires that the parties are so numerous that it is not
practicable to bring them all before the court. But in a
class suit, there is just one cause of action. There is
community of interest among several persons who are so
numerous that it is not practicable to bring them all
before the court.
Rule 4 – Venue of Actions
Venue v. Jurisdiction
The differences between venue and jurisdiction exist
ONLY in a civil case.
Venue is procedural because it is part of Rule 4 of the
Rules of Court, while jurisdiction is substantive law.
But the jurisdiction that we are referring to here is
jurisdiction over the subject matter and nature of the
action so that there will be a basis in giving the
distinctions between venue and jurisdiction.
Since venue is purely procedural, it can be waived by the
parties unlike jurisdiction over the subject matter
which generally is not waivable.
The other distinction is that since jurisdiction is part of
substantive law, it is governed and covered by BP 129
and the amendatory statutes.
Summary procedures
DIFFERENCE IN THE APPLICATION OF
RULE 16 TO ORDINARY PROCEDURE
AND SUMMARY PROCEDURE
Summary procedure gives to the trial court the
discretion to dismiss a case governed by summary
procedure on any of the grounds mentioned in Rule 16.
So the only difference between applications of Rule 16 to
a case governed by ordinary procedure, generally a
motion to dismiss is required.
In the case of summary procedure, the court can motu
proprio dismiss the complaint as long as any of the
grounds for dismissal of a case under Rule 16 is apparent
from the allegations contained in the pleading.
Of course, if the court neglects to dismiss the case
although a ground may be apparent from the allegations
in the complaint, the defendant can still avail of the
grounds for dismissal under Rule 16, even if these
grounds do not involve absence of jurisdiction over the
subject matter or failure to comply with prior barangay
conciliation.
You see, what summary procedure prohibits is the filing
of a motion to dismiss. The defendant can setup any of
the grounds for a motion to dismiss by filing an
answer with an affirmative defense. The filing of an
answer with an affirmative defense is not prohibited in
summary procedure and any of the grounds for a motion
to dismiss in Rule 16 Is available to a defending party as
an affirmative defense.
SUMMONS ISSUED IN ORDINARY
PROCEDURE vs. SUMMONS ISSUED IN
SUMMARY PROCEDURE
The court will also issue a summons that will be
served upon the defendant. But you should note that
there is a significant difference between the summons
issued in summary procedure and the summons issued
in regular procedure.
The summons issued in summary procedure requires
the defendant to file an answer within a non-
extendible period of ten days. In regular procedure,
the summons does not use the phrase “non-
extendible period,” meaning to say that the period to
answer in regular procedure could be extended by the
court.
Another significant difference is that in summary
procedure, there is no threat to the defendant that if
he does not answer, he will be declared in default and
judgment by default will be taken against him.
Another significant difference between processes in
regular procedure and summary procedure is the
limitation of the number of pleadings that could be
filed in summary procedure, compared to the pleadings
in Rule 6 that are allowed in regular procedure. In
summary procedure, only the complaint, the answer, a
compulsory counterclaim and cross-claim are allowed,
while in regular procedure all the pleadings enumerated
in Rule 6 could be availed of by the litigants. So that in
summary procedure, intervention is prohibited. A third
party complaint is prohibited. Even a motion for bill of
particulars is prohibited; a petition for certiorari,
prohibition, and mandamus against an interlocutory
order is also prohibited in summary procedure.
SUMMARY PROCEDURE IN CIVIL CASES
vs. SUMMARY PROCEDURE IN
CRIMINAL CASES
The principal distinction between summary procedure
applicable to civil cases, and the summary procedure
applicable to criminal cases, is that in a criminal case,
there is a right to cross-examine the witnesses. So, it
is not purely summary in other words. In civil cases, the
parties and even the court are not given the privilege
to cross-examine the witnesses. All that the parties
need to do in a civil case governed by summary
procedure is to submit affidavits of witnesses and the
respective position papers. And thereafter, the case is
submitted for decision. But in a criminal case, the
testimony of the witnesses are contained in an affidavit,
but the affidavits will take the place of their testimony on
direct examination, and then the court will require these
witnesses to attend a trial for the purpose of cross-
examination of these witnesses.
In all other aspects, there is no difference between the
summary procedure that covers civil cases and criminal
cases.
In summary procedure in criminal cases, there is also a
preliminary conference, which is akin to the pre-trial
in ordinary procedure, it is also mandatory.
 But the SC has ruled that if the trial court fails
to conduct a preliminary conference, the
proceedings taken thereafter are not
necessarily void, although the holding of a
preliminary conference is mandatory. A party
may be considered to have waived this
mandatory preliminary conference if he
fails to object to its absence, or he fails to
object to the failure of the trial court to
conduct a preliminary conference.
Rule 15 – MOTIONS
MOTIONS vs. PLEADINGS (2004, p.64)
The noticeable distinction between a motion and a
pleading is the number. In Rule 6, there is an
enumeration of only nine pleadings (i.e. in our
jurisdiction, we recognize only nine pleadings).
In Rule 15, the SC mentions nothing about number of
motions that could be used in a particular case. It is not
possible for the SC to enumerate all the possible motions
because motion will depend almost completely upon the
creativity of the lawyer.
Rule 16 – MTD
If a lawyer cannot ask for a relief in a pleading, he can
ADVANTAGE OF PLEADING ANY OF
always do so in motion. THE GROUNDS UNDER RULE 16 AS AN
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Pleadings cannot be filed while the case is already on
If the defendant files an answer with an affirmative
appeal before the SC, before the CA, or before the RTC
defense based on the grounds in Rule 16, the defendant
(that is, if we consider a RTC an appellate court).
can incorporate in that answer already a
But even if the case is on appeal to these appellate courts, counterclaim, whether permissive or compulsory. And
while pleadings can no longer be filed, there is nothing then he could ask for a preliminary hearing on these
to stop a litigant from filing motions before the affirmative defenses as if the MTD had been filed. If the
appellate court court is convinced that the case should really be
dismissed by reason of Rule 16, the court will order the
MOTIONS FILED BEFORE THE TRIAL dismissal of the case.
COURT COMPARED TO MOTIONS FILED A defendant cannot file a MTD and embody in that
BEFORE THE APPELLATE COURTS (SC motion his counterclaim. A counterclaim must always be
incorporated in another
and CA); RULE 15, SECTION 5: NOTICE
OF HEARING LITIS PENDENCIA vs. NOTICE OF LIS
1. Notice of hearing shall be addressed to all parties
PENDENS
concerned, and shall specify the time and date of the
Notice of lis pendens is a constructive notice in real
hearing which must not be later than ten (10) days
actions. It operates when the case involves title to or
after the filing of the motion.
possession of real property and one of the litigants
2. There is also a difference in form between a motion
requires the Register of Deeds to annotate at the back of
that is filed before a trial court and a motion that is
the title of the property involved the fact that there is
filed before an appellate court like the Supreme
pending action between the plaintiff and the defendant
Court or the Court of Appeals:
involving this real property.
a. In a motion filed before a trial court in Rule
15, the motion generally must contain a notice Litis pendencia means the pendency of another case
of hearing. Otherwise, according to involving the same parties founded on the same cause of
jurisprudence, a motion without a notice of action
hearing, a motion which does not comply with
the requirements in Rule 15, is a useless piece Lack of Cause of Action v. Failure to
of paper it is a scrap of paper.
b. A motion that is filed before the Supreme
state cause of action (2015)
Court or the Court of Appeals does not have Failure to state cause of Lack of cause of action
action
to contain a notice of hearing.
Insufficiency in the Failure to prove or
 Reason: in the SC and in the CA, there is no
allegations of the establish by evidence
such thing as a motion day. If a party files a complaint one’s state cause of
motion before the CA, or before the SC and action
he embodies in his motion a notice of As a ground for dismissal
hearing, there is a great chance that this Raised in a motion to Raised in demurrer to
party will be asked to explain why he dismiss under rule 16 evidence under Rule 33
should not be cited for contempt of court. before a responsive after the plaintiff has
c. But before a trial court, compliance with all the pleading is filed rested his case
requisites of a motion is a must. The Determination
requirements are found in Rule 15. Only from the allegations Resolved only on the
of the pleading basis of the evidence he
has presented in support
of his claim
Rule 18 question of law or fact
which may be jointly
of claims, counterclaims,
cross-claims, third-party
PRE-TRIAL IN CIVIL CASE vs. PRE- tried (Sec.1, Rule 31). complaints, or issues
which may be separately
TRIAL IN A CRIMINAL CASE tried.
1. Pre-trial is MANDATORY in both cases. The court
cannot simply do away with it even with the consent
of the parties.
2. In a civil case, the primordial purpose is to enter Ways of consolidating cases
into a compromise agreement. This is not one of the
purposes in criminal cases because it is the
interest of the state, a violation of penal law that is
involved. However, with respect to the civil liability
arising from the crime, the Civil Code still
encourages that there be an amicable settlement.
3. Absence of pre-trial brief in criminal cases. In
civil case, the parties are required to submit a pre-
trial brief otherwise the court could impose
sanctions for the violations.
4. Criminal procedure requires that the stipulation of
facts must be reduced into writing and signed by the
accused and his counsel. Otherwise, the facts
stipulated will not be admissible against the
accused. In a civil case, stipulation of facts arrived at
during the pre-trial conference need not be reduced What is the difference between trial by
into writing
commissioners and the
EX PARTE HEARING UNDER RULE 18 delegation to the clerk of court under
vs. RULE 9 Rule 30?
Rule 9 – if the defendant is declared in default and the The power of a commissioner is much broader than the
court orders the plaintiff to present evidence, the clerk of court.
presentation of evidence is ex parte.
Furthermore, the clerk of court has to be a lawyer. A
Rule 18 – if the defendant does not attend a pre-trial commissioner need not be one. A commissioner must in
conference or fails to submit his pre-trial brief, the court fact have a profession that corresponds to the issue.
could issue an order directing an ex parte hearing be
conducted for the sole purpose of receiving the plaintiff’s  If the issue calls for knowledge on mining, for
evidence. example, the commissioner must be at least a
mining engineer ora geologist.
Major difference – award that can be issued by the
court. A commissioner has the power to rule on objections
Rule 9 – award to be given is limited to what has been while the clerk of court cannot.
prayed for in the complaint. It does not apply the
principle of amendment to pleading to conform to Finally, a commissioner may be appointed to try
evidence. issues that arise even after the judgment has become
final and executory. This is possible in Rule 39. Since the
Rule 18 – apply Rule 10 (i.e. principle of amendment to clerk of court is limited to reception to evidence, then
pleading to conform to evidence). this prerogative does not pertain to them.

RULE 30 Rule 36
Consolidation v. Severance
Consolidation Severance
Involves several actions Contemplates a single
having a common action having a number
 Rule 36 Section 4: Several judgment;
Rule 36 Section 5: Separate judgment;
common element – not appealable

In an action against several defendants, the court may,

when a several judgment is proper, render judgment
against one or more of them, leaving the action to
proceed against the others.

SEVERAL JUDGMENT – is one rendered by a court

against one or more defendants and not against all of
them leaving the action to proceed against the others.

Several judgment is PROPER where the liability of each

party is clearly separable and distinct from his co-
parties such that the claims against each of them could
have been the subject of separate suits, and the judgment
for or against one of them will not necessarily affect the
other. A several judgment is NOT PROPER in action
against solidary debtors (Fernandez vs. Sta.Maria, G.R.
No. 160730, Dec. 10, 2004)

There are several kinds of judgments in Rule 36 itself –

several judgment, separate judgment. And the common
element of these judgments in Rule 36 is that generally
they are not appealable, although they are considered as
judgment.

 Reason: the judgment does not entirely dispose

of the whole litigation.

After the rendition of this judgment, the court will still try
the other matter submitted for decision. So the
judgments enumerated in Rule

36 – several, separate judgment generally are not

appealable.