TITLE OF SUBJECT: CIVIL PROCEDURE 1

UNITS: Three (3)

SUBJECT DESCRIPTION:

This subject is a study of Rules 1-39 of the 2019 Amended Rules of Civil
Procedure. The course starts with a review of the differences between substantive and
remedial law, the basic principles of jurisdiction, and the power of the Supreme Court to
promulgate the Rules of Court. The course involves the analysis of the relevant rules,
jurisprudence, and related laws governing procedure in civil cases and upon completion
of the course, students are expected to have a strong fundamental knowledge and
understanding of the Rules of Civil Procedure.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Remedial Law vs. Substantive Law

II. Rule Making power of the Supreme Court

1. Source
2. Limitations
3. 1987 Philippine Constitution
4. Cases:
a. Estipona vs. Hon. Lobrigo, GR. No. 226679, August 15, 2017
b. Echegaray v. Secretary of Justice, 361 Phil. 73, 88 (1999).
c. Philippine Woman's Christian Temperance Union, Inc. v.
Teodoro R. Yangco 2nd And 3rd Generation Heirs
Foundation, Inc., 731Phil.269, 292 (2014).

III. Jurisdiction

1. What is Jurisdiction
2. Aspects of Jurisdiction
a. Jurisdiction over the parties
b. Jurisdiction over the subject matter
c. Jurisdiction over the issues
d. Jurisdiction over the res
3. Classification of jurisdiction
a. Original
b. Appellate
c. Exclusive
d. Concurrent
e. General
f. Specific
4. Doctrines related to Jurisdiction
a. Doctrine of Hierarchy of Courts
b. Doctrine of Non-interference
c. Doctrine of Judicial Stability
d. Doctrine of Continuity of Jurisdiction
e. Doctrine of Estoppel on Jurisdiction
5. How is Jurisdiction determined
6. How is Jurisdiction Acquired
7. Effects of Lack of Jurisdiction
8. Cases
a. People v. Mariano, G.R. No. L-40527, [June 30, 1976]
b. Bureau of Customs vs. Devanadera, GR No. 193253,
September 8, 2018
c. Ga, Jr., vs. Tubungan, 600 SCRA 736).
d. Calimlim vs. Ramirez, 118 SCRA 399; Pangilinan vs. CA, 321
SCRA 51
e. Tijam vs. Sibonghanoy, 23 SCRA 29

1
 f. Rizal Commercial Banking Corp. v. Plast-Print Industries, Inc.,
G.R. No. 199308, June 19, 2019
g. De Pedro v. Romasan Development Corporation 748 Phil.
706 (2014)
h. Medical Plaza Makati Condominium v. Cullen, G.R. No.
181416 (2013)
i. Heirs of Concha v. Lumocso, 564 Phil. 580, 592–593 (2007)
j. Platinum Tours and Travel Inc. v. Panlilio, G.R. No. 133365,
[September 16, 2003]
k. Civil Service Commission v. Rasuman, G.R. No. 239011,
[June 17, 2019]
l. Cezar v. Ricafort-Bautista, G.R. No. 136415, [October 31,
2006]
m. Dy v. Yu, 763 Phil. 491-522 (2015)
n. Alba vs. CA, G.R. No. 164041, [29 July 2005]
o. De Joya v. Marquez, G.R. No. 162416, [January 31, 2006]
p. Linsangan-Maldia v. Philippine Deposit Insurance Corp., G.R.
No. 241713, [January 10, 2019]
q. Barroso v. Omelio, G.R. No. 194767, October 14, 2015
r. Tan v. Cinco, G.R. No. 213054, [June 15, 2016]
s. Katon vs. Palanca et.,al. G.R. No. 151149, September 7,
2004
t. Eternal Gardens Memorial Corp. v. Court of Appeals, G.R.
No. 50054, 17 August 1988
u. Republic v. Gallo, G.R. No. 207074, January 17, 2018
v. Batelec II Electric Cooperative, Inc. v. Energy Industry
Administration Bureau (EIAB), G.R. No. 135925, December
22, 2004
w. Province of Zamboanga Del Norte v. Court of Appeals, G.R.
No. 109853, [October 11, 2000]

IV. The Philippines Courts

1. Supreme Court
2. Court of Appeals
3. Special Appellate Courts
4. Second Level Courts
5. First Level Courts
6. Jurisdiction in Civil Cases of Philippine Courts
a. BP 129
b. 1987 Philippine Constitution
c. RA 11576

V. RULES ON CIVIL PROCEDURE (2019)

RULE 1 APPLICABILITY IN CIVIL ACTIONS

RULE 2 CAUSE OF ACTION
1. Ordinary Civil Action
a. Classification of Civil Action as to cause
a. Real Action
b. Personal Action
b. Classification as to object
a. Action in Rem
b. Action in Personam
c. Action Quasi In Rem
2. Criminal Action
3. Special Civil Action
4. Special Proceedings
5. Cases not covered by the Rules of Court
2. Elements of Cause of Action
3. Splitting a single cause of action
a. Effects

2
 4. Joinder of causes of Action
5. Conditions for Joinder of Action
6. Rule on Joinder of Parties
7. Misjoinder of Causes of Action
8. Cases
1. Navoa v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 59255, [December 29,
1995]
2. Swagman Hotels and Travel v. CA, G.R. No. 161135 (2005)
3. Perez v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 157616, [July 22, 2005]
4. Spouses Decena v. Spouses Piquero, G.R. No. 155736,
March 31, 2005
5. City of Bacolod v. San Miguel Brewery, Inc., G.R. No. L-
25134
6. Heirs of Bautista vs. Lindo, GR 208232, 2014
7. Olivarez Reality vs. Castillo, GR 196251, 2014
8. Commodities Storage & Ice Plant Corp. v. Court of
Appeals G.R. No. 125008, 19 June 1997
9. Punsalan, Jr. v. Vda. de Lacsamana, G.R. No. L-55729, 28
March 1983
10. Far East Bank and Trust Co. v. Spouses Plaza, G.R. No.
154489, [July 25, 2003
11. Spouses Zepeda v. China Banking Corp, G.R. No. 172175,
[October 9, 2006
12. Davao Light & Power Co., Inc. v. Dinopol, G.R. No. 75195,
[August 29, 1988]
13. Gochan vs. Gochan, 372 SCRA 256, 264
14. Chua vs. Total Office Products and Services, 471 SCRA 500,
507
15. Hernadez vs. Rural Bank of Lucena, 81 SCRA 75, 84
16. Lucas v. Lucas, G.R. No. 190710 (2011)]
17. Lao v. Court of Appeals, G.R. Nos. 47013, 60647 & 60958-
59, [February 17, 2000]
18. Heirs of Maramag vs. Maramag, G.R. No. 181132, [June 5,
2009]
19. Dynamic Builders & Construction Co Inc v. Presbitero, Jr.
G.R. No. 174202 (2015)]
20. City of Bacolod v. San Miguel Brewery, Inc., G.R. No. L-
25134, [October 30, 1969]
21. Ada v. Baylon, G.R. No. 182435 (2012)
22. Delmolin-Paloma v. Delmolin-Magno, G.R. No. 237767,
November 10, 2021

RULE 3: PARTIES TO CIVIL ACTION

1. Who may be parties

a. Plaintiff vs. Defendant
2. Juridical Persons
a. Entities Authorized by law
3. Representatives as Parties
4. Spouses as Parties
5. Real Party in Interest
i. Effect if the party is not a real party in interest
6. Permissive Joinder of Parties
a. Compulsory Joinder
i. Indispensable Party
b. Permissive Joinder
i. Requisites for Joinder of Parties
ii. Rationale of Joinder of Parties
c. Necessary Party
7. Non-Joinder of necessary Parties
8. Unwilling Co-Plaintiff

3
 9. Misjoinder and Non-joinder of Parties

10. Class Suit

a. Conditions for a valid class suit
b. Requites for Class Suit
11. Alternative Defendants
12. Unknown identity or name of the defendant
13. Entity without juridical personality as defendant
14. Death of the party
a. Duty of counsel
b. Effects
c. Non-Compliance
d. Who may substitute
e. Death or separation of a party who is public officer
f. Effect of Death of defendant
a. Rule 86
15. Party becomes incompetent or incapacitated
a. Effects
16. Transfer of Interest
17. Indigent Party
18. Cases
a. Spouses Laus vs. optimum Security Services, GR
No. 208343, February 3, 2016)
b. Flores v. Mallare-Phillipps, G.R. No. L-66620,
[September 24, 1986]
c. Juana Complex I Homeowners Assn., Inc., vs.
Fil-Estate, Land, Inc., GR No. 152272, March 5,
2012
d. Vano vs. Alo, 95 Phil. 495
e. Somes vs. Govt. of Phil., 62 Phil. 432
f. Frias, Jr. v. Sorongon, G.R. No. 184827, [Feb 11,
2015]
g. Spouses Algura v. Local Gov't. Unit of the City of
Naga, 536 Phil. 819 (2006).
h. Ibonilla v. Province of Cebu, G.R. No. 97463, [June
26, 1992]
i. Yale Land Development Corp. v. The Secretary of
Agrarian Reform, G.R. No. 152656, [April 1, 2014]
j. Spouses Crisologo v. JEWM Agro-Industrial Corp.,
G.R. No. 196894, [March 3, 2014]
k. Chua v. Torres, G.R. No. 151900, [August 30,
2005]
l. Jardine Davies Inc. v. JRB Realty Inc., G.R. No.
151438, [July 15, 2005]
m.The Heirs of Vda. De Haberer v. Court of Appeals,
et al., G.R. Nos. L-42699 to L-2709 (1981)
n. Spouses Algura v. Local Gov't. Unit of the City of
Naga, 536 Phil. 819 (2006).
o. Heirs of Mesina vs. Heirs of Fian, G.R. No. 201816,
April 8, 2013
p. B. Van Zuiden Bros., Ltd. v. GTVL Manufacturing
Industries, Inc., G.R. No. 147905, [May 28, 2007]
q. Zomer Development Co., Inc. v. Special Twentieth
Division of the Court of Appeals, Cebu City, G.R.
No. 194461, [January 7, 2020]
r. Resident Marine Mammals vs Sec. Reyes, G.R No.
180771, April 21, 2015
s. Mangila v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 125027,
August 12, 2002
t. National Power Corp. v. Hernandez, G.R. No.
243417, February 11, 2019

4
 u. Grand holdings Investments vs. CA, G.R. No.
22127, June 19, 2019

RULE 4: VENUE OF ACTIONS

1. Venue of Real Actions

2. Venue of Personal Actions
3. Jurisdiction vs. Venue
4. Residence
5. Venue if Non-Resident not found in the Philippines
6. Non-applicability of Rules on Venue
7. Cases:
a. Dolot v. Paje, G.R. 199199 (2013)
b. Republic vs. Glasgow Credit and Collection
Services, 542 SCRA 95, 101).
c. Briones vs. CA, GR No. 204444, January 14, 2015
d. Polytrade Corp. vs. Blanco, 30 SCRA 187
e. Unimasters Conglomeration, Inc., vs. CA, 267
SCRA 759
f. Mangila vs. CA, 387 SCRA 162

RULE 5: UNIFORM PROCEDURE IN TRIAL COURTS

1. Applicability and Uniformity

2. Rules on Summary Procedure
3. Rule on Small Claims
4. Expedited Procedure
5. Procedure in RTCs

RULE 6: KINDS OF PLEADINGS

1. What are Pleadings
2. Pleadings allowed
a. Complaint
b. Answer
1. Defenses
2. Negative
3. Affirmative
4. General Denial vs. Specific
Denial
c. Counterclaim
1. Kinds of Counterclaim
d. Cross-claim
e. Third (fourth,etc) party complaint
f Complaint in intervention
g. Reply
1. Effect of Non-Filing of Reply
h. Rejoinder
3.Cases
a. Talastas v. Abella, G.R. No. L-26398, [October 25,
1968]
b. Seconds To Go v. Fabriano Societa Per Azioni, Inc.,
G.R. No. 213698, November 12, 2014
c. PBCOM v. Go, G.R. No. 175514 (2011)
d. Warner Barnes v. Reyes, 103 Phil. 662 (1958)
e. Serrano Mahilum v. Spouses Ilano, G.R. No. 197923,
June 22, 2015
f. Warner Barnes v. Reyes, 103 Phil. 662
g. Vargas v. Estate of Ogsos, G.R. No. 221062, [October
5, 2016], 796 PHIL 840-856)

5
 h. Dio v. Subic Bay Marine Exploratorium, Inc., G.R. No.
189532, [June 11, 2014]
i. Alba, Jr. v. Malapajo, G.R. No. 198752, January
13, 2016
j. Ganofa v Nee Bon Sing, G.R No. L-22018, Jan 17,
1968
k. Londres v. CA, G.R. No. 136427 (2002)
l. Camara vs. Aguilar, 94 Phil. 527
m. Tiu po vs. Bautista, 103 SCRA 388
n. China Banking Corp. vs. Padilla, 514 SCRA 35
o. Spouses Uy v. Ariza, G.R. No. 158370, [August
17, 2006], 530 PHIL 637-646
p. Commercial Bank vs. Republic Armored Car
Service, 8 SCRA 425

RULE 7 : PARTS AND CONTENTS OF A PLEADING

1. Caption
2. Body
3. Relief
4. Signature and Address
5. Significance of Signature
6. Verification
7. Certification against Forum Shopping
8. Cases
a. Bucal v. Bucal, G.R. No. 206957 (2015)
b. Ballao v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 162342,
[October 11, 2006], 535 PHIL 236-247
c. Municipality of Taguig v. Court of Appeals, G.R.
No. 142619, [September 13, 2005)
d. Fontana Development Corp. v. Vukasinovic, G.R.
No. 222424, [September 21, 2016]
e. Vda. de Formoso vs. PNB, 650 SCRA 35, 44-45
f. Altres v. Empleo, G.R. No. 180986, [December 10,
2008], 594 PHIL 246-268
g. LDP Marketing, Inc. v. Monter, G.R. No. 159653,
[January 25, 2006]

RULE 8: MANNER OF MAKING ALLEGATIONS

1. General Averments
2. Actions or Defense Based on Document
a. Examples of actionable document
b. Requirement regarding actionable document
3. Specific Denials
a. Absolute Denial
b. Partial Denial
c. Denial by Disavowal of knowledge
d. Effect of Failure to make specific denial
e. Instances when specific denial is not required
4. General Denial
5. Affirmative Defenses
a. Defenses allowed under the rules
b. Proper Court actions in resolving affirmative defenses
6. Cases
a. Anchor Savings Bank v. Furigay, G.R. No. 191178 (2013)
b. Republic vs. Gimenez, GR 174673
c. Warner Barnes & Co. vs. Reyes, GR L-9531
d. Guy v. Guy, G.R. No. 189486 (2012)

6
 e. The Municipality of Hagonoy Bulacan vs Hon. Dumdum,
G.R No. 168289, March 22, 2010
f. Aljem’s Credit Investors Corp vs. Sps. Bautista, G.R No.
215175, April 25, 2022
g. Interlink Movie Houses, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, G.R.
No. 203298, [January 17, 2018]
h. Alferez v. Spouses Canencia, G.R. No. 244542, [June
28, 2021]
i. Calano v. Cruz, G.R. No. L-5514, [May 7, 1952]
j. Colmenar v. Colmenar, G.R. No. 252467, June 21, 2021
k. Philippine National Bank v. Abello, G.R. No. 242570,
[September 18, 2019]
l. Mercene v. Government Service Insurance System, G.R.
No. 192971, January 10, 2018, 850 SCRA 209
m. Heirs of Garcia v. Spouses Burgos, G.R. No. 236173,
[March 4, 2020]
n. Dabuco v. CA (Philippine National Bank v. Abello, G.R.
No. 242570, [September 18, 2019]
o. Montoya v. Varilla, G.R. No. 180146, December 18, 2008
p. Kilusang Mayo Uno v. Aquino III, G.R. No. 210500, April
2, 2019
q. Moreno v. Kahn, G.R. No. 217744, [July 30, 2018]
r. Republic v. Felix, G.R. No. 203371, [June 30, 2020]
s. Heirs of Favis, Sr. v. Gonzales, G.R. No. 185922,
[January 15, 2014]
t. Baltazar v. Miguel, G.R. No. 239859, [June 28, 2021]
u. Ngo v. Gabelo, G.R. No. 207707, [August 24, 2020]
v. Aquino v. Aure, G.R. No. 153567, [February 18, 2008]
w. Lansangan v. Caisip, G.R. No. 212987, [August 6, 2018]

Rule 9: EFFECT OF FAILURE TO PLEAD

1. Default
a. Proper declaration of default
b. Effects of Order of default
c. Remedies of defendants declared in default
d. Effect of Partial default
e. Cases where default is not allowed
2. Cases:
a. Intramuros Administration v. Contacto, G.R. No. 152576,
[May 5, 2003]
b. Lafarge Cement Phil. Inc. v. Continental Cement Corp.,
G.R. No. 155173, [November 23, 2004]
c. Spouses de los Santos vs. Carpio, 501 SCRA 390
d. Mandian v. Leong, G.R. No. L-10564, [April 25, 1958],
103 PHIL 431-434
e. Garcia v. Court of Appeals, 209 SCRA 732
f. Duruge v. Biranya, G.R No L-22033
g. Lim Tanhu v Ramolete, 66 SCRA 425
h. Otero v Tan, 678 SCRA 583
i. Lina v CA, et al. 220 Phil 311 (1985)
j. Kilosbayan Foundation v. Janolo, Jr., G.R. No. 180543,
[July 27, 2010]
k. Lui Enterprises, Inc. v. Zuellig Pharma Corp., G.R. No.
193494, [March 12, 2014]
l. Vitarich Corp. v. Dagmil, G.R. No. 217138, [August 27,
2020]
m. Spouses Lumanas v. Sablas, G.R. No. 144568, [July 3,
2007]
n. Cathay Pacific Airways, Ltd. v. Romillo, Jr., G.R. No. L-
64276, [March 4, 1986]

7
 o. Indiana Aerospace University v. Commission on Higher
Education, G.R. No. 139371, [April 4, 2001]

RULE 10: AMENDED AND SUPPLEMENTAL PLEADINGS

1. Amendments in General
2. Kinds of Amendment under the new rules
a. Amendment as a matter of right
b. Amendment by leave of court
c. Substantial Amendment
d. Formal Amendment
3. Effect of Amendment
4. Cases:
a. Republic v. Africa, G.R. No. 172315, [August 28,
2007]
b. Philippine National Bank v Deang Marketing
Corporation, 573 SCRA 312
c. Bautista vs Maya-Maya Cottages, 476 SCRA 419
d. Guntalilib v Dela Cruz,G.R. No. 200042, July 07, 2016
e. Mercado v. Alphaland Corp., G.R. No. 237059
(Notice), [February 15, 2022]
f. Valenzuela v Court of Appeals, 416 Phil 289
g. Lisam Enterprises, Inc. v. Banco De Oro Unibank,
Inc., G.R. No. 143264, [April 23, 2012],
h. Central Bank Board of Liquidators v. Banco Filipino,
G.R. No. 173399, [February 21, 2017]
i. Central Bank Board of Liquidators v. Banco Filipino,
G.R. No. 173399, [February 21, 2017]
j. Campos Rueda Corp. vs. Baustista, 6 SCRA 240
k. Swagman Hotels & Travel Inc. v. Court of Appeals,
G.R. No. 161135, [April 8, 2005]
l. APT vs. CA, 324 SCRA 533
m. Loy, Jr. v. San Miguel Corp. Employees Union-
PTGWO, G.R. No. 164886, [November 24, 2009]
n. Tan v. Heirs of Chua, G.R. No. 244186 (Notice),
[August 1, 2022]
o. Metropolitan Bank and Trust Co. v. Absolute
Management Corp., 701 Phil. 200-215 (2013)
p. Tan v. Heirs of Chua, G.R. No. 244186 (Notice),
[August 1, 2022]

RULE 11: WHEN TO FILE RESPONSIVE PLEADING

1. Answer to the complaint

2. Answer of a defendant foreign private juridical entity
3. Answer to an amended complaint
4. Answer to a counterclaim or cross-claim
5. Answer to a third-party complaint
6. Reply
7. Answer to supplemental complaint
8. Answer to a complaint under the Rules on Summary
procedure/Expedited Rules
9. Extension of time to file Answer
10. Cases:
a. Philippine National Bank v Deang Marketing Corporation,
573 SCRA 312

RULE 12: BILL OF PARTICULARS

1. When to Apply for/ Purpose

8
 2. Instances where Motion for Bill of Particulars is not allowed
3. Action by the Court
4. Effect of Non-compliance
5. Cases:
a. Vitara v Sandiganbayan, 339 Phil 47

RULE 13: FILING AND SERVICE OF PLEADINGS, JUDGMENTS AND

OTHER PAPERS

1. Filing and Service defined

2. Manner of Filing
3. Modes of Service
a. Personal Service
b. Registered Mail
c. Accredited Courier
d. Electronic Mail/ Mean
e. International conventions to which the Philippines is a
party
4. Substituted Service
5. Presumption of Service
6. Completeness of Service
7. Proof of filing and service
8. Notice of Lis Pendens
9. Cases:
a. Manotoc v. CA, 530 Phil. 454 (2006)
b. Serrano v. Delica, G.R. No. 136325, Jul. 29, 2005
c. The Heirs of Reynoso, Sr., vs. CA, 654 SCRA
d. Camaso v. TSM Shipping (Phils), Inc., G.R. No. 223290,
Nov. 7, 2016
e. United Overseas Bank v Ros, 556 Phil. 178 (2007)
f. Ayala Land, Inc. vs the alleged Heirs of the late Lucas
Lactao and Silvestra Aquino, 838 Phil. 441
g. Heirs of Dragon vs Manila Banking Corporation, G.R. No.
205068. March 06, 2019
h. Sun Insurance Office, Ltd., v. Asuncion, 170 SCRA 274
(1989
i. Heirs of Miranda, Sr. vs Miranda, G.R No. 179638, July 8,
2013
j. St. Mary of the Woods School v. Office of the Registry of
Deeds of Makati, January 20, 2009, G.R. No. 174290
k. Heirs of Lopez, Sr. v. Enriquez, G.R. No. 146262, Jan. 21,
2005
l. Republic of the Philippines vs. the Heirs of Spouses
Molinyawe, G.R. No. 217120, April 18, 2016
m. Fernandez v. Court of Appeals, 397 Phil. 205, 216 (2000)

RULE 14: SUMMONS

1. Summons
a. Purpose
b. Who issues
c. When issued
d. Contents
e. Validity of summons
2. By whom served
a. Period to serve
b. Return
3. Service
a. Personal
b. Substituted

9
 c. Constructive Service
d. Service upon entity without juridical personality
e. Service upon minors
f. Service upon prisoners
g. Service upon spouses
h. Service upon domestic corporations
i. Service upon public corporation
4. Publication of Summons
a. Service upon foreign private juridical entities
b. Service upon defendant whose identity or whereabouts
are unknown
c. Defendants temporarily out of the country
d. Non-resident Defendants
5. Extraterritorial Service
a. When availed
b. Modes of effecting extraterritorial service
6. Voluntary Appearance
7. Hague Convention
8. Cases
a. Asiavest Limited v. CA 296 SCRA 539
b. Romualdez-Licaros v. Licaros 401 SCRA 762
c. Cathay Pacific Airways v. Romillo 141 SCRA 45
d. Borlongan v. Banco de Oro, G.R. Nos. Apr. 5, 2017
e. Velayo-Fong v. Spouses Velayo, G.R. No. 155488, Dec. 6,
2006
f. Banco Do Brasil v. Court of Appeals, G.R. Nos. 121576-
78, June 16, 2000
g. Baticano v. Chu, Jr., L-58036, March 16, 1987, 148 SCRA
541.
h. Manotoc v. CA, G.R. No. 130974, August 16, 2006
i. Carson Realty & Management Corp. v. Red Robin Security
Agency, G.R. No. 225035, [February 8, 2017]
j. Spouses Jose v. Spouses Boyon, 460 Phil. 354, (2003)
k. Keister v. Navarro, No. L-29067, May 31, 1977
l. E.B. Villarosa & Partner Co., Ltd. v. Benito, G.R. No.
136426, [August 6, 1999]
m. H.B. Zachry Company International vs CA, 232 SCRA 329
n. Republic vs Domingo, 657 SCRA 621
o. Express Padala (Italia) v. Ocampo , G.R. No. 202505,
[September 6, 2017]
p. Santos, Jr. v. PNOC Exploration Corp., G.R. No. 170943,
Sep. 23, 2008
q. Valmonte v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 108538, 22
January 1996, 252 SCRA 92|||
r. Romualdez-Licaros v. Licaros, G.R. No. 150656, [April 29,
2003], 449 PHIL 824-838
s. PCIB v. Alejandro, G.R. No. 175587, Sep. 21, 2007
t. Constantino Pascual v. Lourdes Pascual, G.R. No.
171916, 2009
u. Reicon Realty Builders Corp vs Diamond Dragon, GR No
204796 February 4 2015
v. Ejercito, et al. v. M.R. Vargas Construction, et al., G.R. No.
172595, April 10, 2008
w. PCIB vs Spouses Dy, G.R. NO. 171137, June 5, 2009
x. Orion Security Corporation v. Kalfam Enterprises, Inc, G.
R. No. 163287, April 27, 2007
y. Potenciano II v. Barnes, G.R. No. 159421, August 20,
2008

RULE 15: MOTIONS

1. Kinds of motions

10
 a. Litigious
b. Non-litigious
2. Difference of Motion and Pleading
3. Requirements of a motion
4. Omnibus motion rule
5. Prohibited Motions
6. Cases:
a. Mitsubishi Motors Philippines Corporation v. Bureau of
Customs, G.R. No. 209830, June 17, 2015
b. Yap vs. CA, G.R No. 186730 [June 13, 2012]
c. Spouses Selga v. Brar, 673 Phil. 581, 591 (2011)
d. Heirs of Sadhwani v. Sadhwani, .GR No. 217365, August
14, 2019
e. A&E Industrial Corp. v. Hwang, G.R. No. 250012 (Notice),
[July 6, 2022]

RULE 17: DISMISSAL OF ACTIONS

1. Kinds of Dismissal
2. Two Dismissal Rule
a. Applicability
3. Motion to Dismiss initiated by the plaintiff
4. Dismissal due to the fault of the plaintiff
5. Cases
a. PNB v. Daradar June 28, 2021
b. Ching vs. Cheng October 8, 2014
c. Padilla v. Globe Asiatique,G.R. No. 207376, 6 August
2014
d. Blay v. Baña, G.R. No. 232189, [March 7, 2018]
e. Shimizu Philippines Contractors v. Magsalin, G.R. No.
170026, June 20, 2012
f. Allied Banking Corp. v. Spouses Madriaga, G.R. No.
196670, [October 12, 2016]

RULE 18: PRE-TRIAL

1. What is Pre-trial
2. When should Pre-trial be conducted
3. Things to consider during Pre-trial
4. Requirements
5. Failure : Effects
a. Appear
b. File Pre-trial Brief
c. Bring documents or evidence required
6. Excused Absence during Pre-trial
7. Contents of Pre-trial Brief
8. Contents of Pre-trial Order
9. Motu Proprio Summary Judgment
10. 2020 Guidelines for the Conduct of the Court-Annexed Mediation
(CAM) and Judicial Dispute Resolution (JDR) in Civil Cases, A.M.
No. 19-10-20-SC (Resolution), [February 9, 2021]
11. Cases:

a. Anson Trade Center Inc, vs Pacific Banking Corporation,

G. R No. 17999, March 17, 2009
b. Ramos v. Spouses Dizon, G.R. No. 137247, Aug 7, 2006
c. Jonathan Landoil International Co v Sps. Mangudadatu,
G.R. No. 155010, 2004
d. Saguid v. CA, G.R. 150611, 2003
e. BPI vs Spouses Genuino, G.R No. 208792, July 22, 2015

11
 RULE 19: INTERVENTION

1. Define Intervention
2. Who may Intervene
3. Requisites for a non-party to intervene
4. When to intervene
5. Types of Pleadings
i. Period
6. Examples of Intervention
7. Cases
i. Ombudsman vs. Bongais July 23, 2018, J.Perlas Bernabe
ii. Office of the Ombudsman v. Gutierrez, G.R. No. 189100,
[June 21, 2017], 811 PHIL 389-410
iii. Manalo v. Court of Appeals, 419 Phil. 215, 233 (2001)
iv. Malvar vs. Kraft Foods Phils. September 9, 2013, J.
Bersamin
v. Lim v. NAPOCOR November 14, 2012
vi. Alfelor v. Halasan, G.R. No. 165987, 31 March 2006, 486
SCRA 451
vii. Executive Secretary v. Northeast Freight, G.R. No.
179516, 17 March 2009
viii. Ombudsman v. Quimbo, 755 Phil. 41 (2015)
ix. Ongco v. Dalisay, G.R. No. 190810, [July 18, 2012], 691
PHIL 462-475

RULE 20: CALENDAR OF CASES

RULE 21: SUBPOENA

1. What is subpoena
a. Kinds
b. Service
2. Who may issue subpoena
3. Forms and Contents
4. Viatory Right of a witness
a. Instances
b. Not applicable
5. Quashal of Subpoena
6. Cases:

a. Roco v Contreras, G.R. 158275, Jun. 28, 2005

b. In Liebenow v. Philippine Vegetable Oil Co., G.R. No.
13463, Nov. 9, 1918
c. re: Petition for cancellation and correction of entries in the
record of birth, Lee v. CA G.R. No. 177861, July 13, 2010
d. Macaspac v. Flores, A.M. No. P-05-2072, August 13, 2008
e. Pagdilao, Jr. v. Angeles, A.M. No. RTJ-99-1467, Aug. 5,
1999

f. Nazareno v. Barnes, G.R. No. 59072, Apr. 25, 1984

RULE 22: COMPUTATION OF TIME

1. How is time computed under the Rules

2. Effect of interruption
3. Cases:

a. Reinier Pacific International Shipping, Inc. v. Guevarra,

G.R. No. 157020, Jun. 19, 2013
b. PDIC v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 139998 (Resolution),
[October 29, 2002], 439 PHIL 980-989

12
 MODES OF DISCOVERY

1. Purpose of Discovery
2. Characteristics of Discovery
a. Largely self-executing process
b. Flexible and permit various method subject to court
protection against abuse
c. Not final and appealable orders (Fundamentals of PT,
Thomas A. Mauet)
3. What are the modes of Discovery
a. Deposition pending Action
b. Deposition before action pending Appeal
c. Interrogatories to parties
d. Request for Admission by adverse party
e. Motion for production or inspection of documents or things
f. Motion for physical or mental examination of a party

RULE 23: DEPOSITION PENDING ACTION

1. What is deposition
2. Kinds to deposition
3. When may be availed
4. When taken
5. Before whom taken
6. Purpose of Deposition
7. Effect of Using deposition
8. Objections
9. Cases:

a. Koh v. Intermediate Appellate Court, G.R. No. 71388,

September 23, 1986
b. People v. Sergio, G.R. No. 240053, [October 9, 2019]
c. People vs. Webb, G.R. No. 176389, August 17, 1999
d. Hyatt Industrial v. Ley Construction, G.R. No. 147143.
March 10, 2006
e. San Luis v. Roxas, G.R. No. 159127. March 3,2008

RULE 24: DEPOSITIONS BEFORE ACTION OR PENDING APPEAL

1. When availed
2. Purpose
3. Objections
4. Cases:

RULE 25: INTERROGATORIES to PARTIES

1. What are interrogatories

2. Use of Interrogatories
3. How served to adverse party
4. Duty of the party served
a. Period to answer
b. Effect of failure to answer
c. Objections
5. Effect if party was not served
6. Case:

a. Afulugencia v. Metrobank, G.R. No. 185145, 5 February

2014

RULE 26: ADMISSION by ADVERSE PARTY

1. How is admission made

13
 2. When can be made
3. Purpose of Admission
4. Duty of the party served
a. Period to answer
b. Effect of failure to answer
c. Objections
5. Case:

a. BP Oil vs Total Distributon, G. R No. 214406, February 6,

2017
b. Motor Service vs Yellowcab, GR No. L-7063, March 29,
1955
c. Limos v Odones, G.R No. 186979, August 11, 2010
d. Duque v. Spouses Yu, G.R. No. 226130, 19 February
2018

RULE 27: PRODUCTION OR INSPECTION OF DOCUMENTS OR

THINGS

1. Purpose
2. What may be subject of production or inspection
3. Cases:

a. Eagleridge v Cameron, G.R. No. 204700, April 10, 2013

b. Solidbank v. Gateway Electronics, G.R. No. 164805, April
30, 2008

RULE 28: PHYSICAL AND MENTAL EXAMINATION OF PERSONS

1. Requisites for the issuance of the order

2. Effects of the examined party
a. As to the party examined
b. As to the party causing the examination
3. Effect of Refusal to deliver a report

RULE 29: REFUSAL TO COMPLY WITH THE MODES OF DISCOVERY

1. Effect of Refusal to comply

a. Refusal to answer any question
b. Refusal to be sworn
c. Refusal to obey order
i. To answer question
ii. To produce documents
iii. To submit physical or mental examination
d. Refusal to admit sworn denial
e. Failure to attend or serve answers

RULE 30: TRIAL

1. What is trial
2. Order of trial
a. Plaintiff’s evidence
b. Defendant’s evidence
c. Third party defendant, counterclaim, cross claim and fourth
party complaint
d. Fourth party
e. Parties subject of counterclaim or cross claim
f. Rebuttal evidence

14
 g. Upon admission of evidence, the case shall be deemed
submitted for decision unless submission of respective
memoranda is allowed
3. Oral Offer of Exhibits
4. Ex-parte proceedings
a. Delegated to clerk of court
5. Cases:

a. Republic v. Vda. de Neri, G.R. No. 139588, [March 4,

2004]
b. Spouses Sibay v. Spouses Bermudez, G.R. No. 198196,
[July 17, 2017],

RULE 31: CONSOLIDATION OR SEVERANCE

1. What is consolidation of actions

2. When allowed
3. What is severance of actions
4. When is severance allowed
5. Cases:

a. Teston v. DBP, G.R. No. 144374, November 11, 2005

b. Espinoza v. UOB, G.R. No. 175380,March 22, 2010
c. Republic vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 152375.
December 13, 2011
d. People v Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 149495, August 21,
2003
e. Palanca v. Querubin, Nos. L-29510-31, November 29,
1969, 30 SCRA 738,
f. Naguiat v. Intermediate Appellate Court, G.R. No. 73836,
August 18, 1988
g. Producers Bank of the Phils. V. Excelsa Industries, Inx.,
GR No. 173820, 2012
h. Caños v. Peralta, G.R. No. L-38352 August 19, 1982

RULE 32: TRIAL BY COMMISSIONER

1. When can a case be referred to a commissioner

2. How reference is made
3. Powers of the commissioner
a. To regulate the proceedings before him
b. To do all acts and tale all measures necessary or proper
for the efficient performance of duties
c. To issue subpoenas
d. To swear witnesses
e. To rule upon the admissibility of evidence
4. Failure of the parties to appear
5. Report
6. Objections

RULE 33: DEMURRER TO EVIDENCE

1. What is a demurrer to evidence

2. When may be filed
3. Grounds for demurrer
4. Effects of denial of demurrer
5. Effect of denial and reversed on appeal
6. Difference with Demurrer to Evidence in Criminal Case
7. Cases:
a. Felipe v MGM Motor Trading, GR No 191849, Sep. 23,
2015
b. Republic vs Tuvera G.R No 148246, February 16, 2007

15
 c. Apostolic Vicar of Tavuk vs Sison G R No191132 January
27 2016
d. Radiowealth Finance vs. Del Rosario, July 6, 2000
e. GMA Network vs. Central CATV July 18, 2014
f. Katigbak v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 140183, Jul. 10,
2003
g. Republic v. De Borja, G.R. No. 187448, Jan. 9, 2017
h. Bangayan, Jr. v. Bangayan, G.R. No. 172777, 172792,
[October 19, 2011], 675 PHIL 656-670

RULE 34: JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS

1. What is Judgment on the pleadings

2. When allowed / basis
3. Meaning of an answer fails to tender an issue
4. Judgments without trial
5. Improper Judgment on the pleadings
6. Cases:

i. GSIS v. Prudential, G.R. No. 165585, 2013

j. Asian Construction v. Sanneadle, G.R. No. 181676, June
11, 2014
k. Fernando Medical Enterprises,Inc vs Wesleyan University
Philippines, G.R. No. 207970, January 20, 2016

RULE 35: SUMMARY JUDGMENTS

1. What is summary judgments

2. When allowed
3. Define Genuine issue
4. In what actions proper
5. Contents of Motion for Summary Judgment
6. Difference from judgment on the pleadings
7. What is partial summary judgment
8. Affidavits in Bad faith
9. Casees:

a. Republic vs Sandiganbayan, G.R No. 152154, July 15,

2003
b. Nocom v Camerino, G.R No. 182984, February 10, 2009
c. Adolfo v Adolfo, G.R No. 201427, March 18, 2015
d. Mandap v. Department of Agrarian Reform, G.R. No.
194348 (Notice), [June 30, 2021]
e. Solidbank Corp. v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 120010,
[October 3, 2002], 439 PHIL 23-36
f. Wood Technology Corp. v. Equitable Banking Corp.,
G.R. No. 153867, [February 17, 2005], 492 PHIL 106-117
g. Calubaquib v. Republic, G.R. No. 170658, [June 22,
2011],
h. Basbas v. Sayson, G.R. No. 172660, [August 24, 2011],
i. Pepsi-Cola Products Philippines, Inc. v. Isabela Leaf
Tobacco Co., Inc., G.R. No. 237840, [June 10, 2019]

RULE 36: JUDGMENTS, FINAL ORDERS and ENTRY THEREOF

1. What is a judgment
2. Parts of a judgment
3. Conflict in the body and disposition portion, effects
4. Requisites for a valid judgment
5. Finality of a judgment

16
 6. Doctrine of Immutability of Judgment
a. Exceptions
7. Cases:

a. Mercury Drug Corp. v. Spouses Huang, G.R. No. 197654,

[August 30, 2017]
b. De Ocampo v. Radio Philippines Network, Inc., G.R. No.
192947, [December 9, 2015]
c. Mocorro, Jr. v. Ramirez, G.R. No. 178366, July 28, 2008
d. Intestate Estate of Sian v. Philippine National Bank, G.R.
No. 168882, January 31, 2006
e. Khemani v. Heirs of Trinidad, G.R. No. 147340, December
13, 2007
f. Filinvest Land, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 142439,
December 6, 2006
g. Dole Philippines v. Esteva, G.R. No. 161115, November
30, 2006
h. Calalang v. Register of Deeds of Quezon City, G.R. No.
76265 & 83280, March 11, 1994
i. Jarantilla v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 80194, March 21,
1989, citing People v. Olarte, G.R. No. L-22465, February
28, 1967
j. Acosta v. Commission on Elections, G.R. No. 131488,
[August 3, 1998]
k. Maria vs Ubay, A.M No 595 CFI, December 11 1978
l. De Leon v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 138884, [June 6,
2002]

RULE 37:NEW TRIAL or RECONSIDERATION

1. Period to file Motion for New Trial of Reconsideration

2. Grounds
a. New Trial
i. F.A.M.E.
ii. Newly Discovered Evidence
b. Reconsideration
i. Excessive damages
ii. Decision contrary to law
3. Pro forma Motion, effects
4. Period of filing
5. Second motion
6. Effect of Granted Motion for New trial
7. Effect of Granted Motion for Reconsideration
8. Fresh period/ Neypes Doctrine
9. Cases:

a. Custodio v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 96027-28, March

8, 2005
b. Demetriou vs CA. G.R. No. 115595. November 14, 1994
c. Office of the Ombudsman v. Coronel, G.R. No. 164460,
June 27, 2006
d. Bejarasco, Jr. v. People, G.R. No. 159781, February 2,
2011, 641 SCRA 328, 330-331
e. Resurreccion v. People, G.R. No. 192866, [July 9, 2014]
f. Neypes v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 141524, [September
14, 2005]
g. Gotesco Properties, Inc. v. International Exchange Bank,
G.R. No. 212262, [August 26, 2020]

RULE 38: PETITION FOR RELIEF

17
 1. When may be filed
2. Grounds
3. Period to file
4. Where to file
5. Requirements
6. Effect of Granting Petition for Relief

RULE 39: EXECUTION, SATISFACTION, and EFFECTS OF

JUDGMENTS

1. What is execution
a. Execution as a matter of right
i. Where to file
b. Execution as a matter of discretion
i. Requirements for discretionary execution
2. When may execution be stayed
a. Judgments not stayed by appeal
3. Contents of Writ of Execution
4. Execution on judgment for money
a. Immediate payment on demand
b. Satisfaction by levy
c. Garnishment of debts and credits
5. Execution on specific act
a. Delivery of personal property
b. Removal of improvements
c.
6. What is revival of judgment
7. Properties exempt from execution
8. Effectivity/ Lifetime of Writ of Execution
9. Remedy of third persons (Third party claim in attachment and
replevin)
a. What is terceria
b. Procedure
10. Judgments that are immediately executory
11. Redemption
a. Who may redeem
b. Period to redeem
12. Cases
a. Urban Bank, Inc. v. Peña, G.R. Nos. 145817, 145822 &
162562, [October 19, 2011], 675 PHIL 474-586
b. Philippine Trust Co. vs. Roxas, GR 171897, October 14, 2015
c. Ilaw Buklod ng Manggagawa [IMB] vs. Nestle Philippines, Inc.,
September 23, 2015)
d. Lou vs. Siapno, 335 SCRA 181
e. Republic v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 91885, [August 7,
1996], 329 PHIL 115-125
f. Solidum v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 161647, June 22, 2006
g. Moslem v. Soriano, G.R. No. L-36837, August 17, 1983, 209
Phil. 143
h. Mejia-Espinoza vs. Carino, GR193397, January 25, 2017
i. Ching vs. CA 423 SCRA 356
j. Stronghold Insurance Company, Inc. v. Felix, G.R. No.
148090, [November 28, 2006]
k. Ma-Ao Sugar Central Co., Inc. v. Cañete, 125 Phil. 1047
(1967)
l. De Leon, et al. v. Soriano, et al., 95 Phil. 806 (1954)
m. Gomez v. Sta. Ines, G.R. No. 132537, October 14, 2005
n. Degayo v. Magbanua-Dinglasan, G.R. No. 173148, [April 6,
2015]
o. Sanson v. Tapuz, G.R. No. 245914, [June 16, 2021]
p. Mijares v. Ranada, G.R. No. 139325, [April 12, 2005]

18
 q. Suzuki v. Office of the Solicitor General, G.R. No. 212302,
[September 2, 2020]

VI: Additional Laws/Issuances:

1. Judicial Affidavit Rule

2. BP 129
3. Rule on Expedited Procedures in First Level Courts (AM No. 08-8-7-SC)
4. RA 11576

19