Anda di halaman 1dari 26

Transcribed Baste Lectures Part II The Review Center at Twilight

Transcribed Notes on Civil Precedures, Part I


SYLLABUS FOR 2011 BAR EXAMINATIONS REMEDIAL LAW I. General Principles A. Concept of Remedial Law The Rules of Court as a whole constitute the body of rules governing pleadings, practice and procedure. As they do not originate from the legislature, they cannot be called laws in the strict sense of the word. However, since they are promulgated by authority of law, they have the force and effect of law if not in conflict with a positive law. The Rules are subordinate to statute, and in case of conflict, the statute will prevail. The concept of Remedial Law lies at the very core of procedural due process, which means a law which hears before it condemns, which proceeds upon inquiry and renders judgment only after trial, and contemplates an opportunity to be heard before judgment is rendered. Remedial Law is that branch of law which prescribes the method of enforcing the rights for obtaining redress for their invasion. Remedial laws are implemented in our system of government through the pillars of the judicial system, including the prosecutory service, our courts of justice and quasi judicial agencies. We cannot separate remedial law from substantive law. Remedial law does not establish a right. Substantive law establishes that right, but remedial law protects and enforces such right.

B. Substantive Law as Distinguished from Remedial Law SUBSTANTIVE LAW is that part of the law which creates, defines and regulates rights concerning life, liberty, or property, or the powers of agencies or instrumentalities for the administration of public affairs. This is distinguished from REMEDIAL LAW which prescribes the method of enforcing those rights and obligations created by substantive law for obtaining redress for their invasion. C. Rule-making Power of the Supreme Court The SC has the constitutional power to promulgate rules concerning pleading, practice and procedure (Sec 5(5), Art. VIII, Constitution). But this is not an absolute power, it is subject to some limitations. 1. Limitations on the rule-making power of the Supreme Court The following are imposed by the Constitution on the rule-making power of the SC: a. The Rules shall provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure for the speedy disposition of cases; b. The Rules shall be uniform for courts of the same grade; and c. The Rules shall not diminish, increase, or modify substantive rights (Sec. 5(5), Art. VIII, Constitution). Only the legislature can do these acts, not the SC. 2. Power of the Supreme Court to amend and suspend procedural rules The courts have the power to relax or suspend technical or procedural rules or to except a case from their operation when compelling reasons so warrant or when the purpose of justice requires it. What constitutes good and sufficient cause that would merit suspension of the rule is discretionary upon the courts. When a rule promulgated by the SC is not applied by the SC to a particular case, it is not a situation where the SC violates its own rules. It is a situation where the SC has promulgated a rule on that particular case only pro hac vice. This is the power of the SC to suspend the rules in the interest of justice. The SC can even not apply a particular rule. In a case where the action of the MTC was patently null and void, the SC took cognizance of a petition for certiorari without it having to pass the RTC. The SC in this particular case did not follow a rule. What is the justification of the court? Action has to be done immediately. Only the SC can do that. The SC has also sustained appeals filed beyond the reglementary period shown to be meritorious and the failure to file on time was with a reason that will compel the court to recognize that reason. The rules are not intended to be applied with pedantic rigor. The rules and technicalities

have to give way to the interest of substantial justice. So when there is a conflict between the interest of justice and technicalities, the latter have to give way in order to give way to justice. Reasons which would warrant the suspension of the Rules: 1. Existence of special or compelling circumstances; 2. the merits of the case; 3. a cause not entirely attributable to the fault or negligence of the party favored by the suspension of rules; 4. lack of any showing that the review sought is merely frivolous and dilatory; and 5. the other party will not be unjustly prejudiced thereby. Compliance with the rules is the general rule, and abandonment thereof should only be done in the most exceptional circumstances. Power to amend the rules. The SC has the power to amend, repeal or even establish new rules for a more simplified and inexpensive process, and the speedy disposition of cases. The constitutional power of the SC to promulgate rules of practice and procedure and to amend or repeal the same necessarily carries with it the power to overturn judicial precedents on points of remedial law through the amendment of the ROC. The ROC are to be liberally construed in order to promote their objective of securing a just, speedy, and inexpensive disposition of every action or proceeding. D. Nature of Philippine Courts Philippine courts are both courts of law and equity. Hence, both legal and equitable jurisdiction is dispensed with in the same tribunal. 1. Meaning of a court Referred to here is the court as a public office, an office under the judiciary. It is tasked with the primary purpose of resolving controversies among individuals, and also tasked with enforcement of the procedures for defending the State against disorder like in criminal prosecution. A court itself does not actually physically exist. The courtroom does. A court exists because of legal fiction. 2. Court as distinguished from a judge

It is a court which has jurisdiction over cases. A judge has no jurisdiction. While a court is an office, the officer that presides over a court is called a judge. A judge is a physical actual being while a court is a creation of law. A judge may die but a court remains. 3. Classification of Philippine courts 4. Courts of original and appellate jurisdiction Original jurisdiction is where a case is filed first. The MTC has original jurisdiction. Does the CA also have original jurisdiction? Yes. There are cases which are filed in the CA for the first time. Does the SC also have original jurisdiction? Yes. Appellate jurisdiction is the authority to review, revise, reverse or modify decisions of a lower court. The MTC has no appellate jurisdiction. 5. Courts of general and special jurisdiction Courts normally have jurisdiction given to them by law. But there are some courts which even if not specifically given could be within the jurisdiction of that court. The RTC is a court of general jurisdiction. If there is no law which confers jurisdiction over a subject matter to any particular court, it is now assumed automatically under BP 129 that it will go to the RTC because it is a court of general jurisdiction. The MTC, CA, and SC are not courts of general jurisdiction. They exercise a special jurisdiction. They only exercise jurisdiction over subject matters conferred directly to them by law. 6. Constitutional and statutory courts Statutory courts are courts created by law, by statute or other specific laws other then the fundamental law. Those laws are authorized by the Constitution. There is only 1 court created directly by the Constitution, the SC. The Sandiganbayan is not constitutional court because it is not directly created by the constitution; it is a constitutionally-mandated court. As early as the 1973 Constitution directed an order to create the Sandiganbayan. 7. Courts of law and equity Philippine courts exercise 2 general types of jurisdiction; the legal and the equity jurisdiction. That means that Philippine courts are not only courts of law but also courts of equity.

Courts of equity decide a case not in relation to a particular statutory provision. Courts of equity decide a case on the basis of the natural concept of what is just and what is fair because human beings have natural concepts of what is right and what is wrong even if we have not gone to school. There is one principle we have to remember. The courts are not authorized to apply the rules or laws on equity if there is a specific statutory provision. Equity is not supposed to come in if there is a law applicable to certain state of facts. No matter how harsh the law is, if there is a law, the court will have to apply the law. If there is no law, thats the time that courts go to the laws on equity. Reyes vs. Lim, August 11, 2003: This was about an agreement to sell a land. Actually it was a conditional sale. The buyer gave a hefty down payment of P10 million because it involved a parcel of land with a prime location in Pasay City. He noticed that the seller really had no intention to go on with the sale. He filed alternatively an action to rescind or to annul the contract. During the pendency of the case, he asked the court to require the defendant seller to deposit in court the P10 million he already gave as down payment because he noticed that the seller is engaged in some activities which made him to believe that the guy was squandering the money he gave as earnest money. If the contract is annulled or rescinded, there is then an obligation for the obligee to make restitution, and the buyer fears that there will be no more money to return. The defendant said that the plaintiff in effect is asking for a provisional remedy that is not found in the rules. The SC said there is a vacuum in the law, and there is a need to protect the right of the plaintiff should he win. And so the court allowed a deposit as a provisional remedy pro hac vice only on that particular case using its equity jurisdiction. 8. Principle of Judicial Hierarchy This principle arises in case of concurrent jurisdiction. Meaning there are cases cognizable by 1 court and another court or courts authorized by law; there are several courts authorized by law to take cognizance over a case. In petitions for a writ of amparo, there is concurrent jurisdiction between the RTC, CA, SC and even the Sandiganbayan. Our courts follow the so-called ladderized procedure. If you could file it in the lowest court, then file it there first. You must have a compelling reason for filing it in a higher court than in a lower court. This is judicial hierarchy, a general rule which may be disregarded sometimes. 9. Doctrine of non-interference or doctrine of judicial stability A court cannot issue an order against a co-equal court. An RTC cannot enjoin the acts of another RTC. This is to promote the doctrine of stability. This is also applied to certain quasi-judicial agencies. The RTC cannot enjoin the SEC because they have equal ranks. Go to the CA by way of Rule 43.

II. Jurisdiction

A. Jurisdiction over the parties 1. How jurisdiction over the plaintiff is acquired An original plaintiff may sometimes become a defendant in the same case. And an original defendant may become a plaintiff in the same case. For example, OP filed a claim against OD. Then OD filed a counterclaim against OP. OD becomes a plaintiff in the counterclaim and OP becomes a defendant. The filing of the complaint by the plaintiff vests upon the court jurisdiction upon his person. 2. How jurisdiction over the defendant is acquired? A true defendant is whom relief is directly sought against. A defendant in name only is the not a true defendant. Therefore, you do not need jurisdiction over the person of every defendant in all cases. You only need the jurisdiction over the person of the defendant when the action is in personam. And this is mandatory. We did not say personal action, it is different from action in personam. In actions in rem and quasi in rem, technically there are no defendants although some persons may be named. You only need jurisdiction over the thing or res, which is either a thing or a status of a person. An action in rem is an action against the whole world addressed to no one in particular. For example, in a probate proceeding the heirs are mentioned because they have interests in the estate but the court needs jurisdiction over the estate only. It is an action in rem. An annulment of marriage or declaration of nullity is also an action in rem. The parties are only incidental to the action. A cadastral case is also an action in rem. An injunction and an action for unlawful detainer and for forcible entry are actions in personam. An action involving the status of an individual is an action in rem. But there is an action about the status of an individual which is not an action in rem but in personam- an action for compulsory recognition of a child. There are other actions called quasi in rem. There is a specific individual who is interested in a property but its actually the property which is the focal point of the suit. For instance, foreclosure of a mortgage, an action quasi in rem. A proceeding for preliminary attachment is a proceeding quasi in rem. Accounting of funds is also quasi in rem. These are jurisprudential examples coming from the Bar exams. So when talking about jurisdiction over the person of the defendant, we are talking only of actions in personam where such jurisdiction is mandatory.

When there is voluntary appearance, jurisdiction over the person of the defendant is acquired even without service of summons or upon a summons invalidly served. It is found in Sec. 20 Rule 14. Master this! Sec. 20 The defendants voluntary appearance in the action shall be equivalent to service of summons. The inclusion in a motion to dismiss of other grounds aside from lack of jurisdiction over the person of the defendant shall not be deemed a voluntary appearance. Voluntary appearance is equivalent to service of summons (1st sentence of Sec. 20). What is the defendants 1st opportunity to question the courts jurisdiction over his person? Motion to dismiss on the ground of lack of jurisdiction over his person. Adding other grounds to the motion to dismiss is not considered voluntary appearance as opposed to the old rule. You can add as many defenses. B. Jurisdiction over the subject matter 1. Meaning of jurisdiction over the subject matter The subject matter refers to the class to which the case belongs. For example, forcible entry and unlawful detainer; actions of incapable of pecuniary estimation; admiralty cases; these are classes. The Filing of a complaint vests jurisdiction upon the court with respect to the person of the plaintiff. Bar: the plaintiff was abroad, his counsel filed the complaint. The defendant moved to dismiss on the ground that the court has no jurisdiction over the complainant because the is not in the Philippines. Defendant is wrong: jurisdiction is not acquired through his personal presence in court to file the complaint. Jurisdiction on his person is acquired by the filing of the complaint in his name and under his authority. Jurisdiction was acquired by virtue of the complaint filed in court. 2. Jurisdiction versus the exercise of jurisdiction When the question speaks about jurisdiction vs. the exercise of jurisdiction, it means jurisdiction over the subject matter. Jurisdiction is the power or authority belonging to the court. When the court acts according to such authority, that action in accordance with such authority is an exercise of jurisdiction. A court has jurisdiction over an UD case; when it receives the complaint and acts in accordance with such authority to take cognizance over such UD case, its action falls under the concept of exercise of jurisdiction.

Jurisdiction is static, the exercise is active. To be valid, the exercise of jurisdiction must be based on jurisdiction. An exercise of jurisdiction without jurisdiction is not a valid act. The court is acting without jurisdiction. 3. Error of jurisdiction as distinguished from error of judgment When the court is exercising jurisdiction without jurisdiction, there is an error called error of jurisdiction. It is a grievous error; it strikes at the very action of the court. It is reviewable by certiorari (Rule 65). When the court has jurisdiction over the subject matter, and the manner of the exercise of that jurisdiction has been found out to be erroneous, it is an error of judgment correctible by appeal (Rule 45). It involves errors in the appreciation of the facts and evidences. It could ripen into a valid judgment if not questioned in a proper proceeding like appeal because it is not a void judgment. It needs to be questioned. If there is a remedy of appeal, do not use certiorari. 4. How jurisdiction is conferred and determined Jurisdiction is conferred by law. It cannot be conferred by the agreement of the parties or of the approval of the court. Good faith of the judge does not confer jurisdiction. Neither can estoppel confer jurisdiction; it will only prevent you from questioning jurisdiction. Jurisdiction is determined by the allegations in the complaint, not the title of the case. Sometimes the title of the complaint and the allegations are in conflict. The allegations prevail. Pay and vacate -> unlawful detainer (MTC) Pay or vacate -> action for a sum of money (depends upon the amount) Comply with the conditions of the lease and to vacate -> UD (MTC) Comply or vacate -> specific performance (RTC) UD: there is a need to demand to vacate FE: no such need Can the parties to a case agree for their convenience and for the convenience of the court that the RTC will try a forcible entry case? No. The court will not rely on the title of the complaint. It has to read the complaint and determine the allegations on the complaint. It is the plaintiff, in effect, that determines jurisdiction thru his allegations. The allegations of the defendant will not determine jurisdiction.

If the amount of the claim is 1 million, jurisdiction will go to the RTC and the court cannot dismiss it if in the course of the trial it was convincingly established that only 100,000 is due to the plaintiff. In this case, the court will render judgment only for 100,000 in favor of the plaintiff, but the court should not dismiss the complaint. 5. Doctrine of primary jurisdiction There are cases which the court will not handle at first because jurisdiction belongs to an administrative or quasi judicial agency. For example tenancy (DARAB), agrarian reform case (DAR), rates for electricity (Energy Dept.) 6. Doctrine of adherence of jurisdiction (the doctrine of continuity of jurisdiction) Once the court acquires jurisdiction by virtue of a valid complaint, that jurisdiction shall continue up to the end of the case. Intervening facts will not deprive the courts of jurisdiction. Suppose an action for a sum of money, 1 million, was filed in the RTC. During the trial of the case it was convincingly established that the liability of the defendant was only 100, 000 cognizable at first instance by the MTC. Can the defendant move to dismiss on the ground of lack of jurisdiction? No, the court already acquired jurisdiction by virtue of the allegations of a valid complaint. Its jurisdiction will not be ousted by contrary evidence. The court should continue with the case and render judgment for 100, 000. This is adherence of jurisdiction doctrine. Even the existence of a new law will not divest the court of jurisdiction already acquired unless the law itself orders that such court be divested of jurisdiction. There was this official of the government with a salary range of grade 27, he was sued in the Sandiganbayan, and while the case was pending he resigned from office and said that the SB no longer had jurisdiction over him in lieu of his resignation. He was wrong. Jurisdiction has already attached and once attached it shall continue until the end of the proceedings by virtue of the doctrine of adherence. 7. Objections to jurisdiction over the subject matter The court may on its own initiative object to an erroneous jurisdiction and may ex mero motu take cognizance of lack of jurisdiction at any point in the case and has a clearly recognized right to determine its own jurisdiction. The courts authority however is only to dismiss the complaint and not to make any other order like forwarding the case to the proper court. 8. Effect of estoppel on objections to jurisdiction Estoppel does not confer jurisdiction. It will only prevent you from questioning the lack of jurisdiction. The ancient case of Tijam vs. Sibunghanoy is the perfect example of estoppel by latches, as used in that case. One litigant in that case knew that the court has no jurisdiction over the case beforehand; when the case was dragging 15 years and he realized he was losing the case

only then did he question the courts jurisdiction. The SC said he was gambling on the results of the litigation; estoppel by latches was born and he was precluded from questioning the jurisdiction of the court. The jurisdiction of the court was left untouched. But estoppel is not the GR, it should be applied only in cases strictly analogous to Tijam vs. Sibunghanoy. The rule still is: the lack of jurisdiction can be questioned in any stage of the proceeding even for the first time on appeal. This is the general rule established in Calimlim vs. Ramirez. C. Jurisdiction over the issues When is an issue created? 1. When a material allegation is specifically denied an issue is created. Then the court has a reason for trial to determine which interpretation is right, to determine who is telling the truth. A material allegation not specifically denied is deemed admitted and there is no issue. If the issue on a case is possession, the court has no jurisdiction to render judgment on ownership. If the only issue is ownership without the parties talking about possession, the court cannot motu proprio include possession in its judgment. To rule on possession would be to do so without jurisdiction on the issue. To have an issue, a denial must be specific. Memorize Sec. 10 of Rule 8. A defendant must specify each material allegation of fact the truth of which he does not admit and, whenever practicable, shall set forth the substance of the matters upon which he relies to support his denial. Where a defendant desires to deny only a part of an averment, he shall specify so much of it as is true and material and shall deny only the remainder. Where a defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of a material averment made in the complaint, he shall so state, and this shall have the effect of a denial. If the provisions above are not followed, you are making a general denial even if you are denying and what is the effect of a general denial? It is an admission. Failure to follow the denials mandated in Sec. 10 would render it no longer specific but general. There are 3 types of denials specified. Blanket denial or general denial where the defendant denies all the allegations of all the paragraphs in the complaint; it is deemed an admission. When you deny, deny every paragraph, every allegation of the complaint or of the pleading. Suppose that par(4) of the complaint alleged that the defendant borrowed 1 million from the plaintiff. The first way of denying it is mentioning the paragraph where it is alleged. Deny it by saying that you never borrowed money from the plaintiff. The truth of the matter being that it was a donation. It is an absolute denial of the allegation. Another way is saying that I admit I borrowed 1 million but the due date is till 5 years from now so it is not yet due. You admit it but by way of avoidance you say something by way of a defense. The third way is to say that you have no sufficient knowledge of the debt. This is a disavowal that must be done in good faith

because it is equivalent to admission if done in bad faith as a penalty for such bad faith. Memorize this concept. Be familiar with the words and the meanings of the words. The pleadings actually will tell us the issues of the case. They will tell the controverted matters meaning those which are denied. 2. When the opposing counsel offers evidence not within the issue of the case, you object. You cannot object if you do not know the issues of the case. But sometimes there are issues being created not because of the pleading but because evidence on a matter was offered in court that was not objected to, it is as if an issue was created by the consent of the parties even if it is not in the pleadings. Sec. 5 of Rule 10. If an issue was tried with the express or implied consent of the parties, they shall be treated in all respects as if they had been raised in the pleadings. This has been the subject of many bar exams. Suppose an evidence for ownership was presented in a case for possession. If it is not objected to, the court will treat the same as if raised in the pleadings and the court may now rule on the issue of ownership as well. This is the concept of implied amendment of the pleading. Bar: There was an action to collect a sum of money. The plaintiff in the complaint did not even state that he made a prior demand for payment. If there is no prior demand, there is a failure to state a cause of action because as a rule no demand, no delay unless the exceptions of 1169 apply. During the trial of the case, the plaintiff presented in evidence exhibit A, a written extrajudicial demand to pay. The defendant did not object to that. Can the court admit exhibit A in evidence? Yes. There was no objection, it is as if the issue of a demand has been tried by the parties impliedly and it is as if the pleadings included a demand. What can the other party do? He can move to amend the pleading to incorporate the evidence in the pleading. Suppose the party did not do so, can the court still try and include the admission of exhibit A? Yes, as if it is raised in the pleading. Bar: An action for ejectment did not mention a demand to vacate. During the trial there was offer of evidence of a demand to vacate. Can the pleading be amended to conform to the evidence? Yes. There was no objection from the defendant. Dean is of the opinion that the question was wrong as there is no trial in an ejectment case the same being a summary procedure. The question should be this was. The demand was for a debt of 2 million. If the plaintiff offers evidence for 3 million, which the defendant did not object to, then the evidence was admitted. Can the court admit the evidence? Yes because the court cannot motu proprio object in behalf of the defendant. Inadmissible evidence will be admitted because of waiver and that waiver is because of the failure to object. Inadmissibility can be waived by the failure to object. Can the court consider the 3 million? Yes, it is as if it was raised in the pleading which is deemed amended. So, as the counsel for defendant, object as to the excess of 2 million because the issue is only 2 million. Remember this concept! Advice: offer evidence not in issue in the pleadings because the adverse party may not object to it and so such evidence may be admitted by the court. This doctrine however is not applicable to a criminal proceeding. This rule has been incorporated in the rules of criminal procedure effective December 2000, Sections 8 and 9 in Rule 110. The life and liberty of an accused is not made to depend upon the skill of his counsel to object.

Sometimes issues could be created not because of the pleadings or on the failure to object. 3. It could be created by stipulations like in the pre-trial conference where parties limit the issues. And sometimes even during the trial the parties could already agree on the issues to be tried. Agreement could also create issues. Sec. 6 of Art. 30 The parties to any action may agree, in writing, upon the facts involved in the litigation, and submit the case for judgment on the facts agreed upon, without the introduction of evidence. If the parties agree only on some of the facts in issue, the trial shall be held as to the disputed facts in such order as the court shall prescribe. In sum, jurisdiction over the issue can be obtained thru specific denial, failure to object to new evidence, and by agreement of the parties. D. Jurisdiction over the res or property in litigation This jurisdiction is mandatory in actions in rem and quasi in rem because the object of these actions is the thing which could either be a property or the status of the parties. The court acquires jurisdiction upon the thing or the res depending on the nature of the case. For instance, in an action for a sum of money there is yet no jurisdiction over the property, but if you apply for a writ of preliminary attachment and such writ is issued by the court, the court now acquires jurisdiction over the property of the defendant which is now in custodia legis. The court acquires jurisdiction over the res. But there are cases where jurisdiction over the res is acquired by simply filing of the proper complaint. For instance, when you file an action to foreclose a real estate mortgage with the proper allegations in the complaint, then the court will acquire jurisdiction over that thing. Now if it is a foreclosure of a chattel mortgage, then the court will acquire jurisdiction over the property if replevin or attachment of the property is made. So jurisdiction over the res or the property is mandatory and very important in an accion in rem and in quasi in rem. While jurisdiction over the defendant is mandatory in an action in personam. Do not forget this because this is very relevant when we talk about summons. III. Civil Procedure A. Actions 1. Meaning of ordinary civil actions One by which a party sues another for the enforcement or protection of a right, or the prevention or redress of a wrong. 2. Meaning of special civil actions Generally follow the rules on ordinary civil actions, but there are some special rules only for it sometimes. Thats why its called special.

What is an action for rescission of a contract? Is it an ordinary civil action or a special civil action? It is an ordinary civil action. Annulment of a contract is also an ordinary civil action. Reformation of an instrument (incapable of PE) falls under declaratory relief and other similar remedies under Rule 63. Quieting of title falls under Rule 63 not as declaratory relief but other similar remedies. Consolidation of ownership falls under Rule 63 but not under declaratory relief but other similar remedies. Read the table of contents. Saan mo ipafile ang application for preliminary attachment proceeding? Hindi mo yan pina-file separartely kasi yan ay provisional remedy. Ang titingnan mo ay principal remedy. Kung saan ang principal remedy, doon ang application for a writ of preliminary attachment. Saan mo ipa-file ang support pendent elite? Hindi rin yan pina-file separately kasi provisional rememdy. Yong action for support ay sa Family Court or sa RTC kung walang FC. Meron bang action for preliminary injunction? Theres none. Theres only action for injunction. Which court has the jurisdiction to issue a provisional remedy? The court which has jurisdiction over the main action. Can an MTC issue a provisional remedy? Yes, if the main action is with the MTC. 3. Meaning of criminal actions One by which the State prosecutes a person for an act or omission punishable by law. 4. Civil actions versus Special proceedings Special proceedings establish a status, a right, or a particular fact. They are not there for the enforcement or protection of a right, or the prevention or redress of a wrong. If you want a person to be declared as absent, use a special proceeding; do not go to an ordinary civil action. Features: 1. The State is interested in the proceeding 2. Proceedings are in rem 3. Rules are for expediency 4. Usually not adversarial in the traditional sense of 2 contending private parties. Special proceedings: 1. 2. 3. 4. Settlement of estate of deceased persons Escheat Guardianship and custody of children Trustees

5. Adoption 6. Rescission and revocation of adoption 7. Hospitalization of insane patient 8. Habeas corpus 9. Change of name 10. Voluntary dissolution of corporations 11. Judicial approval of voluntary recognition of minor natural children; 12. Constitution of family home 13. Declaration of absence and death 14. Cancellation of correction of entries in civil registry 5. Personal actions and real actions A classification of actions according to foundation. Real actions are those affecting title to or possession of real property, or interest therein, shall be commenced and tried in the proper court which has jurisdiction over the area wherein the real property involved, or a portion thereof, is situated. The rule does not define personal actions. It says all other actions not falling under real actions are personal actions. If I file an action for damages, that is personal action; it has nothing to do with interest or title or possession to any real property. The same with an action for collection of a sum of money. But not all action which deals with real property is a real action. Example: you leased an apartment belonging to me for 30k/month. A small apartment with a single room. Then after three months, when I came to you to collect the rental, I realized that it changed a lot, the floors which were made of Italian marbles are now gravel and sand from Boracay, you changed them. When I asked you why, you said you wished to have an environment that is as much close to nature as possible. Then I noticed that you tore down the wall of the apartment and replaced them with nipa wall. Everything was changed. When I realized it, I suffered from a mild heart attack. When I was revived I filed an action for damages for P5 million for destroying my apartment. Is it a real or a personal action? It is personal action. Its not about title to the property, its not about possession or interest, its about damages. He did not want to pay, he resisted so I decided to file an action for unlawful detainer so I could regain possession of the premises. Real or personal? It is a real action because the issue is possession of real property. FE is also a real action. They are real actions in accordance with the nature of the action but they are not real actions in accordance with the objective of the action. Actions for UD and FE are real actions but they are in personam. An in personam action could be real. An annulment of marriage is a personal action, it has nothing to do with real property, but it is in rem. No privity of real estate is mentioned or involved. An action for recognition of myself as a natural child is in personam directed against a person but it is also personal. An action for declaration of nullity of marriage is in rem but it is personal.

An action to collect a sum of money is personal and also in personam. Kasi nga directed to or against a particular defendant. An action for damages, personal and in personam. Cadastral and land registration case is real action and also in rem. When the issue in the Bar exams is the venue of a complaint or an action, do not ask yourself this way: is it personam, in rem or quasi in rem? The question is, is it real or personal? It is the analysis for purposes of venue. Pag ang tanong ay what kind of summons will be proper against this non-resident? O di itatanong mo, is it in personam, in rem or quasi in rem? What summons will be used? The clerk of court will ask if its in personam, in rem or quasi in rem. If you want to know whether in that particular case jurisdiction is necessary over the defendant, your question will be is it in rem, in personam, or quasi in rem. These principles have not been exploited in the Bar exam because they are difficult to understand. It was only asked in 2008 about partition, partition is quasi in rem. But there was a question there: how do you acquire jurisdiction over the defendant? Holy smoke! It should not be asked because in an action quasi in rem, jurisdiction over the defendant is not required. Why do you need to know if an action is real or personal? In order to determine the venue. Why do you need to know if an action is in personam, in rem or quasi in rem? So that you will know if jurisdiction over the defendant is necessary and to determine what kind of summons will be served. Example. Kapag ang action ay in personam, hindi ka pwede magpadala ng summons thru publication. This is the general rule. Because this action is directed to a particular person, and a summons by publication is directed to the whole world. If the defendant was not able to read such publication, then you still havent reached him/her. But if its an action in rem or quasi in rem, then publication is allowed. 6. Local and transitory actions A real action is local, its venue depends upon the location of the property involved in the litigation. A personal action is transitory, its venue depends upon the residence of the plaintiff or the defendant at the option of the plaintiff. 7. Actions in rem, in personam and quasi in rem A classification of actions according to the object of the actions. Actions in rem It is in rem when it is directed against the whole world. An action for the declaration of nullity of marriage is a personal action because it is not founded on real estate. It is also in rem because the issue of the status of a person is one directed against the whole world. A cadastral proceeding is an action in rem. A land registration proceeding is an action in rem. Hence, failure to give a

personal notice to the owners or claimants of the land is not a jurisdictional defect. It is the publication of such notice that brings in the whole world as a party in the case and vests the court with jurisdiction. A proceeding in personam is a proceeding to enforce personal rights and obligations brought against the person and is based on the jurisdiction of the person, although it may involve his right to, or the exercise of ownership of, specific property, or seek to compel him to control or dispose of it in accordance with the mandate of the court. Purpose: to impose thru the judgment of a court some responsibility or liability directly upon the person of the defendant. No one other than the defendant is sought to be held liable. Example: an action for a sum of money; an action for damages. Actions in personam An action in personam is not necessarily a personal action. Nor is a real action necessarily an action in rem. An action to recover title, or possession of real property is a real action but it is an action in personam. It not brought against a person but against at the person upon whom the claim is made. An action for specific performance is an action in personam. An action for specific performance and/or rescission is not an action in rem. An action for damages is a personal action as well as an action in personam. Actions quasi in rem A proceeding quasi in rem is one brought against persons seeking to subject the property of such persons to the discharge of the claims assailed. An individual is named defendant and the purpose of the proceeding is to subject his interests therein to the obligation or loan burdening the property. But the action is one brought against the whole world. The object is the sale or disposition of the property whether by attachment, foreclosure or any other form of remedy. Example: action for partition; action for accounting; attachment; and foreclosure or mortgage. B. Cause of Action 1. Meaning of cause of action It is the act or omission by which a party violates the rights of another. There is an existence of a right that was violated by someone who has the obligation to respect that right. In order to have a cause of action, do you have to prove the damage sustained? No need. Evidence of damage is not found in the definition. As long as you can establish a right, and that right was violated, there is damage automatically without need to prove it because you will be awarded anyway nominal damages for a vindication of a right, for the recognition of the right. If you want to recover actual damages, you have to prove the damage. You cannot recover actual or compensatory damages without evidence of the harm sustained. Do you need a COA for every civil action? No. Only in ordinary civil actions are COAs mandatory. The concept of a COA ad defined in Sec.2 of Rule 2 does not always fit a special civil action. A declaratory relief for example, you want the court to state what your

rights are under a law, a treaty, a statute, a deed, a will, before a violation occurs. In a COA definition, there is a cause of action. Here in declaratory relief, there is none. Thats why the definition of a COA does not fit. Also for interpleader where you are asking the court to decide who between 2 persons is the rightful claimant. It is filed a person whose rights are not violated. He cannot just determine who among 2 persons is the rightful owner of a property being claimed from me. There is no violation of my right. Also the definition of a COA does not apply to an administrative proceeding. You will be charged administratively not because of a violation of a right of another but because you violated a rule. If you violated a Civil Service rule, you will be charged administratively. It does not also apply to a criminal case. 2. Right of Action versus Cause of action The concept of COA is substantive law. A COA while defined in the ROC is not coming from the Rules; the essence comes from substantive law. A right of action is procedural. It is a right to file the case. There cannot be w ROA without a COA. Article 1156 of the Civil Code enumerates the sources of a COA: law, contracts, quasi contracts, delicts, quasi delicts, and acts and omissions punished by law. Thats why when you are asked in civil procedure, what is the basis of your COA? Your basis will either be the law, the contract which is breached, a crime etc. I borrowed money from X. On the due date of the obligation I did not pay. That he has a COA against me? Not yet because I still have not violated his right. He has no demand to pay. If he comes to me and demand payment but I do not pay and just turned my back, I know violate his right to be paid upon demand. He now has a COA. If on the due date of the obligation, he comes to me and said I am reminding you of you debt to me. I did not pay. Is there a violation? No, because it was not a demand, it was just a reminder. The demand must be clear and unequivocal requirement to comply with an obligation. If you did not demand from me on the due date of the obligation, the implication is that you voluntarily extended the obligation with a period. Thats why 1169 provides, no demand no delay. 3. Failure to state a cause of action The allegations of a complaint run: the defendant borrowed P1M from the plaintiff. The defendant under promissory note hereto attached as Exh. A and forming an integral part of the complaint mentions that the debt is payable on Aug. 1, 2010. Until now the debt remains unpaid Is there a correct statement of a COA? No; from the allegations, judgment cannot be rendered in favor of the plaintiff because there was no allegation of a sufficient COA. You will notice only the debt was mentioned, and the due date; it did not mention that there was demand to pay. The complaint was defective. Sa totoo, nagdemand sha pero hindi lang nya sinabi sa complaint. Actually he has a COA, but when he made the complaint, he did not state it. Its not a case of an absence of a COA. Its a case of failure to state a COA. Aside from the demand, the allegations must also include the fact that the debt is already due and demandable. These are the elements; if incomplete, failure to state COA!

Absence of a COA is not a ground for a motion to dismiss; it is a ground for demurrer to evidence according to the SC. Meaning there is no evidence that you do have a COA, demurrer to evidence is anchored on insufficiency of evidence. 4. Test of the sufficiency of a cause of action Assuming that the allegations of the plaintiff are true, will the court be able to render judgment on the basis of the allegations of the plaintiff? If the answer is yes, it is sufficient. But when can the court not be able to render a judgment? If the elements of the COA are not present. Example: you sued me for breach of contract; what are the 2 essential elements that must be found in the complaint? 1. The existence of the contract; 2. The violation of the contract. It is sufficient. The test for sufficiency of a COA is the same with the test for the validity of an information. Are the elements of a felony mentioned in an information? If not, you cannot convict him on the basis of that information. 5. Splitting a single cause of action and its effects If you have 1 COA, do not divide it into several parts making each part the subject of a separate complaint. Example: Dean Riano was hit by a running Mr. Javier along Recto. The latter slammed into his frail 60-year old body. He laid unconscious for several minutes. The doctor told him that his left and right legs, as well as his right and left arms were broken; also 3 of his ribs were broken, and the strands of his hair were removed. Can Dean Riano file separate complaints for each broken part? No; that would be splitting. In every COA, there is a primary relief sought and the others are incidental reliefs. Example: you file an action for collection for a sum of money P500,000; this is the main claim, the payment of the principal; but then there was a stipulation to the interest; there was no payment of the interest; so there was a claim for the interest; if you file for the recovery of P500,000 and another for the interests, theres a clear case of splitting of a COA. You only have to file a single complaint for this. Bar: An action to recover shares of stock was filed. After it was recovered thru a final judgment, an action for the recovery of dividends received by the defendant was also filed. Was there splitting of a single COA? Yes; the 1st action should have included the recovery of dividends on the shares. City of Bacolod vs. San Miguel Brewery: the city filed an action to recover from SMB unpaid local taxes which have not been paid for a long time despite assessments sent; the court decided in favor of the city; SMB, when it received the decision, paid the taxes; 3 months after, the wise boys of the city remembered something: that SMB did not pay the surcharges and the penalties of the overdue taxes; the reason is they did not include in their prayer such recovery; so they filed an action to recover those surcharges on the taxes paid; the issue that went to the SC is very simple: was the 2nd suit already barred by the judgment on the 1st suit? The answer is yes. Kung

nagclaim ka ng recovery of taxes dapat pati surcharges isinama mo na sa pag claim sa 1st case, they belong to a single COA. Case, Labitoria: there was a case for partition against co-heirs; the one who filed the partition case already introduced improvements on the property but since it was owned in common he later on decided to take the part belonging to him; the court ordered the partition; after partition where the improvements went to the other heirs, he filed an action to recover the improvements on the property. The 2nd suit was barred. It should have been included in the 1st suit, he should have prayed for the recovery of the improvements introduced or its expenses when he filed the action for partition. Actions actually have a main part and an incidental part. If you split the incidental part from the main part, that is splitting. Sometimes a single act gives rise to distinct COAs. An act of negligence causing physical injuries is a COA under quasi-delict, culpa criminal, or independent civil action. A single act gives rise to many COAs because the sources are different provisions of the law. You can pursue them separately and there is no splitting of a COA because they are distinct COAs with different bases. A split COA filed may be dismissed for litis pendentia. It could also be barred by res judicata. The rule does not say which case will be dismissed, the 1st one filed or the second, the rule is silent. It could also be dismissed for forum shopping, in which all cases will be dismissed. Bar: While cruising on a highway, a taxi cab driven by Miles hit an electric post. As a result thereof, its passenger Joey suffered serious injuries. Miles, the driver, was subsequently charged before the MTC with reckless imprudence resulting in serious physical injuries. Thereafter, Joey filed a civil action against Lourdes, the owner of the taxi cab for breach of contract of carriage and also against Miles for quasi-delict. Lourdes and Miles filed a motion to dismiss the civil actions on the ground of litis pendentia, that is the pendency of the civil action impliedly instituted in the criminal action for reckless imprudence. Is there litis pendentia? None. The action for breach of contract against the taxi owner cannot be barred by the criminal action against the driver. The civil action for quasi-delict against the driver is a separate civil action under Art. 33 of the CC. They can be filed separately and may proceed independently of the criminal action and regardless of the results of the latter. An obligation that is divisible gives rise to separate causes of actions. Example: an obligation payable in installments; each installments that will not be paid can be a source of a distinct COA. But if you wait for 5 defaults before filing the action on the 6th default, then you can no longer file an action for each, you have to lump in one action all the previous defaults. The doctrine of anticipatory breach: if there are 12 installments and on the 1st installment the debtor already said that he can never ever pay any installment, you cannot file an action for all 12 installments, only 1 installment because of the doctrine of anticipatory breach. Only 1 action can be filed even if there are divisible obligations. The rationale being to avoid court dockets to be clogged. Ang marami pwedeng pag-isahin pero ang isa hindi pwedeng paramihin.

6. Joinder and misjoinder of causes of action Presupposes there are several COAs that you could combine in 1 complaint. It is different from consolidation, you dont call it consolidation. Requisites of Joinder of Causes of Action: a. The party joining the causes of action shall comply with the rules on joinder of parties; (applicable only if there are several plaintiffs or several defendants; example: 1 plaintiff vs. several defendants or several plaintiffs vs. 1 defendant; several plaintiffs vs. several defendants) b. The joinder shall NOT include special civil action or actions governed by special rules; c. Where the causes of action are between the same parties but pertain to different venues or jurisdiction, the joinder may be allowed in the RTC provided one of the causes of action falls within the jurisdiction of the RTC and the venue lies therein; d. Where the claims in all the COA are principally for recovery of money, the aggregate amount claimed shall be the test of jurisdiction. If given a problem on joinder, immediately look at the number of parties. if there is only 1 plaintiff and 1 defendant, go to the 2nd requirement of the Rule. Skip the first. The keyword is a one-on-one situation. Example: Pedro filed an action against D. This is one-on-one, dont look at joinder of parties. But if it says: several plaintiffs vs. 1 defendant or 1 plaintiff vs. several defendants, look at joinder of parties (ramble situation). Plaintiff vs. Defendant. Defendant owes P P350,000 on a separate promissory note. He also have another PN in favor of P for P375,000. And another separate PN for P200,000. And another for P100,000. How many COA are there if all the debts fall due and demands have been made but unable to pay? Four because each PN is a separate obligation. Can P file separate suits? Yes. But there can be also only 1 action filed against the defendant; this is a proper subject of joinder. Whether or not they come from different transactions is totally immaterial because this is a oneon-one situation. If filed under 1 complaint, you follow the totality rule so RTC will have jurisdiction. Suppose that the defendant is also a lessee of P who has failed to pay rentals and there has already been a demand to pay and vacate, can this action be joined with the action above? No. There is now UD which is a special civil action expressly prohibited by the 2nd rule on joinder of COAs. Suppose there are 4 defendants, all neighbors who owe P amounts of money; demand has been made, but still did not pay. Can P join them in one complaint? Now you look at the rule on joinder of parties, Sec. 6 of Rule 3. Requisites of Permissive Joinder of Parties:

1. Right to relief arises out of the same transaction or series of transactions, whether jointly, severally, or in the alternative; 2. There is a question of law or fact common to all the plaintiffs and defendants; 3. Such joinder is not otherwise proscribed by the provisions of the Rules on jurisdiction and venue. The above are separate PNs executed by different people, these are transactions totally unrelated to each other, therefore they cannot be joined. You have to file separate complaints against the defendants. The perfect example would be: 2 injured passengers of a bus filing 1 complaint for quasi-delict against the driver. There are 2 distinct COAs, passenger 1 can sue the driver under his own complaint, and passenger 1 can sue the driver under his own complaint. But they can join as plaintiffs under 1 complaint against the driver. You have now to comply with the rule on joinder of parties because this is no longer a non-on-one situation. There are now 2 plaintiffs against 1 defendant. The rule says the plaintiffs must be related under a single transaction or a series of transactions, and there must be a common question of law or of fact. Where they injured under a single accident? Yes. Same transaction. Could there be a common question of law or of fact? Yes- whether the driver was negligent. So, there can be a joinder. But in the course of the action where he hit an electric post, he hit another car with passenger C who was injured; the circumstances of C are not the same with the circumstances of the 2 earlier passengers; the joinder is not clear. Another example is recovery of money under a PN signed by 4 joint debtors. The plaintiff ,ay file a separate complaint against each debtor but he can only recover as to that debtors art of the debt. He can also join all COA in a single complaint against all joint debtors. Can you join an action for rescission of a contract with an action to collect a sum of money? Say rescission of a contract of a sale of a car. Yes. They are on ordinary actions. Nothing there is a special civil action. What are the special civil actions Types of Special Civil Actions : 1. Mandamus 2. Interpleader 3. Certiorari 4. Contempt 5. Prohibition 6. Eminent Domain 7. Declaratory Relief 8. Quo warranto 9. Partition of real estate 10. Foreclosure of mortgage 11. Unlawful detainer

l. Forcible Entry If it is a one-on-one case, do not anymore look at the rule on joinder of parties, look if there is a special civil action. If there is, then it must be severed. A joinder of COA and of parties is not compulsory. It is permissive. C. Parties to Civil Actions Is the word plaintiff always the original plaintiff? No. can the original defendant become the plaintiff in the same proceeding? Yes; when he file a counterclaim, a cross-claim, a third-party complaint, he is a plaintiff in that sense. The original plaintiff also becomes a defendant in these instances. Who may be parties to a civil action? Can a natural person be a party? Yes. Can a juridical person be a party? Yes. Can some neither natural nor juridical person be a party? Only natural persons, or juridical persons, or entities authorized by law may be parties to a civil action. Under the Labor Code, a labor organization duly registered in accordance by the Code can file suits. Know the concept of real parties in interest, their definition will be in the exams, Dean Riano can feel it. 1. Real Parties in interest; Indispensable parties; Representatives as parties; Necessary parties; Indigent Parties; Alternative defendants Real parties in interest Parties who stand to be benefited or injured by the judgment in the suit, or the parties entitled to the avails of the suit. Its not enough to be a natural person, its not enough to be a juridical person, its not enough to be an entity authorized by law, in order to sue or be sued or be a party to a civil action. What is important is you have to be a real party in interest. There are 2 general types of real parties in interest: i.) The indispensable parties Ang indispensable party hindi pwedeng wala; kung wala sya, there will never be a final determination of the case. The keywords there will be final determination. When the party is indispensable there is a compulsory joinder. ii.) The necessary parties.

Pwedeng matuloy ang kaso kahit walang necessary parties. kaya lang wala kang complete relief and full recovery kapag hindi mo isinali ang ibang necessary party. Pero kapag indispensable party, hindi pwedeng wala sha sa suit. Alternative Defendants Nasaktan ka, hindi mo alam kung sino sa 2 tao ang nag cause og iyong harm or loss or damage. Anong remedy mo? Idemanda mo silang 2 in the alternative. Alternative plaintiffs, yes theoretically. In whom..in the alternative plaintiffs. Against whom in the alternative defendants. There are also alternative COAs and alternative defenses. 2. Compulsory and permissive joinder of parties A joinder of COA and of parties is not compulsory. It is permissive. There is only 1 instance where a joinder of parties is compulsory, its in Sec. 7 of Rule 3. Parties in interest without whom no final determination can be had of an action shall be joined either as plaintiffs or as defendants. When the party is indispensable there is a compulsory joinder. Remember the example on the joint obligation where the debt of each debtor is P250,000 each. Can the plaintiff sue 1 debtor alone without including the others? Yes. But he will only recover 250,000. The other debtors are necessary parties because without them, there will be no full recovery of 1 million. But Sec. 9 imposes an obligation upon the plaintiff to state the names of the necessary parties and the reasons why they are not included in the suit. Absent this requirement, there could be a waiver of your right against the other parties. If P sues 1 debtor alone under a solidary obligation, the debtor is an indispensable party because P cannot collect without suing him. What about the other debtors, are they necessary or indispensable? Neither because P can collect everything from that 1 debtor alone under that solidary obligation. P can collect from any of the debtors. 3. Misjoinder and non-joinder of parties Neither misjoinder nor non-joinder of parties is a ground for dismissal of an action. Parties may be dropped or added by order of a court on motion of any party or of its own initiative at any stage of the action and on such terms as are just. Any claim against a misjoined party may be severed and proceeded with separately (Sec. 11 Rule 3). When an indispensable party is not impleaded, the courts 1st option is not to dismiss but to order that that party be joined thru a proper amendment of the pleading. If the order was not followed or complied with, the court can now dismiss the complaint not on the basis of non-joinder but on the basis of Sec. 3 of Rule 17, failure to obey the order of the court, fault of the plaintiff.

Should an action be prosecuted and defended by the real party in interest? No. In the name of the real party in interest, not by, but in his name. Example: minors sue with the assistance of parents or guardians, not thru their parents or guardians. 4. Class Suit You will be asked to determine if a class suit exists. You go by definitions. Sec. 13 of Rule 3. When the subject matter of the controversy is one of common or general interest to many persons so numerous that is it impracticable to join all as parties, a number of them which the court finds to be sufficiently numerous and representative as to fully protect the interests of all concerned may sue or defend for the benefit of all. Any party in interest shall have the right to intervene to protect his individual interest. Requisites of a Class Suit: 1. Subject matter of the controversy is one of common or general interest to many persons; (this will be the focal point of the Bar) 2. Parties affected are so numerous that it is impracticable to bring them all to the court; 3. Parties bringing the class suit are sufficiently numerous or representative of the class and have the legal capacity to file the action. Example: Wowowee stampede some years ago where more than 70 people died. Assuming there is an average of 20 heirs per person who died, then it would be 20x70 plus, they would be numerous. The heirs of those who died, assuming they filed a class suit against ABS-CBN; is there a class suit? No. The law says common or general interest in the subject matter, not the issue or the question or the facts. Each person who died is a separate SM. Each lola who died is not a common or general lola to the other heirs. Example: Each fisherman in Guimaras affected by the oil spill in the area has a separate interest as to his income. He is not interested in the income of other fishermen. A class suit is not possible. Remedy is to file individual suits and have them consolidated. Example: Princess of the Stars, June 2008. There is no class suit. Case: A barrio that put up a big wooden coin bank for the common fund of everyone. Each person who has extra coins will drop them in that wooden bank. It has been there for 7 years that each depositor can no longer identify his contribution and how much. One day, the coin bank disappeared. The treasurer also disappeared. When he was found, the entire barrio filed a class suit against him for an action to recover the giant coin bank. Is it proper? Yes. There is a common interest; each barrio folk can no longer identify his share in the coin bank. The keyword is if you can no longer identify what is yours. Your interest is merged with the interests of others, then there is common or general interest. Opposa vs. Factoran: the basis of the class suit is the protection of the environment. There is a class suit even in the name of future generations, there is intergenerational responsibility. The plaintiffs, in behalf of the generations yet to come, filed a class suit against then DENR Secretary

Fulgencio Factoran to prevent the rape of the forests and the environment and recall all timber licenses issued before and to prevent issuance of more licenses. The issue that went to court is, is there class suit? The SC, thru Justice Davide, said yes because there was a common or general interest in the SM which is the environment and the natural resources. Can you identify which is yours in the environment and the natural resources? No. Newsweek vs. IAC: a case involving the sugar planters and barons in Negros Occidental. Several writers of Newsweek Asia visited the place and they wrote an article about the exploitation of the plantation workers. It was written in such a fashion that every sugar planter would really shrink in shame and would feel like fading in a wall. The title of the article is Island of Fear. It showed how the sakada were living in a very pitiful condition. They would earn 1 peso a day but 45 cents of that 1 peso would go back to the landowners as payment of their debts. It was outlined in the article which hurt the feelings of the sugar planters and their families. They came together to file a class suit against Newsweek Asia. Was there a class suit? No problem with their number, what about the common or general interest? The SC said none. Each sugar planter is only considered with his own reputation, he is not concerned with the reputation of the other planters. There is no common or general interest in eachs reputation. No class suit. Mathay vs. Consolidated Corporation: this has not yet come out in the exams. There was a wide tract of land divided into lets say 1,000 equal squares at 100sm each. Each square is occupied by a family composed of ten. They have been living there for many years to wake up 1 day to find each of them given a note to vacate because the land and the parcels of land were already titled in the name of a corporation named Land Grabbing Corporation with a primary purpose of land grabbing. They filed a suit for reconveyance. Is there a class suit? None. Each family has interest only on the land it occupies. There is no common or general interest. Bar: an airplane carrying 200 passengers crashed somewhere in the jungles of Agusan. All the passengers and crew perished. The relatives of the fatalities filed for themselves and in behalf of all the relatives in the mishap a class suit for damages totaling 5M pesos against the airline. The propriety of the class suit is questioned by the defendant. Is there a class suit? None. Because there is no common or general interest in the SM of the controversy. Each of the plaintiffs has a separate claims for damages. Bar, 1994: 400 residents of Barrio Ramos initiated a class action suit thru Albert, a former mayor of the town, to recover damages sustained due to their exposure to toxic wastes and fumes emitted by the cooking gas plant of a top fuel corporation located at the town. Is the class suit proper? None. No common general interest in each others illness. 5. Suits against entities without juridical personality There are friends, A, B and C who owns a motor shop operating under the name Macho Boys Corporation. The truth is the latter is not registered with the SEC, no such corporation, it has not juridical personality. They were able to borrow 2M from XYZ Bank. They were not able to pay the loan so the bank sued them as Macho Boys Corp. Their defense was that the complaint cannot state a COA because it cannot sue somebody which has no legal capacity. Can they be sued under the name MBC? Yes (Sec. 15). But if it was somebody who borrowed money from

them, can they sue under the name MBC? No because they have no legal capacity to sue. Who will be eventually liable? The 3 of them thats why when they file their answer, they must state their names and addresses because they will be the ones liable. 6. Effect of death of party litigant Let us assume that there is a case going on and the defendant died during the pre-trial. First, the court will be notified, within 30 days from the death, by the counsel of the deceased, it is his duty. What will the court do? The court will ask itself: is this an action that survives the death of a party? Or is this an action that is extinguished by the death of a party? Then the court will look at the nature of the case. If it is say an action for legal separation, the court will dismiss it, no need to go on. If it is say money claim, it survives. Claims against property survives even claims against UD cases survive. If the plaintiff wants to continue it, it can be continued because once jurisdiction has attached, it remains with the court until the termination of the proceedings, adherence of jurisdiction. So if it is a money claim against the defendant, the court will call the lawyer of the deceased and ask for a substitute such as the heir. But you cannot force the heir to substitute the deceased, in this case the lawyer must get an administrator for purposes of that suit. If the defendant cannot produce an administrator, the plaintiff can procure it. Pwedeng masingil later on sa judgment. Tuloy ang kaso. Judgment against the deceased thru a substitute. Can you file a motion for the execution of the judgment if you were the plaintiff who won the case? No. the judgment should be presented as a claim against the estate. Special proceedings will come in. do not ask for a writ of execution. Rule 86. A claim of real property will not be extinguished. Thats why the next step is substitution. The substitute will fall under the jurisdiction of the court not thru summons, but thru the order of substitution. This is an instance where jurisdiction over the person will apply even if there is no summons- when the defendant dies. It is the same if it was the plaintiff who died. The rules work both ways. Example: the plaintiff dies in an action to recover a sum of money, the defendant cannot rejoice because he has no debt anymore.