1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 25

2001 Edition <draft copy. pls. check for errors> Interrogatories to Parties

Rule 25
INTERROGATORIES TO PARTIES

Q: Going back to Rule 23, what are the modes of deposition taking?
A: The following:
(1) Deposition upon oral examination; and
(2) Deposition upon written interrogatories.

Purpose of written interrogatories:

To elicit facts from any adverse party (answers may also be used as
admissions of the adverse party).

Written interrogatories and the answers thereto must both be filed and served.
Hence, the answers may constitute as judicial admissions (Sec. 4, R 129)

Rule 25 should not be confused with Rule 23, Section 25 – or Deposition Upon
Written Interrogatories.

In written interrogatories under Rule 23, questions are already prepared

beforehand and they are going to be submitted to a deposition officer who will
propound the questions to the deponent and record the answers under oath.
EXAMPLE is, if you want to take the deposition of somebody abroad through a
deposition officer abroad. Of course, it would be very expensive to go there and
conduct an oral examination. So, the best thing is to resort to deposition upon
written interrogatories under Rule 23.

That is not the same as interrogatories to parties under this rule. We are going to
distinguish one from the other later.

Interrogatories mean written questions. EXAMPLE: I file a case against

Frudo. Frudo filed an answer and of course, he has his affirmative defenses
which are statements of ultimate facts. alang details, no evidentiary facts. But I
am interested to find out what are these evidentiary facts I will write a letter
addressed to Frudo under Rule 25 and direct him to answer the following
interrogatories:

According to your answer, you already paid,

please answer the following questions:
Q1: When did you pay?
Q2: Place?
Q3: Who was present when you paid?

Lakas Atenista 19
Ateneo de Davao University College of Law
1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 25
2001 Edition <draft copy. pls. check for errors> Interrogatories to Parties

Or

Q1: Mr. Frudo, you have been in continuous

possession of this piece of land for 30 years,
would you kindly narrate the improvements that you
introduced in the property?
Q2: What year did you introduce them?
Q3: Who are your witnesses? etc…

Now, under Rule 25, you are obliged to answer me also in writing. Then you
sign your answer and you swear to the truth of it. So I will ask you directing a
question – How will you prove this? Who are your witnesses? I will compel you to
reveal the evidentiary facts. And that process is called written interrogatories to
parties. Di para na ring deposition?

I can also ask the same questions through deposition taking under Rule 23.
Why do I have to resort to Rule 25? The trouble is under Rule 23, I need a
deposition officer and I will have to course everything to him. In Rule 25, there
is no need of a deposition officer. I will ask you a question and you will answer
me. Both are done directly. So, less expensive.

But take note, under Rule 25, you can only ask questions to your opponent.
You cannot ask questions to a stranger. Unlike in Rule 23, you can take the
deposition of any person whether a party or not. In Rule 25, the questioning is
direct. Plaintiff questions the defendant, defendant questions the plaintiff. So,
these are the differences between deposition upon written interrogatories and
interrogatories to parties.

Q: Distinguish INTERROGATORIES TO PARTIES (Rule 25) from

DEPOSITION UPON WRITTEN INTERROGATORIES (Rule 23).
A: The following are the distinctions:

1.) (Procedure) Under Rule 23 on Depositions upon written interrogatories,

the deposition is taken before a deposition officer; whereas
Under Rule 25 on Interrogatories to Parties, there is no deposition
officer;

2.) (Procedure) Under Rule 23 on Depositions upon written interrogatories,

questions are prepared beforehand. They are submitted to the
deposition officer who will ask the deponent the questions and he
will record the answers.; whereas
Under Rule 25 on Interrogatories to Parties, the questioning is direct.
Plaintiff questions defendant, defendant questions the plaintiff.
There is no third person who will intervene; and

Lakas Atenista 20
Ateneo de Davao University College of Law
1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 25
2001 Edition <draft copy. pls. check for errors> Interrogatories to Parties

3.) (Deponent) Under Rule 23 on Depositions upon written interrogatories,

the deposition of any person may be taken, whether he is a party or
not, may be taken; whereas
Rule 25 on Interrogatories to Parties applies to parties only. You can
send interrogatories only to parties. You cannot ask question to a
stranger.

4.) (Scope) Under deposition upon written interrogatories (Sec. 25 R 23),

there is direct, cross, re-direct, re-cross examination but under this
rule there is only one set of interrogatories.

5. (Period to answer) Under Rule 23, there is no fixed time while under
this rule the party concerned has 15 days to answer unless extended
or reduced by the court.

SEC. 1. Interrogatories to parties; service,

thereof – Under the same conditions specified in
section 1 of Rule 23, any party desiring to elicit
material and relevant facts from any adverse
parties shall file and serve upon the latter
written interrogatories to be answered by the party
served or, if the party served is a public or
private corporation or a partnership or
association, by any officer thereof competent to
testify in its behalf.

Q: Is leave of court necessary to apply Rule 25? Do I have to apply for a court
permission before I can send interrogatories to parties?
A: IT DEPENDS. The Rule says “under the same conditions specified in Section 1
of Rule 23.” So the manner of resorting to interrogatories are done under the
same conditions for taking of depositions.

1. Without leave of court if an answer has already been served:

2. With leave of court If no answer has been served, although the court has
already acquired jurisdiction over the defendant. That is the same under the rule
on deposition. The reason is that, at that time, the issues are not yet joined and
the disputed facts are not yet clear.

SEC. 2. Answer to Interrogatories - The

interrogatories shall be answered fully in writing
and shall be signed and sworn to by the person
making them. The party upon whom the
interrogatories have been served shall file and
serve a copy of the answers on the party submitting
Lakas Atenista 21
Ateneo de Davao University College of Law
1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 25
2001 Edition <draft copy. pls. check for errors> Interrogatories to Parties

the interrogatories within fifteen (15) days after

service thereof, unless the courts, on motion and
for good cause shown, extends or shortens the time.
(2a)

The interrogatories shall be answered fully in

writing and shall be signed and sworn to by the
person making them.

Answers cannot be made by an agent or attorney;

answers not made by the parties are nullities
(Herrera vol. 2 p. 44)

A judgment by default may be rendered against a

party who fails to answer written interrogatories.

SEC. 3. Objections to Interrogatories – Objections to any

interrogatories may be presented to the court within ten
(10) days after service thereof, with notice as in case of
a motion; and answers shall be deferred until the
objections are resolved, which shall be at as early a time
as is practicable. (3a)

Q: Suppose you do not want to answer my questions because you believe my

questions are improper, you want to object to my questions, what is your
remedy?
A: You go to the court where the case is pending and object. Let the court
decide whether you will have to answer or not.

SEC. 4. Number of Interrogatories - No party may,

without leave of court, serve more than one set of
interrogatories to be answered by the same party.
(4)

Only one set of interrogatories by the same party is allowed. Leave of court is
necessary for succeeding sets of interrogatories.

It means, I send to you interrogatories and I thought tapos na. Then I

remembered kulang pa pala iyon, so another set – ahh hindi na pwede! Dapat
once lang unless the court allows me to send to you another set.

So, as a general rule, when you send questions to your opponent, you better
compile. Lahat ng gusto mong itanong, itanong mo na because no party is given,
as a rule, the privilege of securing more than one set of interrogatories.

SEC. 5. Scope and Use of Interrogatories -

Interrogatories may relate to any matters that can
Lakas Atenista 22
Ateneo de Davao University College of Law
1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 25
2001 Edition <draft copy. pls. check for errors> Interrogatories to Parties

be inquired into under section 2 of Rule 23, and

the answers may be used for the same purposes
provided in section 4 of the same Rule (5a)

Scope of the interrogatories

Q: What kind of questions can you ask under Rule 25 to your opponent?
A: The same questions that you can ask in Rule 23 section 2:
1.) anything that is related to the claim or defense provided it is relevant;
and
2.) it is not privileged.

Use of the answers to interrogatories

Q: Suppose there are already answers to the interrogatories given by your

opponent, how do you use those answers?
A: They have the same uses under Rule 23 Section 4 – you can use it for
impeachment, or any other purpose like to prove an admission already made by
the adverse party.

Since answers to interrogatories may be used for the same purposes as

depositions, they may also be the basis of a summary judgment under Rule 35.

SEC. 6. Effect of Failure to serve written

interrogatories – Unless thereafter allowed by the
court for good cause shown and to prevent a failure
of justice, a party not served with written
interrogatories may not be compelled by the adverse
party to give the testimony in open court, or to
give a deposition pending appeal (n)

This is entirely a new section. It has no counterpart in the old rules. Now, this
is a very controversial section. Actually, you will not understand this until you
study Evidence where you can compel the adverse party to testify. This is
actually related to Rule 132, Sec. 10 (e) of the Rules of Evidence.

Unless a party has been served written interrogatories, he may not be

compelled by the adverse party:

1. to give testimony in open court; or

2. Give a deposition pending appeal.

The only exception is when the court allows it for good cause shown and to
prevent a failure of justice.

Lakas Atenista 23
Ateneo de Davao University College of Law
1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 25
2001 Edition <draft copy. pls. check for errors> Interrogatories to Parties

Note: The sanction adopted by the Rules is not one of compulsion in the sense
that the party is being compelled to avail of the discovery mechanics, but one of
negation by depriving him of evidentiary sources which would otherwise have
been accessible to him.

[The following discussions are taken from the Remedial Law Review Transcription
1997-98]

This is related to the rule on Evidence particularly Rule 132, Section 10 [e]:

Rule 132, Sec. 10. Leading and misleading

questions. – A question which suggests to the
witness the answer which the examining party
desires is a leading question. It is not allowed
except:
x x x x x x
x x x x x x
(e) of a witness who is an adverse party or an
officer, director, or managing agent of a public or
private corporation or of a partnership or
association which is an adverse party.
x x x x x x

Rule 132, Section 10 [e] is the provision in the Rules which authorizes a party
to call the adverse party to the witness stand. A party may call the adverse party
to the witness stand and interrogate him by leading questions – as an element of
surprise. I can call my opponent to the witness stand and he cannot refuse.

I can conduct direct examination on the adverse party and I am entitled under
the Rules to ask leading questions as if he is under cross-examination because he
is the adverse party. He is not actually my witness. The purpose here is to
actually secure admissions from him while he is in the witness stand because
anything that he says against me does not bind me even if I were the one who
called him to the witness stand. But anything he might say that is against himself
binds him.

Under Section 6, if I intend during the trial to call him to the witness stand, I
am obliged to send him ahead written interrogatories. I have to follow Rule 25.
Now, if I do not send written interrogatories to him, then I have no right to call
him to the witness stand. That is why Section 6 is a very radical provision.

So, if I am the lawyer of a party, then binigla mo ako dahil there is really that
element of surprise as it has happened several times before. The lawyer is caught
by surprise when the opposing party says that it would present the adverse

Lakas Atenista 24
Ateneo de Davao University College of Law
1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 25
2001 Edition <draft copy. pls. check for errors> Interrogatories to Parties

party to the witness stand. The lawyer is then caught off-guard as he has not
talked to his client yet.

Ngayon, may panlaban ka na. Pag-binigla ka, you can counter it by arguing
that written interrogatories were not sent under Rule 25. Hence, you can object to
the opposing counsel’s motion to call your client to the witness stand.

This practically compels the lawyers to avail of the modes of discovery

because if you will not compel him, chances are Filipino lawyers do not make
much use of the modes of discovery. So now, if the opposing counsel suddenly
sends interrogatories to you, the he must be planning to call you in the witness
stand later.

Lakas Atenista 25
Ateneo de Davao University College of Law