Civil Procedure Rule 6

Kinds of Pleadings
PROCEDURE IN THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS
Rule 6
KINDS OF PLEADINGS
SECTION 1. Pleadings Defned.
Pleadings are !e "rien sae#ens
$% !e res&e'i(e 'lai#s and de%enses
$% !e &aries su)#ied $ !e '$ur
%$r a&&r$&riae *udg#en. +1a,
Actually, we already touched the word PLEADING
!efore" In the #onstitution when we were as$ing what is the
!asis of the authority of the %u&re'e #ourt to enact the
Rules of #ourt or Procedural Law" (he #onstitution says, the
%u&re'e #ourt shall ha)e the authority to &ro'ulgate Rules
on pleadings, &ractice and &rocedure" (hen we discussed
*urisdiction o)er the issues" +urisdiction o)er the issues is
deter'ined !y the allegations in the pleadings"
,- De.ne &leadings/
A- PLEADING% are the written state'ents of the
res&ecti)e clai's and defenses of the &arties su!'itted to
the court for a&&ro&riate *udg'ent" 0%ection 12
(his is the docu'ent where a &arty will state his clai'
against the defendant3 or where the defendant will state also
his defense" Pleadings 'erely tell a story" 4ou tell your story
there, the other &arty will tell his story"
And how do you assert your clai' in court/ Not !y
calling u& a *udge o)er the tele&hone or writing a letter to the
*udge, Dear judge. !ut through the a&&ro&riate
&leadings" 5ow do they loo$ li$e/ (he rules are laid down" It
!eco'es clearer in the 6rd year su!*ect $nown as Legal
7or's" In that su!*ect you will study &articular for's" (hey
ha)e &atterns" In &leadings, you do it in legal 'anner" 4ou do
not say, Once upon a time
(he counter&art of &leadings in cri'inal &rocedure is
infor'ation, or the cri'inal co'&laint where a &rosecutor will
tell what cri'e you are !eing accused 8 what you did, ti'e,
the )icti', etc"
Se'. - . Pleadings allowed . T!e
'lai#s $% a &ar/ are assered in a
'$#&lain0 '$uner'lai#0 'r$ss1'lai#0
!ird +%$ur!0 e'., . &ar/ '$#&lain0
$r '$#&lain1in1iner(eni$n.
T!e de%enses $% a &ar/ are
alleged in !e ans"er $ !e &leading
assering a 'lai# agains !i#.
An ans"er #a/ )e res&$nded $
)/ a re&l/. +n,
%ection 9 tells us what are the &leadings allowed !y the
Rules of #ourt" In a ci)il case, there are actually two 092
contending &arties- 012 the &erson suing or .ling clai'3 and
092 the &erson !eing sued"
,- If you are the clai'ant or the &lainti:, in what
&leading do you assert your clai'/
A- #o'&laint, counterclai', cross;clai', third;&arty
co'&laint or fourth;&arty co'&laint, etc"
(hese are the di:erent &leadings allowed !y the Rules"
<f course, 'ay!e, the only thing that you are fa'iliar with is
the co'&laint" As we go o)er the Rules, you will understand
what do you 'ean !y those &leadings"
<n the other hand, if you are the &arty sued, you also
ha)e to .le your &leading or your defense" It is $nown as the
AN%=ER" (he defenses of a &arty are alleged in the answer
to the &leading asserting a clai' against hi'" If I .le a
co'&laint against you, in res&onse, you will .le an answer"
In last &aragra&h, an answer 'ay !e res&onded !y a
REPL4" I .le a co'&laint" 4ou .le an answer in)o$ing your
defenses" If I want to res&ond to your defenses, I will .le a
REPL4"
#<>PLAIN( AN%=ER REPL4
(hat is the &attern"
,- %u''ari?ing all of the', what are the $now &leadings
recogni?ed !y the law on #i)il Procedure/
A- (here are se)en 0@2 ty&es of &leadings-
1"2 #o'&laint3
9"2 Answer3
6"2 #ounterclai'3
A"2 #ross;clai'3
B"2 Re&ly
6"2 (hird 07ourth, 7ifth, etc"2 8 Party #o'&laint3
@"2 #o'&laint;in;Inter)ention"
Let us go o)er each one of the'" 5ow do they function/
A"2 CO2PLAINT
Se'. 3. Complaint . T!e '$#&lain is
!e &leading alleging !e &laini45s
'ause $r 'auses $% a'i$n. T!e na#es
and residen'es $% !e &laini4 and
de%endan #us )e saed in !e
'$#&lain.
,- De.ne co'&laint"
A- #<>PLAIN( is the &leading where the &lainti: will
allege his cause or causes of action" A co'&laint is also
called the INI(IA(<R4 PLEADING" Cecause it is actually the
.rst &leading .led in court" It is the &leading that starts the
!all rolling" It is the &leading that initiates the ci)il action"
<f course, the na'es and residences of the defendants
'ust !e stated in the co'&laint" Do you $now the &attern for
a co'&laint/
7or EDA>PLE- >r" Pito wants to sue >r" Peloton to collect
an un&aid loan" >r" Peloton !orrowed 'oney fro' >r" Pito
6E
Civil Procedure Rule 6
Kinds of Pleadings
and refused to &ay" Nor'ally, it starts with an introduction-
Plainti:, through counsel, res&ectfully alleges thatF (hen it
is followed !y &aragra&hs which are nu'!ered" 7or instance-
Illustration-
1"2 Plainti: >r" Pito, of legal age, is a
resident of >atina, Da)ao #ity3
whereas defendant >r" Peloton also of
legal age, a resident of Ca*ada, Da)ao
#ity3
9"2 <n No)" @, 1EE6, defendant secured a
loan fro' &lainti: the su' of
P6G,GGG"GG &aya!le within one 012 year
for' said date with legal interest3
6"2 (he account is already due" Des&ite
re&eated de'ands, defendant failed to
and refused to &ay3
PRA4ER
=5ERE7<RE, it is res&ectfully
&rayed that *udg'ent !e rendered
against the defendant ordering hi' to
&ay the loan of P6G,GGG"GG and
interest in fa)or of the &lainti:"
It is si'&le" (he co'&laint is co'&osed of 6 &aragra&hs
only 8 humiram siya ng pera, ayaw magbayad. (hatHs all"
(hat is the &attern of a co'&laint" 4our allegations 'ust
contain the four 0A2 ele'ents of a #ause of Action 8 the Right,
the <!ligation, the Delict or =rong or Iiolation of 4our Right,
and the Da'age" 5indi $ailangang 'aha!a ang co'&laint"
It !eco'es clearer in the su!*ect of Legal 7or's" (hat is
the last su!*ect in the Car EJa', Legal Ethics K Practical
EJercises" (he eJa'inee will !e as$ed, for instance, to
&re&are a #ontract of >ortgage, or &re&are a #o'&laint for
Lnlawful Detainer" (here are hundreds of for's and you 'ust
!e &re&ared to write down a sa'&le"
C"2 ANS6ER
Se'. 7 . nswer . An ans"er is a
&leading in "!i'! a de%ending &ar/
ses %$r! !is de%enses. +7a,
I a' the &lainti:" I .le the co'&laint" 4ou recei)ed the
co'&laint" 4ou are now reMuired to res&ond"
,- =hat is the &leading where you res&ond/
A- It is called the AN%=ER" (hat is where you will state
your defenses" (hat is why an AN%=ER is called a Res&onsi)e
Pleading"
,- =hy is it called Res&onsi)e Pleading/
A- Cecause it is the &leading which is .led in res&onse to
the co'&laint" It is where you res&ond to the cause of action"
(hat is where you state your defenses"
It is so'ething which is not found in #ri'inal Procedure"
A- N<, there is no such thing as Answer in #ri'inal
Procedure"
,- If you are charged with a cri'e, how do you answer/
A- Cy &leading guilty or not guilty" (hat is the answer"
=hen you &lead guilty, ta&os naN If you say not guilty, trial
will &roceed" No writing of defenses" No written answer in
cri'inal cases" It 0&leadings2 only a&&lies to ci)il cases where
you allege your defenses"
,- =hat are the defenses under the Rules/
A- (hat is %ection B"
Se'. 8 . De!enses . De%enses #a/
ei!er )e negai(e $r a9r#ai(e.
A NEGATI:E DEFENSE . is !e
s&e'i;' denial $% !e #aerial %a' $r
%a's alleged in !e &leading $% !e
'lai#an essenial $ !is 'ause $r
'auses $% a'i$n.
An AFFIR2ATI:E DEFENSE . is an
allegai$n $% a ne" #aer "!i'!0
"!ile !/&$!ei'all/ ad#iing !e
#aerial allegai$ns in !e &leading $%
!e 'lai#an0 "$uld ne(er!eless
&re(en $r )ar re'$(er/ )/ !i#.
Defenses 'ay either !e negati)e or aOr'ati)e"
!"2 nswer 3 NEGA(IIE DE7EN%E%3
,- De.ne an NEGA(IIE defense"
A- Paragra&h PaQ- CrieRy, it is a defense of s&eci.c denial
where you deny the state'ent in the co'&laint and you
state the facts and the reasonSs on which your denial is
!ased" In a negati)e defense, the defendant s&eci.cally
denies a 'aterial fact or facts alleged in the &leading of the
clai'ant essential to his cause of action"
EDA>PLE- (he co'&laint says in &aragra&h 9, <n
No)e'!er 6, 1EE6, defendant secured a loan fro' &lainti: in
the a'ount of P6G,GGG"GG &aya!le one 012 year fro'
No)e'!er 6, 1EE6" (he defendant will say in his answer-
Defendant s&eci.cally denies the
allegation in Paragra&h 9 of the co'&laint" (he
truth of the 'atter !eing he ne)er secured any
loan fro' &lainti: !ecause he does not e)en
$now the &lainti: and he did not see his face
!efore"
(hat is a negati)e defense" 4ou said I !orrowed 'oney
fro' you" No, I donHt e)en $now you" I ha)e not seen you
!efore" 5e denies the eJistence of the loan" (hat is $nown
as the negati)e defense" It is a denial of a 'aterial fact which
constitutes the &lainti:Hs cause of action" (hatHs why it is
!rieRy called a Defense of %&eci.c Denial"
!"2 nswer" A77IR>A(IIE DE7EN%E%
@G
Civil Procedure Rule 6
Kinds of Pleadings
,- De.ne an A77IR>A(IIE defense"
A- In &aragra&h 0!2, it is !rieRy called a de!ense o!
con!ession and a#oidance !ecause, while the defendant 'ay
ad'it the 'aterial allegation in the co'&laint, howe)er, he
will &lead a new 'atter which will &re)ent a reco)ery !y the
&lainti:" I ad'it what you are saying in the co'&laint !ut still
you are not entitled to reco)er fro' 'e"
EDA>PLE- (he defendant 'ay ad'it what you are saying
in your co'&laint" I !orrowed 'oney fro' you 8 ad'ittedN
(he account is due 8 ad'ittedN I ha)e not &aid you 8
ad'itted" 5owe)er, you cannot collect fro' 'e !ecause
the account has already &rescri!ed" >eaning, I will ad'it
what you are saying !ut *ust the sa'e, I a' not lia!le" Kaya
nga, you confess, eh" I confess to what you say !ut I still
a)oid lia!ility"
EJa'&les of aOr'ati)e defenses are- fraud, statute of
li'itations, release, &ay'ent, illegality, statute of frauds,
esto&&el, for'er reco)ery, discharge in !an$ru&tcy, and any
other 'atter !y way of confession and a)oidance"
%u&&ose, you sue 'e for da'ages arising fro' !reach of
contract" I ad'it I entered into a contract !ut I ha)e no
o!ligation to co'&ly !ecause the contract is null and )oid"
<r, the contract is illegal" <r, the sti&ulation is contrary to
&u!lic &olicy, therefore, I a' not !ound" I ad'it what you
say !ut I a' not lia!le !ecause of the illegality of the su!*ect
'atter of the contract"
<r, you sue 'e !ecause according to you, I entered into
a contract and I refused to co'&ly" %o, you .le a case
against 'e for s&eci.c &erfor'ance or for da'ages" (hen I
say- ItHs true that I entered into a contract with you" ItHs
true I did not co'&ly" Cut there is nothing you can do
!ecause the contract is oral and the contract is co)ered !y
the statute of frauds" In order to !e enforcea!le, we should
ha)e reduced it into writing" %ince we ne)er reduced it into
writing, I a' not !ound to co'&ly"
c"2 COUNTERCLAI2S
Se'. 6. Counterclaim. 1 A
'$uner'lai# is an/ 'lai# "!i'! a
de%ending &ar/ #a/ !a(e agains an
$&&$sing &ar/. +6a,
EDA>PLE- 4ou .le a case against 'e for da'ages to
your car" According to you in your co'&laint, while you were
dri)ing your car along the highway carefully" I ca'e along
dri)ing rec$lessly and !u'&ed your car causing da'ages
a'ounting to PBG,GGG"GG for re&air" 4our allegation is !ased
on negligence on 'y &art"
>y answer is denial- (hat is not trueN I deny thatN I was
the one dri)ing carefully and you were dri)ing carelessly and
negligently" (herefore, if you are the &roJi'ate cause of the
accident, IH' not lia!le for the da'age of your car" (hatHs
'y answer 8 IH' not lia!le !ecause you are negligent"
Cecause you were the one negligent, 'y car was also
da'aged" I a' not lia!le for the da'age on your car" As a
'atter of fact, you are the one that should !e held lia!le to
&ay for the da'age of 'y car" I a' now clai'ing for the
da'age of PBG,GGG"GG" (hat is called #<LN(ER#LAI>"
According to a lawyer who is Ruent in #e!uano, he called
it balos" 5e was eJ&laining to his client that they ha)e
counterclai'" (hatHs a legal ter', eh"
(herefore, there is one ci)il case !ut there are two 092
causes in)ol)ed 8 the 'ain cause of action in the co'&laint
and that in the counterclai'" (here are two 092 issues to !e
resol)ed !y the court"
,- If your co'&laint against 'e is to reco)er a su' of
'oney, should 'y counterclai' also in)ol)e reco)ery of su'
of 'oney/
A- N<" (here is no such rule that these two 092 cases
should !e si'ilar in nature" 0De Cor*a )s" De Cor*a, 1G1 Phil"
E112 It is &ossi!le for you to .le case for reco)ery of a &iece
of land and 'y counterclai' is reco)ery of da'ages arising
fro' a )ehicular accident"
,- %u&&ose your clai' against 'e is <ne 012 >illion, is it
&ossi!le that 'y counterclai' against you is (wo 092 >illion/
A- 4E%" (here is no rule which li'its 'y counterclai' to
the sa'e a'ount you are clai'ing" A counterclai' need not
di'inish or defeat the reco)ery sought !y the o&&osing
&arty, !ut 'ay clai' relief eJceeding in a'ount or di:erent I
$ind fro' that sought !y the o&&osing &arty" 0De Cor*a )s" De
Cor*a, 1G1 Phil" E112
,- 4ou .le a case against 'e for reco)ery of un&aid loan"
>y counterclai' is, rescission of &artnershi& contract" Is the
counterclai' &ro&er/
A- 4es although there is no connection !etween what you
are as$ing and what 'y answer is" Cut what is i'&ortant is
tayong dalawa ang naglala!an" If you will not allow 'e to .le
'y counterclai' against you, that will !e another case in the
future" %ince nandito na rin tayo, so lahat ng ating re$la'o,
we 'ight as well ha)e to .nish it" (hat is allowed"
,- =hy is it that law allows the defendant to counter
sue !y way of counterclai' the &lainti:/
A- (he &ur&ose there is a&&arently (< AI<ID
>LL(IPLI#I(4 <7 %LI(%" If you ha)e a cause of action against
'e, I will sue you, in the future it will also lead to another
case where you will also sue 'e"
DE<OR=A #s. DE<OR=A
1G1 Phil E11
7A#(%- A died, of course, what sur)i)es
after that is the estate" D was a&&ointed as
ad'inistrator or legal re&resentati)e" = owes a
su' of 'oney to the estate of A and D .led a
case against = to collect the un&aid loan" D is
called the REPRE%EN(A(IIE PAR(4 under Rule 6,
%ection 6" = .led an answer and that = has a
clai' against D" = .led a counterclai' against
D in the case"
@1
Civil Procedure Rule 6
Kinds of Pleadings
5ELD- (he counterclai' is i'&ro&er" =hen
D sued =, D is not suing in his own &ersonal
ca&acity" 5e is acting as ad'inistrator of the
estate of A" (he real &lainti: is the estate of A"
D is *ust the legal re&resentati)e" (herefore, you
cannot .le a counterclai' against D in the
latterHs &ersonal ca&acity when D is suing = in a
re&resentati)e ca&acity"
(he %# said that the &lainti: should !e sued in a
counterclai' in the %A>E #APA#I(4 that he is suing the
defendant" (hatHs a &rinci&le to re'e'!er"
PER>I%%IIE K #<>PLL%<R4 #<LN(ER#LAI>%
Se'. > . Compulsory counterclaim . A
'$#&uls$r/ '$uner'lai# is $ne "!i'!0
)eing '$gni?a)le )/ !e regular '$urs
$% *usi'e0 arises $u $% $r is '$nne'ed
"i! !e ransa'i$n $r $''urren'e
'$nsiuing !e su)*e' #aer $% !e
$&&$sing &ar/5s 'lai# and d$es n$
re@uire %$r is ad*udi'ai$n !e
&resen'e $% !ird &aries $% "!$ !e
'$ur 'ann$ a'@uire *urisdi'i$n. Su'!
a '$uner'lai# #us )e "i!in !e
*urisdi'i$n $% !e '$ur )$! as $ !e
a#$un and !e naure !ere$%0 eA'e&
!a in !e $riginal a'i$n )e%$re !e
Regi$nal Trial C$ur0 !e '$uner'lai#
#a/ )e '$nsidered '$#&uls$r/.
Lnder the Rules, there are two ty&es of counterclai'" 12
CO2PULSORB COUNTERCLAI2 and, 92 PER2ISSI:E
COUNTERCLAI2"
,- 5ow do you distinguish one fro' the other/ =hen is
a counterclai' co'&ulsory and when is it &er'issi)e/
A- (he ELE>EN(% of a #<>PLL%<R4 #<LN(ER#LAI> are
found in %ection @" If we will outline %ection @, we will see
that a counterclai' is co'&ulsory if the following reMuisites
are &resent-
1"2 It is cogni?a!le !y the regular courts of *ustice3
9"2 It arises out of or it is connected with a transaction
or occurrence constituting a su!*ect 'atter of the
o&&osing &artyHs clai'3
6"2 It does not reMuire for its ad*udication the &resence
of third &arties of who the court cannot acMuire
*urisdiction3
A"2 It 'ust !e within the *urisdiction of the court, !oth
as to the a'ount and the nature thereof, eJce&t
that in an original action !efore the R(#, the
counterclai' 'ay !e considered co'&ulsory
regardless of the a'ount3 and
B"2 (he defending &arty has a counterclai' at the ti'e
he .les his answer"
(he .fth reMuisite is not found in %ection @ !ut in Rule
11, %ection T-
Rule 110 Se'. C. $%isting
counterclaim or cross&claim. 1 A
'$#&uls$r/ '$uner'lai# $r a 'r$ss1
'lai# !a a de%ending &ar/ !as a
!e i#e !e ;les !is ans"er s!all )e
'$nained !erein. +Ca0 R6,
Another way of saying it is, the counterclai' has already
'atured at the ti'e he .les his answer" (hat is the .fth
reMuisite"
,- =hat ha&&ens if one of these reMuisites is 'issing/
A- If one of the .)e reMuisites is 'issing, the
counterclai' is &er'issi)e in nature"
=e will discuss the ele'ents of a co'&ulsory
counterclai' one !y one"
'irst $lement- CO()*$+C,-. *O /$ CO.P(,0O+1
.(0* /$ CO2)-3/,$ /1 *4$ +$2(,+ CO(+*0.
In other words, if you .le a co'&laint against 'e and I
ha)e a counterclai' against you in the La!or #ode, then it
cannot !e classi.ed as a co'&ulsory clai' !ecause how can I
in)o$e against you a clai' which is cogni?a!le !y the NLR#
!efore the R(#/
0econd $lement5 -* +-0$0 O(* O' O+
-* -0 CO))$C*$D 6-*4 *+)0C*-O)
O+ OCC(++$)C$ CO)0*-*(*-)2
0(/7$C* .**$+ O' *4$ OPPO0-)2
P+*180 C,-.
(he second reMuisite is the 'ost i'&ortant" A
counterclai', to !e co'&ulsory, 'ust arise out of or
connected with the transaction or occurrence constituting a
su!*ect 'atter of the o&&osing &arty concerned" It 'ust arise
out of or is connected with a transaction or occurrence
constituting a su!*ect 'atter of the o&&osing &artyHs clai'" It
'ust !e logically related to the su!*ect 'atter of the 'ain
action"
%o the rule is, if the counterclai' did not arise out of or
is not connected with the transaction or occurrence
constituting the su!*ect 'atter of the o&&osing &artyHs
concern, the counterclai' 'ust !e &er'issi)e in nature"
PR<CLE>- E'ily .led a case against Regina for
da'ages arising fro' a )ehicle collision" According to E'ily,
the case of the accident is the negligence of the defendant in
dri)ing her car" 5er car !u'&ed the car of E'ily and was
da'aged" %o, E'ily is holding Regina lia!le for the da'age
on her car" Regina denied that she was negligent" According
to Regina, No, I a' not negligent" As a 'atter of fact, you
0E'ily2 were the one negligent, and !ecause of that
negligence, 'y car was also da'aged" %o you should !e the
one to &ay da'ages" Parang ganyan !a"
@9
Civil Procedure Rule 6
Kinds of Pleadings
,- Is the counterclai' of Regina arising out of or is
connected with the transaction or occurrence constituting the
su!*ect 'atter of the o&&osing &arty/
A- 4E% !ecause we are tal$ing of the sa'e !u'&ing" 4ou
!u'&ed 'y car, you say I !u'&ed your car" %o we are
tal$ing of the sa'e e)ent or transaction"
PR<CLE>- (hea G" 0as in UGa'ayH2 .les a case against
'e for reco)ery of a &iece of land" According to her, she is
the owner of the land which IH' occu&ying" Now, I .le 'y
answer, and then I said, >s" Guadalo&e, I s&ent a lot of
'oney for necessary eJ&enses to &reser)e the land" 4ou are
also lia!le to rei'!urse 'e for the necessary i'&ro)e'ents
eJ&enses I introduced on the land" Lnder the law on
Pro&erty, a defendant or &ossessor is entitled to
rei'!urse'ent for necessary i'&ro)e'ents and eJ&enses"
%o she is trying to reco)er the &iece of land, I a' now as$ing
her to rei'!urse 'e for all necessary eJ&enses that I s&ent
on the land"
,- Is 'y counterclai' arising out of or connected with
the su!*ect 'atter of your clai' or not/
A- 4E%" =e are tal$ing of the sa'e su!*ect 'atter" (hus,
the counterclai' is co'&ulsory"
PR<CLE>- (hea G" .les a case against 'e for reco)ery
of a &iece of land" >y counterclai' against her is da'ages
arising fro' a )ehicular collision"
,- Is 'y counterclai' arising out of a su!*ect 'atter of
your action/
A- N<" It is co'&letely di:erent" (hus, that is a
&er'issi)e counterclai'"
%o, those are the eJa'&les" (hat is why, the second
reMuisite is the 'ost i'&ortant ele'ent 8 a counterclai'
'ust arise out of or is connected with the su!*ect 'atter or a
transaction or the e)ent or the 'ain action" Cy the way, the
second ele'ent is considered the 'ost i'&ortant ele'ent of
co'&ulsory counterclai' !ecause according to the %# in the
1EE9 case of
2ELITON #s. COURT OF APPEALS
916 %#RA ATB
5ELD- It has !een &ostulated that while a
nu'!er of criteria ha)e !een ad)anced for the
deter'ination of whether the counterclai' is
co'&ulsory or &er'issi)e, the one co'&elling
test of co'&ulsoriness is the logical relationshi&
!etween the clai' alleged in the co'&laint and
that in the counterclai', that is, where
conducting se&arate trials of the res&ecti)e
clai's of the &arties would entail a su!stantial
du&lication of e:ort and ti'e, as where they
in)ol)e 'any of the sa'e factual andSor legal
issues"
,- =hat is the i'&ortance of deter'ining whether the
clai' is co'&ulsory or &er'issi)e/
A- A co'&ulsory counterclai' 'ust !e in)o$ed in the
sa'e action" Iit cannot !e the su!*ect 'atter of a se&arate
action" Lnli$e in &er'issi)e where you ha)e the choice of
in)o$ing it in the sa'e case, or in a se&arate action,
co'&ulsory counterclai' 'ust !e in)o$ed in the sa'e action
otherwise it will !e !arred" (hat is found in Rule E, %ection 9-
Rule D0 Se'. -. Compulsory
counterclaim, or cross&claim, not set up
barred. 1 A '$#&uls$r/ '$uner1'lai# $r
a 'r$ss1'lai#0 n$ se u& s!all )e
)arred. +7a,
%o if I do not .le a counterclai' against you in the sa'e
action, under Rule E, the counterclai' is !arred fore)er" I
cannot clai' it against you in any other case in the future"
Cut if the counterclai' is &er'issi)e and I will not raise it as
a counterclai', it is not !arred" It can still !e in)o$ed in
another case against you" It can !e a su!*ect 'atter of a
se&arate action"
Let us try to a&&ly that &rinci&le to the case cited"
PR<CLE>- Ianessa .les a case against 'e for da'ages
arising fro' )ehicular collision" 5er car is da'aged, 'y car is
da'aged" In 'y answer, I denied negligence !ut I did not
clai' fro' her the da'age to 'y )ehicle" After the trial,
court found the &lainti: at fault" %o, the co'&laint of Ianessa
was dis'issed" %o &analo a$o" Cali$an $o siya ngayon" (his
ti'e I will .le a case against her to reco)er da'ages for the
da'age to 'y car since I was a!le to &ro)e that she was
negligent and not 'e"
,- =hat will ha&&en to 'y case now/
A- >y case will !e dis'issed !ecause I did not raise that
cause of action as a counterclai'" #o'&ulsory yan eh" %o
since you did not raise, is !arred fore)er"
PR<CLE>- Aileen .les a case against 'e for reco)ery of
a &iece of land" After trial, talo a$o" (he court said that I
should return the land to her" %o isinauli $o na" Ngayon,
$ailangan !ayaran niya na'an a$o for the necessary
eJ&enses" %o, I will .le a case against her" %he 'o)ed to
dis'iss 8 !arred, !ecause I should ha)e raised that as a
counterclai'" I cannot .le another case in)ol)ing that cause
of action" (hat is the e:ect of failure to raise the co'&ulsory
counterclai' in the case .led against you"
PR<CLE>- Now, su&&ose the counterclai' is
PER>I%%IIE" Pauline .les case against 'e for reco)ery of
land" >y cause of action against her is da'ages arising
against a )ehicular collision" <!)iously, the counterclai' is
&er'issi)e"
,- Is the counterclai' allowed/
A- 4es, allowed"
,- Pauline will .le a case against 'e for da'ages
arising fro' )ehicular collision" >y decision is not to .le a
counterclai' !ut to .le another case against her" Is that
allowed/
A- 4es, that is allowed" >eaning, I 'ay or 'ay not raise it
as a counterclai' !ecause it is &er'issi)e" I a' &er'itted to
raise it as a counterclai' !ut I a' not o!liged" I 'ay decided
to .le another action against you" (hat is the i'&ortance
@6
Civil Procedure Rule 6
Kinds of Pleadings
!etween a co'&ulsory counterclai' and a &er'issi)e
counterclai'"
*hird +e9uisite5 -* DO$0 )O* +$:(-+$ 'O+ -*0
D7(D-C*-O) P+$0$)C$ O' *4-+D P+*-$0 O'
64O. *4$ CO(+* C))O* C:(-+$ 7(+-0D-C*-O).
>eaning, if 'y counterclai' against you will in)ol)e the
&resence of an indis&ensa!le &arty who is, letHs say, a!road,
and therefore, the court cannot acMuire *urisdiction o)er hi',
and since it in)ol)es an indis&ensa!le &arty, I will not raise it
as a counterclai'"
,- =ill it !e !arred/
A- N<" If I will .le 'y counterclai', it will in)ol)e
another &arty who is indis&ensa!le" (he trou!le is, he is not
around" (herefore, the counterclai' is not !arred !ecause
the third ele'ent is 'issing"
'ourth $lement5 *4* *4$ CO()*$+C,-.
.(0* /$ 6-*4-) *4$ 7(+-0D-C*-O) O' *4$
CO(+* /O*4 0 *O *4$ .O()* )D )*(+$
*4$+$O'.
,- I will .le a case against you for forci!le entry" I want to
reco)er a &iece of land" =here is the *urisdiction of that case/
A- >(#" %Muatting" I will reco)er a land fro' a sMuatter"
Re)iew- In the Law on Pro&erty, e)en if you are a
&ossessor in !ad faith, he is entitled to rei'!urse'ent for
necessary eJ&enses" (he theory there is, e)en if he is a
&ossessor in !ad faith, the eJ&enses redounded to the
!ene.t of the land owner" Anyway, you will s&end the' *ust
the sa'e as the land owner will ha)e to s&end for the'" %o it
will not !e fair if he is not rei'!ursed" (hatHs our &re'ise,
noh/
PR<CLE>- Now, the defendant would li$e to clai' for
rei'!urse'ent for the necessary eJ&enses that he s&ent in
'y lot" (he case I .led against you is forci!le entry in the
>(#" 4our necessary eJ&enses a'ount to P6GG,GGG"
,- %hould you raise it as a co'&ulsory counterclai' in
the forci!le entry case/
A- N<"
,- Does it arise out of or connected with the transaction
which is the su!*ect 'atter of the 'ain action/ =hy not
co'&ulsory/
A- Cecause the >(# has no *urisdiction o)er the
P6GG,GGG a'ount for the necessary eJ&enses" (his ti'e, that
is the 'issing ele'ent"
,- 5ow will the defendant clai' rei'!urse'ent/
A- 5e has to .le with the R(# a case for rei'!urse'ent"
5e cannot use that as a counterclai' for the forci!le entry
case !ecause the >(# has no *urisdiction on a counterclai'
where the a'ount is o)er P9GG,GGG"GG"
I will re)erse the &ro!le'-
PR<CLE>- (he &lainti: .led against the defendant an
action for accion &u!liciana 8 reco)ery for a &iece of land
where the )alue of the &ro&erty is P1 'illion" %o the case
should !e .led in the R(#" Now, the defendant is clai'ing for
the rei'!urse'ent of the i'&ro)e'ents thereon 0necessary
eJ&enses2 a'ounting to PBG,GGG"
,- %hould the defendant raise that as a counterclai' in
the accion &u!liciana case/
A- 4E%"
In the .rst eJa'&le, the counterclai' is a!o)e the
*urisdiction of the >(#" (his ti'e, the a'ount for the
counterclai' is !elow the *urisdiction of the R(#" %o the R(#
can clai' *urisdiction"
,- 5ow can the R(# try a counterclai' when the clai' is
only PBG,GGG/
A- It is in accordance with the eJce&tion under %ection @-
e%cept that in an original action be!ore the +*C, the
counterclaim may be considered compulsory regardless o!
the amount" (his 'eans that the 'ain action is accion
&u!licianaVR(#" (he counterclai' is rei'!urse'ent for
necessary eJ&enses with arose out of the sa'e land"
Nor'ally, the R(# cannot try that !ut the answer to this
Muestion is 4E%"
(he R(# can award a clai' for da'ages e)en though the
clai' is !elow its *urisdiction" (he principle is- %ince the
counterclai' is co'&ulsory, *urisdiction o)er the 'ain action
auto'atically carries with it *urisdiction o)er the co'&ulsory
counterclai'" (he co'&ulsory counterclai' is 'erely
incidental to the 'ain action" +urisdiction of the R(# o)er the
'ain action necessarily carries with it *urisdiction o)er the
co'&ulsory counterclai' which is 'erely ancillary"
Cut the .rst eJa'&le is !ali$tad" If the 'ain action is
with the >(#, it cannot try the counterclai' with the R(#" It is
!eyond its *urisdiction" It is not co)ered !y the eJce&tion" Cut
if it is the 'ain action which is within the *urisdiction of the
R(#, it can try a counterclai' which is !elow its *urisdiction
&ro)ided it arose out or is connected with the transaction"
(hat eJce&tion is not written in the &rior rules !ut it is a
recogni?ed eJce&tion laid down !y the %# which is now
written down in the law" In the case of
2ACEDA #s. COURT OF APPEALS
1@6 %#RA AAG
5ELD- (he *urisdiction of the >(# in a ci)il
action for su' of 'oney is li'ited to a de'and
that does not eJceed P1GG,GGG 0now P9GG,GGG2
eJclusi)e of interest and costs" A counterclai'
!eyond its *urisdiction and li'it 'ay !e &leaded
only !y way of defense to wea$en the &lainti:Hs
clai', !ut not to o!tain aOr'ati)e relief"
'i!th +e9uisite5 *4$ D$'$)D-)2 P+*1 40
CO()*$+C,-. * *4$
*-.$ 4$ '-,$0 4-0 )06$+.
@A
Civil Procedure Rule 6
Kinds of Pleadings
5ow can I 'a$e a clai' against you which is not yet
eJisting/ E)en if all the other reMuisites are &resent, the
counterclai' would still not !e co'&ulsory !ecause how can
one in)o$e so'ething now which he can acMuire in the
future/
%o, those are the .)e essential ele'ents" 4ou re'o)e
one, the counterclai' !eco'es &er'issi)e"
,- Again" =hat is the i'&ortance of distinguishing
whether the counterclai' is co'&ulsory or &er'issi)e/
A- If the counterclai' is co'&ulsory, the defendant is
o!liged under the law to raise it as a counterclai' in the
action where he is !eing sued" If he fails to in)o$e it, it is
!arred fore)er 0Rule E %ection 92"
If the counterclai' is &er'issi)e, the defendant has a
choice of raising it as a counterclai' in the case .led against
hi' or he 'ay decide to .le another action against the
&lainti:, raising it as his cause of action" It is &er'itted !ut
not o!liged"
#<LN(ER#LAI>% IN #RI>INAL #A%E%
=A:IER #s. IAC
1@1 %#RA 6GB
7A#(%- (he +a)ier s&ouses .led a cri'inal
case against Leon Gutierre? +r, under CP 99 or
the Councing #hec$ Law, for issuing a !ad
chec$" (he cri'inal case was .led !efore the
R(# of >a$ati" (he co'&lainants did not reser)e
the ci)il action" (he i'&lication is that the clai'
for ci)il lia!ility is dee'ed instituted with the
cri'inal case"
Gutierre? in turn .led a ci)il action for
da'ages against the +a)ier s&ouses in the R(#
of #atar'an, Northern %a'ar, where he
accused s&ouses of ha)ing tric$ed hi' into
signing the chec$" According to hi', !ecause
you tric$ed 'e into signing the chec$ for which
you are suing 'e, IH' holding you lia!le for
da'ages"
=hat ha&&ened now is that he was !eing
cri'inally sued in >a$ati !ut defending hi'self
in #atar'an, Northern %a'ar" 5e is eJ&laining
in the %a'ar court what he should !e doing in
the >a$ati court"
5ELD5 (he ci)il case in %a'ar should !e
dis'issed" It 'ust !e in the >a$ati court that
Gutierre?, as accused in the cri'inal charge of
)iolation of CP 99, should eJ&lain why he issued
the !ouncing chec$" 5e should eJ&lain that
story in >a$ati and not in %a'ar"
(his should ha)e !een done in the for' of
a counterclai' for da'ages for the alleged
dece&tion !y the +a)ier s&ouses" In fact, the
counterclai' was co'&ulsory and should ha)e
!een .led !y Gutierre? u&on the i'&lied
institution of the ci)il action for da'ages in the
cri'inal case"
=hat the %# is saying is, since the ci)il action for
da'ages is i'&liedly instituted in the cri'inal case, and he
wants to hold you lia!le for .ling this case, he should .le a
counterclai' against you in the cri'inal case" =hat is uniMue
was that for the .rst ti'e in the Phili&&ine Procedural Law, %#
laid down the rule that there is such thing as a counterclai'
in a cri'inal case, !ecause, nor'ally, counterclai's are only
recogni?ed in ci)il cases" Cut since the ci)il action is dee'ed
instituted in the cri'inal case, the accused can .le a
counterclai' against the o:ended &arty in the cri'inal
action"
(he trou!le in this ruling is that, it has !een su!*ected to
a lot of criticis's !y acade'icians 8 &rofessors of Re'edial
Law, authors 8 they critici?ed the ruling" It &ro)o$es 'ore
&ro!le's than answers" A *ustice of the %# re'ar$ed, I thin$
we 'ade a 'ista$e 0&ri)ately !a2 in the 7a#ier ruling" Kaya it
was ne)er re&eated"
(he %#, in 1EE@, had another chance to co''ent on
7a#ier in the case ofV
CA<AERO #s. CANTOS
9@1 %#RA 6E9, en banc
N<(E- 5ere, the 7a#ier ruling was set aside"
5ELD- (he logic and cogency of +a)ier
notwithstanding, so'e reser)ations and
concerns were )oiced out !y 'e'!ers of the
#ourt during the deli!erations on the &resent
case" (hese were engendered !y the o!)ious
lacuna in the Rules of #ourt, which contains no
eJ&ress &ro)ision for the ad*udication of a
counterclai' in a ci)il action i'&liedly instituted
in a cri'inal case"
Cy the foregoing discussion, we do not
i'&ly any fault in +a)ier" (he real &ro!le' lies in
the a!sence of clear;cut rules go)erning the
&rosecution of i'&liedly instituted ci)il actions
and the necessary conseMuences and
i'&lications thereof" 7or this reason, the
counter;clai' of the accused cannot !e tried
together with the cri'inal case !ecause, as
already discussed, it will unnecessarily
co'&licate and confuse the cri'inal
&roceedings" (hus, the trial court should con.ne
itself to the cri'inal as&ect and the &ossi!le
ci)il lia!ility of the accused arising out of the
cri'e" (he counter;clai' 0and cross;clai' or
third &arty co'&laint, if any2 should !e set
aside or refused cogni?ance without &re*udice
to their .ling in se&arate &roceedings at the
&ro&er ti'e"
At !alance, until there are de.niti)e rules
of &rocedure to go)ern the institution,
&rosecution and resolution of the ci)il as&ect
and the conseMuences and i'&lications thereof
i'&liedly instituted in a cri'inal case, trial
courts should li'it their *urisdiction to the ci)il
lia!ility of the accused arising fro' the cri'inal
case"
@B
Civil Procedure Rule 6
Kinds of Pleadings
(his 'eans %# ad'itted that the +a)ier doctrine &ut
'ore &ro!le's and confusions in the a!sence of s&eci.c
rules" (he counterclai' should not !e tried together in a
cri'inal case" (he trial court should con.ne itself in the
cri'inal action and that the counterclai' should !e set aside
without &re*udice to its right in setting u& actions in the ci)il
action"
N<(E- (he ruling in the case of C/$+O is now
incor&orated in the last &aragra&h of %ection 1, &aragra&h
PaQ, Rule 111 of the 9GGG Re)ised #ri'inal Procedure-
EN$ '$uner'lai#0 'r$ss1'lai# $r
!ird1&ar/ '$#&lain #a/ )e ;led )/
!e a''used in !e 'ri#inal 'ase0 )u
an/ 'ause $% a'i$n "!i'! '$uld !a(e
)een !e su)*e' !ere$% #a/ )e
liigaed in a se&arae 'i(il a'i$n.F
D"2 CROSS1CLAI2S
Se'. C. Cross&claim. A 'r$ss1'lai# is
an/ 'lai# )/ $ne &ar/ agains a '$1
&ar/ arising $u $% !e ransa'i$n $r
$''urren'e !a is !e su)*e' #aer
ei!er $% !e $riginal a'i$n $r $% a
'$uner'lai# !erein. Su'! 'r$ss1'lai#
#a/ in'lude a 'lai# !a !e &ar/
agains "!$# i is assered is $r #a/
)e lia)le $ !e 'r$ss1'lai#an %$r all
$r &ar $% a 'lai# assered in !e
a'i$n agains !e 'r$ss1'lai#an.+>,
A cross clai' is a clai' !y one &arty against a co;&arty"
It 'ay !e a clai' !y defendant against his co;defendant
arising out of the su!*ect 'atter of the 'ain action"
EDA>PLE- +et and Pao are solidary de!tors for the su' of
P1GG,GGG" +et and Pao signed a &ro'issory note in fa)or of
Dean to collect the su' of P1GG,GGG" 5owe)er, although +et
signed the &ro'issory note, he did not get a single centa)o"
E)erything went to Pao" Coth of the' are now sued"
According to +et, Actually there is a &ossi!ility that I will &ay
the P1GG,GGG to Dean when actually I did not e)en get a
single centa)o out of it" E)erything went to Pao P!wisetNQN
(herefore, +et will now .le a case against Pao where he will
allege that if +et will !e held lia!le to Dean, Pao will rei'!urse
hi' 0+et2" %o, +et will also .le a clai' in the sa'e action
against Pao"
Now, the clai' .led !y +et against his co;defendant Pao
is called a #R<%%;#LAI> where +et is called defendant in the
case .led !y Dean and a cross;clai'ant against Pao" Pao is
also the defendant in the case .led !y Dean and a cross;
defendant with res&ect to the cross;clai' .led !y +et" %o that
is another case which a defendant is .ling against another
defendant"
(he law says that the cross;clai' arises out of the
transaction or occurrence that is the su!*ect 'atter of the
original action" In other words, the cross;clai'ant will assert
that the cross;defendant is lia!le to hi' for all or &art of the
clai' asserted in the 'ain action against the cross;clai'ant"
(a$e note that the cross;clai' of +et against Pao is
'erely an o:;short of the case .led !y Dean against +et and
Pao" >eaning, it arises out of the sa'e transaction or
occurrence that is the su!*ect 'atter of the case .led !y
Dean against the'"
PR<CLE>- %u&&ose Dean .les a case against +et and Pao
to collect a &ro'issory note signed !y +et and Pao" (a&os,
sina!i ni +et in his cross;clai', =ell, since we are already
here, I also ha)e a clai' against Pao for da'ages arising
fro' a )ehicular collision"
,- Is the cross;clai' allowed in the &ro!le'/
A- N<" (he cross;clai' is i'&ro&er" It has no connection
with the co'&laint of Dean against +et and Pao" A counter;
clai' 'ust always arise out of a transaction or occurrence
that is the su!*ect 'atter of the 'ain action"
CAR ,LE%(I<N- Distinguish a #<LN(ER#LAI> fro' a
#R<%%;#LAI>"
A- (he following are the distinctions-
1"2 A #<LN(ER#LAI> is a co'&laint !y the
defendant against the &lainti:, whereas,
A #R<%%;#LAI> is a clai' !y a defendant
against a co;defendant3
9"2 (he life of the #R<%%;#LAI> de&ends on the life
of the 'ain action" A cross;clai' is 'erely
a conseMuence of the case .led !y the
&lainti: against the defendants" No 'ain
action, no cross;clai' 0RLIW, +R" #s" #A,
in!ra2" 6hereas,
In a #<LN(ER#LAI>, you can $ill the 'ain
action, still the counterclai' sur)i)es"
6"2 A #<LN(ER#LAI> 'ay !e asserted whether or
not it arises out of the sa'e transaction or
occurrence that is the su!*ect 'atter of the
action, whereas,
A #R<%%;#LAI> 'ust always arise out of the
sa'e transaction or occurrence that is the
su!*ect 'atter of the action"
$%ample- Pao case .led against +et
to collect a loan" +et .les a
#<LN(ER#LAI> against Pao to reco)er
a &iece of land" (hat is allowed and
that is a &er'issi)e counterclai'" Cut
su&&ose Dean .les a case to collect a
loan against +et and Pao" +et .les a
#R<%%;#LAI> against Pao to reco)er a
&iece of land"
,- =ill it !e allowed/
A- Not allowedN It has no
connection with the su!*ect 'atter of
the 'ain action"
@6
Civil Procedure Rule 6
Kinds of Pleadings
(a$e note that a cross;clai' is any clai' !y one &arty
against a co;&arty arising out of the transaction of
occurrence that is the su!*ect 'atter of the original action or
of a counterclai' therein" %o, a cross;clai' 'ay arise our
either of the original action or counter;clai' therein"
EDA>PLE- +et and Pao .le a case against Dean" Dean
.les his answer with a counterclai' against the &lainti:s +et
and Pao" %o +et and Pao will now !eco'e defendants with
res&ect to the counterclai' .led !y Dean" %o +et now can .le
a cross;clai' against Pao arising out of the counterclai'" %o
this is an eJa'&le of a &lainti: .ling a cross;clai' against his
co;&lainti: !ecause of the counterclai'"
41PO*4$*-C, $;.P,$5
1"2 >ort? and #harles, &lainti:s, .led a case against +et
and Pao, defendants" (here are two &lainti:s suing
two di:erent defendants on a &ro'issory note" Coth
+et and Pao signed the &ro'issory note in fa)or of
>ort? and #harles-
#<>PLAIN( 0#ollection case 8 >ain Action2-
><R(W and #5ARLE% Ptotal- @TB l!s"Q, &lainti:s
;#ersus;
+E( and PA<, defendants
9"2 Now, according to +et, e)ery centa)o of the loan
went to Pao" %o +et .les a cross;clai' against Pao-
#R<%%;#LAI> <N (5E >AIN A#(I<N
Defendant +E( Pfeather weightQ, now cross;clai'ant
;)ersus;
Defendant PA< Phea)y weightQ, now cross;defendant
6"2 +et also says, Actually 'ay re$la'o a$o sa inyong
dalawa 0>ort? and #harles2 !ecause you entered 'y
land and gathered so'e of its &roduct P'ga &atay
guto'NNQ" Nag;.le siya ng counterclai' against
!oth >ort? and #harles" In the counter;clai' of +et,
ang defendants ay si >ort? and #harles for the
accounting of the i'&ro)e'ents on the land-
#<LN(ER#LAI> <7 +E(
Defendant +E(, now &lainti:
;)ersus;
Plainti:s ><R(W and #5ARLE%, now co;defendants
A"2 >ort? now will answer the counterclai' of +et,
Actually, the da'ages on land was not caused !y
'e" %i #harles 'an ang 'ay $asalanan !aN 4un ang
&atay guto'NN %o >ort? .les a cross;clai' against
co;&lainti: #harles arising out to the counterclai' of
+et-
#R<%%;#LAI> ARI%ING 7R<> (5E #<LN(ER#LAI> <7 +E(
Plainti: ><R(W, now cross;clai'ant
;#ersus&
Plainti: #5ARLE%, now cross;defendant
B"2 Now, according to Pao, Actually last 'onth, a car
owned !y !oth of you 0>ort? and #harles2 !u'&ed
'y car and that 'y car was da'aged" %o, nag;.le
na'an si Pao ng counterclai' against >ort? and
#harles for the da'age of the car"
#<LN(ER#LAI> <7 PA<
Defendant PA<, now &lainti:
&#ersus&
Plainti:s ><R(W and #5ARLE%, now defendants
6"2 %a!i ni #harles, IH' not the owner of the car" %i
>ort? ang owner" GagoN %o cross;clai' na'an siya
0#harles2 $ay >ort?-
#R<%%;#LAI> ARI%ING 7R<> (5E #<LN(ER#LAI> <7
PA<
Plainti: #5ARLE%, now cross;clai'ant
&#ersus&
Plainti: ><R(W, now cross;defendant
Ilan lahat ang $aso/ (here are siJ 062 cases which are to
!e decided in the sa'e action" (his rarely ha&&ens, !ut it is
&ossi!le under the rules" (he o!)ious PLRP<%E of these is to
a)oid 'ulti&licity of suits and toward these ends" According
to the %#, the rules allow in a certain cases and e)en co'&el
a &etitioner to co'!ine in one litigation these conRicting
clai's 'ost &articularly when they arise out of the sa'e
transaction" (he rule does not only allow a &er'issi)e
counterclai' !ut the &arties are e)en co'&elled to raise
the' in a co'&ulsory counter;clai'"
RUIG0 =R. #s. COURT OF APPEALS
919 %#RA 66G
7A#(%- Dean .les a case against +et and
Pao" +et .les a cross;clai' against Pao" After a
while, the case against +et and Pao was
dis'issed"
I%%LE- =hat ha&&ens to the cross;clai' of
+et against Pao/
5ELD- =hen the 'ain action was
dis'issed, the cross;action 'ust also !e
dis'issed" (he life of a cross;clai' de&ends on
the life of the 'ain action" If the 'ain action is
dis'issed, the cross;clai' will ha)e to !e
auto'atically dis'issed"
A cross;clai' could not !e the su!*ect of
inde&endent ad*udication once it lost the neJus
u&on which its life de&ended" (he cross;
clai'ants cannot clai' 'ore rights than the
&lainti:s the'sel)es, on whose cause of action
the cross;clai' de&ended" (he dis'issal of the
co'&laint di)ested the cross;clai'ants of
whate)er a&&eala!le interest they 'ight ha)e
@@
Civil Procedure Rule 6
Kinds of Pleadings
had !efore and also 'ade the cross;clai' itself
no longer )ia!le
=hereas, the counterclai' can eJist alone without the
co'&laint"
EDA>PLE- Pao .led a case against +et for the reco)ery of
a &iece of land" +etHs counterclai' is da'ages arising fro' a
)ehicular accident" Na;dis'iss ang $aso ni Pao 8 wala na
yung reco)ery of a &iece of land" (he counterclai' of +et can
still re'ain ali)e e)en if the 'ain action is dead"
Cut in a cross;clai', once the 'ain action is dead, the
cross;clai' is also auto'atically dead too" =hat is there to
rei'!urse when the co'&lainant has !een dis'issed/ A!er/N
#<LN(ER #<LN(ER#LAI> and #<LN(ER #R<%%;#LAI>
Se'. D. Counter&counterclaims and
counter&cross&claims. A '$uner'lai#
#a/ )e assered agains an $riginal
'$uner1'lai#an.
A 'r$ss1'lai# #a/ als$ )e ;led
agains an $riginal 'r$ss1'lai#an.+n,
%ection E is a new &ro)ision" (here is such a thing as
counter;counterclai' and counter;cross;clai'" (he conce&t of
counter;counter;clai' is not new" As a 'atter of fact, that
was as$ed in the !ar years ago"
EDA>PLE- #ha's .led against you an action to collect a
loan" 4ou .led a counterclai' against her to reco)er a &iece
of land" <f course, she ha)e to answer your counterclai'" Cut
she will say, Actually you ha)e !een 'olesting 'e with your
clai' when actually you ha)e no right o)er 'y land" %o,
nag;.le siya ng in*unction to sto& you fro' 'olesting her" In
other words, !ased on your counter;clai' against her to
reco)er 'y land, she will .le a counterclai' to sto& you fro'
'olesting her" In e:ect, there is counter;clai' to a counter;
clai'"
#<LN(ER;#R<%%;#LAI>" Nag cross;clai' $a sa a$in,
'ag cross;clai' din a$o sa iyo"
E"2 REPLB
Se'. 1H. +eply. A re&l/ is a
&leading0 !e $9'e $r %un'i$n $%
"!i'! is $ den/0 $r allege %a's in
denial $r a($idan'e $% ne" #aers
alleged )/ "a/ $% de%ense in !e
ans"er and !ere)/ *$in $r #aIe issue
as $ su'! ne" #aers. I% a &ar/
d$es n$ ;le su'! re&l/0 all !e ne"
#aers alleged in !e ans"er are
dee#ed '$nr$(ered.
I% !e &laini4 "is!es $ iner&$se
an/ 'lai#s arising $u $% !e ne"
#aers s$ alleged0 su'! 'lai#s s!all
)e se %$r! in an a#ended $r
su&&le#enal '$#&lain.+11,
ILLL%(RA(I<N- Plainti: .les a co'&laint against a
defendant to collect an un&aid loan" D .les his answer and
raises a new 'atter, aOr'ati)e defense" According to the
defendant, the o!ligation is already &aid" Plainti: said that
you ha)e &aid the other loan" In other words, the &lainti:
would li$e to deny or dis&ute the defendantHs aOr'ati)e
defense of &ay'ent"
,- #an I .le a &leading to dis&ute your defense/
A- 4es, that &leading is called a REPL4"
,- 5ow do you classify a re&ly/
A- It is a res&onsi)e &leading !ecause it is the res&onse
of the &lainti: to the aOr'ati)e defense raised in the
defendantHs answer"
An answer is a res&onse to the co'&laint and the re&ly is
a res&onse to the answer"
,- 5ali'!awa, you would li$e to answer 'y re&ly, what
&leading would you .le/
A- None" (hat is the last &leading" <therwise, walang
$ata&usan and &leading natin" %o, re&ly is considered as the
last &leading"
,- %u&&ose I .led a co'&laint, you .led an answer
in)o$ing &ay'ent" I failed to re&ly" =hat is the e:ect if the
&lainti: fails to re&ly/ Is he ad'itting the correctness of the
defense/
A- No" (he failure to .le a re&ly has no e:ect" %ection
1G says that if a &arty does .le such re&ly, all the new
'atters alleged in the answer are dee'ed contro)erted"
>eaning, all the aOr'ati)e defenses raised in the answers
are auto'atically denied"
%o, whether you .le a re&ly or not, the defenses are
dee'ed auto'atically dis&uted" (he .ling of a re&ly is
<P(I<NAL"
A re&ly should not !e confused with the answer to a
counterclai' which is also .led !y the &lainti:"

,- Gi)e the distinctions !etween AN%=ER (< #<LN(ER;
#LAI> and REPL4"
A- (he following-
1"2 A REPL4 is a res&onse to the defenses
inter&osed !y the defendant in his answer,
whereas
An AN%=ER (< A #<LN(ER#LAI> is a res&onse
to a cause of action !y the defendant
against the &lainti:3
9"2 (he .ling of a REPL4 is generally o&tional,
whereas
(he .ling of an AN%=ER (< A #<LN(ER#LAI> is
generally 'andatory under Rule 11
!ecause if the &lainti: fails to .le an
answer to the counterclai', he will !e
declared in default on the counterclai'"
@T
Civil Procedure Rule 6
Kinds of Pleadings
<L(LINE <7 7L<= <7 PLEADING%
7" THIRD +FOURTH0 ETC., . PARTB CO2PLAINT
Se'. 11. *hird, <!ourth, etc.= & party
complaint. A !ird +%$ur!0 e'., &ar/
'$#&lain is a 'lai# !a a de%ending
&ar/ #a/0 "i! lea(e $% '$ur0 ;le
agains a &ers$n n$ a &ar/ $ !e
a'i$n0 'alled !e !ird +%$ur!0 e'.,
&ar/ de%endan0 %$r '$nri)ui$n0
inde#ni/0 su)r$gai$n $r an/ $!er
relie%0 in res&e' $% !is $&&$nenJs
'lai#. +1-a,
(5IRD PAR(4 #<>PLAIN( is the &rocedure for !ringing
into a case a third &erson who is not a &arty to the case"
%o, &lainti: .les a case against the defendant"
Defendant !elie)es that a stranger or so'e!ody else should
!e !rought into the case and therefore .les a 'otion in court
that he !e allowed to .le a third;&arty co'&laint against such
&erson and therefore the defendant is called third &arty
&lainti: and that third &erson is a third;&arty defendant"
EDA>PLE - A &lainti: .les a case against a defendant to
collect a loan when there are two de!tors and one of the' is
co'&elled to &ay e)erything so the defendant will drag into
the &icture the co;de!tor for contri!ution or inde'nity" =ell,
you already learned if there are two of the' all he has to do
is to .le a cross;clai' against his co;defendant" CL( since he
is the only one, the re'edy is to a)ail of %ection 11"
(a$e note that .ling a third;&arty co'&laint is not a
'atter of right" (5ERE >L%( CE LEAIE <7 #<LR(" %o unli$e
counterclai' or cross;clai', you do not need any 'otion or
lea)e of court" +ust .le your answer to the counterclai' of
cross;clai' and that will do, !ut not a third;&arty co'&laint"
(he &ur&ose of third;&arty co'&laint is for contri!ution,
inde'nity, su!rogation and other relief in res&ect of his
o&&onentHs clai'"
(hat is why there is a close relationshi& !etween a
cross;clai' and a third;&arty co'&laint !ecause a
cross;clai' 'ust also !e arising out of the su!*ect 'atter of
the 'ain action" A third;&arty co'&laint 'ust !e also related
to the 'ain action" It cannot !e a cause of action which has
no relation to the 'ain action"
EDA>PLE- (he &lainti: .les a case against the surety and
the &rinci&al de!tor, so !oth of the' are defendants, and the
surety see$s rei'!urse'ent for whate)er a'ount he 'ay !e
co'&elled to &ay the &lainti:" =hat $ind of &leading would
he .le against his co;defendant 0the &rinci&al de!tor2/
#R<%%;#LAI>"
CL( if the &lainti: .le a case <NL4 against the surety,
!ecause anyway the &rinci&al de!tor is not an indis&ensa!le
&arty and the surety would li$e to see$ rei'!urse'ent fro'
the &erson who !ene.ted fro' the loan, he cannot .le a
cross;clai' against any!ody !ecause he is the lone
defendant" It is &ossi!le for hi' to *ust .le an answer " If he
loses and &ays the &lainti:, then he will .le another case
against the &rinci&al de!tor for rei'!urse'ent"
Cut if he wants e)erything to !e resol)ed in the sa'e
case, what $ind &leading will he .le/ 5e 'ust resort a (5IRD;
PAR(4 #<>PLAIN( and i'&lead the &rinci&al de!tor"
(he PLRP<%E of a third;&arty co'&laint is for the third
&arty &lainti: to as$ the third &arty defendant for-
1"2 #ontri!ution3
9"2 Inde'nity3
6"2 %u!rogation3 or
A"2 any other relief in res&ect to the o&&onentHs clai'"
CO)*+-/(*-O)5
EJa'&le X1- (wo de!tors !orrowed P1GG,GGG fro' +anis
0creditor2 and they shared the 'oney BG;BG" =hen the de!t
fell due, the creditor .led a case against one of the'" %o,
one of the' is !eing 'ade to &ay the P1GG,GGG" Not only his
share !ut also his co;solidary de!tor" %o if I a' the one lia!le
when actually 'y real lia!ility is only BG,GGG" =hat will I do/
I will .le a third &arty co'&laint against 'y co;de!tor for
contri!ution"
EJa'&le X9- If Andrew and #arlo are guilty of a Muasi;
delict and the in*ured &arty .les an action for da'ages
against Andrew only, Andrew 'ay .le a third;&arty co'&laint
against #arlo for contri!ution, their lia!ility !eing solidary
0Article 91EA, New #i)il #ode2
-)D$.)-'-C*-O)5
EJa'&le X1- (wo &eo&le signed a &ro'issory note in
fa)or of the creditor" Cut actually the entire a'ount went to
you and none for 'e" =hen the note fell due, I was the one
sued" %o I will .le a third;&arty co'&laint against you for
inde'nity" 4ou ha)e to return to 'e e)ery centa)o that I will
&ay the creditor"
EJa'&le X9- A surety sued for reco)ery of de!t !y the
creditor 'ay .le a third;&arty co'&laint against the &rinci&al
de!tor for inde'nity" 0Article 9GA@, New #i)il #ode2
0(/+O2*-O)5
@E
Civil Procedure Rule 6
Kinds of Pleadings
%u!rogation ; 4ou ste& into the shoes of so'eone else"
4our o!ligation is transferred to 'e"
EDA>PLE- =here a contract is leased !y a lessee and he
su!leased the &ro&erty to a third &erson who is now
occu&ying the &ro&erty" In e:ect, the su!;lessee ste&&ed into
the shoes of the original lessee" If the &ro&erty is da'aged
and the lessor sues the lessee for da'ages to his leased
&ro&erty, the lessee or su!;lessor can .le a third;&arty
co'&laint and ha)e the su!;lessee for su!rogation !ecause
actually, you ste&&ed into the shoes when you occu&ied the
leased &ro&erty" 0Articles 16B1 and 16BA, New #i)il #ode2
7or )1 O*4$+ +$,-$' -) +$0P$C* *O *4$ OPPO)$)*0
C,-., )ery !road-
EDA>PLE- =hen I !uy the &ro&erty of >r" #ru? and after
a while, here co'es >r" Dee .ling a case against 'e to clai'
ownershi& of the land" Cut I !ought it fro' >r" #ru? who
warranted that he is the real owner" %o I will now .le third;
&arty co'&laint against >r" #ru? to enforce his warranty 8
warranty against e)iction" 0Article 1BAT, New #i)il #ode2
(a$e note that there is always a connection !etween the
'ain co'&laint and the third;&arty co'&laint !ecause the
condition is contri!ution, inde'ni.cation, su!rogation and
any other relief in res&ect to your o&&onents clai'" (here is
always a relation !etween the third &arty;co'&laint and the
'ain co'&laint against you" 5ere is a !ar Muestion"""
CAR ,LE%(I<N- +anis .les a case against Nud* to reco)er
an un&aid load" Now the reason is that #arlo also owes Nud*"
Nud* says, I cannot &ay you !ecause there is a &erson who
has also utang to 'e" =hat I will &ay you de&ends on his
&ay'ent to 'e" 7ile agad si Nud* ng third;&arty co'&laint
against #arlo" Is the third;&arty co'&laint &ro&er/
A- N<" (here is no connection !etween the 'ain action
and the 6rd;&arty co'&laint 8 the loan of Nud* to +anis and
the loan of Andrew to Nud*" =alang connection" Anong
&a$iala' ni +anis sa utang ni Andrew $ay Nud*/ Not in res&ect
to his o&&onentHs clai'"
CAR ,LE%(I<N- 5ow do you deter'ine whether a 6rd;
&arty co'&laint is &ro&er or i'&ro&er/ =hat are the tests to
deter'ine its &ro&riety/
A- #ase of
CAPABAS #s. COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
@@ P5IL" 1T1
5ELD- (here are four 0A2 &ossi!le tests to
deter'ine the &ro&riety of a third;&arty co'&laint"
In order for it to !e allowed, it 'ust &ass one of
the'" (hat is the reason when you .le it, you need
the &er'ission of the court to deter'ine whether it
is &ro&er or not and the original &lainti: 'ay o!*ect
to the &ro&riety of the third;&arty co'&laint"
(here are the 7<LR (E%(% 0any one will do2-
1" A third;&arty co'&laint is &ro&er if it arises out
of the sa'e transaction on which &lainti: is
!ased3
$;.P,$- A creditor sued only one
solidary de!tor" %o you can .le a third;&arty
co'&laint for contri!ution" Anyway, there is
only one loan and our lia!ility arises out of
the sa'e &ro'issory note
9" A third;&arty co'&laint is &ro&er if the third;
&artyHs co'&laint, although arising out of
another transaction, is connected with the
&lainti:Hs clai'"
$;.P,$- (he car owner is sued for
cul&a aMuiliana for da'ages arising fro'
)ehicular collision and he .les a third;&arty
co'&laint against the insurance co'&any
for inde'nity !ased on the contract of
insurance" %o it is connected with &lainti:Hs
clai', and that is &recisely the &ur&ose of
'y insurance co)erage"
6" (hird &arty defendant would !e lia!le to the
original &lainti:Ys clai'" Although the third
&arty defendantYs lia!ility arises out of another
transaction"
$;.P,$- %u!lease" Roy leased his
&ro&erty to Eric" Eric su!leased it to
Rudol&h" If RoyHs &ro&erty is da'aged, Roy
will sue Eric" Cut Eric will also sue Rudol&h"
(he su!;lessor has the right to .le a third;
&arty co'&laint against the su!;lessee for
the da'aged leased &ro&erty which is now
occu&ied !y the su!;lessee" (he third;&arty
defendant Rudol&h would !e lia!le to
&lainti:Hs 0RoyHs2 clai'" Rudol&h will !e
lia!le to Roy for RoyHs clai' against Eric
although the lia!ility of Rudol&h arises out
of another transaction 0%u!;lease contract2
A" (he third &arty defendant 'ay assert any
defense which the third &arty &lainti: has or
'ay ha)e against &lainti:Hs clai'"
EDA>PLE- (ato is a registered owner of
a car and then sold it to Phili&" Phili& is the
actual owner" 5owe)er, Phili& did not
register the sale to the L(<" (he registered
owner is si (ato lang giha&on although he is
no longer the real owner" =hile Phili& was
dri)ing that car it !u'&ed the car of Lewee
(anduay" Lewee researched the owner of
the car at L(< and ang lu'a!as ay si (ato"
%o ang ginawa ni Lewee, ang $inasuhan
nya ay si (ato na walang 'alay"""under the
law, the registered owner is lia!le" <f
TG
Civil Procedure Rule 6
Kinds of Pleadings
course, when (ato got the co'&laint, =ala
a$ong ala' sa sinasa!i nyo, that car is no
longer 'ine" I sold that two years ago, I
ha)e no idea what ha&&ened"
%o o!)iously, (ato arri)ed at the
conclusion that si Phili& and na$a!angga"
(ato .led a third;&arty co'&laint against
Phili& !ecause he is the real owner" =hen
Phili& got the third;&arty co'&laint, and
!ecause he $nows the story, in fact he was
the one dri)ing, ang ginawa niya, nila!anan
niya ng diretso si Lewee" >eaning, instead
of (ato .ghting Lewee, Phili& fought Lewee
directly" 7rontal na !a" %a!i ni Phili&, I
was not at fault, you 0Lewee2 are at fault"
%o here is a situation where Lewee sues
(ato, (ato sues Phili& !ut Phili& .ghts
Lewee, as if he is the real defendant, then
the third &arty co'&laint 'ust !e &ro&er"
It 'ust !e related"
%o those are the sa'&les of third &arty co'&laint which
are correct"
(a$e note that there is a close si'ilarity !etween a third;
&arty co'&laint and a cross;clai' !ecause as we ha)e
learned, a cross;clai' 'ust also !e related to the sa'e
action" %o we will go to so'e interesting case on third;&arty
co'&laint"
SA2ALA #s. :ICTOR
1@G %#RA AB6
7A#(%- (his case in)ol)es a )ehicular
accident" Phili&, while riding on a &assenger
*ee& owned !y (ato, the *ee& was !u'&ed !y
the truc$ of Lewee, in*uring Phili&" Phili& .led a
case for da'ages arising fro' !reach of
contract against (ato" (ato .led a third;&arty
co'&laint against Lewee" After trial, the court
found that (ato has not at fault" (he fault is
entirely against Lewee " %o the action against
(ato was dis'issed, !ut the court held that
Lewee !e directly lia!le to Phili&"
It was Muestioned !y Lewee" Lewee clai's
that is should !e (ato who is lia!le to Phili&
!ecause Phili& did not sue 'e 0Lewee2, Ca$it
a$o ang 'a;lia!le hindi na'an a$o ang
dine'anda ni Phili&/ %o &rocedurally, I a'
lia!le to (ato, (ato is lia!le to Phili&"

I%%LE X1- #an Lewee, a third;&arty
defendant, !e held lia!le directly to Phili&, the
original &lainti:/
5ELD- 4E%, that is &ossi!le" In a third;&arty
co'&laint, nor'ally Lewee is lia!le to (ato" Cut
Lewee can !e 'ade lia!le to Phili&, or Lewee
can !e 'ade lia!le to !oth Phili& and (ato !e;
cause that is co)ered !y the &hrase O+ )1
O*4$+ +$,-$' 8 so !road that it co)er a direct
lia!ility of a third &arty defendant to the original
&lainti:"
I%%LE X9- 5ow can the court award
da'ages to Phili& !ased on the theory of cul&a
aMuiliana when his co'&laint is !ased on cul&a
contractual/ #an Lewee !e held lia!le for cul&a;
contractual/
5ELD- 4E%" (hat is also &ossi!le !ecause
the &ri'ary &ur&ose of this rule is to a)oid
circuitry of action and to dis&ose of in one
litigation, the entire su!*ect 'atter arising fro'
a &articular set of fact it is i''aterial that the
third;&arty &lainti: asserts a cause of action
against the third &arty defendant on a theory
di:erent fro' that asserted !y the &lainti:
against the defendant" It has li$ewise !een
held that a defendant in a contract action 'ay
*oin as third;&arty defendants those lia!le to
hi' in tort for the &lainti:Hs clai' against hi'
or directly to the &lainti:"
Another interesting case which is to !e co'&ared with
the a!o)e'entioned case is the 1ETE case of
SHAFER #s. =UDGE OF RTC OF
OLONGAPO CITB
16@ %#RA 6T6
N<(E- (his case although it refers to third;
&arty co'&laint is related to cri'inal &rocedure"
(his is si'ilar to the case of 7>-$+ where the
issue is, is there such a thing as a counterclai'
in a cri'inal case where the o:ended &arty did
not 'a$e a reser)ation" In 04'$+, is there
such a thing as a third;&arty co'&laint in a
cri'inal case/
7A#(%- %hafer while dri)ing his car co)ered
!y (PL, !u'&ed another car dri)en !y (" ( .led
a cri'inal case against % for &hysical in*uries
arising fro' rec$less i'&rudence" ( did not
'a$e any reser)ation to .le a se&arate ci)il
action" %o o!)iously, the clai' for ci)il lia!ility
is dee'ed instituted"
%hafer was co)ered !y the insurance, so he
.led a third;&arty co'&laint against the
insurance co'&any insofar as the ci)il lia!ility is
concerned" (he insurance co'&any Muestioned
the &ro&riety of d third;&arty co'&laint in a
cri'inal case, !ecause according to the
insurance co'&any, the third;&arty co'&laint is
entirely di:erent fro' the cri'inal lia!ility"
I%%LE- =hether or not the .ling of a third;
&arty co'&laint in a cri'inal case is
&rocedurally correct"
5ELD- 4es, it is &ro&er" (here could !e a
third &arty co'&laint in a cri'inal case !ecause
an o:ense causes two classes of in*uries 8 the
T1
Civil Procedure Rule 6
Kinds of Pleadings
%<#IAL and the PER%<NAL in*ury" In this case,
the ci)il as&ect of the cri'inal case is dee'ed
i'&liedly instituted in the cri'inal case" %hafer
'ay raise all defenses a)aila!le to hi' in so far
as the cri'inal and ci)il as&ects are concerned"
%haferHs clai' of inde'nity against the
insurance co'&any are also the clai' !y the
)icti' in the cri'inal clai'" (herefore %haferHs
clai' against the insurance co'&any is related
to the cri'inal case" %o si'ilar to +a)ier that an
accused 'ay also .le a co'&ulsory
counterclai' in a cri'inal case when there is no
reser)ation"
CL( in the light of the ruling in the case of
CA<AERO #s. CANTOS, supra
(he %5A7ER ruling has to !e set aside for
the 'eanti'e !ecause there is no such thing as
third;&arty co'&laint in cri'inal cases now" In
other words, forget it in the 'eanti'e" Also,
forget counterclai's in cri'inal cases e)en if
they arose out of the 'ain action"
(his case refers to 7>-$+ on whether or not
there is such a thing as a co'&ulsory
counterclai' in cri'inal cases" %# said, 5uwag
'una sa'o$N If we will allow it in cri'inal
cases it will only co'&licate and confuse the
case" (he attention 'ight !e di)ested to
counterclai's or cross;clai's or third;&arty
co'&laints, etc"
5ELD- (he trial court should con.ne itself
to the cri'inal as&ect and the &ossi!le ci)il
lia!ility of the accused arising out of the cri'e"
(he counter;clai' 0and cross;clai' or third
&arty co'&laint, if any2 should !e set aside or
refused cogni?ance without &re*udice to their
.ling in se&arate &roceedings at the &ro&er
ti'e"
=e will go to the old case of
REPU<LIC #s. CENTRAL SURETB CO.
9B %#RA 6A1 P1E6TQ
7A#(% - 5annah .led a case against Rina
for a lia!ility a'ounting to P6GG,GGG" %o it was
.led in R(#" Rina .led a third;&arty co'&laint
against #on#on Insurance #o'&any for
inde'nity insurance !ut the 'aJi'u'
insurance is only PBG,GGG" (he insurance
co'&any 'o)ed to dis'iss on the ground that
the court has no *urisdiction !ecause third;&arty
co'&laint is only for PBG,GGG which is su&&osed
to !e within the co'&etence of the >(#"
I%%LE- Is the insurance co'&any correct/
5ELD- N<" (he insurance co'&any is
wrong" (he third;&arty co'&laint is only
incidental" (he third;&arty co'&laint need not
!e within the *urisdiction of the R(# where the
&rinci&al action is &ending !ecause the third;
&arty co'&laint is really a continuation and an
ancillary to the &rinci&al action" If the court
acMuires *urisdiction o)er the 'ain action,
auto'atically, it acMuires *urisdiction o)er the
third;&arty co'&lain which is 'ainly a
continuation of the &rinci&al action"
Now, the sa'e situation ha&&ened in another case" (he
case of
EASTER ASSURANCE #s. CUI
1GB %#RA 6A9
7A#(% - #arol is a resident of Da)ao #ity"
#athy is a resident of #e!u #ity" #arol .led a
case !efore the R(# of Da)ao #ity against
#athy" #athy .les a third;&arty co'&laint
against +oy, a resident of >anila" Is the )enue
&ro&er/
5ELD- (he )enue is &ro&er !ecause the
)enue of the 'ain action is &ro&er" %o
auto'atically third;&arty co'&laint is also
&ro&er" (he third;&arty has to yield to the
*urisdiction and )enue of the 'ain action"
Now of course, if thereHs such a thing as 6rd &arty
co'&laint, there is also a Ath, Bth, 6th or @th co'&laint" (hat
is &ossi!le !ut e)erything is with res&ect to his o&&onentHs
clai'"
EKA2PLEL
AHs car was !u'&ed !y C" Cut C contented that the
reason that he !u'&ed AHs car was !ecause he was !u'&ed
!y # and the sa'e goes to #, D, E" C then .les a 6rd &arty
co'&laint against #" # .les a Ath &arty co'&laint against D"
D .les a Bth &arty co'&laint against E" >eaning, &asahan,
!a" (hey will throw the lia!ility to the one who did it" (hat is
a good hy&othetical eJa'&le of how a fourth, .fth, siJth
&arty co'&laint can co'e into &lay"
Se'. 1-. /ringing new parties. 1
6!en !e &resen'e $% &aries $!er
!an !$se $ !e $riginal a'i$n is
re@uired %$r !e graning $% '$#&lee
relie% in !e deer#inai$n $% a
'$uner'lai# $r 'r$ss1'lai#0 !e '$ur
s!all $rder !e# $ )e )r$ug! in as
de%endans0 i% *urisdi'i$n $(er !e#
'an )e $)ained.
T9
Civil Procedure Rule 6
Kinds of Pleadings
(he !est eJa'&le of %ection 19 is the case of-
SAPUGAB #s. COURT OF APPEALS
1T6 %#RA A6A
7A#(%- >o!il Phili&&ines .led a case
against %a&ugay, its gasoline dealer" %a&ugay
.led a answer and inter&osed a counterclai' for
da'ages against >o!il and included #ardenas
0the 'anager of >o!il2 who is not a &lainti:"

I%%LE- =hether or not the inclusion of
#ardenas in the counterclai' is &ro&er where
he is not a &lainti: in the >o!il case"
5ELD- (he inclusion of #ardenas is &ro&er"
(he general rule that the defendant cannot !y a
counterclai' !ring into the action any clai'
against &ersons other than the &lainti:, ad'its
of an eJce&tion under this &ro)ision 0%ection
192 8 'eaning, if it is necessary to include a 6rd
&erson in a counterclai' or cross;clai', the
court can order hi' to !e !rought in as
defendants" In e:ect, the !ringing of #ardenas
in the case is sanctioned !y the Rules"
(he case of 0P(21 should not !e confused with the
case of-
CHA:EG #s. SANDIGAN<ABAN
1ET %#RA 9T9
7A#(%L Petitioner 7rancisco #ha)e? 0for'er
solicitor general2 re&resented the go)ern'ent
for P#GG" (he case arose out of P#GG cases
wherein Enrile was sued for accu'ulation of his
ill;gotten wealth" Enrile .led an answer to the
co'&laint" Enrile contends that the case is
harass'ent suit whose 'aster'ind was the
%olicitor General hi'self" Enrile .les a
counterclai' against #ha)e?" 0EnrileHs lawyer
'ay!e well aware of the 0apugay case the one
sued is the lawyer"2 #ha)e? Muestioned such
counterclai' contending that he was not a
&lainti:" %andigan!ayan denied such
contention"
5ELDL (he inclusion of &lainti:Hs lawyer is
i'&ro&er"
(o allow a counterclai' against a lawyer
who .les a co'&laint for his clients, who is
'erely their re&resentati)e in court and not a
&lainti: or co'&lainant in the case would lead
to 'ischie)ous conseMuences" A lawyer owes
his client entire de)otion to his genuine interest,
war' ?eal in the 'aintenance and defense of
his rights and the eJertion of his ut'ost
learning and a!ility" A lawyer cannot &ro&erly
attend to his duties towards his client if, in the
sa'e case, he is $e&t !usy defending hi'self"
,- Is the %# suggesting that a lawyer who sued in a
harass'ent case can get away with it/ Does that 'ean to
say that the lawyer is i''une fro' suit/
A- N<, the %# does not say a lawyer en*oys a s&ecial
i''unity fro' da'age suits" 5owe)er, when he acts in the
na'e of the client, he should not !e sued in a counterclai'
in the )ery sa'e case where he has .led only as a counsel
and not as &arty" <nly clai's for alleged da'ages or other
causes of action should !e .led in a se&arate case" (hus, if
you feel that the lawyer is acting 'aliciously, you .le a
co'&laint !ut in a se&arate case" (hatHs why the case of
0apugay should not !e confused with Cha#e?"
Se'. 13. nswer to third <!ourth, etc.=
party complaint. 1 A !ird +%$ur!0 e'.,1
&ar/ de%endan #a/ allege in !is
ans"er !is de%enses0 '$uner'lai#s $r
'r$ss1'lai#s0 in'luding su'! de%enses
!a !e !ird +%$ur!0 e'.,1&ar/
&laini4 #a/ !a(e agains !e $riginal
&laini4 in res&e' $% !e laerJs 'lai#
agains !e !ird1&ar/ &laini4. +n,
ILLUSTRATIONSL
A #s. C3 C #s. #" Nor'ally, C will defend hi'self against
the co'&laint of A and # will defend hi'self in the co'&laint
of C" (hat is su&&osed to !e the &attern" Nor'ally, # does not
.le a direct clai' against A" Cut the law allows # in defending
hi'self, to answer the clai' of A" (he law allows hi' to .le a
direct counterclai' against A"
If # has the right to frontally 'eet the action .led !y A 8
'eaning, # will .ght A directly 8 if # has the right to assert
any defense which C has against A and e)en for # to litigate
against A, then it 'ust !e a &ro&er third &arty co'&laint"
(hat has ha&&ened se)eral ti'es"
EDA>PLE- C owns a car which was already sold to #" (he
trou!le is that C ne)er registered the transaction" <n the
record, C is still the registered owner" (hen #, while dri)ing
the car, 'eets an accident and in*ures A" =hen A loo$ed at
the record, the owner is C" %o A .les a case against C" %o C
will .le a third &arty co'&laint against the real owner 0#2"
Now, # can frontally 'eet the co'&laint .led !y A" (hat is
T6
Civil Procedure Rule 6
Kinds of Pleadings
the !est eJa'&le where you ha)e the right against the
original &lainti: or e)en assert a counterclai' against hi'"
As a 'atter of fact, that last test is now incor&orated as a
new &ro)ision 0%ection 162"
In the case of-
SINGAPORE AIRLINES #s. COURT OF
APPEALS
9A6 %#RA 1A6 P1EEBQ
7A#(%- Aying .led a case against Cugoy"
Cugoy .led a third &arty co'&laint against and
#yle who wants to frontally 'eet the 'ain
co'&laint .led !y Aying
5ELD- If that is your &ur&ose, you ha)e to
.le two 092 answers 8 you .le an answer to the
third &arty co'&laint and you .le a second
answer to the 'ain co'&laint .led !y Aying"
A third;&arty co'&laint in)ol)es an action
se&arate and distinct fro', although related to,
the 'ain co'&laint" A third;&arty defendant
who feels aggrie)ed !y so'e allegations in the
'ain co'&laint should, aside fro' answering
the third;&arty co'&laint, also answer the 'ain
co'&laint"
Nor'ally, #yle answers the 6rd &arty co'&laint of Cugoy
and does not answer to the co'&laint of Aying" Cut according
to 0-)2PO+$ case, if #yle feels aggrie)ed !y the allegations
of Aying, he should also answer the 'ain co'&laint of Aying"
Practically, he shall answer the 6rd &arty co'&laint and the
'ain co'&laint"

TA