You are on page 1of 3

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

NATIONAL CAPITAL JUDICIAL REGION


METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT
MANILA
BRANCH 27

JUAN SANTOS DE LA CRUZ


Plaintiff,

- versus - CIVIL CASE NO. 12345-AX


FOR: UNLAWFUL DETAINER
PEDRO SANCHEZ LAUREL
Defendant,

x---------------------------------------- ------- ---------- ------x

MOTION TO DISMISS

Defendant thru counsel, respectfully moves this Honorable Court to dismiss the plaintiffs
complaint on ground that the PERIOD FOR THE INSTITUTION OF A CIVIL ACTION FOR
UNLAWFUL DETAINER HAD ALREADY PRESCRIBED.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The dispute involves a parcel of land registered in the name of JUAN SANTOS DE LA
CRUZ under Transfer Certificate of Title No. 12345, located at Brgy. 657, Malate, City of Manila.
Plaintiff leased the property to herein defendant, PEDRO SANCHEZ LAUREL. The parties
executed a Contract of Lease on February 10, 2014, which provides that the term of the lease shall
be TWO (2) YEARS. Pursuant to the execution of the said document, defendant occupied the
said property on March 01, 2014. Upon expiration of the period of the lease, plaintiff neither made
any demand to the defendant to vacate the said premises nor collect any rental fees for the
continuous occupation of the said property by the defendant.

On July 01, 2017, Plaintiff instituted a civil action for unlawful detainer with the
Metropolitan Trial Court of Manila.

ARGUMENTS

PLAINTIFFS COMPLAINT IS BARRED BY PRESCRIPTION

Article 1147 of the Civil Code on the rules on prescription of actions provides that:
Art. 1147. The following actions must be filed within one year:
(1) For forcible entry and detainer;
(2) For defamation.
(3)
As aptly shown in the statement of facts, the actual occupation of the said premises
took place on March 01, 2014, and that the period of lease expired on March 01, 2016. It
is however apparent that the continuous occupation of the defendant in the said premises
was merely tolerated by the plaintiff. It is worthy to note that from the expiration of the
Lease Contract on March 01, 2016, it was only on July 01, 2017 or after the lapse of one
(1) year that the plaintiff instituted the said action against the defendant; which action is
now barred by prescription.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, defendants prays that plaintiffs


complaint be dismissed, with costs against the plaintiff.

City of Manila, Philippines, August 27, 2017

ATTY. OLIVIA G. POPE


NOTARY PUBLIC
PTR NO.: 123456/ 01-20-17
IBP NO.: 7891011/ 01-20-17
TIN No.; 234567-1
Commission No.: 2010-01-09
NOTICE OF HEARING

TO: Counsel for the Plaintiff


Address: Rm 272, 6th Fl., Pacific Towers Bldg.
Salcedo Village, Brgy. Dasmarinas,
City of Makati

Greetings!

Please take notice that on Wednesday, September 03, 2017 at 3 pm, or as soon thereafter
as counsel may be heard, the undersigned will ask this Honorable Court to approve the foregoing
Motion to Dismiss.

ATTY. OLIVIA G. POPE

EXPLANATION AS TO SERVICE

Copy of this Motion to Dismiss was served the counsel for plaintiff thru registered mail.
Personal service cannot be effected due to lack of manpower, as well as distance and time
constraints.

ATTY. OLIVIA G. POPE

Copy Furnished:

Atty. Cyrus Beanne


Counsel for Plaintiff
CB Law Offices
Rm 272, 6th Fl., Pacific Towers Bldg.,
Salcedo Village, Brgy. Dasmarinas,
City of Makati, Philippines

You might also like