1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 34

2001 Edition <draft copy. pls. check for errors> Judgment on the Pleadings

Rule 34
JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS

SEC. 1. Judgment on the pleadings.- Where an

answer fails to tender an issue, or otherwise
admits the material allegations of the adverse
party's pleading, the court may, on motion of that
party, direct judgment on such pleading. However,
in actions for declaration of nullity or annulment
of marriage or for legal separation, the material
facts alleged in the complaint shall always be
proved. (1a, R19)

Judgment on the pleadings is an expeditious way of terminating a civil action.

There is no more trial and judgment will be rendered based on what the plaintiff
says in his pleadings.

Judgment on the pleadings is a judgment rendered by the court if the answer

fails to tender an issue, or otherwise admits the material allegations of the
adverse party's pleading.

It is rendered without a trial, or even without a pre-trial.

Nature of judgment on the pleadings

1. The concept of a judgment on the pleadings will not apply when no answer
is filed. It will come into operation when an answer is served and filed but
the same fails to tender an issue or admits the material allegations of the
adverse party’s pleading (Sec. 1)
2. An answer fails to tender an issue when the material allegations of the
other party are admitted or not specifically denied by the pleader. Under
the rules, material allegations of the complaint are deemed admitted (sec.
11 R 8).
3. When there is no answer, the proper remedy for the plaintiff is to file a
motion to declare defendant in default.

A motion is required

A judgment on the pleadings must be on motion of the claimant. However,

if at the pre-trial the court finds that a judgment on the pleadings is proper, it
may render such judgment motu proprio (sec. 2g R 18)

One who prays for judgment on the pleadings without offering proof of his
own allegations and without giving the opposing party any opportunity to
Lakas Atenista 58
Ateneo de Davao University College of Law
1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 34
2001 Edition <draft copy. pls. check for errors> Judgment on the Pleadings

introduce evidence must be understood to admit all the material and relevant
allegations of the opposing party and to rest his motion for judgment on those
allegations taken together with such of his own as are admitted in the
pleadings (Falcasantos vs. How Suy Cheng GR No. l-4229, May 29, 1952)

Allegations not deemed admitted by filing a motion for judgment on the

pleadings:
1. Irrelevant allegations;
2. Immaterial allegations; and
3. Allegations of damages in the complaint.

llustration:

PROBLEM: Plaintiff files a complaint. Defendant files an answer. The

answer contains what you call defenses – negative, affirmative defenses.
Now, after the defendant files the answer, his issues are joined. Next step is
pre-trial. If the case is not terminated in pre-trial, next step is trial. That’s the
procedure.
But suppose I will file a complaint against you and you file your answer
where you admitted everything that I said in my complaint. All the
allegations in the complaint are admitted and no defense was interposed by
the defendant. So, meaning, the defendant filed an answer which contains no
defense at all. Everything is admitted. Should the case go to trial? Should the
plaintiff prove his cause of action? What is there to prove when you admitted
everything? So, there is no more trial because everything is admitted by the
defendant.

Q: In the above case, what should the plaintiff do?

A: The plaintiff will now apply Rule 34. He will file a motion in court
which is known as Judgment on the Pleadings. He will ask the court to render
judgment based on what the complaint says and what the answer says. No
more evidence. Eto ang sabi ng complaint, “Oh! You borrowed money, and you
did not pay.” Sabi ng answer, “admit! admit! admit!” Oh, ano pa? What is there
to be tried? You admitted everything, so the court will now decide! You can
render a decision based on what the complaint says and what the answer says
and the court will immediately render judgment for the plaintiff. So wala ng
trial.

Rule 34 is one of the procedures or remedies under the Rules of Court for the
prompt expeditious resolutions of civil actions – one of the fastest ways of
resolving a civil dispute because plaintiff files the complaint, defendant files his
answer, plaintiff asks for judgment and the case is decided. No more pre-trial,

Lakas Atenista 59
Ateneo de Davao University College of Law
1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 34
2001 Edition <draft copy. pls. check for errors> Judgment on the Pleadings

no more trial. Why? There is nothing to try kasi wala ka mang depensa.
Everything that I say in my complaint you admit.

Grounds for Judgment on the pleadings

Q: Under Rule 34, what are the grounds for Judgment on the Pleadings?
A: The following are the grounds:
1.) When an answer fails to tender an issue; or
2.) When an answer otherwise admits all the material allegations of the
adverse party’s pleading.

Q: When does an answer fail to tender an issue?

A: An answer fails to tender an issue:

1.) when it neither admits nor denies the allegations in the complaint;
It neither admits nor denies. So, you cannot do that. Either you
admit or you deny the allegations in the complaint. You cannot say,
“Defendant does not admit, he does not also deny the allegation.” Meaning
you are trying to be evasive. That is not allowed.

2.) when all the denials in the answer are general denials and not specific.
A denial is general if the pleader does not state the facts relied
upon in support of his denial – “Defendant denies the allegations in
paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8.” That is an answer which does not
tender an issue because all the denials are general, or no knowledge
or information sufficient to form a belief. Just like what happened in
the case of CAPITOL MOTORS vs. YABUT.

Note: By moving for judgment on the pleadings, plaintiff waives

his claim for unliquidated damages. Claim for such damages must be
alleged and proved.

So if an answer contains evasive allegations, denials which are general, it does

not also tender any issue aside from the fact that it also admits the law. Consider
it as an admission of the material allegations of the complaint. Therefore plaintiff
will now move for an immediate judgment in his favor. That is why it is called
judgment on the pleadings.

Now, judgment on the pleadings has already been mentioned in the previous
rule that we took up. Let’s go back to pre-trial in Rule 18 because there is a
mention there on judgment on the pleadings. Section 2, Rule 18:

SEC. 2. Nature and purpose. - The pre-trial is

mandatory. The court shall consider:
xxx

Lakas Atenista 60
Ateneo de Davao University College of Law
1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 34
2001 Edition <draft copy. pls. check for errors> Judgment on the Pleadings

g) The propriety of rendering judgment on the

pleadings, or summary judgment, or of dismissing
the action should a valid ground therefor be found
to exist.
xxx

In other words, during the pre-trial, the defendant there and based on his
pleadings, meron siyang defense. But during the pre-trial, he makes now an
admission, “Actually, your honor, wala akong depensa ba. I have no defense.” Court:
“Ah, wala ka ba? Okay. Judgment on the pleadings!” – tapos!

Or, another example: Collection case. According to the defendant in his

answer the obligation is paid. And then during the trial, the court asks the
defendant, “Are you serious that the obligation is paid?” Defendant: “Actually your
honor, wala pa. Hindi pa bayad.” Court: “Ganoon ba? O plaintiff, what do you say?”
Plaintiff: “I move for judgment on the pleadings.” Tapos! The case is finished
because the admission is made in the course of the pre-trial that he has no valid
defense.

CASES WHERE JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS WILL NOT APPLY

Q: Give the exceptions to the rule on judgment on the pleadings.

A: Judgment on the pleadings does not apply:
1.) in actions for declaration of nullity or annulment of marriage; or
2.) in actions for legal separation;
3.) when the issue is the amount of unliquidated damages because there
must always be evidence to prove such amount (Rule 8, Section 11);
4.) when only conclusions of law are being alleged.

So, judgment on the pleading is not allowed on actions for nullity of marriage
or for legal separation. It cannot be resolved based only on what the complaint
and what the answer says. Otherwise, if we will allow Rule 34 in that kind of
action, then it is very easy for husbands and wives to have their marriages
annulled or in obtaining a legal separation. So, the husband and the wife, they
quarrel and they decide: “O, sige. I-admit mo lahat para judgment on the pleadings
na! Eh, di tapos!”

My golly! The court will never allow that to succeed simply because the other
party admitted everything. That would be a license for collusion. It’s not as easy
as that. Walang judgment on the pleading sa marriage. In other words, no
allegation is deemed admitted even if the other party admits. You still have to
prove or disprove.

Lakas Atenista 61
Ateneo de Davao University College of Law
1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 34
2001 Edition <draft copy. pls. check for errors> Judgment on the Pleadings

So, the premise is similar to Rule 9 on Defaults. There is no default judgment

in actions for legal separation based on the same principle eh! It is a one-sided
story and collusion or connivance between the parties is possible.

Motion to Dismiss and Motion for Judgment on the pleadings

A motion to dismiss is filed by a defendant to a complaint, counterclaim, cross

claim or third-party complaint; while a the latter is filed by the claiming party if
the answer fails to tender an issue or admits the material allegations in the claim.

Note: If the complaint states no cause of action, a motion to dismiss should be

filed and not a motion for judgment on the pleadings.

A judgment on the pleadings is one that is considered ex parte because upon

particular facts thus presented, the plaintiff is entitled to judgment or motu
proprio under Rule 18 2g (Dino v. Valencia GR No. L-43886 July 19, 1989)
-oOo-

Lakas Atenista 62
Ateneo de Davao University College of Law