Syllabus Codal Provisions Simplified Cases

Topic
2. Pleadings Small Claims No other No recent pertinent
allowed under formal jurisprudence, yet
The 2016 pleadings are
Revised Rules A. M. No. allowed
of 08-8-7-SC except the
Section 6. Statement of
Procedure for
Commencement Claim
Small Claims
of Small Claims provided
Cases and
Action. A small under the
The1991
claims action is Rule.
Revised
commenced by
Rule on filing with the
Summary court an
Procedure accomplished and
verified Statement
of Claim xxx No
formal pleading,
other than the
Statement of
Claim/s described
in this Rule, is
necessary to
initiate a small
claims action.
Summary By “Forcible entry and
Procedure enumeration, unlawful detainer cases
only are summary proceedings
complaints, xxx a ‘time procedure’
II. Civil Cases, compulsory designed to remedy the
Sec. 3 Pleadings counterclaims, situation. Thus, as a
cross-claims consequence of the
pleaded in the defendant’s failure to file
A. Pleadings answer and an answer, the court is
allowed. — The the answer simply tasked to render
only pleadings are allowed. judgment as may be
allowed to be filed warranted by the facts
are the alleged in the complaint
complaints, and limited to what is
compulsory prayed for therein.
counterclaims and (Fairland Knitcraft
cross-claims' Corporation v. Arturo
pleaded in the Loo Po G.R. No. 217694,
answer, and the
 answers thereto. 2016)

“for an offense covered by

the Rules on Summary
Procedure, the period of
prescription is interrupted
only by the filing of the
complaint or information in
court.” The rules prohibit
dilatory motions for
postponements without
justifiable cause; and
make the appearance of
parties and their counsels,
during the preliminary
conference, mandatory.
(Jadewell Parking
Systems Corporation v.
On. Judge Nelson F.
Lidua Sr. G.R. No.
169588, 2013)

It can be gainsaid that the

liberal construction of the
rules and the pleading is
the controlling principle to
effect substantial justice
and indication should, as
much as possible, be that
suits are to be decided on
their merits and not on
technicalities. (Don Tinio
Realty v. Florentino G.R.
No. 134222, 1999)
3. Parts of a Sec. 1. Caption Provides who
pleading the parties are
The caption sets
Rule 7 forth the name of
the court, the title
of the action, and
the docket
number if
assigned.

Sec. 3. Signature Every The rule allows the

and address. — pleading must pleadings to be signed by
Every pleading be signed in either the party to the case
must be signed by order to or the counsel
the party or produce legal representing that party.
counsel effect.
(Sameer Overseas
representing him,
Placement Agency, Inc.
stating in either
v. Mildred R. Santos,
case his address
G.R. No. 152579 August
which should not
4, 2009)
be a post office
box.
Therefore, only the
signature of either the
The signature of party himself or his
counsel counsel operates to validly
constitutes a convert a pleading from
certificate by him one that is unsigned to
that he has read one that is signed.
the pleading; that Counsels authority and
to the best of his duty to sign a pleading are
knowledge, personal to him. He may
information, and not delegate it to just any
belief there is person. (Republic v.
good ground to Kenrick Development
support it; and Corp. G.R. No. 149576,
that it is not August 8, 2006)
interposed for
delay.
On the other hand, the
requirement on verification
An unsigned of a pleading is a formal
pleading produces and not a jurisdictional
no legal effect. requisite. It is intended
However, the simply to secure an
court may, in its assurance that what are
discretion, allow alleged in the pleading are
such deficiency to true and correct and not
be remedied if it the product of the
shall appear that imagination or a matter of
the same was due speculation, and that the
to mere pleading is filed in good
inadvertence and faith. The party need not
not intended for sign the verification. A
delay. Counsel partys representative,
who deliberately lawyer or any person who
files an unsigned personally knows the truth
pleading, or signs of the facts alleged in the
a pleading in pleading may sign the
violation of this verification.
Rule, or alleges
(Pajuyo v. Court of
scandalous or
Appeals, G.R. No.
indecent matter
146364, June 3, 2004)
therein, or fails
promptly report to
the court a
change of his
address, shall be
subject to
appropriate
disciplinary action.
Section 4. Every Unlike, however, the
Verification. pleading must requirement for a
— Except when be signed in Certification against
otherwise order to Forum Shopping in
specifically produce legal Section 5, wherein failure
required by law or effect. to comply with the
rule, pleadings requirements is not
need not be under curable by amendment of
oath, verified or the complaint or other
accompanied by initiatory pleading, Section
affidavit. xxx 4 of Rule 7, as amended,
states that the effect of the
A pleading
failure to properly verify a
required to be
pleading is that the
verified which
pleading shall be treated
contains a
as unsigned
verification based
on "information (Negros Oriental
and belief", or Planters Association,
upon "knowledge, Inc. V. Hon. Presiding
information and Judge Of Rtc-Negros
belief", or lacks a Occidental G.R.
proper No. 179878 December
verification, shall 24, 2008)
be treated as an
unsigned
pleading. On the other hand, the
requirement on verification
of a pleading is a formal
and not a jurisdictional
requisite. It is intended
simply to secure an
assurance that what are
alleged in the pleading are
true and correct and not
the product of the
imagination or a matter of
speculation, and that the
pleading is filed in good
faith. The party need not
sign the verification. A
partys representative,
lawyer or any person who
personally knows the truth
of the facts alleged in the
pleading may sign the
verification.
(Pajuyo v. Court of
Appeals, G.R. No.
146364, June 3, 2004)

Verification as to the truth

of these facts in the
petition for review before
the CA was, therefore,
strictly a redundancy; its
filing remained a necessity
only because the Rules on
the filing of a petition for
review before the CA
require it. This
consideration could have
led to a more equitable
treatment of the
petitioners failure to strictly
comply with the Rules,
additionally justified by the
fact that the failure to
comply with the rules on
verification is a formal
rather than a jurisdictional
defect. (Sps. Valmonte v.
Alcala G.R. No. 168667
 July 23, 2008)

4. Allegations Sec. 1. In general. State only The basic rules of proper

in a pleading Every pleading direct pleading and procedure
shall contain in a statement of require that every pleading
methodical and ultimate facts shall contain in a
a) Manner of logical form, a omitting mere methodical and logical
making plain, concise and evidentiary form, a plain, concise and
allegations direct statement facts. direct statement of the
of the ultimate ultimate facts on which the
facts on which the party pleading relies for
party pleading his claim or defense, as
relies for his claim the case may be, omitting
or defense, as the the statement of mere
case may be, evidentiary facts. And in
omitting the all averments of fraud or
statement of mere mistake, the
evidentiary facts. circumstances constituting
fraud or mistake must be
stated with particularity.

Caete et al v. Genuino
Ice Company G.R. No.
154080 January 22, 2008

This Court has been

liberal in giving the lower
courts the widest latitude
of discretion in setting
aside default orders
justified under the right to
due process principle.
Plain justice demands and
the law requires no less
that defendants must
know what the complaint
against them is all about.

x x x In the interest of
justice, we need to dispel
the impression in the
individual respondents'
minds that they are being
 railroaded out of their
rights and properties
without due process of
law.
Republic v.
Sandiganbayan G.R. No.
148154 December 17,
2007

Section 3. General That a condition precedent

Conditions averment of for filing the claim has not
precedent. — In performance been complied with, a
any pleading a or occurrence ground for a motion to
general averment of conditions dismiss emanating from
of the precedent the law that no suit
performance or sufficient. between members from
occurrence of all the same family shall
conditions prosper unless it should
precedent shall be appear from the verified
sufficient. complaint that earnest
efforts toward a
compromise have been
made but had failed, is, as
the Rule so words, a
ground for a motion to
dismiss.

Hrs. Of Favis v.
Gonzales G.R. No.
185922 January 15, 20
14 Section 5. Fraud, These must The basic rules of proper
mistake, condition be stated with pleading and procedure
of the mind. — In particularity. require that every pleading
all averments of shall contain in a
fraud or mistake methodical and logical
the circumstances form, a plain, concise and
constituting fraud direct statement of the
or mistake must ultimate facts on which the
be stated with party pleading relies for
particularity. his claim or defense, as
Malice, intent, the case may be, omitting
 knowledge, or the statement of mere
other condition of evidentiary facts. And in
the mind of a all averments of fraud or
person may be mistake, the
averred generally. circumstances constituting
fraud or mistake must be
stated with particularity.

Caete et al v. Genuino
Ice Company G.R. No.
154080 January 22, 2008

“In all averments of fraud

or mistake, the
circumstances constituting
fraud or mistake must be
stated with particularity” to
“appraise the other
party of what he is to be
called on to answer, and
so that it may be
determined whether the
facts and circumstances
alleged amount to fraud.
Guy v. Guy G.R. No.
189486. September 5,
2012

b) Pleading an Section 7. Action Substance of Since Malayan alluded to

actionable or defense based the document an actionable document,
document on document. — must be set the contract of insurance
Whenever an forth in the between it and ABB
action or defense pleading and Koppel, as integral to its
is based upon a original or cause of action against
written instrument copy must be Regis and Paircargo, the
or document, the attached to contract of insurance
substance of such pleading as should have been
instrument or exhibit. attached to the complaint.
document shall be (Malayan Insurance Co.
set forth in the V. Regis Brokerage G.R.
pleading, and the No. 172156, November
original or a copy 23, 2006)
thereof shall be
attached to the
pleading as an No rule is more settled
exhibit, which than that in an action
shall be deemed based on a written
to be a part of the instrument attached to the
pleading, or said complaint, if the defendant
copy may with like fails to specifically deny
effect be set forth under oath the
in the pleading. genuineness and due
execution of the
instrument, the same is
deemed admitted.
Imperial Textile Mills v.
CA G.R. No. 86568,
March 22 1990

An actionable document is
a written instrument or
document on which an
action or defense is
founded. It may be
pleaded in either of two
ways:
(1) by setting forth the
substance of such
document in the
pleading and attaching
the document thereto as
an annex, or
(2) by setting forth said
document verbatim in
the pleading.

(Metropolitan Bank and

Trust Company v. Ley
Construction, G.R. No.
185590, December 3,
2014)
Section 11.
Allegations not
Allegations The purpose of requiring
specifically denied
not specifically the defendant to make a
deemed admitted.
denied are specific denial is to make
— Material
deemed him disclose the matters
averment in the
admitted. alleged in the complaint
complaint, other
which he succinctly
than those as to
intends to disprove at the
the amount of
trial, together with the
unliquidated
matter which he relied
damages, shall be
upon to support the denial.
deemed admitted
The parties are compelled
when not
to lay their cards on the
specifically
table (Aquintey vs.
denied.
Tibong, GR No. 166704,
Allegations of
December 20, 2006)
usury in a
complaint to
recover usurious
interest are
deemed admitted An admission in a
if not denied pleading cannot be
under oath. controverted by the party
making such admission
because the admission is
conclusive as to him. All
proofs submitted by him
contrary thereto or
inconsistent therewith
should be ignored whether
an objection is interposed
by a party or not
(Republic vs. Sarabia,
GR 157847, Aug. 25,
2005).

The purpose of requiring

the defendant to make a
specific denial is to make
him disclose the matters
alleged in the complaint
which he succinctly
intends to disprove at the
trial, together with the
 matter which he relied
upon to support the denial.
(PNB v. CA, G.R. No.
126153. January 14,
2004)
Section 8. How Genuineness No rule is more settled
to contest such and than that in an action
documents. — authenticity of based on a written
When an action or written instrument attached to the
defense is document complaint, if the defendant
founded upon a deemed fails to specifically deny
written instrument, admitted under oath the
copied in or unless genuineness and due
attached to the adverse party execution of the
corresponding specifically instrument, the same is
pleading as denies under deemed admitted.
provided in the oath.
Imperial Textile Mills v.
preceding section,
CA G.R. No. 86568,
the genuineness
March 22 1990
and due execution
of the instrument
shall be deemed
admitted unless The rule that the
the adverse party, genuineness and due
under oath execution of the
specifically denies instrument shall be
them, and sets deemed admitted, unless
forth what he the adverse party
claims to be the specifically denies them
facts, but the under oath, applies only to
parties to such instrument.
requirement of an
oath does not (Sps. Fernando v. Lolita
apply when the Alcazar, G.R. No.
adverse party 183034, March 12,2014)
does not appear
to be a party to
the instrument or
when compliance
with an order for The pertinent rule on
an inspection of actionable documents is
the original found in Rule 8, Section 7
instrument is of the Rules of Court
refused. which provides that when
the cause of action is
anchored on a document,
 the genuineness or due
execution of the
instrument shall be
deemed impliedly
admitted unless the
defendant, under oath,
specifically denies them,
and sets forth what he
claims to be the facts.
(Permanent Savings and
Loan Bank v. Mariano
Velarde, G.R. No.
140608, September 23,
2004)
5. Effect of a) Failure to plead Failure to
failure to plead defenses and plead
We take this to mean that
objections defenses and
a defendant may, in fact,
objections:
Section 1. feel enjoined to set up,
they are
Defenses and along with his objection to
deemed
objections not the court's jurisdiction over
waived.
pleaded. — his person, all other
Defenses and possible defenses. It thus
objections not appears that it is not the
pleaded either in a invocation of any of such
motion to dismiss defenses, but the failure to
or in the answer so raise them, that can
are deemed result in waiver or
waived. However, estoppel. By defenses, of
when it appears course, we refer to the
from the grounds provided for in
pleadings or the Rule 16 of the Rules of
evidence on Court that must be
record that the asserted in a motion to
court has no dismiss or by way of
jurisdiction over affirmative defenses in an
the subject answer. (La Naval Drug
matter, that there Corporation v. CA, G.R.
is another action No. 103200, August 31,
pending between 1994)
the same parties
for the same
cause, or that the Exception: Since the
action is barred by defense of lack of
a prior judgment jurisdiction over the
or by statute of person of a party to a case
limitations, the is not one of those
court shall dismiss defenses which are not
the claim. deemed waived under
Section 1 of Rule 9, such
defense must be invoked
when an answer or a
motion to dismiss is filed in
order to prevent a waiver
of the defense.37 If the
objection is not raised
either in a motion to
dismiss or in the answer,
the objection to the
jurisdiction over the
person of the plaintiff or
the defendant is deemed
waived by virtue of the first
sentence of the
above-quoted Section 1 of
Rule 9 of the Rules of
Court. (Boston Equity
Resources v. CA, G.R.
No. 173946, June 19,
2013)
b) Failure to plead compulsory A compulsory
a compulsory counterclaim counterclaim set up in the
counterclaim and or cross claim answer is not
not set up or an initiatory or similar
cross-claim
pleaded, pleading. The initiatory
barred. pleading is the plaintiffs
complaint. A respondent
Section 2. has no choice but to raise
Compulsory a compulsory
counterclaim, or counterclaim the moment
cross-claim, not the plaintiff files the
set up barred. — complaint. Otherwise,
A compulsory respondent waives the
counterclaim, or a compulsory counterclaim.
cross-claim, not
set up shall be Ponciano v. Judge
barred. Parentela (G.R. No.
133284. May 9, 2000)

And section 6 of said Rule

10 further provides that a
counterclaim not set up
shall be barred if it arises
out or is necessarily
connected with the
transaction or occurrence
that is the subject matter
of the opposing party's
claim and does not require
for its adjudication the
presence of third parties of
whom the court cannot
acquire jurisdiction. This is
what is generally termed a
compulsory counterclaim,
one which a defendant
must interpose in order to
prevent it from being
barred in a subsequent,
separate action.
(Ledesma v. Morales,
G.R. No. L-3251, August
24, 1950)

Private respondent should

have raised its complaint
as compulsory
counterclaim in the
Regional Trial Court of
Quezon City. Failing to do
so, it is now barred. The
reason for the rule relating
to counterclaims is to
avoid multiplicity of suits
and to enable the Courts
to dispose of the whole
matter in controversy in
one action, and
adjustment of defendant’s
demand by counterclaim
rather than by
independent suit. (Reyes
vs. Court of Appeals, 38
SCRA 138)
6. Default a) When a Proper when Conformably with the
declaration of defending foregoing
default is proper party fails to pronouncements, the
answer within declaration of default by
the time the court in this case,
Section 3. allowed, upon before petitioners' period
Default; motion of the to file their answer had
declaration of. — claiming party expired, clearly is in
If the defending and with excess of and/or without
party fails to notice to jurisdiction and, therefore,
answer within the defending properly correctible by a
time allowed party. writ of certiorari.
therefor, the court (Viacrucis v. Estenzo,
shall, upon motion G.R. No. L-18457, June
of the claiming 30, 1962)
party with notice
to the defending
party, and proof of A default judgment is
such failure, frowned upon because of
declare the the policy of the law to
defending party in hear every litigated case
default. on the merits. But the
Thereupon, the default judgment will not
court shall be vacated unless the
proceed to render defendant satisfactorily
judgment granting explains the failure to file
the claimant such the answer, and shows
relief as his that it has a meritorious
pleading may defense. (Momarco
warrant, unless Import Co. V. Villamena,
the court in its G.R. No. 192477, July 27,
discretion requires 2016)
the claimant to
submit evidence.
Such reception of The policy of the law is to
evidence may be have every litigant's case
delegated to the tried on the merits as
clerk of court. much as possible. Hence,
judgments by default are
frowned upon. A case is
best decided when all
contending parties are
able to ventilate their
respective claims, present
their arguments and
 adduce evidence in
support thereof. The
parties are thus given the
chance to be heard fully
and the demands of due
process are subserved.
Moreover, it is only amidst
such an atmosphere that
accurate factual findings
and correct legal
conclusions can be
reached by the courts.
(San Pedro Cineplex v.
Hrs. Of Enano, G.R. No.
190754, November 17,
2010)

(a) Effect of order Party may not We hold that a party

of default. — A take part in declared in default is
party in default trial, but entitled to notice of the
shall be entitled to entitled to motion for execution
notice of notice of pending appeal. This
subsequent subsequent interpretation is consistent
proceedings but proceedings. with the nature and effects
not to take part in of being in default as well
the trial. as with what has been
jurisprudentially laid down
with respect to executions
pending appeal. (S.C.
Johnson & Son, Inc. vs.
Court of Appeals, et al.,
G.R. No. 54040, August
14, 1990)

The philosophy or
fundamental reason
underlying the law on the
effects of default is that
the failure to answer on
the part of a defendant
who receives a summons
and knows that he is being
sued, may be due to one
oppose to the plaintiff's
allegations and relief
demanded in the
complaint, and willingness
to abide by the judgment
granting said relief after
the presentation of
evidence by the plaintiff,
or (2) to fraud, accident,
mistake or excusable
negligence without which
he should have filed his
answer in time for he has
a good defense. Lim
Toco v. Go Fay, G.R. No.
L-1423, January 31,
1948)

We have in the past

admonished trial judges
against issuing precipitate
orders of default as these
have the effect of denying
a litigant the chance to be
heard, and increase the
burden of needless
litigations in the appellate
courts where time is
needed for more important
or complicated cases.
While there are instances
when a party may be
properly defaulted, these
should be the exception
rather than the rule, and
should be allowed only in
clear cases of obstinate
refusal or inordinate
neglect to comply with the
orders of the court
(Tropical Homes, Inc. vs.
Hon. Villaluz, et al., G.R.
No. L-40628, February
24, 1989).
(b) Relief from Party declared While Carson filed its
order of default. in default may Urgent Motion to Lift Order
— A party at any time of Default, the CA found
declared in default after notice that the same failed to
may at any time and before comply with the
after notice judgment file requirement under Sec.
thereof and before motion under 3(b) that the motion be
judgment file a oath to set under oath. (Carson
motion under oath aside order of Realty v. Red Robin
to set aside the default if the Security, G.R. No.
order of default reason for 225035, February 8,
upon proper default was 2017)
showing that his due to fraud,
failure to answer accident,
was due to fraud, mistake or ..when a motion to lift the
accident, mistake excusable order of default contains
or excusable negligence the reasons for the failure
negligence and and that he to answer as well as the
that he has a has a facts constituting the
meritorious meritorious prospective defense of the
defense. In such defense. defendant and it is sworn
case, the order of to by said defendant,
default may be set neither a formal
aside on such verification nor a separate
terms and affidavit of merit is
conditions as the necessary. (Lim Tanhu
judge may impose vs. Ramolete, 66 SCRA
in the interest of 425)
justice.

A satisfactory showing by
the movant of the
existence of fraud,
accident, mistake or
excusable neglect is an
indispensable requirement
for the setting aside of a
judgment of default or the
order of
default. (Ramnani v. CA,
G.R. No. 101789. April
28, 1993)
Effect of partial Court shall try Thus, the default of the
default. — When the case original defendants should
a pleading against all not result in the ex parte
asserting a claim upon the presentation of evidence
states a common answers thus because De Vera (a
cause of action filed and transferee pendente lite
against several render who may thus be joined as
defending parties, judgment defendant under Rule 3,
some of whom upon evidence Section 19) filed an
answer and the presented. answer. The trial court
others fail to do should have tried the case
so, the court shall based on De Vera’s
try the case answer, which answer is
against all upon deemed to have been
the answers thus adopted by the
filed and render non-answering
judgment upon defendants. (Hrs. Of
the evidence Medrano v. De Vera,
presented. G.R. No. 165770, August
9, 2010)

Stated differently, in all

instances where a
common cause of action is
alleged against several
defendants, some of
whom answer and the
others do not, the latter or
those in default acquire a
vested right not only to
own the defense
interposed in the answer
of their co-defendant or
co-defendants not in
default but also to expect
a result of the litigation
totally common with them
in kind and in amount
whether favorable or
unfavorable. (Tanhu v.
Judge Ramolete, 160
Phil. 1101)

(d) Extent of relief Shall not

to be awarded. — exceed the
The raison d’être in
A judgment amount or be
limiting the extent of relief
rendered against different in
a party in default kind from that that may be granted is that
shall not exceed prayed for nor it cannot be presumed that
the amount or be award the defendant would not
different in kind unliquidated file an Answer and allow
from that prayed damages. himself to be declared in
for nor award default had he known that
unliquidated the plaintiff will be
damages. accorded a relief greater
than or different in kind
from that sought in the
Complaint.
(Diona v. Balangue, G.R.
No. 173559
January 7, 2013)

Needless to say, the

extent of the relief that
may be granted can only
be as much as has been
alleged and proved with
preponderant evidence
required under Section 1
of Rule 133.(Gajudo v.
Traders Royal Bank,
G.R. No. 151098, March
21, 2006)

A court is bereft of
jurisdiction to award, in a
judgment by default, a
relief other than that
specifically prayed for in
the complaint. (Lim Toco
vs. Go Fay, 80 Phil. 166)
(e) Where no Not allowed in Considering that in cases
defaults allowed. certain cases of declaration of nullity of
— If the defending such as marriage or annulment of
party in an action actions for marriage, there can be no
for annulment or annulment or default pursuant to
declaration of declaration of Section 6, Rule 18 of the
nullity of marriage nullity of Revised Rules of Court in
or for legal marriage. relation to Article 48 of the
separation fails to Family Code it is with
answer, the court more reason that
shall order the petitioner should likewise
prosecuting be entitled to notice of all
attorney to proceedings.(Lam v.
investigate Chua, G.R. No. 131286,
whether or not a March 18, 2004)
collusion between
the parties exists,
and if there is no A grant of annulment of
collusion, to marriage or legal
intervene for the separation by default is
State in order to fraught with the danger of
see to it that the collusion. Hence, in all
evidence cases for annulment,
submitted is not declaration of nullity of
fabricated. marriage and legal
separation, the
prosecuting attorney or
fiscal is ordered to appear
on behalf of the state for
the purpose of preventing
any collusion between the
parties and to take care
that their evidence is not
fabricated or suppressed.
(Tuason v. Tuason, G.R.
No. 116607 April 10,
1996)

If the defendant-spouse
fails to answer the
complaint, the court
cannot declare him or her
in default but instead,
should order the
prosecuting attorney to
determine if collusion
exists between the parties.
The prosecuting attorney
or fiscal may oppose the
application for legal
separation or annulment
through the presentation
of his own evidence, if in
his opinion, the proof
 adduced is dubious and
fabricated. (Ancheta v.
Ancheta, G.R. No.
145370, March 4, 2004)
F. Filing and 1. Payment of Clerk to issue Although Section 1, Rule
Service of docket fees summons 1410 of the Rules, imposes
Pleadings, after payment upon the clerk of court the
Rule 14 Section 1.
Judgments, of fees and duty to serve summons,
Clerk to issue
Final Orders filing of this does not relieve the
summons. —
and complaint. plaintiff of his own duty to
Upon the filing of
prosecute the case
Resolutions the complaint and
diligently. If the clerk had
the payment of
been negligent, it was
the requisite legal
plaintiff's duty to call the
fees, the clerk of
court's attention to that
court shall
fact. (Producer’s Bank of
forthwith issue the
the Philippines v. CA,
corresponding
G.R. No. 125468,
summons to the
October 9, 2000)
defendants. (1a)

when a civil action is

commenced by filing a
complaint with the clerk of
the court, the clerk must
"forthwith issue one
summons or more for
calling the defendants into
court. (Smith, Bell and
Co. V. Mangahas, G.R.
No. L-17799, May 9,
1922)
Section 2. Filing Filing is the Sections 3 and 5, Rule 13
and service, act of of the 1997 Rules of Civil
defined. — Filing presenting the Procedure, as amended,
is the act of pleading or prescribe two modes
presenting the other paper to of filing and service of
pleading or other the clerk of pleadings, motions,
paper to the clerk court. notices, orders, judgments
of court. and other papers. These
are: (a) by personal
Service is the delivery, governed by
Service is the act act of Section 6 of the same
of providing a providing a Rule; and (b) by mail,
party with a copy party with a under Section 7 thereof. If
of the pleading or copy of the service cannot be done
paper concerned. pleading or either personally or by
If any party has paper mail, substituted service
appeared by concerned. may be resorted to
counsel, service pursuant to Section 8 of
upon him shall be the same Rule. (Ello v.
made upon his CA, G.R. No. 141255,
counsel or one of June 21, 2005)
them, unless
service upon the
party himself is Personal service and filing
ordered by the are preferred for obvious
court. Where one reasons. Plainly, such
counsel appears should expedite action or
for several resolution on a pleading,
parties, he shall motion or other paper; and
only be entitled to conversely, minimize, if
one copy of any not eliminate, delays likely
paper served to be incurred if service or
upon him by the filing is done by mail,
opposite side. considering the
inefficiency of the postal
service. Likewise,
personal service will do
away with the practice of
some lawyers who,
wanting to appear clever,
resort to the following less
than ethical practices: (1)
serving or filing pleadings
by mail to catch opposing
counsel off-guard, thus
leaving the latter with little
or no time to prepare, for
instance, responsive
pleadings or an
opposition; or (2) upon
receiving notice from the
post office that the
registered parcel
containing the pleading of
or other paper from the
adverse party may be
claimed, unduly
procrastinating before
claiming the parcel, or,
 worse, not claiming it at
all, thereby causing undue
delay in the disposition of
such pleading or other
papers. (G.R. No. 132007
August 5, 1998)
To reiterate, service upon
the parties' counsels of
record is tantamount to
service upon the parties
themselves, but service
upon the parties
themselves is not
considered service upon
their lawyers. The reason
is simple-the parties,
generally, have no formal
education or knowledge of
the rules of procedure,
specifically, the
mechanics of an appeal or
availment of legal
remedies; thus, they may
also be unaware of the
rights and duties of a
litigant relative to the
receipt of a decision. More
importantly, it is best for
the courts to deal only with
one person in the interest
of orderly procedure-
either the lawyer retained
by the party or the party
him/herself ifs/he does not
intend to hire a
lawyer.(Delos
Santos v. Elizalde, 543
Phil. 12, 2007)

2. Periods of filing
of pleadings
(See Rule 11)

Section 3. Made by
Manner of presenting the
The date of filing may be
filing. — The filing original copies
shown either by the post
of pleadings, thereof
office stamp on the
appearances, personally to
envelope or by the registry
motions, notices, the clerk of
receipt. (Pablo-Gualberto
orders, judgments court or by
v. Gualberto, G.R. No.
and all other sending them
154994, June 28, 2005)
papers shall be by registered
made by mail.
presenting the
original copies Considering that the Rules
thereof, plainly on Pleadings, Practice
indicated as such, and Procedure before the
personally to the Panel of Arbitrators and
clerk of court or by MAB are bereft of any
sending them by provision regarding the
registered mail. In computation of time and
the first case, the the manner of filing, the
clerk of court shall Court may refer to Section
endorse on the 1, Rule 22 and Section 3,
pleading the date Rule 13 of the 1997
and hour of filing. Revised Rules of Civil
In the second Procedure. (Pyro Copper
case, the date of Mining v. Mines
the mailing of Adjudication Board,
motions, G.R. No. 179674
pleadings, or any July 28, 2009)
other papers or
payments or
deposits, as
shown by the post
office stamp on
the envelope or
the registry
receipt, shall be
considered as the
date of their filing,
payment, or
deposit in court.
The envelope
shall be attached
to the record of
the case.
5. Modes of Delivering Personal service and filing
service personally a are preferred for obvious
copy to the reasons. Plainly, such
a) Personal
party or his should expedite action or
service
counsel or by resolution on a pleading,
leaving it in his motion or other paper; and
office with his conversely, minimize, if
Section 6. clerk or with a not eliminate, delays likely
Personal person having to be incurred if service or
service. — charge filing is done by mail,
Service of the thereof. considering the
papers may be inefficiency of the postal
made by service. (Solar Team
delivering Entertainment v.
personally a copy Rica-Fort, G.R. No.
to the party or his 132007 August 5, 1998)
counsel, or by
leaving it in his
office with his
clerk or with a
person having Only after the attempt at
charge thereof. If personal service has
no person is found become futile or
in his office, or his impossible within a
office is not reasonable time may the
known, or he has officer resort to substituted
no office, then by service. (Macasaet v. Co,
leaving the copy, G.R. No. 156759
between the June 5, 2013)
hours of eight in
the morning and
six in the evening, When the defendant in an
at the party's or action in personam is a
counsel's non-resident who does not
residence, if voluntarily submit himself
known, with a to the authority of the
person of court, personal service of
sufficient age and summons within the State
discretion then is essential to the
residing therein. acquisition of jurisdiction
over his person. This
cannot be done if the
defendant is not physically
present in the country, and
 thus, the court cannot
acquire jurisdiction over
his person and therefore
cannot validly try and
decide the case against
him. (Gomez v. CA, G.R.
No. 127692, March 10,
2004)
Section 7. Made by The general rule is that
Service by depositing the service by registered mail
mail. — Service copy in the is complete upon actual
by registered mail post office in a receipt thereof by the
shall be made by sealed addressee. The exception
depositing the envelope is where the addressee
copy in the post addressed to does not claim his mail
office in a sealed the party or within five (5) days from
envelope, plainly his counsel at the date of the first notice
addressed to the his office if of the postmaster, in
party or his known, his which case the service
counsel at his residence, if takes effect upon the
office, if known, known. expiration of such period.
otherwise at his (Sps. Jose v. CA, G.R.
residence, if No. 120972July 19, 1999)
known, with
postage fully
prepaid, and with It may be observed that
instructions to the the rule on service by
postmaster to registered mail
return the mail to contemplates two (2)
the sender after situations: first, actual
ten (10) days if service the completeness
undelivered. If no of which is determined
registry service is upon receipt by the
available in the addressee of the
locality of either registered mail
the senders or the and, second, constructive
addressee, service the completeness
service may be of which is determined
done by ordinary upon the expiration of five
mail. (5) days from the date of
first notice of the
postmaster without the
addressee having claimed
the registered
mail. (Santos v. CA,
G.R. No. 128061
 September 3, 1998)

Section 8. Service may Thus, it is only in

Substituted be made by exceptional circumstances
service. — If delivering the that constructive
service of copy to the notification, or substituted
pleadings, clerk of court, service of summons, is
motions, notices, with proof of allowed. If the server falls
resolutions, failure of both short of the rigorous
orders and other personal requirements for
papers cannot be service and substituted service of
made under the service by summons, then the Court
two preceding mail. has no other option but to
sections, the strike down a void
office and place of judgment, regardless of
residence of the the consequences. (Ong
party or his v. Co, G.R. No. 206653,
counsel being February 25, 2015)
unknown, service
may be made by
delivering the Since the substituted
copy to the clerk service of summons in this
of court, with proof case was not validly
of failure of both effected, the trial court did
personal service not acquire jurisdiction
and service by over the persons of the
mail. The service petitioners. The order of
is complete at the default, the judgment by
time of such default, the writ of
delivery. (6a)c) execution issued by it, as
Substituted well as the auction sale of
service the petitioners' properties
levied on execution are,
therefore, all null and void.
(Laus v. Perez, G.R. No.
101256. March 8, 1993)

To warrant the substituted

service of the summons
and copy of the complaint,
the serving officer must
first attempt to effect the
same upon the defendant
 in person. Only after the
attempt at personal
service has become futile
or impossible within a
reasonable time may the
officer resort to substituted
service. (Macasaet v. Co,
G.R. No. 156759, June 5,
2013)
Section 9. Service may The service of judgment
Service of be either serves as the reckoning
judgments, final personally or point to determine whether
orders, or by registered a decision had been
resolutions. — mail. appealed within the
Judgments, final reglementary period or
orders or has already become final.
resolutions shall (Mindanao Terminal and
be served either Brokerage v. CA, G.R.
personally or by No. 163286, August 22,
registered mail. 2012)
When a party
summoned by
publication has
failed to appear in
the action,
judgments, final
orders or
resolutions
against him shall
be served upon
him also by
publication at the
expense of the
prevailing party.
Section 11. Personal By priority we mean an
Priorities in service is order of preference in the
modes of service prioritized. service thereof, such that
and filing. — the first alternative must
Whenever be availed of, and only
practicable, the upon its non-availability
service and filing may the second and
of pleadings and succeeding options be
other papers shall resorted to. Xxx we cannot
be done determine the reason why
personally. Except they served and filed their
with respect to pleading by registered
papers emanating mail instead of personally
from the court, a serving and filing them.
resort to other (Solar Team
modes must be Entertainment v.
accompanied by a Rica-Fort, G.R. No.
written 132007 August 5, 1998)
explanation why
the service or
filing was not
done personally.
A violation of this "Personal service and filin
Rule may be g are preferred for obvious
cause to consider reasons. Plainly, such
the paper as not should expedite action or
filed. resolution on a pleading,
motion or other paper; and
conversely, minimize, if
not eliminate, delays likely
to be incurred if service or
filing is done by mail,
considering the
inefficiency of the postal
service. (Ello v. CA, G.R.
No. 141255, June 21,
2005)

Section 10. Personal In service by registered

Completeness service: upon mail, the general rule is
of service. — actual delivery that service is complete
Personal service upon actual receipt by the
is complete upon addressee. The exception
actual delivery. Mail: upon is that when the
Service by expiration of addressee does not claim
ordinary mail is ten days after his mail within five days
complete upon mailing from the date of the first
the expiration of notice of the postmaster,
ten (10) days after then the service takes
mailing, unless Registered effect at the expiration of
the court mail: Upon such time. (Barrameda v.
otherwise actual receipt Castillo, G.R. No.
provides. Service L-27211,July 6, 1977)
by registered mail
is complete upon
actual receipt by To him, the decision, as
the addressee, or the rules dictate, if served
after five (5) days by way of registered mail,
from the date he must be actually received
received the first by the addressee or any
notice of the person in his office,
postmaster, otherwise, service cannot
whichever date is be considered complete.
earlier. Because no valid service
was made, the period to
appeal did not prescribe
and the decision has not
yet attained finality.
(Mindanao Terminal and
Brokerage v. CAG.R. No.
163286, August 22,
2012 )

Service is deemed
completed only when
made at the updated
address. (Gatmaytan v.
Dolor, G.R. No. 198120,
February 20, 2017)
g) Proof of filing Proof of Filing This Court noted the
and service - proved by its following as acceptable
existence in proofs of mailing and
the record of service by a court to a
Section 12. Proof the case party: (1) certifications
of filing. — The from the official Post
filing of a pleading Office record book and/or
or paper shall be Proof of delivery book; (2) the
proved by its Service - shall actual page of the postal
existence in the consist of a delivery book showing the
record of the written acknowledgment of
case. If it is not in admission of receipt; (3) registry
the record, but is the party receipt; and (4) return
claimed to have served, or the card. (Cortes v.
been filed official return Valdellon, G.R. No.
personally, the of the server, L-40891, April 30, 1976)
filing shall be or the affidavit
proved by the of the party
written or serving, or an Proof, however, of
stamped affidavit of the ineffectual service at a
acknowledgment person mailing counsel's former address
of its filing by the if served by is not necessarily proof of
clerk of court on a registered a party's claim of when
copy of the same; mail. service was made at the
if filed by updated address. The
registered mail, by burden of proving the
the registry affirmative allegation of
receipt and by the when service was made is
affidavit of the distinct from the burden of
person who did proving the allegation of
the mailing, where service was or was
containing a full not made. A party who
statement of the fails to discharge his or
date and place of her burden of proof is not
depositing the entitled to the relief prayed
mail in the post for. (Gatmaytan v. Dolor,
office in a sealed G.R. No. 198120,
envelope February 20, 2017)
addressed to the
court, with
postage fully
It is true that, under the
prepaid, and with
Rules of Court, the date of
instructions to the
the post office stamp on
postmaster to
the envelope or the
return the mail to
registry receipt is
the sender after
considered the date of
ten (10) days if
filing of a pleading sent by
not delivered. (n)
registered mail. (South
Villa Chinese Restaurant
v. NLRC, G.R. No.
Section 13. Proof 112120 November 23,
of Service. — 1995)
Proof of personal
service shall
consist of a
written admission
of the party
served, or the
official return of
the server, or the
affidavit of the
party serving,
containing a full
statement of the
date, place and
manner of
service. If the
service is by
ordinary mail,
 proof thereof shall
consist of an
affidavit of the
person mailing of
facts showing
compliance with
section 7 of this
Rule. If service is
made by
registered mail,
proof shall be
made by such
affidavit and the
registry receipt
issued by the
mailing office. The
registry return
card shall be filed
immediately upon
its receipt by the
sender, or in lieu
thereof the
unclaimed letter
together with the
certified or sworn
copy of the notice
given by the
postmaster to the
addressee.
G. Amendment 1. Amendments At any time The Rules of Court allow
as a matter of before a amendments of pleadings
right responsive as a matter of right before
pleading is a responsive pleading is
served or in a served; otherwise, leave
Section 2. reply, at any of court must first be
Amendments time within ten obtained. (Quirao v.
as a matter of days after it is Quirao, G.R. No. 148120,
right. — A party served October 24, 2003)
may amend his
pleading once as
a matter of right at Under the above
any time before a provisions therefore,
responsive formal and substantial
pleading is served amendments to a pleading
or, in the case of a may be made at anytime
reply, at any time before a responsive
within ten (10) pleading has been filed.
days after it is Such amendment is a
served. matter of right. Thereafter,
and during trial,
amendments may only be
done with the permission
of the court. (Ng v. Sps.
Marcelo, G.R. No.
149132, May 9, 2002)

Amendments to pleadings
are liberally allowed in
furtherance of justice, in
order that every case may
so far as possible be
determined on its real
facts, and in order to
speed the trial of cases or
prevent the circuitry of
action and unnecessary
expense. (Rudolf Heitz
Holdings v. The RD of
Paranaque City, G.R. No.
133240, November 15,
2000)
2. Amendments Substantial Under the above
by leave of court amendments provisions therefore,
may be made formal and substantial
only upon amendments to a pleading
Section 3. leave of court. may be made at anytime
Amendments before a responsive
by leave of court. pleading has been filed.
— Except as Such amendment is a
provided in the matter of right. Thereafter,
next preceding and during trial,
section, amendments may only be
substantial done with the permission
amendments may of the court. (Ng v. Sps.
be made only Marcelo, G.R. No.
upon leave of 149132, May 9, 2002)
court. But such
leave may be
refused if it The filing of the amended
appears to the complaint together with
court that the the petition for its
motion was made admission, far from being
with intent to against, is in accordance
delay. Orders of with the provisions of the
the court upon the law, because the court
matters provided must have before it the
in this section amended complaint, and a
shall be made mere statement that it
upon motion filed shall be presented after
in court, and after the leave had been
notice to the granted would not be
adverse party, sufficient, in order that the
and an court may properly
opportunity to be determine whether or not
heard. the amendment is
presented with the intent
to delay the action, and
whether the new copy of
the pleading filed with the
court incorporating the
amendments are indicated
by appropriate marks, as
required by section 3 of
said Rule 17 in
amendments by leave of
court under section 2 of
the same Rule. (Breslin v.
Luzon Stevedoring, G.R.
No. L-3346 (CA-No.
3121-R) September 29,
1949
Section 4. Court may As laid down by this Court,
Formal summarily an amendment is only in
amendments. — correct defect form when it merely adds
A defect in the in designation specifications to eliminate
designation of the of the parties vagueness in the
parties and other and other information and not to
clearly clerical or clearly clerical introduce new and
typographical or material facts.(Caparas v.
errors may be typographical Gonzales and Lindayag,
summarily errors. 117 Phil. 201,1963)
corrected by the
court at any stage
of the action, at its Here, the amendment of
initiative or on respondent’s complaint at
motion, provided the instance of the trial
no prejudice is court merely involves the
caused thereby to designation of respondent
the adverse party. as a proper party, i.e.,
whether it has a juridical
personality and, therefore,
can sue or be sued. We
note that when respondent
amended its complaint by
attaching the required
supporting
documents, such
amendment did not
change its cause of
action. Nor was its action
intended to prejudice
petitioners. Verily, the
Court of Appeals correctly
ruled that the RTC did not
gravely abuse its
discretion when it ordered
the amendment of the
complaint. (Godinez v.
CA, G.R. No. 154330,
February 15, 2007)
Section 5. May be made Section 5, Rule 10 of the
Amendment upon motion Rules of Court allows
to conform to or of any party at amendments of pleadings
authorize any time, even to conform to the evidence
presentation of after presented, to be treated in
evidence. — judgment. all respects as if they had
When issues not been raised in the
raised by the pleadings, at any time,
pleadings are even after judgment.
tried with the (Dayao v. Shell
express or implied Company of the
consent of the Philippines, G.R. No.
parties they shall L-32475 April 30,
be treated in all 1980)
respects as if they
had been raised in
the pleadings.
Such amendment
of the pleadings Amendments to conform
as may be to the proofs may be made
necessary to on or after trial, after entry
cause them to of judgment, and even
conform to the while the case is pending
evidence and to on appeal. (Jalandoni vs.
raise these issues Ledesma, et al., L-42589,
may be made Aug. 31, 1937)
upon motion of
any party at any
time, even after
judgment; but
failure to amend This, notwithstanding,
does not effect the "when", as provided in the
result of the trial of above-quoted section 4,
these issues. If "issues not raised by the
evidence is pleadings are tried by
objected to at the express or implied
trial on the ground consent of the parties,
that it is not within they shall be treated, in all
the issues made respects, as if they had
by the pleadings, been made in the
the court may pleadings," and "such
allow the amendment of the
pleadings to be pleadings as may be
amended and necessary to cause them
shall do so with to conform to the evidence
liberality if the and to raise these issues
presentation of may be made upon motion
the merits of the of any party even after
action and the judgment; but failure so to
ends of amend does not affect the
substantial justice result of the trial of these
will be subserved issues." This provision
thereby. The court confers upon the Court
may grant a discretion to permit a party
continuance to to amend its own
enable the pleading, at any time,
amendment to be under the circumstances
made. therein adverted to. (In Re
Robert Dick v. Dick,G.R.
No. L-18220, April 30,
1963)

Section 6. Upon motion A supplemental pleading

Supplemental and is meant to supply
pleadings. — reasonable deficiencies in aid of the
Upon motion of a notice, party original pleading and not
party the court may be to dispense with or
may, upon permitted to substitute the latter.
reasonable notice serve (Shoemart, Inc. v. Court
and upon such supplemental of Appeals, G.R. No.
terms as are just, pleading 86956, October 1, 1990)
permit him to setting forth
serve a transactions,
supplemental occurences or It is not like an amended
pleading setting events which pleading which is a
forth transactions, have happned substitute for the original
occurrences or since the date one. It does not supersede
events which of the the original, but assumes
have happened pleading that the original pleading
since the date of sought to be is to stand. The issues
the pleading supplemented joined under the original
sought to be pleading remain as issues
supplemented. to be tried in the action.
The adverse party (Delbros Hotel
may plead thereto Corporation v.
within ten (10) Intermediate Appellate
days from notice Court, G.R. No. 72566,
of the order April 12, 1988)
admitting the
supplemental
pleading. The Court ruled that when
the cause of action stated
in the supplemental
complaint is different from
the cause of action
mentioned in the original
complaint, the court
should not admit the
supplemental complaint.
(Leobrera v. Court of
Appeals, G.R. No. 80001,
February 27, 1989)
Section 8. Effect Amended Under Section 8, Rule 10
of amended pleading of the Rules of Court, an
pleadings. — An supersedes amended complaint
amended the pleading it supersedes an original
pleading amends. one. As a consequence,
supersedes the the original complaint is
pleading that it deemed withdrawn and no
amends. longer considered part of
However, the record. (Figuracion v.
admissions in Libi, G.R. No. 155688,
 superseded November 28, 2007)
pleadings may be
received in
evidence against Although it is well-settled
the pleader, and that an amended pleading
claims or supersedes the original
defenses alleged one, which is thus deemed
therein not withdrawn and no longer
incorporated in considered part of the
the amended record, it does not
pleading shall be follow ipso facto that the
deemed waived service of a new summons
for amended petitions or
complaints is required.
Xxx It is not the change of
cause of action that gives
rise to the need to serve
another summons for the
amended complaint, but
rather the acquisition of
jurisdiction over the
persons of the defendants.
If the trial court has not yet
acquired jurisdiction over
them, a new service of
summons for the
amended complaint is
required. (Vlason
Enterprises Corporation
v. CA, G.R. Nos.
121662-64 July 6, 1999)

H. Summons 1. Nature and

purpose of
summons in
relation to actions
in personam, in
rem and quasi in
rem
Section 20. Voluntary Courts acquire jurisdiction
Voluntary appearance over the plaintiffs upon the
appearance. — equivalent to filing of the complaint. On
The defendant's service of the other hand, jurisdiction
voluntary summons. over the defendants in a
appearance in the civil case is acquired
action shall be either through the service
equivalent to of summons upon them or
service of through their voluntary
summons. The appearance in court and
inclusion in a their submission to its
motion to dismiss authority, as provided in
of other grounds Section 20,Rule 14 of the
aside from lack of Rules of Court. (Carson
jurisdiction over Realty v. Red Robin
the person of the Security, G.R. No.
defendant shall 225035, February 8,
not be deemed a 2017)
voluntary
appearance.
As a general proposition,
one who seeks an
affirmative relief is
deemed to have submitted
to the jurisdiction of the
court. It is by reason of
this rule that we have had
occasion to declare that
the filing of motions to
admit answer, for
additional time to file
answer, for
reconsideration of a
default judgment, and to
lift order of default with
motion for
reconsideration, is
considered voluntary
submission to the court's
jurisdiction. (Philippine
Commercial
International Bank v.
Spouses Dy, G.R. No.
171137, June 5, 2009)

We have, time and again,

held that the filing of a
motion for additional time
to file answer is
considered voluntary
submission to the
 jurisdiction of the court.
(Palma v. Galvez, G.R.
No. 165273, March 10,
2010)
Section 6. Handling a In actions in personam,
Service in copy to summons on the
person on defendant in defendant must be served
defendant. — person. by handing a copy thereof
Whenever to the defendant in
practicable, the person, or, if he refuses to
summons shall be receive it, by tendering it
served by to him. This is specifically
handling a copy provided in Section 7,
thereof to the Rule 14 of the Rules of
defendant in Court. (Gomez v. CA,
person, or, if he G.R. No. 127692, March
refuses to receive 10, 2004)
and sign for it, by
tendering it to him.
Meanwhile, in actions in
rem or quasi in rem,
jurisdiction over the
person of the defendant is
not a prerequisite to
confer jurisdiction on the
court provided that the
court acquires jurisdiction
over the res, although
summons must be served
upon the defendant in
order to satisfy the due
process requirements.(id)

A plain and simple reading

of the above provisions
indicates that personal
service of summons
should and always be the
first option, and it is only
when the said summons
cannot be served within a
reasonable time can the
process server resort to
substituted service.(Id)
Section 7. (a) Leaving Thus, it is only in
Substituted copies of exceptional circumstances
service. — If, for summons at that constructive
justifiable causes, defendant’s notification, or substituted
the defendant residence service of summons, is
cannot be served withsome allowed. If the server falls
within a person of short of the rigorous
reasonable time suitable age requirements for
as provided in the and discretion substituted service of
preceding section, residing summons, then the Court
service may be therein has no other option but to
effected (a) by strike down a void
leaving copies of judgment, regardless of
the summons at (b) Leaving the consequences.
the defendant's copies at
(Ong v. Co, G.R. No.
residence with defendant’s
206653, February 25,
some person of office or
2015)
suitable age and regular place
discretion then of business
residing therein,
or (b) by leaving To warrant the substituted
the copies at service of the summons
defendant's office and copy of the complaint,
or regular place of the serving officer must
business with first attempt to effect the
some competent same upon the defendant
person in charge in person. Only after the
thereof. attempt at personal
service has become futile
or impossible within a
reasonable time may the
officer resort to substituted
service. (Macasaet v.
Co, G.R. No. 156759)

In general, substituted
service can be availed of
only after a clear showing
that personal service of
summons was not legally
possible. Also, service by
publication is applicable in
actions in rem and quasi in
rem, but not in personal
suits such as the present
one which is for specific
 performance. (Sps. Jose
v.Sps. Boyon, G.R. No.
147369, October 23,
2003)
Section 14. Service may As a rule, summons
Service upon be done by should be personally
defendant whose publication served on a defendant.
identity or whenever When summons cannot
whereabouts are whereabouts be served personally
unknown. — In of defendant within a reasonable period
any action where are unknown of time, substituted service
the defendant is and cannot be may be resorted to.
designated as an ascertained by Service of summons by
unknown owner, diligent inquiry publication can be
or the like, or resorted to only if the
whenever his defendant's "whereabouts
whereabouts are are unknown and cannot
unknown and be ascertained by diligent
cannot be inquiry." (Borlongan v.
ascertained by BDO, G.R. No. 217617,
diligent inquiry, April 5, 2017)
service may, by
leave of court, be Service by publication is
effected upon him available when the
by publication in a whereabouts of the
newspaper of defendant is unknown
general circulation (Cathay Metal
and in such Corporation v. Laguna
places and for West MPC, G.R. No.
such time as the 172204, July 2, 2014)
court may order.
Since Phua’s
whereabouts were
unknown and could not be
ascertained by diligent
inquiry, service of
summons by publication
was correctly availed of by
the Heirs of Pacaña
(Gonzales v. CA, G.R.
No. 150908, January 21,
2005)
Section 16. Service may Because Section 16 of
Residents be effected Rule 14 uses the words
temporarily out of out of the "may" and "also," it is not
the Philippines. — mandatory. Other
When any action Philippines. methods of service of
is commenced summons allowed under
against a the Rules may also be
defendant who availed of by the serving
ordinarily resides officer on a
within the defendant-resident who is
Philippines, but temporarily out of the
who is temporarily Philippines. Thus, if a
out of it, service resident defendant is
may, by leave of temporarily out of the
court, be also country, any of the
effected out of the following modes of service
Philippines, as may be resorted to: (1)
under the substituted service set
preceding section. forth in section 7 ( formerly
Section 8), Rule 14; (2)
personal service outside
the country, with leave of
court; (3) service by
publication, also with
leave of court; or (4) in any
other manner the court
may deem sufficient.
(Montefalcon v.
Vasquez, G.R. No.
165016, June 17, 2008)

Substituted service of
summons under the
present Section 7, Rule 14
of the Rules of Court in a
suit in personam against
residents of the
Philippines temporarily
absent therefrom is the
normal method of service
of summons that will
confer jurisdiction on the
court over such defendant.
(Montalban v.
Maximo,No. L-22997,
March 15, 1968)

We have held that a

dwelling, house or
residence refers to the
place where the person
named in the summons is
living at the time when the
service is made, even
though he may be
temporarily out of the
country at the time.
(Keister v. Navarro, No.
L-29067, May 31, 1977)