REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT

ILOILO CITY
BRANCH 8

GABBY GUBAT,

Plaintiff

CIVIL CASE No. 98765

- Versus – FOR: Unlawful Detainer

MEGAN OLD,

Defendants.

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

ANSW ER

(In re: Summons, Received on September 16, 2018)

COMES NOW, Defendants MEGAN OLD, by the undersigned counsel, in the above-entitled

case and before this Honorable Court most respectfully submits this ANSWER and aver that:

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

1. This is a case for Unlawful Detainer founded allegedly on Plaintiffs’ claim of that

defendant’s failed to pay her monthly rentals, specifically from the month of February

up to the present;

2. Defendants received a copy of the Complaint and Summons on September 16, 2018

giving her until September 25, 2018 to file Defendant’s Answer;

ADMISSIONS AND DENIALS

3. Defendant admit Paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Complaint in so far as the personal

circumstances of the parties involved;

4. Defendant admit Paragraphs 3 and 4 that she did enter into a contract of lease with

the Plaintiff’s house rental.

5. Defendant admit Paragraph 5 in so far that she did not pay the plaintiff the amount

due for the said month of February up to the present date due to the defendant

financial problem because the defendant was fired from her work and she is currently

on a job hunting so that she can pay her bills especially the money she owes from the

plaintiff. That the defendant and the plaintiff entered into a verbal contract that the

former will pay the latter, once she can find a job. That the plaintiff agreed with her

and allowed her to stay on the said house.

6. The defendant deny Paragraph 6 and 7. The demand letter that the plaintiff sent

was not received by defendant personally but instead it was received by her

neighbor. And the plaintiff failed to comply with the three notice rule that is a premise

for filing a case in court.

7. The defendant deny Paragraph 8 of the Complaint for lack of knowledge and

information sufficient to form a belief as to the veracity or falsity of the alleged

amounts of attorney’s fees agreed upon between the plaintiff and her lawyer.

AND BY WAY OF COUNTERCLAIM

8. Due to the Complaint filed by Plaintiff with no sufficient bases, herein Defendant

both suffered mental anguish, fright, serious anxiety, besmirched reputation,

wounded feelings, moral shock, and social humiliation. Defendants are suffering from

pain – both physical and otherwise – and though moral damages may be beyond

pecuniary estimation, these may well be assessed for each Defendant at an

amount left to the of discretion of this Court. Our New Civil Code on Damages

specifically provides the following legal bases for this counterclaim of Defendants,

to wit:

“Article 2217. Moral damages include physical suffering, mental anguish, freight,

serious anxiety, besmirched reputation, wounded feelings, moral shock, social

humiliation and similar injury Xxx

 PRAYER

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is most respectfully prayed of this Honorable

Court that judgment be rendered as follows:

1. DISMISSING THE CASE for failure to state cause/s of action and violation of the

certification against forum shopping;

2. ORDERING Plaintiff to pay herein Defendants the following, to wit:

2.1 Attorney’s Fees since Defendants were compelled to hire the services of

the counsel for an agree sum of Thirty Thousand Pesos (PhP30,000.00),

Philippine currency as Attorney’s Fees and the amount of Two Thousand

Pesos (PhP2,000.00), Philippine currency, as Appearance Fee for each

hearing in court;

2.2 Judicial costs and litigation expenses in the sum of Ten Thousand Pesos

(PhP10,000.00),Philippine Currency; and

3. AWARDING Defendants moral and exemplary damages in the

amount left to the sound discretion of this Honorable Court.

Defendants further pray for such other reliefs which are just and equitable under the

premises.

VERIFICATION

AND

ANTI-FORUM SHOPPINFG CERTIFICATION

I, MEGAN OLD, of legal age, single, Filipino, and with postal address Malaiba, San Jose,

Antique, under oath, depose: I am the defendant in the foregoing case; that I caused the preparation

of the foregoing Answer; that I have read its contents; and that the same are true and correct of my

own direct, personal knowledge.

Further, pursuant to Rule 7 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure and existing Supreme Court

circulars, I hereby certify that I have not heretofore commenced any other action or proceeding

involving the same issues in the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or any other tribunal or

agency; that to the best of my knowledge, no such action or proceeding is pending in the Supreme

Court, the Court of Appeals, or any other tribunal or agency; and that if I should hereafter learn that

other similar or related actions or proceedings has been filed or is pending before the Supreme Court,
the Court of Appeals, or any other tribunal or agency, I undertake to report that fact within five (5)

days therefrom to this court.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my signature this September 20, 2018,

Iloilo City, Philippines.

MEGAN OLD
Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this January 17, 2019 at the City of Iloilo,

Philippines, Affiant exhibited to me her Philippine Passport with No. P8912413B, Iloilo. I hereby certify

that I have personally examined the affiant and I am satisfied that he voluntarily executed and

understood the foregoing statements.

Christie Joi C. Navallasca

NOTARY PUBLIC, SAN JOSE, ANTIQUE
NOTARIAL COMMISSION REG NO 110
ISSUED ON APRIL 21, 2015, ILOILO CITY
FOR A TERM EXPIRING DECEMBER 31, 2019
RM. 9, Centillion Building, Salazar Street, San Jose Antique
PTR No. 5294351/January 4, 2019/Antique
IBP ID NO.1017323/January 4, 2006/Antique
Attorney’s Roll No. 56433

Doc. No. 266;

Page No. 5;
Book No.X;
Series of 2019

YELO LAW OFFICE

Counsel for the Plaintiff
Unit 123, Injap Tower
Manduriao, Iloilo City
By:
Louise ReZes
Roll of Attorney No. 98765
IBP No. 12345/2-5-12/Iloilo
PTR No. 87654/12-22-11/Iloilo
 EXPLANATION

A copy of this pleading is served via registered mail, instead of via personal service, on the

adverse counsel due to the distance of his law office address and the lack of field staff of undersigned

counsel at this time.

MANUEL J. LASERNA JR.