Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Example: The Doctrine in Bristol Meyers Exception to the Exception: When a party
joined support towards another action and it is
- The Bond was filed for the preliminary
cognizable by the MTC hence there is no need
injuction but the principal action was
to file two separate action
already dismissed therefore the
provisional remedy shall also cease. Example: A party filed a criminal case of
seduction (Cognizable by MTC) and
Principal Action:
simultaneously filed support
Preliminary Attachment- Recovery of either
Q: What are the requirements in provisional
real or personal property
remedies?
Preliminary Injunction- The Principal action is
A: (A) Affidavit and (B) Bond
inherent under this rule.
Exception: Support Pendente Lite- Only Verified
Receivership- It shall serve as the principal
Complaint
action, the provisional remedy is the
appointment of a receiver. Q: Can there be a claim for damages for a
provisional remedy?
-When a property is attached, it shall become required by the next succeeding section, must
custodia legis or custody of the law. be duly filed with the court before the order
issues.
Requirements:
Principal Purpose: The written Purpose is to
“Secure the Satisfaction of favorable judgment” - Valid Cause of Action or Principal Action
-If a party that attaches a property obtain a - Valid Ground Sec 1 (a) to (f)
favorable judgment, he can proceed
- No Security
immediately to the sale of it or sale on
attachment. - The amount due or value of the
property sought to be recovered must
-Under the jurisdiction over the res, if the court
be equal to the sum prayed for in the
cannot acquire jurisdiction over the defendant,
order less other counter-claim
a party should acquire jurisdiction over the
thing or property. The limitation provided by *There is no limitation in the attachment of the
law is that a party cannot go beyond the res. property as long as the order prayed for must
be equal to the claim.
a bond, but Mr. Satsatin questioned it since *In the first two-the court is not required to
Preliminary Attachment is issued before the have jurisdiction but in the last- court should
action. The court denied the motion but have issued a summons.
granted post of the counter-bond.
Q: What are the ways to lift a preliminary
Issue: WON the posting of the bond in this case attachment?
is proper?
A: Posting of counter bond/cash deposit or
Held: NO – The posting of the bond is incorrect Filing of a motion assailing the propriety and
since it is not duly accredited by the Supreme regularity of the issuance.
Court. From the facts given, it was shown that
Section 5- The means to lift is through cash
the bonding company that issued the bond to
deposit
secure the judgment of Preliminary Attachment
was only accredited in Makati, Pasay and Pasig Section `12- The means to lift is through cash
but it was not accredited in Dasmarinas, Cavite deposit/ counterbond and the writ has already
where the principal action is tried. In this case issued and implemented
the issuance of the Preliminary Attachment is Section 13- The mode to discharge is through a
null and void. motion assailing or questioning the propriety/
Case Doctrine: Mangila vs Court of Appeals regularity of its issuance
Supreme Court ruled that the issuance of the Case: Chuidian vs Sandiganbayan
writ of preliminary attachment was wrong on Doctrine: When the ground of the principal
the ground that there was no earnest effort of action and writ are the same, a party cannot
serving the summons. The Supreme Court used discharge the writ of PA pursuant to Section 13.
“SEC 5- The requirement of prior service of
summons shall not apply where the summons Facts: Vicente Chuidian was one of the cronies
could not be served personally or by substituted during the Marcos Regime and he was able to
diligent efforts”. The sheriff should exert effort secure a loan from a government bank in
to serve the summons to Mangila before she millions of dollar, to be used in the Philippines.
left for Guam. Chuidian instead invested such money in Silicon
Valley, Californian since there is the growth of
Q: What are the stages of preliminary Information technology in the early 1980’s. The
attachment? bank ran after him for the purpose of payment
A: (1) Order of granting the issuance, (2) and filed a case against before the court of San
Issuance of writ and (3) Order of Mateo, California which ended up in a
implementation compromise agreement. After the EDSA
Revolution, Cory Aquino created Ill-gotten
wealth act for the purpose of recovery of such
ill-gotten wealth coming from the Marcos and sum not less than the value of the property
its cronies. The government sought to attach levied upon. In case of disagreement as to such
the Letters of Credit of Chuidian in California value, the same shall be decided by the court
USA. The writ of preliminary attachment was issuing the writ of attachment. No claim for
implemented when he arrived in the country. damages for the taking or keeping of the
property may be enforced against the bond
Issue: WON the Sandiganbayan abused its
unless the action therefor is filed within one
discretion for the denial of Chuidian’s motion?
hundred twenty (120) days from the date of the
Held: NO – The Supreme Court ruled that When filing of the bond.
the ground for the cause of action in the same
The sheriff shall not be liable for damages for
as for the application of preliminary
the taking or keeping of such property to any
attachment, a party cannot discharge the writ
such third-party claimant, if such bond shall be
through a mere motion otherwise you will also
filed. Nothing herein contained shall prevent
resolve the principal action through motion. In
such claimant or any third person from
this case, the principal action is for the recovery
vindicating his claim to the property, or prevent
of letters of credit and the ground for the
the attaching party from claiming damages
discharge of the writ is under fraud. If the court
against a third-party claimant who filed a
will release the preliminary attachment through
frivolous or plainly spurious claim, in the same
a motion, the court is also resolving the
or a separate action.
principal action. The proper remedy is Sec 12 or
posting a counter bond. When the writ of attachment is issued in favor
of the Republic of the Philippines, or any officer
Section 14. Proceedings where property
duly representing it, the filing of such bond shall
claimed by third person. — If the property
not be required, and in case the sheriff is sued
attached is claimed by any person other than
for damages as a result of the attachment, he
the party against whom attachment had been
shall be represented by the Solicitor General,
issued or his agent, and such person makes an
and if held liable therefor, the actual damages
affidavit of his title thereto, or right to the
adjudged by the court shall be paid by the
possession thereof, stating the grounds of such
National Treasurer out of the funds to be
right or title, and serves such affidavit upon the
appropriated for the purpose.
sheriff while the latter has possession of the
attached property, and a copy thereof upon the Q: Can a party attach a property that belongs to
attaching party, the sheriff shall not be bound the estate?
to keep the property under attachment, unless
A: NO, a party cannot attach the property
the attaching party or his agent, on demand of
belonging to the estate but he can attach his
the sheriff, shall file a bond approved by the
court to indemnify the third-party claimant in a
interest over the estate since the property is in Nothing herein contained shall prevent the
custodia legis. party against whom the attachment was issued
from recovering in the same action the
damages awarded to him from any property of
Q: When a party discharge the writ under Sec the attaching party not exempt from execution
12, can he still apply under Sec 13? should the bond or deposit given by the latter
A: Yes, a party is now seeking to recover the be insufficient or fail to fully satisfy the award.
bond he put up (i) Bond- coming from a -When a party is granted of preliminary
Bonding Company and the party is only paying attachment does not automatically mean that
the premium (ii) Cash Deposit- Payment of cash he will get a favorable judgment.
directly to the court.
Cases:
Section 20. Claim for damages on account of
ALFREDO C. LIM, JR., Petitioner, v. SPOUSES
improper, irregular or excessive attachment. —
TITO S. LAZARO AND CARMEN T.
An application for damages on account of
LAZARO,Respondents.G.R. No. 185734, July 03,
improper, irregular or excessive attachment
2013
must be filed before the trial or before appeal is
perfected or before the judgment becomes Facts:
executory, with due notice to the attaching
On August 22, 2005, Lim, Jr. filed a
party and his surety or sureties setting forth the
complaint for sum of money with prayer for the
facts showing his right to damages and the
issuance of a writ of preliminary attachment
amount thereof. Such damages may be
before the RTC, seeking to recover from
awarded only after proper hearing and shall be
respondents-spouses Tito S. Lazaro and Carmen
included in the judgment on the main case.
T. Lazaro (Sps. Lazaro) the sum of
If the judgment of the appellate court be P2,160,000.00, which represented the amounts
favorable to the party against whom the stated in several dishonored checks issued by
attachment was issued he must claim damages the latter to the former, as well as interests,
sustained during the pendency of the appeal by attorney’s fees, and costs. The RTC granted the
filing an application in the appellate court, with writ of preliminary attachment application and
notice to the party in whose favor the upon the posting of the required P2,160,000.00
attachment was issued or his surety or sureties, bond, issued the corresponding writ on October
before the judgment of the appellate court 14, 2005.
becomes executory. The appellate court may
On September 22, 2006, the parties entered
allow the application to be heard and decided
into a Compromise Agreement whereby Sps.
by the trial court.
Lazaro agreed to pay Lim, Jr. the amount of
P2,351,064.80 on an installment basis, following upon the relief sought and expected to be
a schedule of payments covering the period granted in the main or principal action; it is a
from September 2006 until October 2013, measure auxiliary or incidental to the main
under the following terms, among others: (a) action. As such, it is available during its
that should the financial condition of Sps. pendency which may be resorted to by a litigant
Lazaro improve, the monthly installments shall to preserve and protect certain rights and
be increased in order to hasten the full payment interests during the interim, awaiting the
of the entire obligation; and (b) that Sps. ultimate effects of a final judgment in the case.
Lazaro’s failure to pay any installment due or
In this relation, while the provisions of Rule 57
the dishonor of any of the postdated checks
are silent on the length of time within which an
delivered in payment thereof shall make the
attachment lien shall continue to subsist after
whole obligation immediately due and
the rendition of a final judgment, jurisprudence
demandable.
dictates that the said lien continues until the
Sps. Lazaro filed an Omnibus Motion, seeking to debt is paid, or the sale is had under execution
lift the writ of preliminary attachment issued on the judgment or until the judgment
annotated on the subject TCTs, which the RTC is satisfied, or the attachment discharged or
granted on March 29, 2007. It ruled that a writ vacated in the same manner provided by law.
of preliminary attachment is a mere provisional Records indicate that while the parties have
or ancillary remedy, resorted to by a litigant to entered into a compromise agreement which
protect and preserve certain rights and had already been approved by the RTC in its
interests pending final judgment. Considering January 5, 2007 Amended Decision, the
that the case had already been considered obligations thereunder have yet to be fully
closed and terminated by the rendition of the complied with – particularly, the payment of
January 5, 2007 Amended Decision on the basis the total compromise amount of P2,351,064.80.
of the September 22, 2006 compromise Hence, given that the foregoing debt remains
agreement, the writ of preliminary attachment unpaid, the attachment of Sps. Lazaro’s
should be lifted and quashed. properties should have continued to subsist.
Issue: WON the preliminary attachment was The Court holds that the writ of preliminary
properly lifted? attachment subject of this case should be
restored and its annotation revived in the
Held:
subject TCTs, re-vesting unto Lim, Jr. his
By its nature, preliminary attachment, under preferential lien over the properties covered by
Rule 57 of the Rules of Court (Rule 57), is an the same as it were before the cancellation of
ancillary remedy applied for not for its own sake the said writ. Lest it be misunderstood, the lien
but to enable the attaching party to realize or security obtained by an attachment even
before judgment, is in the nature of a vested On February 18, 2003, a similar complaint for
interest which affords specific security for the collection of sum of money, damages, and
satisfaction of the debt put in suit. cancellation of title with prayer for issuance of a
writ of preliminary attachment was lodged
LETICIA P. LIGON, Petitioner, v. THE REGIONAL
before the Makati City RTC, docketed as Civil
TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 56 AT MAKATI CITY
Case No. 03–186 (Makati City Case), by Spouses
AND ITS PRESIDING JUDGE, JUDGE REYNALDO
Cecilia and Gil Vicente (Sps. Vicente) against
M. LAIGO, SHERIFF IV LUCITO V. ALEJO, ATTY.
Sps. Baladjay, Polished Arrow, and other
SILVERIO GARING, MR. LEONARDO J. TING,
corporations. In that case, it was established
AND MR. BENITO G. TECHICO, Respondents.
that Sps. Baladjay solicited millions of pesos in
G.R. No. 190028, February 26, 2014 investments from Sps. Vicente using conduit
Facts: companies that were controlled by Rosario, as
President and Chairperson. During the
On November 20, 2002, petitioner Leticia P. proceedings therein, a writ of preliminary
Ligon (Ligon) filed an amended complaint attachment also against the subject property
before the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City, was issued and annotated on the dorsal
Branch 101 (Quezon City RTC) for collection of portion of TCT No. 9273 on March 12, 2003.
sum of money and damages, rescission of
contract, and nullification of title with prayer On September 25, 2008, the March 26, 2008
for the issuance of a writ of preliminary Decision of the Quezon City RTC became final
attachment, docketed as Civil Case No. Q–10– and executory. However, when Ligon sought its
48145 (Quezon City Case), against Sps. Baladjay, execution, she discovered that the December 3,
a certain Olivia Marasigan (Marasigan), Polished 2002 attachment annotation had been deleted
Arrow Holdings, Inc. (Polished Arrow), and its from TCT No. 9273 when the subject property
incorporators, namely, Spouses Julius Gonzalo was sold by way of public auction on September
and Charaine Doreece Anne Fuentebella (Sps. 9, 2005 to the highest bidder, respondent Ting,
Fuentebella), Ma. Linda Mendoza (Mendoza), for the amount of P9,000,000.00 during the
Barbara C. Clavo (Clavo), Bayani E. Arit, Jr. (Arit, execution proceedings in the Makati City Case,
Jr.), and Peter M. Kairuz (Kairuz), as well as the as evidenced by the Officer’s Final Deed of
latter’s spouses (individual defendants). Sale dated October 27, 2006 (Officer’s Final
Deed of Sale) issued by Sheriff Alejo. Atty.
In her complaint, Ligon alleged, inter alia, that Garing manifested before the Makati City RTC
Rosario Baladjay (Rosario) enticed her to extend that it submitted the matter en consulta to the
a short–term loan in the amount of Land Registration Authority (LRA) as he was
P3,000,000.00, payable in a month’s time and uncertain whether the annotations on TCT No.
secured by an Allied Bank post–dated check for 9273 should be carried over to TCT No. 8502.
the same amount.
In a Decision dated October 30, 2009, the CA been duly levied upon a property, a purchaser
dismissed Ligon’s certiorari petition, finding that thereof subsequent to the attachment takes the
the Makati City RTC did not gravely abuse its property subject to the said attachment.
discretion in issuing the Assailed Orders, adding
in order to secure the satisfaction of a favorable
further that the same was tantamount to a
judgment in the Quezon City Case, applied for
collateral attack against the titles of both Ting
and was eventually able to secure a writ of
and Techico, which is prohibited under Section
preliminary attachment over the subject
48 of Presidential Decree No. (PD) 1529.
property on November 25, 2002, which was
Issue: WON Makati City Judge erred in its later annotated on the dorsal portion of TCT No.
issuance of Preliminary Attachment 9273 in the name of Polished Arrow on
December 3, 2002. Notwithstanding the
HELD:
subsequent cancellation of TCT No. 9273 due to
YES- Attachment is defined as a provisional the Makati City RTC’s December 9, 2004
remedy by which the property of an adverse Decision rescinding the transfer of the subject
party is taken into legal custody, either at the property from Sps. Baladjay to Polished Arrow
commencement of an action or at any time upon a finding that the same was made in fraud
thereafter, as a security for the satisfaction of of creditors, Ligon’s attachment lien over the
any judgment that may be recovered by the subject property continued to subsist since the
plaintiff or any proper party. Case law instructs attachment she had earlier secured binds the
that an attachment is a proceeding in rem, and, property itself, and, hence, continues until the
hence, is against the particular property, judgment debt of Sps. Baladjay to Ligon as
enforceable against the whole world. adjudged in the Quezon City Case is satisfied, or
Accordingly, the attaching creditor acquires a the attachment discharged or vacated in some
specific lien on the attached property which manner provided by law.
nothing can subsequently destroy except the
very dissolution of the attachment or levy itself.
Such a proceeding, in effect, means that the
property attached is an indebted thing and a
Alejandro Ng Wee vs Tankiansee, G.R. No.
virtual condemnation of it to pay the owner’s
171124, Feb 13, 2008
debt. The lien continues until the debt is paid,
or sale is had under execution issued on the
judgment, or until the judgment is satisfied, or Facts:
the attachment discharged or vacated in some
manner provided by law. Thus, a prior Sometime in February 2000, petitioner received
registration of an attachment lien creates a disturbing news on Wincorps financial condition
preference, such that when an attachment has prompting him to inquire about and investigate
the companys operations and transactions with 2001, the RTC, in an Omnibus Order, denied all
its borrowers. He then discovered that the the motions for the discharge of the
company extended a loan equal to his total attachment. The defendants, including
money placement to a corporation [Power respondent herein, filed their respective
Merge] with a subscribed capital of motions for reconsideration but the trial court
only P37.5M. This credit facility originated from denied the same on October 14, 2002.
another loan of about P1.5B extended by
On September 30, 2004, respondent filed
Wincorp to another corporation [Hottick
before the trial court another Motion to
Holdings]. When the latter defaulted in its
Discharge Attachment, re-pleading the grounds
obligation, Wincorp instituted a case against it
he raised in his first motion but raising the
and its surety. Settlement was, however,
following additional grounds: (1) that he was
reached in which Hotticks president, Luis Juan L.
not present in Wincorps board meetings
Virata (Virata), assumed the obligation of the
approving the questionable transactions; and
surety.
(2) that he could not have connived with
Wincorp and the other defendants because he
and Pearlbank Securities, Inc., in which he is a
Under the scheme agreed upon by Wincorp and
major stockholder, filed cases against the
Hotticks president, petitioners money
company as they were also victimized by its
placements were transferred without his
fraudulent schemes.
knowledge and consent to the loan account of
Power Merge through an agreement that Issue: WON there was irregularity in the
virtually freed the latter of any liability. issuance of writ of preliminary attachment?
Allegedly, through the false representations of
Held:
Wincorp and its officers and directors,
petitioner was enticed to roll over his A writ of attachment can only be granted on
placements so that Wincorp could loan the concrete and specific grounds and not on
same to Virata/Power Merge. general averments quoting perfunctorily the
words of the Rules. Connivance cannot also be
On October 26, 2000, on the basis of the
based on mere association but must be
allegations in the complaint and the October 12,
particularly alleged and established as a fact.
2000 Affidavit of petitioner, the trial court
Respondent further contends that the trial
ordered the issuance of a writ of preliminary
court, in resolving the Motion to Discharge
attachment against the properties not exempt
Attachment, need not actually delve into the
from execution of all the defendants in the civil
merits of the case. All that the court has to
case subject, among others, to petitioners filing
examine are the allegations in the complaint
of a P50M-bond. The writ was, consequently,
and the supporting affidavit. Petitioner cannot
issued on November 6, 2000. On October 23,
also rely on the decisions of the appellate court not to pay, or without any showing of how
in CA-G.R. SP No. 74610 and this Court in G.R. respondent committed the alleged fraud, the
No. 162928 to support his claim because general averment in the affidavit that
respondent is not a party to the said cases. respondent is an officer and director of Wincorp
who allegedly connived with the other
For a writ of attachment to issue under this
defendants to commit a fraud, is insufficient to
rule, the applicant must sufficiently show the
support the issuance of a writ of preliminary
factual circumstances of the alleged fraud
attachment.
because fraudulent intent cannot be inferred
from the debtors mere non-payment of the Phil-Air Conditioning Center vs RCJ Lines and
debt or failure to comply with his obligation. Rolando Abadilla, Jr., G.R. No. 193821,
November 23, 2015
“To sustain an attachment on this ground, it
must be shown that the debtor in contracting
the debt or incurring the obligation intended to
Facts:
defraud the creditor. The fraud must relate to
the execution of the agreement and must have On various dates between March 5, 1990, and
been the reason which induced the other party August 29, 1990, petitioner Phil-Air sold to
into giving consent which he would not have respondent RCJ Lines four Carrier Paris 240 air
otherwise given. To constitute a ground for conditioning units for buses (units). The units
attachment in Section 1 (d), Rule 57 of the Rules included compressors, condensers,
of Court, fraud should be committed upon evaporators, switches, wiring, circuit boards,
contracting the obligation sued upon. A debt is brackets, and fittings.
fraudulently contracted if at the time of
contracting it the debtor has a preconceived
plan or intention not to pay, as it is in this case. Phil-Air allegedly performed regular
Fraud is a state of mind and need not be proved maintenance checks on the units pursuant to
by direct evidence but may be inferred from the the one-year warranty on parts and labor. RCJ
circumstances attendant in each case.” Lines issued three post-dated checks in favor of
Phil-Air to partly cover the unpaid balance.
The affidavit, being the foundation of the
writ, must contain such particulars as to how
the fraud imputed to respondent was All the post-dated checks were dishonored
committed for the court to decide whether or when Phil-Air subsequently presented them for
not to issue the writ. Absent any statement of payment. Check No. 479759 was returned
other factual circumstances to show that because it was drawn against insufficient funds,
respondent, at the time of contracting the while Check Nos. 479760 and 479761 were
obligation, had a preconceived plan or intention returned because payments were stopped.
There are various modes of discharging an cash, and after hearing to determine the
attachment under Rule 57, viz.: sufficiency of the cash deposit or counter-bond.
On the other hand, the discharge under Section
(1) by depositing cash or posting a counter-
13 takes effect only upon showing that the
bond under Section 12;
plaintiff’s attachment bond was improperly or
(2) by proving that the attachment bond was irregularly issued, or that the bond is
improperly or irregularly issued or enforced, or insufficient. The discharge of the attachment
that the bond is insufficient under Section 13; under Section 13 must be made only after
(3) by showing that the attachment is excessive hearing.
under Section 13; and (4) by claiming that the
property is exempt from execution under
As discussed above, it is patent that under the
Section 2.
Rules, the attachment bond answers for all
damages incurred by the party against whom
RCJ Lines availed of the first mode by posting a the attachment was issued. Thus, Phil-Air
counter-bond. cannot be held directly liable for the costs
adjudged to and the damages sustained by RCJ
Lines because of the attachment. Section 4 of
Under the first mode, the court will order the Rule 57 positively lays down the rule that the
discharge of the attachment after (1) the attachment bond will pay “all the costs which
movant makes a cash deposit or posts a may be adjudged to the adverse party and all
counterbond and (2) the court hears the motion damages which he may sustain by reason of
to discharge the attachment with due notice to the attachment, if the court shall finally
the adverse party. adjudge that the applicant was not entitled
thereto.”
The order to refund the counter-bond premium Exception: Joinder of Action- If a party cause of
is likewise erroneous. The premium payment action with injunction it will depend to which
may be deemed a cost incurred by RCJ Lines to court has jurisdiction
lift the attachment. Such cost may be charged
-If injunction is filed with the Supreme Court, it
against the attachment bond.
is not solely filed in that court but with another
cause of action
Sec 2- Who may grant the Preliminary 72 hrs TRO- It takes effect upon issuance of an
Injunction order
A preliminary injunction may be granted by the 20 day TRO- It takes effect upon receipt of the
court where the action or proceeding is party
pending. If the action or proceeding is pending -The court is not precluded in setting for a
in the Court of Appeals or in the Supreme summary hearing in the issuance of TRO
Court, it may be issued by said court or any
member thereof. - The grant of TRO is discretionary upon the
judge who will issue it.
Q: Which court has jurisdiction to grant
Preliminary Injunction? -If a court grants a 72 hour TRO and the party
would like to extend it, the court shall only
A: Only Cognizable by the Regional Trial Court grant an extension of 17 more days and it shall
(Original & Exclusive) begin to run from the receipt of the order
granting the TRO.
On May 23, 1997, the mortgaged property was Issue: WON the Injunction filed by Idolor is
sold in a public auction to respondent proper on the ground that he has still a right
Gumersindo, as the highest bidder and over the property
consequently, the Sheriffs Certificate of Sale
Held:
was registered with the Registry of Deeds of
Quezon City on June 23, 1997. Injunction is a preservative remedy aimed at
protecting substantive rights and interests.
On June 25, 1998, petitioner filed with the
Before an injunction can be issued, it is
Regional Trial Court of Quezon City, Branch 220,
essential that the following requisites be
a complaint for annulment of Sheriffs
present: 1) there must be a right in esse or the
Certificate of Sale with prayer for the issuance
existence of a right to be protected; 2) the act
of a temporary restraining order (TRO) and a
against which the injunction is to be directed is
writ of preliminary injunction against private
a violation of such right. The existence of a right
respondents, Deputy Sheriffs Marino Cachero
violated, is a prerequisite to the granting of an
and Rodolfo Lescano and the Registry of Deeds
injunction. Injunction is not designed to protect
of Quezon City alleging among others alleged
contingent or future rights. Failure to establish
irregularity and lack of notice in the extra-
either the existence of a clear and positive right
judicial foreclosure proceedings subject of
which should be judicially protected through
the real estate mortgage. In the meantime, a
the writ of injunction or that the defendant has
temporary restraining order was issued by the
committed or has attempted to commit any act
trial court.
which has endangered or tends to endanger the
On July 28, 1998, the trial court issued a writ of existence of said right, is a sufficient ground for
preliminary injunction enjoining private denying the injunction. It is to be resorted to
respondents, the Deputy Sheriffs and the only when there is a pressing necessity to avoid
Registry of Deeds of Quezon City from causing injurious consequences which cannot be
the issuance of a final deed of sale and remedied under any standard of compensation.
consolidation of ownership of the subject
In the instant case, we agree with the
property in favor of the De Guzman spouses.
respondent Court that petitioner has no more
The trial court denied the motion for
proprietary right to speak of over the foreclosed
reconsideration filed by the de Guzman
property to entitle her to the issuance of a writ
spouses.
of injunction. It appears that the mortgaged
On September 28, 1999, the respondent court property was sold in a public auction to private
granted the petition and annulled the assailed respondent Gumersindo on May 23, 1997 and
writ of preliminary injunction. Teresita Idolor the sheriffs certificate of sale was registered
filed her motion for reconsideration which was with the Registry of Deeds of Quezon City on
denied in a resolution dated February 4, 2000. June 23, 1997. Petitioner had one year from the
registration of the sheriffs sale to redeem the On May 20, 1997, his opponent filed an election
property but she failed to exercise her right on protest case, docketed as Civil Case No. 703-M,
or before June 23, 1998, thus spouses de before the MCTC of Victorias-Manapla, Negros
Guzman are now entitled to a conveyance and Occidental. Libo-on sought the recounting of
possession of the foreclosed property. ballots in two precincts, preliminary prohibitory
injunction, and damages. On May 29, 1997,
RIMEO S. GUSTILO, complainant, vs. HON.
respondent judge issued a temporary
RICARDO S. REAL, SR., Presiding Judge, 2nd
restraining order (TRO) and annulled the
Municipal Circuit Trial Court of Victorias-
proclamation of complainant as the duly
Manapla, Negros Occidental, respondent.,
elected punong barangay of Punta Mesa,
A.M. No. MTJ-00-1250. February 28, 2001
Manapla.
Facts:
On May 30, 1997, complainant took his oath of
In a verified complaintdated June 15, 1997, office as punong barangay. That same day, he
Rimeo S. Gustilo charged respondent Judge also filed a petition for certiorari before the
Ricardo S. Real, Sr., of the Municipal Circuit Trial Regional Trial Court of Silay City, Negros
Court of Victorias-Manapla, Negros Occidental Occidental, Branch 69. On June 5, 1997, the RTC
with gross misconduct, gross incompetence, lifted the TRO issued by respondent and
gross ignorance of the law, and violation of the declared as null and void the order nullifying
Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act relative to complainants proclamation as duly
Civil Case No. 703-M entitled Weddy C. Libo-on elected punong barangay.
v. Rimeo S. Gustilo, et al. for recounting of
Issue: WON Judge Real erred in his issuance of
ballots of Precinct Nos. 27 and 27-A, Barangay
Temporary Restraining Order
Punta Mesa, Manapla, Negros Occidental.
Complainant avers that he was a candidate Held:
for punong barangay of Barangay Punta Mesa,
Supreme Court Administrative Circular No. 20-
Manapla, Negros Occidental in the May 12,
95 provides: 2. The application for a TRO shall
1997 elections. His lone opponent was Weddy
be acted upon only after all parties are heard in
C. Libo-on, then the incumbent punong
a summary hearing conducted within twenty-
barangay and the representative of the
four (24) hours after the records are
Association of Barangay Captains (ABC) to
transmitted to the branch selected by raffle.
the Sangguniang Bayan of Manapla and
The records shall be transmitted immediately
the Sangguniang Panlalawigan of Negros
after raffle.
Occidental. Both complainant and Libo-on
garnered eight hundred nineteen (819) votes The foregoing clearly show that whenever an
during the elections, resulting in a tie. application for a TRO is filed, the court may act
on the application only after all parties have
fair market value of his Team Share Stock Issue: WON the Court of Appeals erred in
Option Grant. disallowing the discharge and release of the
injunction cash bond
On February 28, 2002, Labor Arbiter Renaldo O.
Hernandez rendered a Decision declaring the Held:
dismissal illegal. He noted that while Lagrosas
A preliminary injunction may be granted only
committed a misconduct, it was not connected
when, among other things, the applicant, not
with his work. On appeal, the National Labor
explicitly exempted, files with the court where
Relations Commission (NLRC) set aside the
the action or proceeding is pending,
Decision of Labor Arbiter Hernandez in its
a bond executed to the party or person
Decision dated September 24, 2002. It held that
enjoined, in an amount to be fixed by the court,
Lagrosas was validly dismissed for serious
to the effect that the applicant will pay such
misconduct in hitting his co-employee and
party or person all damages which he may
another person with a metal steering wheel
sustain by reason of the injunction or
lock. The gravity and seriousness of his
temporary restraining order if the court should
misconduct is clear from the fact that he
finally decide that the applicant was not
deliberately waited for Lim and Menquito to
entitled thereto. Upon approval of the requisite
return to McDonalds.
bond, a writ of preliminary injunction shall be
Bristol-Myers moved to quash the writ of issued.
execution contending that it timely filed a
The injunction bond is intended as a security for
petition for certiorari with the Court of
damages in case it is finally decided that the
Appeals. The appellate court gave due course to
injunction ought not to have been granted. Its
Bristol-Myers petition and issued a temporary
principal purpose is to protect the enjoined
restraining order (TRO) enjoining the
party against loss or damage by reason of the
enforcement of the writ of execution and
injunction, and the bond is usually conditioned
notices of garnishment. Upon the expiration of
accordingly.
the TRO, the appellate court issued a writ of
preliminary injunction dated September 17, By its Decision dated January 28, 2005, the
2004. appellate court disposed of the case by granting
Bristol-Myers petition and reinstating the
Bristol-Myers moved to release the TRO cash
Decision dated September 24, 2002of the NLRC
bond and injunction cash bond in view of the
which dismissed the complaint for dismissal. It
Decision dated January 28, 2005. On August 12,
also ordered the discharge of the TRO cash
2005, the appellate court denied the motion as
bond and injunction cash bond. Thus, both
premature since the decision is not yet final and
conditions of the writ of preliminary injunction
executory due to Lagrosas appeal to this Court.
were satisfied.
litigant may be denied relief by a court of equity On October 5, 2000, claiming that the interests,
on the ground that his conduct has been penalties and charges imposed by CBC were
inequitable, unfair and dishonest, or fraudulent, iniquitous and unconscionable and to enjoin
or deceitful as to the controversy in issue. CBC from initiating foreclosure proceedings, SBI
and MFII filed a Complaint "To Compel
Petitioners, having reneged on their agreement
Execution of Contract and for Performance and
without any justifiable reason, come to court
Damages, With Prayer for Writ of Preliminary
with unclean hands. This Court may deny a
Injunction and Ex-Parte Temporary Restraining
litigant relief if his conduct has been
Order" in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Pasig
inequitable, unfair and dishonest as to the
City. The case was docketed as Civil Case No.
controversy in issue.
68105 and assigned to Branch 264. After
SOLID BUILDERS, INC. and MEDINA FOODS hearing the parties, the trial court issued an
INDUSTRIES, INC., Petitioners, Order dated December 14, 2000 granting the
vs. CHINA BANKING application of SBI and MFII for the issuance of a
CORPORATION, Respondent. G.R. No. 179665 writ of preliminary injunction. The trial court
April 3, 2013 held that SBI and MFII were able to sufficiently
Facts: comply with the requisites for the issuance of
an injunctive writ:
During the period from September 4, 1992 to
March 27, 1996, China Banking Corporation It is well-settled that to be entitled to an
(CBC) granted several loans to Solid Builders, injunctive writ, a party must show that: (1) the
Inc. (SBI), which amounted to ₱139,999,234.34, invasion of right sought to be protected is
exclusive of interests and other charges. To material and substantial; (2) the right of
secure the loans, Medina Foods Industries, Inc. complainant is clear and unmistakable; and, (3)
(MFII) executed in CBC’s favor several surety there is an urgent and paramount necessity for
agreements and contracts of real estate the writ to prevent serious damage.
mortgage over parcels of land in the Loyola The Court of Appeals found that, on its face, the
Grand Villas in Quezon City and New Cubao trial court’s Order dated December 14, 2000
Central in Cainta, Rizal. granting the application of SBI and MFII for the
In a letter dated March 20, 2000 addressed to issuance of a writ of preliminary injunction had
CBC, SBI requested the restructuring of its no basis as there were no findings of fact or law
loans, a reduction of interests and penalties and which would indicate the existence of any of
the implementation of a dacion en pago of the the requisites for the grant of an injunctive writ.
New Cubao Central property. Issue: WON the issuance of writ of preliminary
injunction is proper?
conducted by the City of Butuan on December preliminary injunction may be issued only upon
27, 1996. clear showing of an actual existing right to be
protected during the pendency of the principal
In its December 14, 1999 order, the Regional
action. When the complainant’s right or title is
Trial Court (RTC) of Butuan City, Branch 5,
doubtful or disputed, he does not have a clear
reconsidered its earlier order, denied the prayer
legal right and, therefore, the issuance of
for a Writ of Preliminary Injunction, and
injunctive relief is not proper.
ordered that the possession and occupation of
the land be returned to the respondents. The Upon the dismissal of the main case by the RTC
RTC found that the auction sale was tainted on August 8, 2013, the question of issuance of
with irregularity as the bidder was a the writ of preliminary injunction has become
government employee disqualified in moot and academic.
accordance with Section 89 of the Local
Novecio vs Lim, 754 SCRA 111
Government Code of 1991.
Facts:
In its October 24, 2005 decision, the CA
Respondents Maria Carmen J. Tuazon and
affirmed the RTC’s ruling, found the petitioners
Manuel V. Nieto, represented by their attorney-
guilty of forum shopping, dismissed the case,
in-fact, Lope Durotan , filed complaints for
and referred the case to the Court and to the
forcible entry with damages against petitioners
Integrated Bar of the Philippines for
Saturnino Novecio, Gavino Novecio, Anastacio
investigation and institution of the appropriate
Golez.
administrative action.
The petitioners, on the other hand, contended
Issue: WON petitioners failed to show clear and
that they have already been in possession of
unmistakable rights to be protectedby the writ;
the land for more than two years when the
the present action has been rendered moot and
complaints were filed. They maintained that
academic by the dismissal of the main action
they have planted the land with corn, durian,
Held: coconut, mango, jackfruit, rambutan, etc. for
their livelihood. They also alleged that they
As the lower courts correctly found, Tuazon had
were harassed by some men armed with
no ownership to confer to the petitioners
shotguns and pistols on February 12, 2004.
despite the latter’s reimbursement of Tuazon’s
purchase expenses. Because they were never The MTC found that the respondents anchored
owners of the property, the petitioners failed to their alleged prior possession on the fact that
establish entitlement to the writ of preliminary they have applied title for the land as shown by
injunction. "[T]o be entitled to an injunctive a certification authorizing land survey. Other
writ, the right to be protected and the violation than this, the respondents had no evidence of
against that right must be shown. A writ of their actual and physical possession of the land.
The MTC also found that they were not even intended merely to give the court an evidence
residents of the place and never personally of justification for a preliminary injunction
appeared in court during trial. pending the decision on the merits of the case,
and is not conclusive of the principal action
The RTC held that the MTC ignored some pieces
which has yet to be decided. In a prayer for
of evidence, warranting the reversal of the
preliminary injunction, the plaintiff is not
decision.
required to submit conclusive and complete
The RTC ruled that the MTC should have given
evidence. He is only required to show that he
credence to the certification issued by the
has an ostensible right to the final relief prayed
Department of Environment and Natural
for in his complaint.
Resources - Community Environment and
Natural Resources Office (DENR-CENRO) The petitioners have adequately shown their
showing that the land in litigation is the subject entitlement to a preliminary injunction. First,
of an application for title and claim by the the relief demanded consists in restraining the
respondents. execution of the RTC decision ordering their
ejectment from the disputed land. Second, their
This Court, acting on the petitioners' prayer,
ejectment from the land from which they derive
issued a TRO on October 18, 2010, enjoining the
their source of livelihood would work injustice
RTC from executing its decision. The TRO
to the petitioners. Finally, the execution of the
remains effective until this day. Finally, it
RTC decision is probably in violation of the
appears that the CA has yet to issue a decision
rights of the petitioners, tending to render the
on the Petition for Review.
MTC judgment dismissing the forcible entry
Issue: WON CA abused its discretion when it cases ineffectual.
denied the petition for preliminary injunction
Held:
Rule 59- Receivership
A preliminary injunction is proper when the
Receivership is the principal action, the
plaintiff appears to be clearly entitled to the
provisional remedy is the appointment of a
relief sought and has substantial interest in the
receiver which is cognizable by the MTC or RTC.
right sought to be defended. As this Court has
previously ruled, "while the existence of the Section 1. Appointment of receiver. — Upon a
right need not be conclusively established, it verified application, one or more receivers of
must be clear." the property subject of the action or proceeding
may be appointed by the court where the
A writ of preliminary injunction is generally action is pending or by the Court of Appeals or
based solely on initial or incomplete evidence. by the Supreme Court, or a member thereof, in
Such evidence need only be a sampling the following cases:
(a) When it appears from the verified appointed to be subject to the control of said
application, and such other proof as the court court.
may require, that the party applying for the
PAD- Preservation, Administration &
appointment of a receiver has an interest in the
Disposition
property or fund which is the subject of the
action or proceeding, and that such property or Q: Why is there a need for the appointment of a
fund is in danger of being lost, removed, or receiver?
materially injured unless a receiver be A: In order to preserve the property, administer
appointed to administer and preserve it; such property or proper disposal of such
(b) When it appears in an action by the property.
mortgagee for the foreclosure of a mortgage *Receivership has the longest time frame to file
that the property is in danger of being wasted an application
or dissipated or materially injured, and that its
value is probably insufficient to discharge the Receivership- At the commencement of the
mortgage debt, or that the parties have so action or even after execution
stipulated in the contract of mortgage; Preliminary Attachment- At the
(c) After judgment, to preserve the property commencement of the action or before entry of
during the pendency of an appeal, or to dispose judgment
of it according to the judgment, or to aid Preliminary Injunction- At the commencement
execution when the execution has been of the action or before final judgment
returned unsatisfied or the judgment obligor
Replevin- Any time before the defendant files
refuses to apply his property in satisfaction of
his answer
the judgment, or otherwise to carry the
judgment into effect; Support Pendte Lite- It vary depending on the
circumstances surrounding it
(d) Whenever in other cases it appears that the
appointment of a receiver is the most Q: Who may be appointed as a receiver?
convenient and feasible means of preserving,
A: Not necessarily the applicant since it is not a
administering, or disposing of the property in
guaranty that he will be appointed by the court.
litigation.
The court is not bound and it has the discretion
During the pendency of an appeal, the appellate to which he shall appoint.
court may allow an application for the
-The applicant for the appointment of a receiver
appointment of a receiver to be filed in and
is required to post a BOND.
decided by the court of origin and the receiver
Reason: By mere application, damage may same; to make transfers; to pay outstanding
occur over the property. debts; to divide the money and other property
that shall remain among the persons legally
Example: BDO is placed under liquidator
entitled to receive the same; and generally to
ship/receivership, when a depositor applies for
do such acts respecting the property as the
receivership he should post a bond in order to
court may authorize. However, funds in the
protect the interest of BDO
hands of a receiver may be invested only by
-By applying for a receivership, a bond is order of the court upon the written consent of
necessary and once appointed by the court as a all the parties to the action.
receiver, he is required to post another bond.
No action may be filed by or against a receiver
(Double the amount principle)
without leave of the court which appointed
Section 2. Bond on appointment of receiver. — him.
Before issuing the order appointing a receiver
Section 8. Termination of
the court shall require the applicant to file a
receivership; compensation of receiver. —
bond executed to the party against whom the
Whenever the court, motu proprio or on motion
application is presented, in an amount to be
of either party, shall determine that the
fixed by the court, to the effect that the
necessity for a receiver no longer exists, it shall,
applicant will pay such party all damages he
after due notice to all interested parties and
may sustain by reason of the appointment of
hearing, settle the accounts of the receiver,
such receiver in case the applicant shall have
direct the delivery of the funds and other
procured such appointment without sufficient
property in his possession to the person
cause; and the court may, in its discretion, at
adjudged to be entitled to receive them and
any time after the appointment, require an
order the discharge of the receiver from further
additional bond as further security for such
duty as such. The court shall allow the receiver
damages.
such reasonable compensation as the
Section 6. General powers of receiver. — circumstances of the case warrant, to be taxed
Subject to the control of the court in which the as costs against the defeated party, or
action or proceeding is pending a receiver shall apportioned, as justice requires.
have the power to bring and defend, in such
-When the property is in the possession of
capacity, actions in his own name; to take and
another, receivership is not the proper remedy.
keep possession of the property in controversy;
to receive rents; to collect debts due to himself Case Doctrine: Koruga vs Arcenas
as receiver or to the fund, property, estate,
The jurisdiction in action for receivership and
person, or corporation of which he is the
financial institution shall be under the
receiver; to compound for and compromise the
Monetary Board of the Central Bank in
accordance with Revised Central Bank Law. In his agent, she also filed for the appointment of
other entities, an action for receivership shall a receiver.
be under the regular courts.
Issue: WON the application for receivership is
Case: Sps Larrobis vs Phil Veterans Bank valid?
Facts: Sps Larrobis secured a loan from Phil Held: No- The appointment of a receiver in this
Veterans Bank, at one point during the case is not proper since the property is intact
pendency of the loan. PVB was placed under and it is not materially lost therefore there is no
receivership, the bank was later on ground for such appointment
rehabilitated, the management found that Sps.
Case: Tantano vs Espina-Caboverde 702 SCRA
Larrobis is not yet paid with their loan. PVB
foreclosed the property, Sps Larrobis put up the Facts:
defense of prescription since they filed the case Petitioners files a complaint of annulment of
after 14 years which is beyond the 10 year the Deed of Sale purportedly transferring lots
period. PVB argued that they undergo from their parents Maximo and Dominalda.
receivership therefore the prescriptive period During the pendency of the case the parties
was stalled. executed a Partial Settlement Agreement (PSA)
Issue: WON prescription shall run against PVB where they fixed the sharing of the
that is placed under receivership uncontroverted properties among themselves,
in particular, the adverted additional eight (8)
Held: YES- One of the duties & responsibilities
parcels of land including their respective
of a receiver is to collect debts in order to
products and improvements. Under the PSA,
rehabilitate such bank. The prescriptive period
Dominalda’s daughter, Josephine, shall be
therefore shall not be stalled. When banks are
appointed as Administrator. The PSA provided
placed in a receivership, they are only
that Dominalda shall be entitled to receive a
prohibited to conduct business banking
share of one-half (1/2) of the net income
transaction. When PNB failed to file an action
derived from the uncontroverted properties.
against Sps, Larrobis, they already slept on their
The PSA also provided that Josephine shall have
rights.
special authority, among others, to provide for
Case: Chavez vs Court of Appeals the medicine of her mother.
approved by the trial court over petitioners’ requirement of a receiver’s bond rests upon the
opposition. discretion of the court. Sec. 2 of Rule 59 clearly
states that the court may, in its discretion, at
any time after the appointment, require an
Petitioners harp on the fact that the court a quo additional bond as further security for such
failed to require Dominalda to post a bond prior damages.
to the issuance of the order appointing a
Rule 60- Replevin
receiver, in violation of Section 2, Rule 59 of the
Rules of court Section 1. Application. — A party praying for
the recovery of possession of personal property
may, at the commencement of the action or at
Respondents insist that where there is sufficient any time before answer, apply for an order for
cause to appoint a receiver, there is no need for the delivery of such property to him, in the
an applicant’s bond because under Sec. 2 of manner hereinafter provided.
Rule 59, the very purpose of the bond is to
Principal Action is for the recovery of
answer for all damages that may be sustained
possession of personal property and the
by a party by reason of the appointment of a
Provisional Remedy is Replevin
receiver in case the applicant shall have
procured such appointment without sufficient Purpose: Immediate recovery of possession of
cause. personal property and not applicable in real
property.
Issue:
Example: Car (Vios)
WON posting bond is required in receivership?
-When a person bought a car, the seller will ask
Held:
you to sign a document pertaining to Chattel
Mortgage that has a clause ”The Company can
Sec. 2 of Rule 59 is very clear in that before judicially or extra-judicially foreclose/retrieve it
issuing the order appointing a receiver the court upon failure to pay the necessary payment”.
shall require the applicant to file a bond The mortgage in an action for the foreclosure
executed to the party against whom the can file a replevin.
application is presented. The use of the word Time Period: At the commencement of an
"shall" denotes its mandatory nature; thus, the action or before the defendant files his answer
consent of the other party, or as in this case,
-Once the answer is submitted to the court,
the consent of petitioners, is of no moment.
issues shall be joined and the court should hear
Hence, the filing of an applicant’s bond is
both sides. Upon the issuance of the writ, it
required at all times. On the other hand, the
shall be forwarded to the sheriff and he can
recover it anywhere within the Philippines. (No preliminary attachment, or otherwise placed
jurisdictional limitation) under custodia legis, or if so seized, that it is
exempt from such seizure or custody; and
Requirements: -Bond -Affidavit
(d) The actual market value of the property.
-The bond should be twice the value of the
property.
Example: Juan bought a car for P 1 million Section 4. Duty of the sheriff. — Upon receiving
pesos, the seller seek to recover such property such order, the sheriff must serve a copy
by posting twice the value of the car. thereof on the adverse party, together with a
copy of the application, affidavit and bond, and
-The bond mentioned is not a cash deposit but
must forthwith take the property, if it be in the
rather a SURETY BOND
possession of the adverse party, or his agent,
-The applicant shall only pay the premium of and retain it in his custody. If the property or
the bond (3%-15%) any part thereof be concealed in a building or
-The bond shall be twice the value of the enclosure, the sheriff must demand its delivery,
property and if it be not delivered, he must cause the
building or enclosure to be broken open and
First Value- It answers for the value of the take the property into his possession. After the
property sheriff has take possession of the property as
Second Value- It answers for the damages of herein provided, he must keep it in a secure
the property place and shall be responsible for its delivery to
the party entitled thereto upon receiving his
Section 2. Affidavit and bond. — The applicant
fees and necessary expenses for taking and
must show by his own affidavit or that of some
keeping the same.
other person who personally knows the facts:
-When the sheriff takes possession of the
(a) That the applicant is the owner of the
personal property, he has the obligation to keep
property claimed, particularly describing it, or is
it for 5 days. (Mandatory Provision)
entitled to the possession thereof;
-He cannot give the property to the applicant
(b) That the property is wrongfully detained by
before the expiration of 5 days otherwise he
the adverse party, alleging the cause of
can be made liable for administratively.
detention thereof according to the best of his
knowledge, information, and belief ; Purpose: -To determine the sufficiency of the
bond posted.
(c) That the property has not been distrained or
taken for a tax assessment or a fine pursuant to -To await of the possibility of posting of
law, or seized under a writ of execution or counter-bond/ re-delivery bond.
Section 7. Proceedings where property claimed When the writ of replevin is issued in favor of
by third person. — If the property taken is the Republic of the Philippines, or any officer
claimed by any person other than the party duly representing it, the filing of such bond shall
against whom the writ of replevin had been not be required, and in case the sheriff is sued
issued or his agent, and such person makes an for damages as a result of the replevin, he shall
affidavit of his title thereto, or right to the be represented by the Solicitor General, and if
possession thereof, stating the grounds held liable therefor, the actual damages
therefor, and serves such affidavit upon the adjudged by the court shall be paid by the
sheriff while the latter has possession of the National Treasurer out of the funds to be
property and a copy thereof upon the applicant, appropriated for the purpose.
the sheriff shall not be bound to keep the
-The bond is for the benefit of the sheriff
property under replevin or deliver it to the
applicant unless the applicant or his agent, on -The sheriff will ask the applicant to post a bond
demand of said sheriff, shall file a bond equivalent to the value of the property
approved by the court to indemnify the third- THRICE THE VALUE DOCTRINE
party claimant in a sum not less than the value
of the property under replevin as provided in Q: What are the remedy for frivolous claim?
section 2 hereof. In case of disagreement as to A: File for damage in the same case or separate
such value, the court shall determine the same. action:
No claim for damages for the taking or keeping,
Same Case- if the court has jurisdiction
of the property may be enforced against the
bond unless the action therefor is filed within Separate Action- If the court has no jurisiction
one hundred twenty (120) days from the date
Section 9. Judgment. — After trial of the issues
of the filing of the bond.
the court shall determine who has the right of
The sheriff shall not be liable for damages, for possession to and the value of the property and
the taking or keeping of such property, to any shall render judgment in the alternative for the
such third-party claimant if such bond shall be delivery thereof to the party entitled to the
filed. Nothing herein contained shall prevent same, or for its value in case delivery cannot be
such claimant or any third person from made, and also for such damages as either
vindicating his claim to the property, or prevent party may prove, with costs.
the applicant from claiming damages against a
Navarro vs Escobido Doctrine
third-party claimant who filed a frivolous or
plainly spurious claim, in the same or a separate “Demand is not necessary in a writ of replevin
action. since it destroy the very essence or purpose of
replevin”
Hao vs Andres Doctrine July 28, 1984 as well as three (3) consecutive
installments which fell due on August 28,
“Sheriff has the obligation to safe keep the
September 28, and October 28, 1984.
property for 5 days. “ The sheriff immediately
released the property even prior to the 5 day The trial court ruled that private respondent
period. The writ of replevin indicated was 20 FCP had no reason to file the present action
cars but it turned out that only 9 was in his since petitioner already paid the installments
possession and the 3 cars were lost under his for the months of July to November 1984,
custody. which are the sole bases of the complaint. The
lower court declared that private respondent
Case: Orosa vs Court of Appeals
was not entitled to the writ of replevin, and was
Doctrine: A party cannot recover the value of liable to petitioner for actual damages under
the car if he already received the value of the the replevin bond it filed.
car.
Issue: WON Mr Orosa can recover the value of
Facts: the car and of the property simultaneously?
On December 6, 1984, private respondent FCP Held:
Credit Corporation filed a complaint for replevin
NO- Mr. Orosa cannot recover the value of the
and damages in the Regional Trial Court of
car if he already received the car since it will
Manila against petitioner Jose S. Orosa and one
produce unjust enrichment.
John Doe to recover possession of a 1983 Ford
Laser 1.5 Sedan with Motor and Serial No. Case: Smart Communication vs Astorga
SUNKBT-14584. The complaint alleged that on
Facts:
September 28, 1983, petitioner purchased the
subject motor vehicle on installment from Astorga was hired by Smart Communication as a
Fiesta Motor Sales Corporation. He executed manager and she was given a car plan. She
and delivered to Fiesta Motor Sales Corp. a failed the re-evaluation by Smart and as a result
promissory note in the sum of P133,824.00 she was to different location. Astorga did not
payable in monthly installments. To secure follow order and as a result she was dismissed
payment, petitioner executed a chattel from Smart on the ground of insubordination.
mortgage over the subject motor vehicle in She filed a case towards the NLRC and during
favor of Fiesta Motor Sales Corp. On September the pendency of the case, Smart demand to
28, 1983, Fiesta Motor Sales assigned the return the car but Astorga refused. Smart filed a
promissory note and chattel mortgage to writ of replevin for the recovery of the car,
private respondent FCP Credit Corporation. The Astorga filed a Motion to dismiss on the ground
complaint further alleged that petitioner failed of lack of jurisdiction but it was denied the RTC.
to pay part of the installment which fell due on CA reversed the ruling of the RTC since the
cause of action arises from an employer- interest of 6% per month shall be imposed for
employee relationship therefore RTC has no failure to pay each installment on or before the
jurisdiction. stated due date. For failure to pay four
successive installments from May 15, 2002 to
August 15, 2002, respondent, through counsel,
sent to petitioners a demand letter dated
Issue: WON RTC has jurisdiction over the writ of August 29, 2002, declaring the entire obligation
replevin as due and demandable and requiring to pay
Php576,664.04, or surrender the mortgaged
Held: The car involved in this case under did not vehicle immediately upon receiving the letter.
fall under employer-employee relationship but
rather for creditor-debtor relationship A writ of replevin was issued. Despite this, the
therefore it is cognizable by regular courts. subject vehicle was not seized. Trial on the
merits ensued. On August 11, 2005, the Manila
The RTC rightfully assumed jurisdiction over the RTC Br. 33 ruled for the respondent and
suit and acted well within its discretion in ordered petitioners to jointly and severally pay
denying Astorgas motion to dismiss. SMARTs the amount of Php576,664.04 plus interest at
demand for payment of the market value of the the rate of 72% per annum from August 20,
car or, in the alternative, the surrender of the 2002 until fully paid, and the costs of suit.
car, is not a labor, but a civil, dispute. It involves
the relationship of debtor and creditor rather Petitioners appealed the decision to the Court
than employee-employer relations. As such, the of Appeals (CA), but the CA affirmed the lower
dispute falls within the jurisdiction of the court’s decision and, subsequently, denied the
regular courts. motion for reconsideration;
Sps Agner vs BPI Family Savings Bank G.R. No. Issue: WON the writ of replevin is properly
182963, June 3, 2013 issued
Facts: Held:
On February 15, 2001, petitioners spouses Deo Records bear that both verbal and written
Agner and Maricon Agner executed a demands were in fact made by respondent
Promissory Note with Chattel Mortgage in favor prior to the institution of the case against
of Citimotors, Inc. The contract provides, among petitioners. Even assuming, for argument’s
others, that: for receiving the amount of sake, that no demand letter was sent by
Php834, 768.00, petitioners shall pay Php respondent, there is really no need for it
17,391.00 every 15th day of each succeeding because petitioners legally waived the necessity
month until fully paid; the loan is secured by a of notice or demand in the Promissory Note
2001 Mitsubishi Adventure Super Sport; and an with Chattel Mortgage, which they voluntarily
and knowingly signed in favor of respondent’s -The only interlocutory order subject for
predecessor-in-interest. execution
Further, the Court even ruled in Navarro v. - A judgment or order for support pendent lite
Escobido that prior demand is not a condition never becomes final
precedent to an action for a writ of replevin,
- Res Judicata is not applicable
since there is nothing in Section 2, Rule 60 of
the Rules of Court that requires the applicant to Section 1. Application. — At the
make a demand on the possessor of the commencement of the proper action or
property before an action for a writ of replevin proceeding, or at any time prior to the
could be filed. judgment or final order, a verified application
for support pendente lite may be filed by any
party stating the grounds for the claim and the
Rule 61- Support PendeLite financial conditions of both parties, and
accompanied by affidavits, depositions or other
Principal Action: Support
authentic documents in support thereof.
Provisional Remedy: Support Pende Lite
Section 2. Comment. — A copy of the
Jurisdiction application and all supporting documents shall
RTC- Incapable of Pecuniary Estimation be served upon the adverse party, who shall
have five (5) days to comment thereon unless a
Exception: different period is fixed by the court upon his
-In Criminal Cases, when the civil aspect is motion. The comment shall be verified and
deemed instituted shall be accompanied by affidavits, depositions
or other authentic documents in support
*In support of Minor- Family Court
thereof.
Legal Age- RTC
Periods:
Q: What is the venue of such action?
5 days- Comment to the application
A: Residence of the plaintiff/ defendant
3 days- Set the application of support for
Requirement: hearing
*Support does not need an affidavit & bond “Maria Clara and Jose” Love Story
*When an order granting support pende lite is Maria Clara is working as an entertainer
issued by the court, it is an interlocutory order in a videoke bar while Jose is a grab
driver. They have a sexual relationship
for 1 year and as a result a child was Reimbursement- If a third person is giving
born out of wedlock named Mario. support in lieu of the adverse party, the party is
obliged to return the 100k
Situation # 1: Maria Clara filed a case of support
along with a writ of support pendete lite -It shall be in a separate action since the third
towards the RTC of Quezon City person is not a party to the principal action and
the court has no jurisdiction over such party.
- The rule proves that within a period of
5 days, the adverse party is mandated Situation# 3- The court rendered a decision on
to file a comment. (Rule 61, Sec 2). If the principal action that Jose should give 5k
the adverse party failed to file a support to Maria Clara.
comment within the reglementary
-The 5k judgment for support never becomes
period, the court shall render a
final since Maria Clara or Jose can come to court
decision/order on the application for
to change the amount.
support pendete lite.
*If there is an increase or decrease in the
- The court shall issue an order directing
amount of support, a person through motion
Jose to give support pendete lite
can file it the same court and docket number.
Situation #2: After 1 year of trial, 100k was
- In the determination for amending the
already given as support pendete lite by Jose.
amount of support, two criteria must be
RTC of Quezon City rendered a decision on the
established:
principal action dismissing the case.
- Capacity of the person giving support
Q: What is the remedy for Jose?
- Necessity of the person to be supported
A: There should be Restitution, Maria Clara is
obliged to return the 100k plus interest Case: People vs Manahan 315 SCRA
minor. The crime resulted into Asis. Defandant-De Asis is the father of
pregnancy. When the parents the minor.
learned of such incident, they
- During the proceeding of the trial, both
jreported it to the local police.
the plaintiff & defendant filed a motion
- The Trial court of Dagupan to dismiss provided that the latter shall
convicted Manahan for the crime of not pursue his counter-claim.
rape.
- On September 7, 1995, another
Issue: WON Manahan is liable for support even complaint for support was filed by
if he did not acknowledge the child. Vircel de Andres against Manuel de
Asis. Defendant moved to dismiss the
complaint on the ground of res judicata
Held: but it was denied by the trial court.
YES- In the decision of the trial court, it provides - On certiorari, the Court of Appeals
that persons guilty of rape shall also be affirmed the denial of the motion to
sentenced to acknowledge the offspring unless dismiss filed by defendant de Asis.
the law should prevent him to do so is
Issue: WON Support can be a subject of res
erroneous.
judicata
-Compulsory acknowledgment of a child is not
Held:
proper there being a legal impediment in doing
so. NO- The right to receive support cannot be
renounced nor it can be transmitted to third
-Married men are not forced to recognize a
persons.
child out of wedlock. The purpose is to preserve
the sanctity of the family. -Filiation and/or support must be judicially
established and it is for the court to declare its
existence and absence.
Case: De Asis vs CA 303 SCRA
-The right of support cannot be waived or
Doctrine: “An action for support can never be transferred and future support cannot be a
under the principle of res judicata” subject of future compromise there the present
Facts: action for support can be brought
notwithstanding the fact the previous case was
- Vircel Andres, the legal guardian of Glen dismissed.
de Asis brought an action for
maintenance & support of Camil de Lim vs Lim 604 SCRA
Doctrine: “Grandparents shall be liable to their support passes on to ascendants not only upon
grandchildren in case their parents cannot default of the parents but also or the latter
provide for sufficient support.” inability to provide for support.
- Cheryl Lim abandoned their residence Doctrine: “Supreme Court laid down the factors
in Forbes Park bringing the children in determining the amount of provisional
after she discovered the illicit affairs of support”
his husband Edward towards the in-
Facts:
house midwife.
- Susan Lim-Lua filed an action for the
- Cheryl sued the petitioners in the RTC
declaration of nullity of her marriage
of Makati City for support.
with Danito Lua. In her prayer, she
- RTC of Makati rendered a decision alleged for support pendete lite in the
ordering Edward and petitioners to amount of Php 500,000 monthly
jointly provide for Php 40,000 monthly support.
support while the husband shall
- The trial court rendered a decision that
shoulder the remaining balance.
Danilo shall only be liable for the
- The Court of Appeals affirmed the amount of Php 250,000.
decision of the trial court on the ground
- On appeal, CA reversed the decision of
the parents and their legitimate
the RTC on the ground that the amount
children are obliged to mutually
is excessive and there is no proof of
support each other and this obligation
such.
extends to the grandchildren.
No- The amount of support which those related -Matusalem prayed for support pendete lite
by marriage and family relations shall be in which was granted by the Trial Court.
proportion to the resources or means of the
-RTC rendered a decision in favor of Matusalem
giver and to the needs of the receipient
and ordering for the monthly support. CA
-The court may motu proprio or upon verified affirmed the decision of the trial court.
application of any of the parties, temporary
grant support pendete lite prior to the
judgment. The court is tasked to determin the Issue: WON Salas is liable to give support to
kind and amount of evidence which may be Matusalem
enable to resolve the application.
-Buling filed a complaint with the RTC of Case: Del Socorro vs Van Wilsem 744 SCRA 516
Southern Leyte for compulsory recognition and
Doctrine: “If the foreign law, judgment or
support pendete lite against Gotardo.
contract is contrary to sound and established
-Petitioner Gotardo and Buling started their policy, it shall be applied in this jurisdiction”
intimate sexual relation with Buling in their
Facts:
boarding house. As a result of this action, Buling
got pregnant. - Del Socorro and Van Wilsem contracted
a marriage in The Netherlands on
- During the pendency of the action, RTC
September 25, 1990.
granted the Php 2,000 monthly support. In its
decision, it dismissed the action for insufficiency - Their marriage ended by virtue of a
of evidence to prove filiation. Divorcee decree applied by Van Wilsem
in his country (The Netherlands). He
-CA reversed the decision of the RTC and
however promised that he will give
ordered a grant of Php 2,000 monthly support.
support to their child but later on did
not materialize.
Issue: WON the Court of Appeals erred in its - Del Socorro filed a criminal complaint
decision to recognize and provide for support. for VAWC but it was dismissed by the
Trial Court. She later on filed a civil
Held:
action for support.
NO – Buling established a prima facie evidence
- Van Wilsem argued that under the
that Gotardo is the putative father of Glifze
Dutch law, he is not obliged to give
through the testimony that she had been
support since his marriage with Del
sexually involved with only one man.
Socorro is already divorced.
-Support follow as a matter of right, parents are
Issue: WON Van Wilsem is obliged to give
obliged to support his/her children whether
support even if his national law does not
legitimate or illigitmate.
provide for it.
Held:
- The amount of support is variable and for this
YES- When the foreign law, judgment is
reason no final judgment on the amount of is
contrary to the sound policy, morals, it shall not
made as the amount shall be in proportion to
be applied in this country.
the resources, means of the giver and
necessities of the recipient. -Even if the laws of The Netherlands neither
enforce parental obligation to support his child,
such obligation is still enforceable in the
-Grounds under Rule 16 of the ROC YES –The essence of interpleader aside from
disavowal of interest in the property in litigation
Section 7. Docket and other lawful fees, costs is also the deposit of property or funds in court.
and litigation expenses as liens. — The docket
and other lawful fees paid by the party who -The need for deposit in question has been
filed a complaint under this Rule, as well as the established not applicable in the lower courts,
costs and litigation expenses, shall constitute a Court of Appeals but also in the Supreme Court
lien or change upon the subject matter of the where such deposit is required.
action, unless the court shall order otherwise.
Case: Wack-Wack Golf and Country Club vs
Case: Eternal Gardens vs IAC 165 SCRA Won & Tan 70 SCRA
Facts: Facts:
in which he has no interest over the subject -Pasricha is also entitled to judicial consignation
matter. where it shall be made by depositing the thing
due at the disposal of judicial authority.
-Wack Wack is now estopped since it is already
a party to the previous case of WON in which a -Instead of availing of the available remedies,
court order was issued. petitioner refrains from making payments.
Held: Held:
YES- The defense of Pasricha is untenable in YES- Rule 62 does not expressly authorize the
order to escape the payment of rentals. filing of a complaint in interpleader as separate
and independent. This also allows “counter-
-An action for interpleader is proper when the complaint/cross-claim for interpleader” run
lessee does not know to whom payment of counter to general procedure.
rentals should be made due to conflicting
claims.
-BSP did not initiate the interpleader suit the declaration shall be made parties; and no
through an original complaint but through declaration shall, except as otherwise provided
answer. in these Rules, prejudice the rights of persons
not parties to the action.
Held:
Issue: WON RA 9372 is constitutional in nature - Harry Roque et. Al filed a petition for
based on the allegations made by the declaratory relief before the RTC
petitioners challenging the constitutionality of RA
9372 or Anti- Human Security Act for
being void for vagueness violating the
right to privacy of communication.
Held: - On Oct 5, 2010, SC released a decision
in the Southern Hemisphere case
YES- The petition for certiorari does not lie dismissing its petition.
against the respondent who does not exercise - RTC held that the respondent has legal
judicial or quasi-judicial function. standing to assail the petition for
declaratory relief.
-The Supreme Court gave the four requisites for Issue: WON RTC gravely abused it discretion
judicial review: (a) there must be an actual case when it denied the subject motion to dismiss
or controversy, (b) the question of
Held:
constitutionality must be raised at the earliest
possible opportunity, (c) the question of YES- The requisites for an action of declaratory
constitutionality must be raised at the earliest relief: (a) subject matter of deed, will, contract
possible opportunity and (d) the issue of or other written instrument, (b) the terms of
constitutionality must be the lis mota of the such document require judicial construction, (c)
case. no breach of the document in question, (d)
justiciable controversy, (e) ripe for judicial
-In this case, petitioners have not presented any
determination and (f) adequate relief is not
personal stake in the outcome of the
available.
controversy since none of the faces any charge
of RA 9372. -Based on the Southern Hemisphere Case, there
was no imminent danger/threat towards the
-The obscure allegations of sporadic
petitioner. Without any justiciable controversy,
surveillance and being tagged as communist
the petition have become pleas for declaratory
front in no way approximate credible threat of
relief over the Court has no original jurisdiction.
prosecution.
Absent the requisites (d),(e) and (f), the petition
- The allegations and issues were not valid to should be dismissed.
held RA 9372 as unconstitutional.
RULE 64- REVIEW OF JUDGMENT AND FINAL *the Fresh Period shall not be applicable in Rule
ORDER OR RESOLUTION OF COMELEC AND 12, 16, 62 and 64
COA
to be specified by the court, to do the act Officer- Herbosa (SEC) Judges of the trial courts
required to be done to protect the rights of the
petitioner, and to pay the damages sustained by 3. What are the grounds?
the petitioner by reason of the wrongful acts of
the respondent. Certiorari- Lack of jurisdiction, Excess of
jurisdiction and grave abuse of discretion
6 Issues under Rule 65 amounting to lack of jurisdiction
A: Aggrieved Party- A party was aggrieved by A: Over stepping the authority or going beyond
the actuation of the respondent. the authority
Tribunal- Regional Trial Court or Municipal Trial A: It amounts to gross violation of the rule.
Court (Whimsical, Capricious, Arbitrary and Despotic)
Board- Energy Regulatory Board, SEC Whimsical and Capricious- No Basis at all
Arbitrary and Despotic- Out of passion or Ministerial- When a party or officer has no
emotion option or choice in the performance of duty.
-A party can join its cause of action quo Issue: WON the petition for certiorari shall
warranto & mandamus simultaneously. apply to Marcos that exercise executive
function
4. What are the functions of the respondents?
Held: YES- The petition for certiorari is proper to
Certiorari- It must be discretionary question the Presidential Decree since Marcos
is a usurper of judicial function. The cancellation
Prohibition- It must be discretionary or of existing titles belongs to the judiciary and not
ministerial the executive department. Only judicial courts
can nullify such titles.
Mandamus- Ministerial function
Judicial Courts- RTC, MTC, Sandiganbayan, CTA
Discretionary- When a party or officer is given and Court of Appeals
an option or choice in the performance of duty.
Quasi-judicial- it may fall under executive or
Example: Granting a motion for extension of legislative department
appeal
Example: HLURB, SEC, Energy Regulatory Board
5. What is the common condition in certiorari, Q: Can DeAndre use petition for certiorari as a
prohibition and mandamus? remedy in the decision rendered by the court
that has no jurisdiction over the case?
A: - There should be no appeal, or any other
plain, adequate remedy in the ordinary course A: NO, since DeAndre has the remedy of Appeal
of law. in the final judgment rendered by such court
even if it has no jurisdiction over the case.
-No appeal, No Motion for Reconsideration or
No New Trial 6. What is the prayer?
-Certiorari and Appeal are mutually exclusive Certiorari- To nullify the proceeding, judgment,
order rendered by a judicial or quasi- judicial
Remington Doctrine: Certiorari and Appeal can
be availed of in one case since they are directed Prohibition-To cease/desist from doing
to different acts/ orders. something
Blake filed a case against DeAndre in the Lack of jurisdiction Valid Cause of Action
amount of Php 275,000 towards the RTC and
judgment was rendered in favor Blake. Excess of jurisdiction Violation of Right
Grave abuse of Cause irreparable *When a party filed a petition for certiorari,
discretion damage prohibition or mandamus, the court will not
Nature: Nature: issue summons to the respondents.
Special Civil Action Ordinary Civil Q: How will the court acquire jurisdiction over
the person of the respondent?
Case: UP Board of Regents vs Judge Ligot-Telan
A: The court shall acquire jurisdiction over the
Facts: Nadal (law student) applied for a respondent which can either be a tribunal,
scholarship in UP Law but it was later on board, officer, corporation or natural person in
discovered that there is misrepresentation. He which the petition should be valid in form and
was expelled by the UP Board but he applied for substance. The court shall issue an order for the
reconsideration in which downgraded the respondent to file comment or opposition to
penalty to Honorable dismissal. Nadal filed an the petition.
injunction, certiorari, prohibition/mandamus
against UP Board for his reinstatement in which -Upon receipt of the order to file
Judge Ligot-Telan granting its petition. comment/opposition, that is the time the court
acquires jurisdiction over the respondent.
Issue: WON Mandamus shall be applicable in
this case? -For Court of Appeals and Supreme Court, no
need to set for hearing of the petition.
Held:
Q: Can the court dismiss the petition through a
NO- Mandamus is not applicable since UP minute resolution?
exercise a valid academic freedom. SC
reiterated the doctrine in Arellano vs Cui that A: Yes it can be dismissed on the grounds of (a)
school has an academic freedom to whom they patently without merit and (b) filed manifestly
will accept in their institution. UP has therefore to incur delay
the discretion in this case that the court should
respect therefore Mandamus shall not prosper. Q: Should the court acquire jurisdiction over the
petition after it was dismissed?
Common Provision (Sec 4-9)
A: YES
-Number of Copies of the petition:
-If the respondent already filed their
Supreme Court- 5 copies comment/opposition to the petition, the court
can already resolve it based on the papers
Court of Appeals- 3 copies submitted to them since issues are already
joined.
-Parties should observe efficient paper rule
-The court still has the discretion if they will
need corresponding additional paper, oral
argument or memorandum.
Q: What is the remedy of a party in a decision Case: AL Ang Network, Inc vs Mondejar 714
of certiorari of Court of Appeals? SCRA 1/28/14
Example:
Issue: WON the petition for certiorari is
RTC- A (Plaintiff) vs XYZ (defendant)
erroneously filed
CA- XYZ (Petitioner) vs Judge K of RTC Manila &
A (Respondents)
Held:
SC- XYZ (Petitioner) vs Judge K of RTC Manila &
A (Respondents)
-The judge of court is prohibited to participate NO- In Small Claims Cases, the decision shall be
in the proceeding. final and executory. The court ruled that
certiorari may only be invoked when there is no
-The private respondent shall be the one to file
appeal nor plain, speedy and adequate remedy
their comment/opposition.
in the course of law.
CASES:
-Considering that Small Claims are within the NO- A petition for certiorari should be instituted
exclusive jurisdiction of MTC, MTCC, petition for within a 60-day period from notice of judgment,
order or resolution. The 60 day period is
certiorari assailing its disposition should be filed
with the RTC exercising concurrent jurisdiction. inextendible to avoid unreasonable delay that
would violate constitutional right.
-Magalalang received a Memorandum from -One cannot file petition for certiorari where
PAGCOR informing him that he was charged appeal is available even if the ground availed of
with discourtesy towards a customer. He is grave abuse discretion.
received a penalty of 30-day suspension. He
filed a motion of appeal but it was denied by
the board. -The dismissal of the petition for certiorari on
the basis of non-exhausation of admin remedies
should be set aside.
-Magalalang filed a petition for certiorari
towards CA but it was denied on the ground of
failure to exhaust administrative remedies. Case: UP Board of Regents vs Judge Ligot-Telan
and Ramon Nadal 227 SCRA
Held:
Facts:
YES- Under the doctrine of exhaustion of admin -Ramon Nadal applied for a STFAP or
remedies, a party should availd first of scholarship since he was enrolled in the college
administrative process before going to court of Law in UP.
intervention with the exception that no admin
review is provided by law
-The Scholarship office found discrepancy in the
STFAP application of Nadal. SDP rendered a
-Decision of administrative or quasi-admin decision against Nadal which is expulsion from
agencies which are declared by law final and the University.
unappelable are subject to judicial review if
they fail the test of arbitrariness or grave abuse
of discretion. -Nadal appealed this decision to the BOR and it
was reduced to Honorable dismissal.
-Nadal filed with the RTC of QC a petition for -One day the discovered that they are no longer
Mandamus and TRO against UP to admit him to owner of the parcel of lots since Pres. Marcos
school. Judge Ligot-Telan granted the petition through PD 293 cancelled all the titles
and ordered UP to accept Nadal. belonging to occupants in Caloocan and was
transferred to the members of PSG.
Case: Sps Tuason vs Register of Deeds, - The Presidential Decree may be struck down
Caloocan City, 157 SCRA by the writ of certiorari because it is done by an
officer in the performance of a judicial function.
Facts:
- The acts of nullifying the title were completely
-Sps Tuason were retired public school alien to the executive acts since it is a judicial
teachers. The bought a land located in Caloocan function therefore petition for certiorari is the
City. proper remedy.
Facts:
- In 2006 & 2007, the Province of Leyte issued 4 - The petition for shall indicate the material
franchise tax assessment against EDC. dates showing the notice of judgment, final
order or resolution was received and a Motion
for New Trial and Motion for Reconsideration
was filed and when notice of denial was
- Province of Leyte issued another tax
received.
assessment on 2008 against EDC. EDC filed a
Preliminary Injunction with a prayer for
assessing or collecting franchise tax but it was
denied by the RTC. -Failure of the petitioner to comply with the
requirements shall be a ground for the dismissal
of the petition.
Held:
Facts:
YES- In a petition for certiorari, there is a need -Rural Bank of Faire was a registered bank in
for the Court of Appeals to acquire jurisdiction Cagayan Valley. Vivas and his principals
over the person of the parties before in can acquired the controlling interest over RBFI.
resolve the merits. -BSP issued a certificate of authority to RFBI for
another 50 years. Monetary Board issued a
Held:
-OSG on behalf of Andal filed a Motion to
NO- Prohibition is a preventive remedy seeking Dismiss but it was denied by the RTC however
that a judgment be rendered which would CA reversed such decision.
direct the defendant from continuing with the
commission of an act.
Facts:
-The City of Manila and DOE entered into a - Villanuevas was appointed as the Presiding
Judge of MTC in Compostela Valley. After 1 year
Memorandum of Understanding that will
provide a better safety related measures. of office as MTC judge, he applied for the
vacant position of RTC Judge in Tagum City.
Issue: WON the petitioner has the legal duty to -He filed a petition for certiorari to prevent the
enforce such ordinance JBC from perfoming its function of selection and
mandamus to include his name in the short list.
Held:
-Dennis Funa sent a letter to Commission on -Another issue is concerned with the petition is
Audt requesting for a copy of the latest financial non-observance of the principle of hierarchy of
and audit report for the purpose of his right to courts. The COA assails the filing of the instant
information towards matters of public concern. mandamus petition directly with this Court,
when such petition could have very well been
-Commissioner Narank revelead that MECO was presented, at the first instance, before the
not among the agencies audited by any Court of Appeals or any Regional Trial Court.
Corporate Sector.
The COA claims that the petitioner was not able
-Funa filed the instant petition for mandamus. to provide compelling reasons to justify a direct
He impleaded COA and MECO. resort to the Supreme Court. In view of the
transcendental importance of the issues raised
-COA on argue that the petition already become in the mandamus, petition, as earlier
moot and academic since chairperson Tan mentioned, this Court waives this last
directed a team of auditors to account of procedural issue in favor of a resolution on the
MECO.
merits.
Issue: WON the petition for Mandamus may be
denied on ground of moot & academic Rule 66- Quo Warranto
Section 1. Action by Government against election. Dra Rodolfo filed a petition towards
individuals. — An action for the usurpation of a the COMELEC to disqualify Lonzanida on the
public office, position or franchise may be ground that he already served 4 consecutive
commenced by a verified petition brought in terms.
the name of the Republic of the Philippines
against:
(a) A person who usurps, intrudes into, or - Comelec 2nd division rendered a decision
unlawfully holds or exercises a public office, cancelling the COC fo Lonzanida. During the
position or franchise;
pendency of the action, Lonzanida and Aratea
won respectively.
(b) A public officer who does or suffers an act
which, by the provision of law, constitutes a
-Comelec en banc issued a resolution
ground for the forfeiture of his office; or
disqualifying Lonzanida.
(c) An association which acts as a corporation
Issue: WON Aratea the 2nd placer can assume
within the Philippines without being legally
incorporated or without lawful authority so to public office in lieu of the disqualified winner
act.
Held:
- It is a proceeding assailing the authority or by YES- Lonzanida lacks eligibility under the
what authority a person is occupying a position.
present constitution and statutory provision
-The subject matter is a public office. since he hold public office for 4 consecutive
terms.
Case Doctrine: Calleja vs Panday- The Quo
Warranto is dismissed because is settled is the -In the quo warranto petition, the ground to
rule that it shall only be applicable to public oust an elected official are ineligibility and
offices. disloyalty to the Republic. While quo warranto
and cancellation share the same ineligibility
Q: What kind of public office shall quo warranto grounds as they from the grounds cited. Under
apply? the election code, the disqualification for
elective office are misrepresented in the COC
A: It shall be applicable only to appointive office
while under the rules it must ineligibility and
since an elected office is governed by the
Omnibus Election Code. disloyalty to the Republic and must be initiated
within 10 days after proclamation.
Case: Aratea vs COMELEC 683 SCRA
Case: Lokin Jr vs COMELEC, 621 SCRA
Facts:
Facts:
-Lonzanida and Antipolo were candidates for
Mayor of San Antonio, Zambales in the 2010
-CIBAC was a registered group under the party A: The Solicitor General or a public prosecutor
list system. Bro Eddie Villanueva, the president may, with the permission of the court in which
of CIBAC listed 5 nominees from which the the action is to be commenced, bring such an
representatives would be choosen and Lokin action at the request and upon the relation of
was the 2nd nominee. another person; but in such case the officer
bringing it may first require an indemnity for
the expenses and costs of the action in an
-CIBAC filed an ammended list of nominees amount approved by and to be deposited in the
wherein Lokin et,al were dropped. court by the person at whose request and upon
whose relation the same is brought. (Rule 66
Sec 3)
-CIBAC won in the party list and gained 2 seats Q: What is the issue of quo-warranto in an
in the congress. COMELEC en banc proclaimed election code?
Cruz-Gonzales as the 2nd official nominee.
A: The ineligibility of the public officer to hold
office under the election code but in Rule 66 it
-Lokin Jr filed a petition for mandamus to pertains to disqualification of public officer.
compel COMELEC to declare him as the 2nd
nominee. -When a person usurps a public office, he is
subject to Quo Warranto. He shall be ousted
from office and the one who has claim to that
office must be reinstated.
Issue: WON Quo Warranto under the Rule 66 is
applicable in a election protest Q: Which court shall have jurisdiction over a
petition of quo warranto?
Held:
A: Concurrent jurisdiction of RTC, CA and SC.
NO- Election protest is strictly between
defeated and winning candidate based on the Q: What shall be the venue in a petition for quo
grounds of electoral frauds and irregularity. warranto?
-Neither does an action for quo warranto will lie A: An action under the preceding six sections
since considering that the case does not involve can be brought only in the Supreme Court, the
the ineligibility and disloyalty of Cruz-Gonzales Court of Appeals, or in the Regional Trial Court
to the Republic of the Philippines or some other exercising jurisdiction over the territorial area
cause of disqualification of her. where the respondent or any of the
respondents resides, but when the Solicitor
Q: What instrumentality of the government can
General commences the action, it may be
file a case of quo warranto?
brought in a Regional Trial Court in the City of -Mendoza filed a Motion for execution with
Manila, in the Court of Appeals, or in the court a quo but it was denied since Allas is no
Supreme Court. (Rule 66, Sec 7) longer holding public office.
Exception: A private individual can commence Issue: WON a petition for quo warranto can be
an action for quo warranto provided he has a applied against the new person occupying the
claim to the public office. public position
Held:
Q: Can a Third party who does not have a claim
to the public office file an action for quo NO- A petition for quo warranto is a proceeding
warranto? to determine the right of a person to the use of
exercise of a franchise or public office and to
A: YES, He is called as “Relator” oust its enjoyment.
-A third party complainant who has no claim to -A judgment in quo warranto does not bind the
the public office but can initiate a petition for respondent's successor in office even though
quo warranto. such successor may trace his title to the same.
-The OSG will help to facilitate the action. -A quo warranto is never directed against an
office but against the person to determine if he
Case: Mendoza vs Allas, 302 SCRA is constitutionally and legally authorized to
perform such act.
Facts:
Section 11. Limitations. — Nothing contained in
-Mendoza filed a petition for quo warranto this Rule shall be construed to authorize an
against Allas who was appointed by Former action against a public officer or employee for
President Ramos while he was assigned in his ouster from office unless the same be
Cagayan de Oro. commenced within one (1) year after the cause
of such ouster, or the right of the petitioner to
-The trial court ruled in favor of Mendoza and hold such office or position, arose, nor to
ordered Allas to be ousted from office. authorize an action for damages in accordance
with the provisions of the next preceding
-Allas appelead the decision towards the Court section unless the same be commenced within
of Appeals, during its pendency Allas was one (1) year after the entry of the judgment
promoted as the Deputy Commissioner establishing the petitioner's right to the office in
question.
therefore he filed a motion to dismiss the
appeal. Damages: Prescriptive Period
For damages: 1 year from the entry of -An action for quo warranto is not applicable in
judgment usurpation of power under a private
corporation since it is only limited to persons
-Damages shall be filed in a separate action who usurp public office/corporation.
CASES Case: De Castro vs Carlos 696 SCRA 4/16/2013
Held:
Issue: WON the petition for quo warranto is the
NO- A petition for quo warranto is a proceeding
proper remedy in a usurpation of power in a
to determine the rights of a person to use or
private corporation
exercise of a franchise or office and to oust the
Held: holder from the enjoyment thereof. When the
action is filed by a private person in his own
NO- Quo Warranto is limited only against name, he must prove that he is entitle to the
person who usurps a public office, position.
position/franchise, public officer who forfeit
their office.
-Considering that De Castro is appointed by -Petition for Mandamus is proper in this case in
PGMA whose term already ended, his term of this case since the taking of oath of office is no
office also already ended. longer discretion since there was already a
judgment rendered by COMELEC that Reyes is
-The person suing must show that he has a clear disqualified to hold office.
right to the office but in this case it already
cease to exist.
-Comelec grant the petition and cancelled the Constitutional basis: “No property shall be
COC of Reyes but in the election she won for taken without payment of just compensation”
the position of congress representative. The
Eminent Domain
Comelec En Banc affirmed the decision of the
division. Basis: Regalian Doctrine- All lands belong to the
state and he who claims otherwise has the
-Velasco filed a petition for Mandamus towards
burden of proof
Speaker Belmonte to administer the oath in his
favor. Substantive Law: CA 141 PD 1521
Issue: WON the petition filed by Velasco is Q: To what does the property refer in this
proper provision?
*The property provided in the Constitution is YES- under the ROC, it provides that there is no
not limited to real property but also includes requirement of filing of an answer or summary
Personal. judgment in expropriation case. Under this
case, there is no such thing as the matter of
Q: What is the concept of “Taking”? right to dismiss since the landowner has already
A: It is not limited to actual seizure or custody. suffered damage upon actual taking of the
There is already “taking” when there is property.
diminution of usefulness. If -The dismissal of expropriation case restores
utilization/usefulness of the property is gone,
the expropriated land but when possession of
there is actual taking therefore he is entitled to land cannot be turned over because it is neither
compensation. convenient nor feasible, the only remedy is to
Case: National Power Corporation vs CA, 436 pay just compensation and for this case the
SCRA property is no longer feasible for use or
occupancy.
Facts:
MIA CASE
-NPC is created to generate geothermal,
hydroelectric power while Antonio Pobre is an Manila International Airport expropriated
owner of 68,969 sq meter land located in Tiwi, several properties located within the airport
Albay. Pobre began developing the property as area. The adjacent owners of the properties
a resort subdivision which he named as Tiwi Hot also demand for compensation since they are
Spring Resort. owners of poultry farm and their chicken or
ducks cannot produce eggs.
-On 1977, NPC filed its expropriation case to
acquire an 8,311 sq meter of the property. In Ruling: There was already a taking of the
1979, NPC filed its 2nd expropriation case for property even if the adjacent lot was not
5,554 sq meters. covered of expropriation because its business
or livelihood of the owners situated already
-NPC filed a motion to dismiss to the 2nd case diminished therefore they are entitled to just
sunce they already found an alternative site for compensation.
such project. RTC rendered a decision in favor
of Pobre and it was affirmed by the Court of *The taking of the property has the purpose of
Appeals. public use
Issue: WON Pobre is entitled to just PUBLIC USE- It is not necessary beneficial to the
compensation for the entire property sought to entire public/community. Even only a portion of
be expropriated the membership in the community will be
benefited, it can be a subject of expropriation.
Held:
As long as the common good is promoted it Case Doctrine: Asia Emerging Dragon vs DOTC
shall be for public use.
- Before the government can take
Example: Pink urinals constructed by former over/possession of the property, the have to
MMDA Chairman Bayani Fernando. pay 100% of the zonal valuation for judicial
deposit. It shall only be applicable towards
Formula for Just Compensation: infrastructure projects.
JC (Just Compensation) = FMV (Fair Market Example of Infrastructure Project: MRT/LRT
Value) + Consequential Damages –
Line Extension
Consequential benefit which should not be
more than the damages Note: A party cannot expropriate a government
property
FMV- Fair Market Value= The price where the Q: What if it is a government property but with
buyer is willing to buy and the seller is willing to individuals residing, can you still proceed with
sell. the expropriation?
Q: Can you apply the FMV strictly in the A; YES, Since based from Rule 67 Sec 1, all
payment of just compensation? person owning or claiming to own or occupying
any part thereof.
A: No, The owner shall be prejudiced of such
since the determination belongs to the Q: What is the jurisdiction of expropriation
government. case?
-Upon filing of the complaint, the government A: RTC- An action incapable of pecuniary
can immediately takeover provided they will estimation
pay deposit equivalent to the assessed value of
Q: Who can be the plaintiff in an action for
the land- AMMENDED
expropriation?
“The term deposit is already amended”-
A: The government can only be the plaintiff
BRONDIAL
under the exercise of eminent domain.
Q: What is the current value of judicial deposit
-The Local Government Code also grant that
for taking immediate takeover?
power to government owned and controlled
A: It must be 15% of the zonal valuation of the corp.
property.
Q: Can a Barangay council expropriate a
Zonal Value- Price declared per assessment of property?
the BIR
A: NO. It must be with the concurrence of Bar Problem: Can Congress pass a law
Sangguniang panglungsod or pangbayan. expropriating certain portion of UST in Espana
to be paid through exchange or barter with
Q: What controls the power of GOCC? another 1 hectare property located in Calamba,
A: It will be their charter that will control their Laguna. The objective to build a statue of
power to expropriate. Arsenio Lacson.
Reclamation- It is a mode of acquiring title over Doctrine: “The government should deposit an
the property amount equivalent to the assessed value of the
property”
Procedure in Court
Facts:
A) The court will issue an order of
condemnation -On December 21, 1993, the City Council of
- This order is a final order and the Manila enacted an ordinance authorizing the
remedy shall be record on appeal which expropriation of certain properties located in
is 30 days from notice. Tondo.
B) Determination of Just Compensation -One of the properties sought to be
- The Court is mandated to appoint 3 expropriated was derived from TCT issued in
Commissioners that will determine just the name of Feliza de Guia. It was later on
compensation. 1-Plaintiff 1-Defendant transferred to Lee Kuan Hui.
1- Judicial Court
- The members of the commission are -The trial court issued an order directing the
entitled to accept evidence and hear City of Manila to deposit the amount of Php
testimonies. 1,825,421.00 equivalent to the assessed value
- The Commission shall not issue a of the property. Serrano filed a petition for
judgment but only a report certiorari that the land sought to be
- The report shall not be conclusive upon expropriated are exempt from expropriation
the court but it was denied by the Court of Appeals.
*Determination of Just Compensation is always Issue: WON the property sought complied with
a judicial determination and it can never be a the procedure of expropriation
legislative or executive function.
Held:
-A writ of execution may only be issued by a -The exercise of eminent domain occurs not
only when the government actually deprives
court upon the filing of a complaint sufficient in
form and substance and upon deposit made by the owner of his property of its ordinary use but
the government. also when there is a practical destruction or
material impairment.
Case: Republic vs Andaya, 524 SCRA
-Andaya is entitled to payment of just
Facts: compensation which is neither more or less
than the monetary value of the land.
-Andaya is the registered owner of two parcels
of land situated in Butuan City. These properties Case: NPC vs YCLA Sugar Developmet Corp 712
are subject to an easement for public highway, SCRA 550
irrigation and aqueducts.
Facts:
-The Republic instituted an action before the
RTC of Butuan City to enforce the easement of - In order to complete its Calapan-Mamburao
Island Grind Project. It shall construct a
right of way. Board of Commissioner rendered a
finding that the Easement would diminish the transmission line that would traverse several
value of the property. private properties.
Case: Limkaichong vs LBP, 799 SCRA 139 -Name and residence of the mortgagor
- Limkaichong was the registered owner of an -Statement of the date of the note
agricultural lands located in Negros Oriental. -Names and residence of all persons having or
DARAB sent to her notice for the land valuation claiming an interest in the property
and acquisition.
Two Types
-Limkaichong filed in the RTC of Dumaguete City
a complaint for the fixing of just compensation. - Judicial (Rule 68)
- Extra-judicial (Act 4118)
-RTC sitting as Special Agricultural Court
dismissed the complaint on the ground that it Applicability: When there is a mortgage of real
should be filed within 15 days from notice of property and always anchored on a loan.
assailed order.
Q: Who are the parties in a real estate
Issue: WON there was grave abuse of discretion mortgage?
in dismissing the complaint
A: *Mortgagee- Plaintiff *Mortgagor-
Held: Defendant
Right of Redemption- The 1 year period to -It is only through a motion filed in court.
redeem the property counted from the
registration of the certificate of sale. -When the sale of the property and the amount
is less than the judgment obligation. A party
-The judgment obligor can redeem the property shall file a motion in the court a quo for
along with the redemptioner deficiency judgment.
*If there is non-compliance of payment during -Once the deficiency judgment is granted, a
the period of equity of redemption, the party shall proceed using the remedies available
property can now be sold at the public auction. in Rule 39 (Sec 31,32 & 34)
Q: Who are the buyers of the property in the Q: What will happen if the property mortgaged
auction sale? is greater than the judgment obligation?
Q:What is the period in extra-judicial NO- CA erred in ruling this case that failure of
foreclosure? Manila Banking Corp to personal notice
constitutes breach of contract.
A: It will depend on the nature of the contract
between the contract. -Personal Notice to the mortgagor in extra-
judicial foreclosure is not necessary but only
Writ of Possession- Not a separate action, it is requires the posting of the notice of sale in
only filed through a Motion and Summary three public places and the publication of that
Hearing is necessary. notice in a newspaper of general circulation.
Held:
-A writ of possession in favor of the purchaser -Issue of lack of publication of notice cannot be
in a foreclosure sale is ministerial towards the raised for the first time on appeal.
RTC with the exception that a third party is
actually holding the property by adverse title or
right. Case: LZK Holdings vs Planters Development
Bank, 714 SCRA
-The issuance of a writ of possession is already a
ministerial function of the RTC. Facts:
Case: Ardiente vs Provincial Sheriff, 436 SCRA -LZK Holdings obtained a Php 40 million loan
from PDB and it was secured the same with a
Facts: real estate mortgage over its land located in La
-Sps Ardiente obtained a loan from Peninsula Union. The Lot was sold at public auction after
Development Bank secured by a real estate PDB extrajudicially foreclosed the property due
mortgage over the land. Ardiente purchased a to LZK's failure to pay the loan.
mini bus coming from the obtained loan. This -LZK Holdings filed before the RTC of Makati
mini bus figured in an accident and as a result City for annulment of extra-judicial foreclosure
Sps. Ardiente failed to pay the loan. of real properties. 3 days before the expiration
-PDB extra judicially foreclosed the mortgage of LZK's redemption, RTC issued a TRO.
and it was sold in a public auction. Two (2) days -RTC of Makati rendered a decision declaring as
before the expiration of the redemption period, null and void the consolidated title of PDB.
Sps. Ardiente filed a complaint for the
annulment of the auction sale. Issue: WON in a petition for issuance of writ of
possession may be dispensed when the court
-RTC rendered a decision dismissing the sale on already issued an order.
the ground that strict compliance on the
publication was not complied with. Held:
Issue: WON publication is necessary in sale of a YES- Under the principle of conclusiveness of
property in extra-judicial foreclosure of judgment, the right of PDB to a writ of
mortgage possession is binding and conclusive towards
the parties.
-The proceeding in a petition for a writ of within Register of Deeds, which in no case shall
possession is ex-parte and summary in nature. be more than 3 months per foreclosure.
It is a judicial proceeding brought for the
benefit of one party and without notice by the Case: Robles vs Yapcinco, G.R. No. 169568,
court to any person adverse of interest. October 22, 2014.
-Goldenway filed a complaint for specific -CA reversed the decision of RTC stating that an
non-registration of its certificate of sale will
performance and damages but it was dismissed
by the RTC. have an effect that the period of redemption
shall not begin to run.
Issue: WON PCI Bank can be compelled to sell
the foreclosed property. Issue: WON the non-registration of certificate
of sale is applicable in judicial foreclosure
Held:
Held:
NO- The Right of Redemption being statutory
must be exercised in the manner prescribed by NO- Failure of Cruz to register the certificate of
the statue and within the prescribed time limit. sale was of no consequence since it is only
applicable in extra-judicial foreclosure.
-Under Act 3135, juridical person whose
property is being sold pursuant to an extra- -The effect of failure to obtain judicial
confirmation was only to prevent the title from
judicial foreclosure, shall have the right to
redeem the property until, but not later, the being transferred to him. Such right shall not
registration of the certificate of foreclosure sale give rise to any right in favor of the mortgagor.
-Judicial confirmation operated only to divest inclusive of penalties at the time of the
the rights of all parties to the action and to best foreclosure.
their right in the purchaser subject to right of
redemption.
-From Feb to Oct 2015, CPR Promotion Section 1. Complaint in action for partition of
obtained loans from Metrobank. The loans real estate. — A person having the right to
were covered by 15 Promissory Notes. compel the partition of real estate may do so as
provided in this Rule, setting forth in his
-To secure the loans, Sps. Reynoso executed complaint the nature and extent of his title and
an adequate description of the real estate of
two deeds of real estate mortgage. They also
which partition is demanded and joining as
executed a continuing surety over the loans
defendants all other persons interested in the
they have secured. property.
-Upon maturity of the loans, CPR defaulted in -A complaint shall set forth the nature and
payment prompted Metrobank to extra- extent of his title.
judicially foreclosure the real estate mortgage.
-Adequate description of the real estate of
-MBCTC filed a civil case to recover the which portion is demanded and joining of
deficiency balance and the trial court ruled in defendants.
their favor. It was reversed by the Court of
Appeals. Sec 2- Order for partition and partition by
agreement thereunder
Issue: WON CA erred in reversing the decision
of the Trial Court -If after the trial the court finds that the plaintiff
has the right thereto, it shall order the partition
Held: of the real estate among all the parties in
NO- In extra-judicial foreclosure of mortgage, interest.
the proceeds of the sale are insufficient to pay -If the parties are able to agree, make the
the debt, the mortgagee has the right to partition among themselves by proper
recover the deficiency from the debtor. instruments of conveyance and the court shall
-There can only be deficit when the proceeds of confirm the partition.
the sale is not sufficient to cover the foreclosure
proceeding and the amount due to the creditor,
-A final order decreeing partition and property. The other sibling filed an action for
accounting may be appealed by any party partition based on the extra-judicial settlement
aggrieved thereby. of estate.
Sec 3- Commissioner to make partition when Issue: WON partition shall apply in the case and
parties fail to agree WON there is co-ownership in the property
-The court shall appoint NOT MORE THAN 3 Ruling: In a partition case, the court should
competent and DISINTERESTED persons as determine if there is co-ownership over the
commissioners to make the partition. property. In this case, there is no more co-
ownership from the time the bank consolidated
Sec 5- Assignment or sale of real estate by the title.
commissioners
Parts of Partition:
-The real estate or portion cannot be divided
without prejudice (a) Determination of co-ownership of the
property
-The court may order it assigned to one of the (b) Accounting of the expenses for the
parties willing to take the same, provided he partition, the proceeds of such property
pays to the other parties such amount as the
commissioners deem equitable -The accounting must be determined by a
commissioner.
Co-Ownership- When a property is owned by
two or more persons. Situation:
Facts: Mr. Balus (Father) owned a piece of land Children: Andoy, Betty, Carla, Danilo and Eric
located in Tarlac and he secured a loan from a
bank. The property was subjected into a real Procedure: if the siblings cannot agree on extra-
judicial settlement, the can file an action for
estate mortgage. Mr Balus failed to pay the loan
and as a result the land was foreclosed. The partition.
Bank was the buyer in the auction sale and the (A) When a party file a petition for
title thereto was consolidated. The two children partition, the court must convience the
of Mr. Balus entered into an extra-judicial parties to enter into a “project of
settlement of estate of their father and they do partition” or Extra-judicial settlement of
not have an idea that the TCT of the lands were estate
already consolidated in favor of the bank. One -In case of co-ownership, only one party
of the children bought back the property from can file an action but if they are
the bank and wanted full ownership of the
defendants all of them must be property is assigned to one of the parties upon
impleaded. his paying to the others the sum or sums
-If the other co-owners does not want ordered by the court, the judgment shall state
to join the action, they shall be the fact of such payment and of the assignment
of the real estate to the party making the
considered as “unwilling plaintiff”.
payment, and the effect of the judgment shall
be to vest in the party making the payment the
(B) The trial court will assign commissioners
whole of the real estate free from any interest
that will determine the accounting of the co- on the part of the other parties to the action. If
owned property the property is sold and the sale confirmed by
the court, the judgment shall state the name of
-The commissioner will insist another extra- the purchaser or purchasers and a definite
judicial settlement of estate. description of the parcels of real estate sold to
each purchaser, and the effect of the judgment
-The commissioner has the option of shall be to vest the real estate in the purchaser
assignment or Buy out of the property or purchasers making the payment or
payments, free from the claims of any of the
-If one of the co-owners opposed the parties to the action. A certified copy of the
assignment, it will be automatically judgment shall in either case be recorded in the
terminated. registry of deeds of the place in which the real
estate is situated, and the expenses of such
-The commissioner has the remedy of sale recording shall be taxed as part of the costs of
over the property and the proceeds will be the action.
partitioned.
Cases: Felciano vs Canoza, G.R. No. 161746,
Section 10. Costs and expenses to be taxed and September 1, 2010
collected. — The court shall equitably tax and
apportion between or among the parties the Facts:
costs and expenses which accrue in the action,
-When Antonio Felciano died on May 30, 1930,
including the compensation of the
commissioners, having regard to the interests he left behind his only property located in
of the parties, and execution may issue therefor Bustos, Bulacan.
as in other cases.
-On 1972, Leona, Maria and Pedro with the
Section 11. The judgment and its effect; copy exception of Salinas executed an extra-judicial
to be recorded in registry of deeds. — If actual settlement of estate belonging to Antonio.
partition of property is made, the judgment
shall state definitely, by metes and bounds and -Jacinto Feliciano applied for a free patent over
adequate description, the particular portion of the land.
the real estate assigned to each party, and the
effect of the judgment shall be to vest in each
party to the action in severalty the portion of
the real estate assigned to him. If the whole
-Surviving heirs of late Esteban Felciano filed a -Hilaria prompted to seek the demolition of the
complaint alleging that the settlement of Estate house of Emilia which prompted the latter to
was done without their participation & consent. seek partition of the lots. RTC rendered a
decision that the partition was dismissed.
-CA reversed the decision alleging that
prescription already set in since the annulment -CA reversed the decision by the RTC since no
of extra-judicial settlement already lapsed necessity to place Lot 707 under judicial admin
which is 4 years from the issuance of free since Carolina sold her ½ share to Felipa and
patents. Hilaria.
Issue: WON Extra-Judicial partition of the estate Issue: WON there is still co-ownership over the
wherein some of the compulsory heirs were property
excluded can be assailed after 4 years.
Held:
Held:
YES- The first stage in an action for partition is
NO- The prescriptive period to institute the the settlement of co-ownership.
action to annul the deed of extra-judicial
settlement is 4 years counted from the -Mere issuance of a certificate of title in the
discovery of fraud. name of any person does not foreclose the
possibility that the real property maybe under
-The complaint was only filed 16 years after co-ownership with persons not named in the
Jacinto was issued free patents and petitioner certificate.
have obtained constructive notice of fraud upon
-Co-ownership of Lot 707 is established, the
the registration of Free Patent.
affidavit of self- adjudication did not prejudice
Case: Vda de Figuracion vs Figuracion-Gerilla, the share of Agripina. The deed of sale executed
G.R. No. 151334, February 13, 2013 by Carolina in favor of Hilaria and Felipa was
valid as to the share of Carolina in the co-
Facts: ownership.
-Parties are the heirs of Leandro Figuracion who
died intestate in 1958. Subject of the dispute
are two parcels of land situated in Pangasinan. Case: Mangahas vs Brobio, G.R. No. 183852,
October 20, 2010.
-On 1962, Carolina executed an Affidavit of Self-
Adjudication as the sole and exclusive heir of Facts:
the deceased. She also executed a deed of -Pacifico died intestate and was survived by his
absolute sale in favor of Hilaria and Felipa. wife (Euforcina) 4 legitimate and 3 illegitimate
child.
-The heirs of Pacifico executed a deed of extra- Accion Interdictal- Recovery of Possession de
judicial settlement of estate and respondent facto
agreed to pay Carmela of her share in the estate
but the former failed to comply. -Unlawful Detainer -Forcible Entry
-Carmela Mangahas filed a complaint for Unlawful Detainer Forcible Entry
Specific Performance with Damages and the
trial court rendered a decision in her favor. Possession was lawful Possession was
-It was reversed by the Court of Appeals at the start and unlawful from the
become unlawful later start
considering that the waiver in the deed of
on.
extra-judicial may not considered as the
consideration in the Promissory Note. Demand to vacate the Demand to vacate is
property is necessary not necessary
Issue: WON an act of partition is the proper
Prescriptive Period: 1 Prescriptive Period: 1
remedy year from the last year from the last
demand entry in the property
Held:
NO- An action for partition implies that the -Upon the lapse of 1
year, it will be
property is still owned in common. Considering
converted into Accion
that the heirs had already executed a deed of Publiciana
extra-judicial and waived their shares in favor of
respondent. Grounds: Grounds:
-The properties are no longer under the state of
-Expiration of the FITTS- Fraud,
co-ownership, there is nothing more to be Contract (Written or Intimidation, Threat,
partitioned as ownership land already merged Oral) Strategy and Stealth
into one person.
-Violation of any
term/condition in the
contract
-Tolerance
Rule 70- Unlawful Detainer and Forcible Entry
-Legitimate need of the lessor/owner of his except lack of jurisdiction over the subject
property matter. Cross-claims and compulsory
counterclaims not asserted in the answer shall
-All cases of unlawful detainer & forcible entry be considered barred. The answer to
are within the jurisdiction of MTC or MTCC. counterclaims or cross-claims shall be served
and filed within ten (10) days from service of
Exception: On appeal to RTC, it is no longer the answer in which they are pleaded.
governed by summary procedure but regular
procedure. (Refuga vs CA) Section 8. Preliminary conference; appearance
of parties.
Q: What is the jurisdiction of Unlawful Detainer
and Forcible Entry Cases? Not later than thirty (30) days after the last
answer is filed, a preliminary conference shall
A: MTC or MTCC be held. The provisions of Rule 18 on pre-trial
shall be applicable to the preliminary
Q: What is the venue of ejectment case? conference unless inconsistent with the
provisions of this Rule.
A: Where the property is located since the
action is quasi in rem. The subject matter of the Section 13. Prohibited pleadings and motions.
case is real property The following petitions, motions, or pleadings
shall not be allowed:
Cases of Unlawful Detainer and Forcible Entry
is governed by Summary Procedure 1. Motion to dismiss the complaint
except on the ground of lack of
*No Hearing jurisdiction over the subject matter, or
failure to comply with section 12;
*Periods are shorter
2. Motion for a bill of particulars;
Section 4. Pleadings allowed.
3. Motion for new trial, or for
-Complaint, compulsory counterclaim and reconsideration of a judgment, or for
cross-claim reopening of trial;
8. Motion to declare the defendant in -When the defendant raises the defense of
default; ownership, the question of possession cannot
be resolved without deciding the issue of
9. Dilatory motions for postponement; ownership. It shall be resolved only to
determine the issue of possession.
10. Reply;
-The issue of ownership shall not be res judicata
11. Third-party complaints; therefore litis pendentia shall not apply.
supersedes bond and regularly monthly deposit Supersedes bond- Unpaid rentals or if there are
for the use & occupancy of the premises. no unpaid rentals, it shall not be necessary.
-Once the records of the case is elevated -Once the Regional Trial Court affirms the
towards the RTC, there should be a monthly decision of the MTC, there shall be execution of
deposit for the use & occupancy of the judgment.
premises.
Remedy: File a petition for review under Rule
Q: Where should a party file their notice of 42.
appeal & posting of supersedes bond?
-If a party wants to stall the execution of
A: MTC judgment, he shall file a preliminary injunction
or TRO.
Q: Where should a party pay the regular
monthly deposit for the use & occupancy? Case Doctrine Zacarrias vs Anacay- “In order
for tolerance to be a valid ground for unlawful
A: Appellate Court- RTC detainer, it must co-exist with possession”
Q: When should a party pay the regular -The act of tolerance must be together with the
monthly deposit for the use & occupancy? time of possession.
A: On or Before the 10th day of every Example #1: Mr A is an owner of a real property
succeeding month. and B is occupying the property of Mr. A. Mr. A
is tolerating the occupancy of B in his property,
Rationale: Under Rule 40 of ROC, the clerk of his possession is co-existence with tolerance. If
court shall have 15 days to which to transmit Mr.A will tell B to vacate the property and the
the records of the case from MTC to RTC. latter refuse, Mr. A can file a case of unlawful
detainer on the ground of tolerance.
Q: How much will be the regular monthly
deposit? Example #2: Mr A sold the property to Mr. Y,
the latter will now be the owner. He noticed
A: Amount based on the judgment that B is still in his property and thereafter
demanded to vacate the property. In the event
Example: A-lessor, B-lessee with a contract of Mr. Y will file a case against B, it will not prosper
lease in the house which will expire on Dec on the ground of tolerance since it is not co-
2018 with a monthly rental of Php 5,000. A existence with possession.
wrote a letter to B that the rental will increase
to Php 15,000. Rule 70- Unlawful Detainer and Forcible Entry
- To give the court jurisdiction to effect the occupancy of the property. Failure of the
ejectment of an occupant or deforciant on the defendant to comply is a ground for the
land, it is necessary that the complaint must outright execution of the judgment.
sufficiently show such a statement of facts as to
bring the party clearly within the class of cases -In this case, the bond filed did not meet the
for which the statutes provide a remedy, legal requirement since the bond posted was a
without resort to parol testimony, as these property bond, not case not surety.
proceedings are summary in nature. In short, -Enforcement of ejectment cases requires the
the jurisdictional facts must appear on the face sheriff to give such writ and to demand from
of the complaint. defendant to vacate such property.
Atty. Alconera vs Pallanan, 714 SCRA 204
Issue: WON exclusive ownership of a property YES- Execution shall issue immediately upon
subject of an action for forcible entry should be motion unless an appeal has been perfected
proven. and the defendant file a supersedeas bond and
payment of rentals, damages.
Case: Ferrer vs Judge Rabaca, 632 SCRA -CGR filed a complaint with the MTC for forcible
entry and damages with the RTC. Treyes filed a
motion to dismiss on the ground of litis
Facts: pendentia and res judicata.
- Complainant were the president of YMCA in -RTC dismissed the complaint on the ground of
an ejectment against Cano. They received a prematurity.
favorable judgment pending appeal they tried
to execute the judgment of MTC but it was
denied by Judge Rabaca. Issue: WON the separate complaints for forcible
entry and damages can independently
instituted
Issue: WON the issuance of writ of execution
pending appeal can be granted
Held:
value or reasonable compensation for the use & became illegal upon termination of such lawful
occupation of the property. possession.
-Other damages arising out of forcible -Tolerance must be present from the start of
entry/unlawful detainer may be filed separatelt possession sought to be recovered to as
and independently of the claim or restoration of unlawful detainer and not forcible entry.
possession.
-It is essential in unlawful detainer cases that
the plaintiff's act of tolerance must be present
from the start of possession which is sought to
be recovered.
involved an essentially boundary dispute that that the RTC ultimately decided the appeal
should be properly resolved in an accion based on the survey and the surveyor's
reivindicatoria. testimony instead of the record of the
proceedings had in the court of origin.
-RTC reversed the MTC (Branch 2), and
remanded the case for further proceedings, -The MTC dismissed the action because it did
holding that because there was an apparent not have jurisdiction over the case. The
withholding of possession of the property and dismissal was correct. It is fundamental that the
the action was brought within one year from allegations of the complaint and the character
such withholding of possession the proper of the relief sought by the complaint determine
action was ejectment which was within the the nature of the action and the court that has
jurisdiction of the MTC; and that the case was jurisdiction over the action.
not a boundary dispute that could be resolved
in an accion reinvidicatoria, considering that it -To be clear, unlawful detainer is an action filed
involved a sizeable area of property and not a by a lessor, vendor, vendee, or other person
mere transferring of boundary. against whom the possession of any land or
building is unlawfully withheld after the
Issue: WON RTC has the authority to receive expiration or termination of the right to hold
additional evidence on appeal in an ejectment possession by virtue of any contract, express or
case. implied.To vest in the MTC the jurisdiction to
effect the ejectment from the land of the
respondents as the occupants in unlawful
Held: detainer, therefore, the complaint should
embody such a statement of facts clearly
NO- Under Rule 70, Sec 18 of the ROC it showing the attributes of unlawful detainer.
provides that: “The judgment or final order shall
be appealable to the appropriate Regional Trial Case: De la Cruz vs Hermano, 754 SCRA 231
Court which shall decide the same on the basis Facts:
of the entire record of the proceedings had in
the court of origin and such memoranda and/or -Respondents Antonio and Remedios Hermano
briefs as may be submitted by the parties or are the registered owners of a house and lot
required by the Regional Trial Court.” situated in P.B. Constantino Subdivision,
Tagaytay City, covered by Transfer Certificate of
-RTC violated the foregoing rule by ordering the Title (TCT) No. T-24503. On 13 June 2002,
conduct of the relocation and verification Antonio sued petitioner before the MTCC of
survey in aid of its appellate jurisdiction and by Tagaytay City, Branch 1, for ejectment and
hearing the testimony of the surveyor, for its damages.
doing so was tantamount to its holding of a trial
de novo. The violation was accented by the fact
-petitioner admitted the existence of TCT No. T- possession was obtained by unlawful means.
24503, but she contended that the true and Further, the complainant must allege and prove
actual owner of the property was Don Enciso prior physical possession of the property in
Benitez (Benitez). Allegedly, Antonio and his litigation until he or she was deprived thereof
wife, respondent Remedios Hermano, had by the defendant. The one-year period within
already sold the property to Benitez; the latter, which to bring an action for forcible entry is
in turn, sold it to petitioner by virtue of a Deed generally counted from the date of actual entry
of Absolute Sale,which they executed on 1 into the land, except when entry was made
March 2001. through stealth; if so, the one-year period
would be counted from the time the plaintiff
-The MTCC found that Antonio had, indeed,
learned about it.
executed a Deed of Absolute Sale over the
subject property in favor of Benitez. -The complaint subject of this case was
captioned as ejectment. From a reading of the
allegations of the subject Complaint, we find
The RTC opined that respondents, Complaint that the action is one for forcible entry.
did not clearly show whether it was one for Petitioner alleged that he is the owner of the
forcible entry or for unlawful detainer. Because property registered under TCT No. T-24503;
it appeared to be an ejectment case, the MTCC that the possession thereof by respondent on 1
took cognizance of it. The parties subsequent
September 2001 was pursuant to an alleged
pleadings revealed, however, that the case was Memorandum of Agreement between her and a
actually an accion reivindicatoria. certain Don Mario Enciso, without the authority
Issue: WON the complaint sufficiently suffice and consent of the petitioner; and that he has
the requisites of unlawful detainer served written demands, dated 27 September
2001 and 24 October 2001, but that respondent
Held: refused to vacate the property. According to
petitioner, the Complaint, which was filed on 13
YES- Section 1, Rule 70 of the Rules of Court,
June 2002, was filed within one year from the
requires that in actions for forcible entry, it
occupation of the property.
must be alleged that the complainant was
deprived of the possession of any land or
building by force, intimidation, threat, strategy,
or stealth, and that the action was filed anytime -The Court agrees with the CA's findings that
within one year from the time the unlawful the Complaint was timely filed. It is settled that
deprivation of possession took place. This where forcible entry occurred clandestinely, the
requirement implies that in those cases, one-year prescriptive period should be counted
possession of the land by the defendant has from the time the person who was deprived of
been unlawful from the beginning, as the possession demanded that the deficient desist
from dispossession when the former learned -On June 4, 2007, the RTC decided in the
about it. Spouses Dumlao’s favor. It ordered the
defendants (1) to immediately vacate the
property and turn it over to the Spouses
Dumlao, and (2) to pay accumulated rentals,
damages, and attorney’s fees. The RTC also
prohibited the defendants from accepting
enrolees to the San Mariano Academy.
Case: Erorita vs Dumlao, 781 SCRA 551
-The CA ruled that the applicable law on
Facts:
jurisdiction when the complaint was filed, was
-Spouses Antonio and Ligaya Dumlao(Spouses Republic Act No. 7691 (RA 7691). This law
Dumlao)are the registered owners of a parcel of provides that in civil actions involving a real
land located at Barangay San Mariano, Roxas, property’s title or possession, jurisdiction
Oriental Mindoro, and covered by TCT No. T- depends on the property’s assessed value and
53000. The San Mariano Academy structures location – if the assessed value exceeds fifty
are built on the property. thousand pesos (P50,000.00) in Metro Manila,
and twenty thousand pesos (P20,000.00)
-The Spouses Dumlao agreed to allow the outside of Metro Manila, the RTC has
petitioners to continue to operate the school on jurisdiction.
the property. The Spouses Erorita appointed
Hernan and Susan Erorita as the San Mariano
Academy’s administrators.
Issue: WON RTC has jurisdiction over the
-On December 16, 2002, the Spouses Dumlao complaint.
asked the petitioners to vacate the property.
Although the Spouses Erorita wanted to
comply, they could not immediately close the Held:
school without clearance from the Department
of Education, Culture, and Sports to whom they NO- Jurisdiction does not depend on the
are accountable. complaint’s caption.Nor is jurisdiction changed
by the defenses in the answer; otherwise, the
-On March 4, 2004, the Spouses Dumlao filed a defendant may easily delay a case by raising
complaint for recovery of possession before the other issues, then, claim lack of jurisdiction.
Regional Trial Court (RTC) against the
defendants Hernan, Susan, and the Spouses -To make a case for unlawful detainer, the
Erorita. complaint must allege that: (a) initially, the
defendant lawfully possessed the property,
either by contract or by plaintiff’s tolerance; (b)
the plaintiff notified the defendant that his right personalities toward others, or refusal to be
of possession is terminated; (c) the defendant sworn or to answer as a witness, or to subscribe
remained in possession and deprived plaintiff of an affidavit or deposition when lawfully
its enjoyment; and (d) the plaintiff filed a required to do so, may be summarily adjudged
in contempt by such court and punished by a
complaint within one year from the last
fine not exceeding two thousand pesos or
demand on defendant to vacate the property. A imprisonment not exceeding ten (10) days, or
complaint for accion publiciana or recovery of both, if it be a Regional Trial Court or a court of
possession of real property will not be equivalent or higher rank, or by a fine not
considered as an action for unlawful detainer if exceeding two hundred pesos or imprisonment
any of these special jurisdictional facts is not exceeding one (1) day, or both, if it be a
lower court.
omitted.
-The complaint did not state that (i) possession Section 3. Indirect contempt to be punished
after charge and hearing. — After a charge in
was unlawfully withheld and (ii) the complaint
writing has been filed, and an opportunity given
was filed within a year from the last demand. to the respondent to comment thereon within
Because these special jurisdictional facts for an such period as may be fixed by the court and to
unlawful detainer case were lacking, we held be heard by himself or counsel, a person guilty
that the case should be accion publiciana over of any of the following acts may be punished for
which the RTC has jurisdiction indirect contempt;
In the present case, however, the complaint (a) Misbehavior of an officer of a court in the
clearly contained the elements of an unlawful performance of his official duties or in his
detainer case. Thus, the case should have been official transactions;
filed with the MTC. The RTC had no jurisdiction
(b) Disobedience of or resistance to a lawful
over this case. writ, process, order, or judgment of a court,
including the act of a person who, after being
dispossessed or ejected from any real property
by the judgment or process of any court of
competent jurisdiction, enters or attempts or
Rule 71- Contempt
induces another to enter into or upon such real
property, for the purpose of executing acts of
Kinds:
ownership or possession, or in any manner
Direct and Indirect disturbs the possession given to the person
adjudged to be entitled thereto;
Section 1. Direct contempt punished
(c) Any abuse of or any unlawful interference
summarily. — A person guilty of misbehavior in
with the processes or proceedings of a court
the presence of or so near a court as to obstruct
not constituting direct contempt under section
or interrupt the proceedings before the same,
1 of this Rule;
including disrespect toward the court, offensive
(d) Any improper conduct tending, directly or property involved or such amount as may be
indirectly, to impede, obstruct, or degrade the alleged and proved.
administration of justice;
The writ of execution, as in ordinary civil
(e) Assuming to be an attorney or an officer of a actions, shall issue for the enforcement of a
court, and acting as such without authority; judgment imposing a fine unless the court
otherwise provides. (6a)
(f) Failure to obey a subpoena duly served;
Section 8. Imprisonment until order obeyed. —
(g) The rescue, or attempted rescue, of a person When the contempt consists in the refusal or
or property in the custody of an officer by virtue omission to do an act which is yet in the power
of an order or process of a court held by him. of the respondent to perform, he may be
imprisoned by order of the court concerned
-In Indirect Contempt Proceedings, it partakes until he performs it. (7a)
of criminal proceedings. Notice & Hearing is
mandatory. Section 9. Proceeding when party released on
bail fails to answer. — When a respondent
Jurisdiction: Regional Trial Court released on bail fails to appear on the day fixed
for the hearing, the court may issue another
Penalties: order of arrest or may order the bond for his
appearance to be forfeited and confiscated, or
-Fine both; and, if the bond be proceeded against,
the measure of damages shall be the extent of
-Ceisure the loss or injury sustained by the aggrieved
party by reason of the misconduct for which the
-Reprimand contempt charge was prosecuted, with the
costs of the proceedings, and such recovery
Section 7. Punishment for indirect contempt. shall be for the benefit of the party injured. If
— If the respondent is adjudged guilty of there is no aggrieved party, the bond shall be
indirect contempt committed against a Regional liable and disposed of as in criminal cases.
Trial Court or a court of equivalent or higher
rank, he may be punished by a fine not Judgment
exceeding thirty thousand pesos or Section 11. Review of judgment or final
imprisonment not exceeding six (6) months, or order; bond for stay. — The judgment or final
both. If he is adjudged guilty of contempt order of a court in a case of indirect contempt
committed against a lower court, he may be may be appealed to the proper court as in
punished by a fine not exceeding five thousand
criminal cases. But execution of the judgment
pesos or imprisonment not exceeding one (1)
month, or both. If the contempt consists in the or final order shall not be suspended until a
violation of a writ of injunction, temporary bond is filed by the person adjudged in
restraining order or status quo order, he may contempt, in an amount fixed by the court from
also be ordered to make complete restitution to which the appeal is taken, conditioned that if
the party injured by such violation of the
the appeal be decided against him he will abide Case: Judge Espanol vs Atty. Formoso, 522
by and perform the judgment or final order SCRA
the administration of justice. Freedom of petitioners counsel and ordering the transmittal
speech should not be impaired through the of the records of the case to the Office of the
exercise of the power of contempt of court Clerk of Court for re-raffle to another sala. The
unless there is no doubt that the utterances in case was subsequently re-raffled to RTC Branch
question make a serious and imminent threat to 90 presided by Judge Reynaldo B. Daway, who
the administration of justice. It must constitute likewise voluntarily recused himself from the
an imminent, not merely a likely, threat. case per Order dated July 13, 2007.
- As to the merits, the comments seem to be -During the January 11, 2007 inspection, the
what the respondents claim to be an expression only document produced by the Acting
of their opinion that their loved ones were Corporate Secretary, Atty. Antonio V. Meriz,
murdered by Marantan. This is merely a and one of the staff, Malou Santos, was the
reiteration of their position in G.R. No. 199462, Stock and Transfer Book of the Corporation.
which precisely calls the Court to upgrade the They alleged that they could not find from the
charges from homicide to murder. The Court corporate records the copies of the proxies
detects no malice on the face of the said submitted by the stockholders, including the
statements. tape recordings taken during the stockholder's
meeting, and that they needed more time to
Case: Capitol Hills Gold and Country Club vs
locate and find the list of stockholders as of
Sanchez, 717 SCRA
March 2002, which was in the bodega of the
Facts: Corporation.
-On July 1, 2002, respondent Manuel O. Issue: WON the petitioners are guilty of
Sanchez (respondent), a stockholder of contempt charges
petitioner Capitol Hills Golf & Country Club, Inc.
Held:
(Corporation) filed a petition for the
nullification of the annual meeting of NO- In contempt proceedings, the prescribed
stockholders of May 21, 2002 and the special procedure must be followed. Sections 3 and 4,
meeting of stockholders of April 23, 2002. Rule 71 of the Rules of Court provide the
procedure to be followed in case of indirect
-On August 12, 2002, respondent filed a Motion
contempt. First, there must be an order
for Production and Inspection of Documents,
requiring the respondent to show cause why he
which the court granted in an Order dated
should not be cited for contempt.Second, the
September 10, 2002.
respondent must be given the opportunity to
-On February 9, 2007, Judge Hernando issued comment on the charge against him. Third,
an Order, inhibiting himself from handling the there must be a hearing and the court must
case in view of his close friendship relation with investigate the charge and consider
respondent's answer. Finally, only if found the long overdue order to produce and make
guilty will respondent be punished accordingly. available for inspection and photocopying of
the requested records/documents.
-In all other cases, charges for indirect
contempt shall be commenced by a verified
petition with supporting particulars and
Case: Tormis vs Paredes, 749 SCRA 505
certified true copies of documents or papers
involved therein, and upon full compliance Facts:
with the requirements for filing initiatory -Jill added that Judge Paredes included Judge
pleadings for civil actions in the court Tormis in his discussions not only once but
concerned. If the contempt charges arose out several times. In one session, Judge Paredes
of or are related to a principal action pending was even said to have included in his discussion
in the court, the petition for contempt shall Francis Mondragon Tormis(Francis), son of
allege that fact but said petition shall be Judge Tormis, stating that he was a court-noted
docketed, heard and decided separately, addict. She was absent from class at that time,
unless the court in its discretion orders the but one of her classmates who was present,
consolidation of the contempt charge and the Rhoda L. Litang(Rhoda), informed her about the
principal action for joint hearing and decision. inclusion of her brother. To avoid humiliation in
school, Jill decided to drop the class under
-In contempt proceedings, the respondent Judge Paredes and transfer to another law
must be given the right to defend himself or school in Tacloban City.
herself and have a day in court a basic Judge Paredes denied the accusations of Jill. He
requirement of due process. This is especially stated that Judge Tormis had several
so in indirect contempt proceedings, as the administrative cases, some of which he had
court cannot decide them summarily pursuant investigated; that as a result of the
to the Rules of Court. investigations, he recommended sanctions
-In this case, the proceedings for indirect against Judge Tormis; that Judge Tormis used
contempt have not been initiated. To the Jill, her daughter, to get back at him; that he
Court's mind, the September 3, 2007 Resolution discussed in his class the case of Lachica v.
could be treated as a mere reiteration of the Tormis, but never Judge Tormis involvement in
September 10, 2002 Order. It is not yet a the marriage scams nor her sanctions as a result
judgment or final order of a court in a case of of the investigation conducted by the Court;
indirect contempt as contemplated under the that he never personally attacked Judge Tormis
Rules. The penalty mentioned therein only dignity and credibility.
serves as a reminder to caution petitioners of
the consequence of possible non-observance of
-Justice Diy came up with the following choose his words and exercise more caution
recommendations, The undersigned and control in expressing himself. In other
Investigating Justice finds that indeed Judge words, a judge should possess the virtue of
Paredes is guilty of conduct unbecoming of a gravitas. Furthermore, a magistrate should not
judge. Conduct unbecoming of a judge is descend to the level of a sharp-tongued, ill-
classified as a light offense under Section 10, mannered petty tyrant by uttering harsh words,
Rule 140 of the Revised Rules of Court. snide remarks and sarcastic comments. He is
required to always be temperate, patient and
Issue: WON Judge Paredes is guilty of conduct
courteous, both in conduct and in language.
unbecoming of a judge
Held:
-The totality of the decedent’s assets & liability -Personal Circumstance of the petitioner
-What things that the decedent left behind? -Evidence of ownership (TCT/OCT)
A:Jurisdiction - In all matters of probate, both patent, the state is the proper party in interest
testate and intestate, where the gross value of to file Reversion.
the estate exceeds Three hundred thousand
pesos (P300,000.00) or, in probate matters in Reversion- An action for taking back the
Metro Manila, where such gross value exceeds property of the state, it is only initiated by the
Four Hundred Thousand pesos (P400,000.00).- State in a judicial action.
RTC Case: Maltos vs Heirs of Eusebio Borromeo,
Venue-Where the property is located 770 SCRA 397
Issue: WON the petitioners are the real-party in reversion must first be filed by the Office of
interest in this case the Solicitor General.
allowance of the will shall be conclusive as to its -The rule provides that whoever that has
due execution. possession of the will must surrender it to court
within 20 days of death or knowledge of it.
PROBATE OF A WILL IS MANDATORY
-2 months after the death of Mr. X, Mrs X and
-Any court that takes cognizance of a probate of Mr B (Second son) filed for the probate of the
a will shall have limited jurisdiction. will annexed in the RTC of Makati City.
-Limited jurisdiction is when the court is acting Q: Where does Mr. A should file his opposition
on a probate of a will. over the probate of the will?
Section 2. Custodian of will to deliver. — The A: It shall be in Cebu RTC since Makati City is
person who has custody of a will shall, within not the proper jurisdiction
twenty (20) days after he knows of the death
of the testator, deliver the will to the court Q: Is there a probate of the will in Cebu when
having jurisdiction, or to the executor named in Mr. A surrendered it to the court?
the will.
A: YES, the mere surrender of the will in court
-Whoever is in possession of a will, it has the connotes that it can now set the hearing for the
duty to surrender such will. If that person does probate.
not surrender the will, he can be penalized by
court. Exclusionary Rule- The court that take
cognizance of the case, it takes it to the
-That person should surrender such will to the exclusion of all other courts.
court within 20 days from death of decedent or
knowledge of the death. Rule 76- Allowance or Disallowance of Will
Example: Mr. X resides in Makati City, he has 5 Section 1. Who may petition for the allowance
children and he executed a will in Makati City. of will. — Any executor, devisee, or legatee
Upon the execution of the will, he gave it to his named in a will, or any other person interested
eldest son Mr. A. 2 years later Mr. A got married in the estate, may, at any time after the death
and transferred residence in Cebu City. Mr X of the testator, petition the court having
died a year after the marriage of Mr. A in jurisdiction to have the will allowed, whether
Makati City. Mr A complied with the provision the same be in his possession or not, or is lost
in Rule 75 and surrenders a copy of the will with or destroyed.
the RTC of Cebu City.
DELTA- Devisee, Executor, Legatee, Testator, Rule 77- Allowance of Will Proved Outside of
Any person interested Philippines and Administration of Estate
Thereunder
No Witness Rule- The application for
allowance/disallowance of a will is filed by the
Section 1. Will proved outside Philippines may
testator himself
be allowed here. — Wills proved and allowed in
a foreign country, according to the laws of such
1-Witness Rule- A Notarial Will which is country, may be allowed, filed, and recorded by
uncontested and no oppositor the proper Court of First Instance in the
Philippines.
2 witness rule- lost/destroyed will, the
petitioner should prove its existence Q: Can a will executed outside the Philippines
executed in the Phil?
3 witness rule- contested holographic will
A: NO, Since it shall be considered as a foreign
4 witness rule- Notarial Will Contested; Present judgment
Three (3) witnesses including the notary public
Establishment of foreign judgment/reprobate
Section 9. Grounds for disallowing will. — The of a will
will shall be disallowed in any of the following
cases: Requisites:
(a) If not executed and attested as required by
-The testator should be domiciled outside the
law; Phil.
(b) If the testator was insane, or otherwise -The testator executed a will outside the Phil.
mentally incapable to make a will, at the time of
its execution;
-According to the law of the country executing
(c) If it was executed under duress, or the
-It is probated of a court of competent
influence of fear, or threats;
jurisdiction
(d) If it was procured by undue and improper
Q: What shall be the jurisdiction for the
pressure and influence, on the part of the
reprobate of the will?
beneficiary, or of some other person for his
benefit;
A: RTC since it is a court of general jurisdiction
and it is action incapable of pecuniary
(e) If the signature of the testator was procured
estimation
by fraud or trick, and he did not intend that the
instrument should be his will at the time of
Q: Where shall be the venue of the action?
fixing his signature thereto
A: It shall be the location/place of the estate
-The reprobate court should render a valid (a) To the surviving husband or wife, as the case
judgment or issue a certificate of finality. may be, or next of kin, or both, in the discretion
of the court, or to such person as such surviving
-The court shall appoint ancillary administrator husband or wife, or next of kin, requests to
which shall take charge of the property in the have appointed, if competent and willing to
Philippines. serve;
Rule 78- Letters Testamentary and of (b) If such surviving husband or wife, as the case
Administration, when and to whom issued may be, or next of kin, or the person selected
by them, be incompetent or unwilling, or if the
For Letters Testamentary- Discretionary husband or widow, or next of kin, neglects for
towards the court. thirty (30) days after the death of the person to
apply for administration or to request that
-The executor must post a Bond and Accept the administration be granted to some other
trust. person, it may be granted to one or more of the
principal creditors, if may be granted to one or
Section 1. Who are incompetent to serve as more of the principal creditors, if competent
executors or administrators. — No person in and willing to serve;
competent to serve as executor or
administrator who: (c) If there is no such creditor competent and
willing to serve, it may be granted to such other
(a) Is a minor; person as the court may select.
(c) Is in the opinion of the court unfit to execute Section 1. Appointment of special
the duties of the trust by reason of administrator. — When there is delay in
drunkenness, improvidence, or want of granting letters testamentary or of
understanding or integrity, or by reason of administration by any cause including an appeal
conviction of an offense involving moral from the allowance or disallowance of a will,
turpitude. the court may appoint a special administrator
to take possession and charge of the estate of
*DELTA can file a petition for letters of the deceased until the questions causing the
testamentary delay are decided and executors or
administrators appointed.
Section 6. When and to whom letters of
administration granted. — If no executor is -There should be delay in the appointment of a
named in the will, or the executor or executors regular administrator/executor.
are incompetent, refuse the trust, or fail to give
bond, or a person dies intestate, administration Section 2. Powers and duties of special
shall be granted: adminsitrator. — Such special administrator
shall take possession and charge of the goods,
chattels, rights, credits, and estate of the
deceased and preserve the same for the Grandchildren are not entitled to the fruits of
executors or administrator afterwards the estate. (Heirs of Hilario Ruiz vs Edmond
appointed, and for that purpose may Ruiz)
commence and maintain suits as administrator.
He may sell only such perishable and other
property as the court orders sold. A special
administrator shall not be liable to pay any RULE 85- Accountability and Compensation of
debts of the deceased unless so ordered by the Executors and Administrators
court.
Section 1. Executor or administrator
Q: What are the rights & obligations of the chargeable with all estate and income. —
administrator/executor? Except as otherwise expressly provided in the
following sections, every executor or
A: -Payment/Posting of bonds administrator is chargeable in his account with
the whole of the estate of the deceased which
-Submission of inventory within 3 months from has come into his possession, at the value of
appointment the appraisement contained in the inventory;
with all the interest, profit, and income of such
-Accounting of the estate within 1 year from estate; and with the proceeds of so much of the
appointment or order of probate court estate as is sold by him, at the price at which it
was sold.
-Payment of debts
-A lawyer and Executor at the same time cannot
-Sale, mortgage or encumbrance of the estate charge attorney’s fee.
-Distribution & partition of the estate- END of Remedy: Charge such expenses with all the
the settlement of estate estate and income
RULE 83-Inventory and Appraisal. Provision for Rule 86- Claims Against estate
Support of Family
Section 1. Notice to creditors to be issued by
Section 1. Inventory and appraisal to be court. — Immediately after granting letters
returned within three months. — Within three testamentary or of administration, the court
(3) months after his appointment every shall issue a notice requiring all persons having
executor or administrator shall return to the money claims against the decedent to file
court a true inventory and appraisal of all real them in the office of the clerk of said court.
and personal estate of the deceased which has
come into his possession or knowledge. In the Section 2. Time within which claims shall be
appraisement of such estate, the court may filed. — In the notice provided in the preceding
order one or more of the inheritance tax section, the court shall estate the time for the
appraisers to give his or their assistance. filing of claims against the estate, which shall
not be more than twelve (12) not less than six
(6) months after the date of the first
publication of the notice. However, at any time Q: Which should prevail statute non-claims or
before an order of distribution is entered, on statute of limitation?
application of a creditor who has failed to file
his claim within the previously limited, the court A: Statute of non-claims since if a party do not
may, for cause shown and on such terms as are file against the estate within the period, it shall
equitable, allow such claim to be filed within a be barred forever.
time not exceeding one (1) month.
-A party should comply with the period of
Statute of non-claims- Claims against estate statute of non-claims rather than statute of
which shall not be more that twelve (12) not limitation.
less than six (6) months after the date of the
first publication of the notice. Example of Contingent Claim
Q: What are claimable against estate? -Mr. Mayaman promised Juan that if he will
pass the bar examination, he will give him Php 5
A: The basis shall be Rule 86 Sec 5: million pesos. Before the release of the bar
exams results, Mr Mayaman died but upon the
-Claims for money against the decedent based release of the result Juan passed the bar
on contract. (Due, Not Due or Contingent) examination.
of the assets of the estate; or he may foreclose No on-going settlement of estate- A Party can
his mortgage or realize upon his security, by start the filing of such complaint for the
action in court, making the executor or settlement of estate
administrator a party defendant, and if there is
a judgment for a deficiency, after the sale of -The executor/administrator shall file an answer
the mortgaged premises, or the property within 15 days against the person interested
pledged, in the foreclosure or other proceeding
to realize upon the security, he may claim his -If a party has a claim for recovery of
deficiency judgment in the manner provided in real/personal property, recovery of interest
the preceding section or he may rely upon his therein, claim for damages against the estate.
mortgage or other security alone, and
foreclosure the same at any time within the -A party can file a separate action against the
period of the statute of limitations, and in that executor/administrator under Rule 87
event he shall not be admitted as a creditor,
and shall receive no share in the distribution of Q: What if the estate is not sufficient to cover
the other assets of estate; but nothing herein the payment of debts and no specific provision
contained shall prohibit the executor or in the will as to what property shall be used,
administrator from redeeming the property what will be the proper remedy?
mortgaged or pledged, by paying the debt for
which it is held as security, under the direction A: The personal property shall be the first in
of the court, if the court shall adjudge it to be priority, if the personal property is not
for the best interest of the estate that such sufficient, a party can proceed to the real
redemption shall be made. property.
Q: How can a party can claim against the estate -Only real property can be the subject of
under a mortgage property? mortgage, encumbrances and levy. Personal
properties can only be sold ahead of the real
A: A party has 3 options: (a) file it as a claim properties.
against the estate, (b) apply Rule 68-
foreclosure of real estate mortgage, (c) avail of Rule 87- Actions By and Against Executors and
(RA 3135)- extra-judicial foreclosure of real Administrators
estate mortgage
Section 1. Actions which may and which may
-The following remedies are not successive but not be brought against executor or
alternative in nature administrator. — No action upon a claim for
the recovery of money or debt or interest
Q: How do a party can claim against the estate? thereon shall be commenced against the
executor or administrator; but to recover real
A: It will depend if there is an on-going or personal property, or an interest therein,
settlement of estate- File a motion and Present from the estate, or to enforce a lien thereon,
evidence and actions to recover damages for an injury to
person or property, real or personal, may be
commenced against him.
Rule 88- Payment of Debts of the Estate (6) Claims for laborers' wages, on
the goods manufactured or the work done;
The Executor/Administrator shall be guided
with preference of credit under the Civil Code: (7) For expenses of salvage, upon the goods
salvaged;
Art. 2241. With reference to specific
movable property of the debtor, the following (8) Credits between the landlord and the
claims or liens shall be preferred: tenant, arising from the contract of tenancy
on shares, on the share of each in the fruits
(1) Duties, taxes and fees due thereon or harvest;
to the State or any subdivision thereof;
(9) Credits for transportation, upon the
(2) Claims arising from misappropriation, goods carried, for the price of the contract
breach of trust, or malfeasance by public and incidental expenses, until their delivery
officials committed in the performance of and for thirty days thereafter;
their duties, on the movables, money or
securities obtained by them; (10) Credits for lodging and supplies
usually furnished to travelers by hotelkeepers,
(3) Claims for the unpaid price of movables on the movables belonging to the guest as long
sold, on said movables, so long as they are as such movables are in the hotel, but not for
in the possession of the debtor, up to the money loaned to the guests;
value of the same; and if the movable has been
resold by the debtor and the price is still (11) Credits for seeds and expenses for
unpaid, the lien may be enforced on the price; cultivation and harvest advanced to the debtor,
this right is not lost by the immobilization of upon the fruits harvested;
the thing by destination, provided it has not
lost its form, substance and identity; neither is (12) Credits for rent for one year, upon
the right lost by the sale of the thing the personal property of the lessee existing on
together with other property for a lump the immovable leased and on the fruits of the
sum, when the price thereof can be same, but not on money or instruments of
determined proportionally; credit;
(4) Credits guaranteed with a pledge so (13) Claims in favor of the depositor if
long as the things pledged are in the hands the depositary has wrongfully sold the thing
of the creditor, or those guaranteed by a deposited, upon the price of the sale.
chattel mortgage, upon the things pledged or
Art. 2242. With reference to specific pecuniary charges or other conditions imposed
immovable property and real rights of upon the donee, upon the immovable donated;
the debtor, the following claims, mortgages
and liens shall be preferred, and shall constitute (10) Credits of insurers, upon the property
an encumbrance on the immovable or real insured, for the insurance premium for two
right: years.
YES- Based on the doctrine laid down in Fule an Opposition/Motion to Dismiss. The
“The venue for the settlement of estate shall be petitioners asserted that as shown by his Death
the last residence of the decendent”. Residence Certificate, Eliseo was a resident of Capas,
pertains to the actual, personal and physical Tarlac and not of Las Piñas City, at the time of
abode of the decedent. his death. Pursuant to Section 1, Rule 73 of the
Revised Rules of Court, the petition for
-The court also ruled that the requirement for
settlement of decedent’s estate should have
venue under the settlement of estate shall be
been filed in Capas, Tarlac and not in Las Piñas
residence and not domicile. Domicile is defined
City.
the residence of someone with intent to remain
so for the purposes of election, since the -The lower court ruled that the venue of the
requirement is residence and not domicile petition was properly laid in Las Piñas City,
thereby discrediting the position taken by the
Case: Garcia-Quiazon vs Belen, 702 SCRA
petitioners that Eliseo’s last residence was in
July 31,2013 Capas, Tarlac, as hearsay.
Facts:
- On 12 September 1994, Maria Lourdes Elise Issue: WON the petition for letters of
Quiazon (Elise), represented by her mother, Ma. administration if properly filed in Las Pinas as
Lourdes Belen (Lourdes), filed a Petition for venue of the action
Letters of Administration before the Regional
Trial Court (RTC) of Las Piñas City. In her
Petition docketed as SP Proc. No. M-3957, Elise Held:
claims that she is the natural child of Eliseo
YES- Rule 73 Sec. 1. Where estate of deceased
having been conceived and born at the time
persons settled. – If the decedent is an
when her parents were both capacitated to
inhabitant of the Philippines at the time of his
marry each other. Insisting on the legal capacity
death, whether a citizen or an alien, his will
of Eliseo and Lourdes to marry, Elise impugned
shall be proved, or letters of administration
the validity of Eliseo’s marriage to Amelia by
granted, and his estate settled, in the Court of
claiming that it was bigamous for having been
First Instance now Regional Trial Court in the
contracted during the subsistence of the latter’s
province in which he resides at the time of his
marriage with one Filipito Sandico (Filipito).
death, and if he is an inhabitant of a foreign
-Claiming that the venue of the petition was country, the Court of First Instance now
improperly laid, Amelia, together with her Regional Trial Court of any province in which
children, Jenneth and Jennifer, opposed the he had estate.
issuance of the letters of administration by filing
- The term "resides" connotes ex vi termini properly laid in Las Piñas City. It is evident from
"actual residence" as distinguished from "legal the records that during his lifetime, Eliseo
residence or domicile." This term "resides," like resided at No. 26 Everlasting Road, Phase 5,
the terms "residing" and "residence," is elastic Pilar Village, Las Piñas City. For this reason, the
and should be interpreted in the light of the venue for the settlement of his estate may be
object or purpose of the statute or rule in which laid in the said city.
it is employed. In the application of venue
Case: Agtarap vs Agtarap, 651 SCRA, October
statutes and rules – Section 1, Rule 73 of the
2012
Revised Rules of Court is of such nature –
residence rather than domicile is the Facts:
significant factor. Even where the statute uses -On September 15, 1994, Eduardo filed with the
word "domicile" still it is construed as meaning Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 114, a
residence and not domicile in the technical verified petition for the judicial settlement of
sense. Some cases make a distinction between the estate of his deceased father Joaquin
the terms "residence" and "domicile" but as Agtarap (Joaquin).
generally used in statutes fixing venue, the
terms are synonymous, and convey the same -The petition alleged that Joaquin died intestate
meaning as the term "inhabitant." In other on November 21, 1964 in without any known
words, "resides" should be viewed or debts or obligations. During his lifetime, Joaquin
understood in its popular sense, meaning, the contracted two marriages, first with Lucia
personal, actual or physical habitation of a Garcia (Lucia), and second with Caridad Garcia
person, actual residence or place of abode. It (Caridad). Lucia died on April 24, 1924.
signifies physical presence in a place and actual -Joseph, Gloria, and Teresa filed their
stay thereat. Venue for ordinary civil actions answer/opposition. They alleged that the two
and that for special proceedings have one and subject lots belong to the conjugal partnership
the same meaning. As thus defined, of Joaquin with Lucia, and that, upon Lucias
"residence," in the context of venue death in April 1924, they became the pro
provisions, means nothing more than a indiviso owners of the subject properties. They
person’s actual residence or place of abode, said that their residence was built with the
provided he resides therein with continuity exclusive money of their late father Jose, and
and consistency. the expenses of the extensions to the house
were shouldered by Gloria and Teresa, while
the restaurant (Manongs Restaurant) was built
-The Court of Appeals cannot be faulted for with the exclusive money of Joseph and his
affirming the ruling of the RTC that the venue business partner.
for the settlement of the estate of Eliseo was
-RTC issued a resolution and order of partition administered, and liquidated, and the debts
of the property involved. thereof paid; in the testate or intestate
proceedings of the deceased spouse, and if
Issue: WON the court acquired jurisdiction over
both spouses have died, the conjugal
the distribution of inheritance
partnership shall be liquidated in the testate or
Held: intestate proceedings of either. Thus, the RTC
YES had jurisdiction to determine whether the
properties are conjugal as it had to liquidate
-The general rule is that the jurisdiction of the the conjugal partnership to determine the
trial court, either as a probate or an intestate estate of the decedent.
court, relates only to matters having to do with
the probate of the will and/or settlement of the
estate of deceased persons, but does not Case: Suntay III vs Cojuangco-Suntay 683 SCRA
extend to the determination of questions of October 2012
ownership that arise during the proceedings.
Facts:
The patent rationale for this rule is that such
court merely exercises special and limited - The decedent Cristina Aguinaldo-Suntay
jurisdiction. (Cristina) died intestate on 4 June 1990. Cristina
was survived by her spouse, Dr. Federico Suntay
-The probate court may provisionally pass upon
(Federico) and five grandchildren: three
in an intestate or a testate proceeding the
legitimate grandchildren, including herein
question of inclusion in, or exclusion from, the
respondent, Isabel; and two illegitimate
inventory of a piece of property without
grandchildren, including petitioner Emilio III, all
prejudice to the final determination of
by Federico’s and Cristina’s only child, Emilio A.
ownership in a separate action. Second, if the
Suntay (Emilio I), who predeceased his parents.
interested parties are all heirs to the estate, or
the question is one of collation or -Isabel’s parents, along with her paternal
advancement, or the parties consent to the grandparents, were involved in domestic
assumption of jurisdiction by the probate court relations cases, including a case for parricide
and the rights of third parties are not impaired, filed by Isabel Cojuangco against Emilio I. Emilio
then the probate court is competent to resolve I was eventually acquitted.
issues on ownership.
-On 27 September 1993, more than three years
-Section 2, Rule 73 of the Rules of Court after Cristina’s death, Federico adopted his
provides that when the marriage is dissolved illegitimate grandchildren, Emilio III and Nenita.
by the death of the husband or the wife, the On 26 October 1995, respondent Isabel, filed
community property shall be inventoried, before the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Malolos,
Bulacan, a petition for the issuance of letters of days after the death of the person to apply for
administration over Cristina’s estate. administration or to request that
administration be granted to some other
-Federico filed a Motion to Dismiss Isabel’s
person, it may be granted to one or more of
petition for letters of administration on the
the principal creditors, if competent and
ground that Isabel had no right of
willing to serve; (c) If there is not such creditor
representation to the estate of Cristina, she
competent and willing to serve, it may be
being an illegitimate grandchild of the latter as
granted to such other person as the court may
a result of Isabel’s parents’ marriage being
select.
declared null and void.
-The paramount consideration in the
-The trial court rendered a decision appointing
appointment of an administrator over the
Emilio III as administrator of decedent Cristina’s
estate of a decedent is the prospective
intestate estate. The Court of Appeals reversed
administrator’s interest in the estate. This is the
and set aside the decision of the RTC, revoked
same consideration which Section 6, Rule 78
the Letters of Administration issued to Emilio III,
takes into account in establishing the order of
and appointed respondent as administratrix of
preference in the appointment of administrator
the subject estate
for the estate. The rationale behind the rule is
Issue: WON Emilio III is the proper that those who will reap the benefit of a wise,
administrator of the estate of the decedent speedy and economical administration of the
Held: estate, or, in the alternative, suffer the
consequences of waste, improvidence or
NO-Rule 78 SEC. 6 When and to whom letters mismanagement, have the highest interest and
of administration granted. – If no executor is most influential motive to administer the
named in the will, or the executor or executors estate correctly.
are incompetent, refuse the trust, or fail to give -Under certain circumstances and for various
bond, or a person dies intestate, administration reasons well-settled in Philippine and American
shall be granted:(a) To the surviving husband or jurisprudence, we have upheld the
wife, as the case may be, or next of kin, or appointment of co-administrators: (1) to have
both, in the discretion of the court, or to such the benefits of their judgment and perhaps at
person as such surviving husband or wife, or all times to have different interests
next of kin, requests to have appointed, if represented;(2) where justice and equity
competent and willing to serve; (b) If such demand that opposing parties or factions be
surviving husband or wife, as the case may be, represented in the management of the estate
or next of kin, or the person selected by them, of the deceased; (3) where the estate is large
be incompetent or unwilling, or if the husband or, from any cause, an intricate and perplexing
or widow, or next of kin, neglects for thirty (30) one to settle; (4) to have all interested persons
satisfied and the representatives to work in -On June 29, 1992, four years after the testators
harmony for the best interests of the estate; death, it was private respondent Maria Pilar
and when a person entitled to the Ruiz Montes who filed before the Regional Trial
administration of an estate desires to have Court, Branch 156, Pasig, a petition for the
another competent person associated with him probate and approval of Hilario Ruizs will and
in the office. for the issuance of letters testamentary to
Edmond Ruiz. Edmond opposed the petition on
-it should be noted that on the matter of
the ground that the will was executed under
appointment of administrator of the estate of
undue influence.
the deceased, the surviving spouse is preferred
over the next of kin of the decedent. When the -On January 19, 1993, the probate court
law speaks of "next of kin," the reference is to ordered to deposit with the Branch Clerk of
those who are entitled, under the statute of Court the rental deposit and payments totalling
distribution, to the decedent's property; one P540,000.00 representing the one-year lease of
whose relationship is such that he is entitled to the Valle Verde property. In compliance, on
share in the estate as distributed, or, in short, January 25, 1993, turned over the amount of
an heir. In resolving, therefore, the issue of P348,583.56, representing the balance of the
whether an applicant for letters of rent after deducting P191,416.14 for repair and
administration is a next of kin or an heir of the maintenance expenses on the estate.
decedent, the probate court perforce has to
-On May 14, 1993, Edmond withdrew his
determine and pass upon the issue of filiation.
opposition to the probate of the will.
Case: Heirs of Hilario Ruiz vs Edmond Ruiz, 252 Consequently, the probate court on May 18,
SCRA 1993, admitted the will to probate and ordered
the issuance of letters testamentary to
Facts:
conditioned upon the filing of a bond in the
-On June 27, 1987, Hilario M. Ruiz executed a amount of P50,000.00. The letters testamentary
holographic will naming as his heirs his only son, were issued on June 23, 1993.
Edmond Ruiz, his adopted daughter, private
Issue: WON the estate shall be liable for the
respondent Maria Pilar Ruiz Montes, and his
support of the testator's grandchildren
three granddaughters, private respondents
Maria Cathryn, Candice Albertine and Maria Held:
Angeline, all children of Edmond Ruiz. The
NO- Section 3 of Rule 83 of the Revised Rules of
testator bequeathed to his heirs substantial
Court provides: Sec. 3. Allowance to widow and
cash, personal and real properties and named
family. - The widow and minor or incapacitated
Edmond Ruiz executor of his estate.
children of a deceased person, during the
settlement of the estate, shall receive
therefrom under the direction of the court, legitimate children (Rafael, Jose and Antonio
such allowance as are provided by law. Ortaez) and five illegitimate children by Ligaya
Novicio (herein private respondent Ma. Divina
-It is settled that allowances for support under
Ortaez-Enderes and her siblings Jose, Romeo,
Section 3 of Rule 83 should not be limited to the
Enrico Manuel and Cesar, all surnamed Ortaez).
minor or incapacitated children of the
deceased. Article 188 of the Civil Code of the -Juliana S. Ortaez, claiming that she owned
Philippines, the substantive law in force at the 1,014 Philinterlife shares of stock as her
time of the testators death, provides that conjugal share in the estate, sold said shares
during the liquidation of the conjugal with right to repurchase in favor of herein
partnership, the deceaseds legitimate spouse petitioner Filipino Loan Assistance Group
and children, regardless of their age, civil (FLAG), represented by its president, herein
status or gainful employment, are entitled to petitioner Jose C. Lee. Juliana Ortaez failed to
provisional support from the funds of the repurchase the shares of stock within the
estate. The law is rooted on the fact that the stipulated period, thus ownership thereof was
right and duty to support, especially the right to consolidated by petitioner FLAG in its name.
education, subsist even beyond the age of
-On July 12, 1995, herein private respondent
majority.
Ma. Divina Ortaez-Enderes and her siblings filed
-Grandchildren are not entitled to provisional a motion for appointment of special
support from the funds of the decedents administrator of Philinterlife shares of stock.
estate. The law clearly limits the allowance to This move was opposed by Special
widow and children and does not extend it to Administrator Jose Ortaez. On November 8,
the deceaseds grandchildren, regardless of their 1995, the intestate court granted the motion of
minority or incapacity. private respondents Enderes et al. and
appointed private respondent Enderes special
Case: Lee vs RTC of Quezon City Branch 85, 423 administratrix of the Philinterlife shares of
SCRA stock.
1981, Edmund, as one of the heirs, was person to dispose of his property by will may
appointed as the special administrator of the be rendered nugatory. The authentication of a
estate of the decedent. will decides no other question than such as
touch upon the capacity of the testator and the
-On August 20, 1981, a Deed of Assignment
compliance with those requirements or
with Assumption of Liabilities was executed by
solemnities which the law prescribes for the
and between FCCC and Union Savings and
validity of a will.
Mortgage Bank, wherein the FCCC as the
assignor, among others, assigned all its assets -The probate proceeding had already acquired
and liabilities to Union Savings and Mortgage jurisdiction over all the properties of the
Bank. deceased, including the three (3) tractors. To
dispose of them in any way without the probate
-Demand letters for the settlement of his
courts approval is tantamount to divesting it
account were sent by petitioner Union Bank of
with jurisdiction which the Court cannot allow.
the Philippines (UBP) to Edmund, but the latter
Every act intended to put an end to indivision
failed to heed the same and refused to pay.
among co-heirs and legatees or devisees is
Thus, on February 5, 1988, the petitioner filed a
deemed to be a partition, although it should
Complaint for sum of money against the heirs of
purport to be a sale, an exchange, a
Efraim Santibaez, Edmund and Florence, before
compromise, or any other transaction. Thus, in
the RTC of Makati City, Branch 150.
executing any joint agreement which appears
Issue: WON the partition in the agreement to be in the nature of an extra-judicial
executed by the heirs is valid partition, as in the case at bar, court approval
Held: is imperative, and the heirs cannot just divest
the court of its jurisdiction over that part of
NO the estate. Moreover, it is within the
-A probate court has the jurisdiction to jurisdiction of the probate court to determine
determine all the properties of the deceased, to the identity of the heirs of the decedent. In the
determine whether they should or should not instant case, there is no showing that the
be included in the inventory or list of properties signatories in the joint agreement were the only
to be administered. heirs of the decedent. When it was executed,
the probate of the will was still pending before
-In testate succession, there can be no valid
the court and the latter had yet to determine
partition among the heirs until after the will
who the heirs of the decedent were. Thus, for
has been probated. The law enjoins the
Edmund and respondent Florence S. Ariola to
probate of a will and the public requires it,
adjudicate unto themselves the three (3)
because unless a will is probated and notice
tractors was a premature act, and prejudicial to
thereof given to the whole world, the right of a
the other possible heirs and creditors who may
have a valid claim against the estate of the -Maximino was married to Donata but their
deceased. union did not produce any children. When
Maximino died on 1 May 1952, Donata
-The filing of a money claim against the
instituted intestate proceedings to settle her
decedents estate in the probate court is
husbands estate with the Cebu City Court of
mandatory. This requirement is for the purpose
First Instance (CFI), 14th Judicial District.
of protecting the estate of the deceased by
informing the executor or administrator of the -Donata died on 1 November 1977. Erlinda, one
claims against it, thus enabling him to examine of Donatas nieces, instituted with the RTC a
each claim and to determine whether it is a petition for the administration of the intestate
proper one which should be allowed. The plain estate of Donata. Erlinda and her husband,
and obvious design of the rule is the speedy Gregorio, were appointed by the RTC as
settlement of the affairs of the deceased and administrators of Donatas intestate estate.
the early delivery of the property to the Controversy arose among Donatas heirs when
distributees, legatees, or heirs. `The law strictly Erlinda claimed exclusive ownership of three
requires the prompt presentation and parcels of land.
disposition of the claims against the decedent's
-On 3 March 1987, the heirs of Maximino filed a
estate in order to settle the affairs of the estate
Complaint with the RTC against the heirs of
as soon as possible, pay off its debts and
Donata for the partition, annulment, and
distribute the residue.
recovery of possession of real property. RTC
Case: Pilapil vs Heirs of Maximo Briones, 514 rendered a decision in favor of the heirs of
SCRA, Feb 2007 Maximino.
the New Civil Code had been sufficiently Case: Heirs of Maglasang vs MBC, 706 SCRA
established in the present case. 235
-Although Donata may have alleged before the -In view of the issuance of letters of
CFI that she was her husbands sole heir, it was administration, the probate court, on August
not established that she did so knowingly, 30, 1977, issued a Notice to Creditors for the
maliciously and in bad faith, so as for this Court filing of money claims against Flaviano’s estate.
to conclude that she indeed committed fraud. -The probate court terminated the proceedings
This Court again brings to the fore the delay by with the surviving heirs executing an extra-
which respondents filed the present case, when judicial partition of the properties of Flaviano’s
the principal actors involved, particularly, estate. The loan obligations owed by the estate
Donata and Maximinos siblings, have already to respondent, however, remained unsatisfied
passed away and their lips forever sealed as to due to respondent’s certification that Flaviano’s
what truly transpired between them. account was undergoing a restructuring.
-RTC rendered a decision directing the heirs of without the right to file a claim for any
Maglasang to pay the amount of ₱434,742.36 deficiency.
with interest at the rate of 12%. CA affirmed the
-In our jurisdiction, the remedies available to
decision made by the RTC.
the mortgage creditor are deemed alternative
Issue: WON CA erred in affirming the RTC's and not cumulative. Notably, an election of one
award of deficiency judgment remedy operates as a waiver of the other. For
this purpose, a remedy is deemed chosen upon
Held:
the filing of the suit for collection or upon the
YES- Claims against deceased persons should be filing of the complaint in an action for
filed during the settlement proceedings of their foreclosure of mortgage, pursuant to the
estate. Such proceedings are primarily governed provision of Rule 68 of the 1997 Rules of Civil
by special rules found under Rules 73 to 90 of Procedure.
the Rules, although rules governing ordinary
-Section 7, Rule 86 governs the parameters and
actions may, as far as practicable, apply
the extent to which a claim may be advanced
suppletorily.
against the estate, whereas Act No. 3135 sets
-A creditor holding a claim against the deceased out the specific procedure to be followed when
secured by a mortgage or other collateral the creditor subsequently chooses the third
security" as above-highlighted, it may be option – specifically, that of extra-judicially
reasonably concluded that the aforementioned foreclosing real property belonging to the
section covers all secured claims, whether by estate. The application of the procedure under
mortgage or any other form of collateral, which Act No. 3135 must be concordant with Section
a creditor may enforce against the estate of the 7, Rule 86 as the latter is a special rule
deceased debtor. applicable to claims against the estate, and at
-Jurisprudence breaks down the rule under the same time, since Section 7, Rule 86 does
Section 7, Rule 86 and explains that the secured not detail the procedure for extra-judicial
creditor has three remedies/options that he foreclosures, the formalities governing the
may alternatively adopt for the satisfaction of manner of availing of the third option – such as
his indebtedness. In particular, he may choose the place where the application for extra-
to: (a) waive the mortgage and claim the entire judicial foreclosure is filed, the requirements of
debt from the estate of the mortgagor as an publication and posting and the place of sale –
ordinary claim; (b) foreclose the mortgage must be governed by Act No. 3135.
judicially and prove the deficiency as an -Having unequivocally opted to exercise the
ordinary claim; and (c) rely on the mortgage third option of extra-judicial foreclosure under
exclusively, or other security and foreclose the Section 7, Rule 86, respondent is now precluded
same before it is barred by prescription,
from filing a suit to recover any deficiency - The Petitioner argues that the assailed
amount as earlier discussed. Decision and Order of the Court a quo, supra,
should be annulled and set aside on the
grounds of extrinsic fraud and lack of
Case: Butiong vs Plazo, 765 SCRA 227 jurisdiction.
Facts: Issue: WON RTC of Nasugbu Batangas has
-On November 16, 1989, Pedro L. Rifioza died jurisdiction over the settlement of estate
intestate, leaving several heirs, including his_ Held:
children with his first wife, respondents Ma.
- Considering that settlement of estate is a
Gracia R. Plazo and Ma. Fe Alaras, as well as
special proceeding cognizable by a probate
several properties including a resort covered by
court of limited jurisdiction while judicial
Transfer Certificates of Title (TCT) No. 51354
partition with annulment of title and recovery
and No. 51355, each with an area of 351 square
of possession are ordinary civil actions
meters, and a family home, the land on which it
cognizable by a court of general jurisdiction, the
stands is covered by TCT Nos. 40807 and 40808,
trial court exceeded its jurisdiction in
both located in Nasugbu, Batangas.
entertaining the latter while it was sitting
-Respondents alleged that sometime in March merely in its probate jurisdiction. This is in view
1991, they discovered that their co-heirs, of the prohibition found in the Rules on the
Pedro’s second wife, Benita"Tenorio and other joiner of special civil actions and ordinary civil
children, had sold the subject properties to actions.
petitioners, spouses Francisco Villafria and
Rule 74 Sec 1-. Extrajudicial settlement by
Maria Butiong, who are now deceased and
agreement between heirs. - If the decedent left
substituted by their son, Dr. Ruel B. Villafria,
no will and no debts and the heirs are all of
without their knowledge and consent.
age 5 or the minors are represented by their
-On October 1, 2001, the trial court nullified the judicial or legal representatives duly
transfer of the subject Properties to petitioners authorized for the purpose, the parties may
and spouses Bondoc due to irregularities in the without securing letters of administration,
Documents of conveyance offered by divide the estate among themselves as they
petitioner’s .as well as the circumstances see fit by means of a public instrument filed in
Surrounding the execution of the same. the office of the register of deeds, and should
Specifically, the Extra-Judicial Settlement was they disagree, they may do so in an ordinary
notarized by a notary public that was not duly action of partition. If there is only one heir, he
commissioned as such on the date it was may adjudicate to himself the entire estate by
executed. means of an affidavit filled in the office of the
register of deeds. The parties to an the Rules of Court. An exception to this rule,
Extrajudicial settlement, whether by public however, is found in the aforequoted Section 1
instrument or by stipulation in a pending of Rule 4 wherein the heirs of a decedent, who
action for partition, or the sole heir who left no will and no debts due from is estate,
adjudicates the entire estate to himself by may divide the estate either extrajudicially or
means of an affidavit shall file, simultaneously in an ordinary action or partition without
with and as a condition precedent to the filing submitting the same for judicial administration
of the public instrument, or stipulation in the nor applying for the appointment of an
action for partition, or of the affidavit in the administrator by the court.
office of the register of deeds, a bond with the
-Section 1, Rule 74 of the Revised Rules of
said register of deeds, in an amount equivalent
Court, however, does not preclude the heirs
to the value of the personal property involved
from instituting administration proceedings,
as certified to under oath by the parties
even if the estate has no· debts or obligations, if
concerned and conditioned upon the payment
they do not desire to resort for good reasons to
of any just claim that may be filed under section
an ordinary action for partition. he complaint
4 of this rule. It shall be presumed that the
contained allegations inherent in an action for
decedent left no debts if no creditor files a
settlement of estate does not. Mean that there
petition for letters of administration within
was a prohibited joined of causes of action for
two (2) years after the death of the decedent.
questions as to the estate's properties as well as
-The fact of the Extrajudicial settlement or a determination of the heirs, their status as
administration shall be Published in a such, and the nature and extent of their titles to
newspaper of general circulation in the manner the estate, may also be properly ventilated in
provided in the next succeeding section; but no partition proceedings alone.
Extrajudicial settlement shall be binding upon
any person who has not participated therein or GUARDIANSHIP (Rule 92-97) AM No. 03-02-05
had no notice thereof. SC
-The general rule is that when a person dies Q: What are the three kinds of guardianship?
intestate, or, if testate, failed to name an
executor in his will or the executor o named is A: Natural, Judicial and Guardianship ad litem
incompetent, or refuses the trust, or. Fails to
Natural Guardian- Parents of the Ward
furnish the bond equipped by the Rules of
Court, then the decedent's estate shall be Judicial Guardian- Any person qualified to be
judicially administered and the competent appointed as guardian of the person of the
court shall appoint a qualified administrator ward or its property.
the order established in Section 6 of Rule 78 of
Guardian Ad Litem- Any person qualified to be -Deaf and dumb who are unable to read and
appointed as guardian but has limited duty write
since his duty is for a particular purpose.
-Unsound mind even though they have lucid
Object of guardianship interval
-Guardianship over the incompetent -The natural guardians are not entitled to sell
the property of their wards.
*Under the new rules on guardianship, mere
minority is not a ground for him to qualify. -Their remedy is to apply for the appointment
as guardian ad litem in order for them to sell
(Example: Orphan, one of the parents died and such property
remarried)
Q: When is guardianship is terminated?
Rule 92- Venue
A: The petition for guardianship ceases to exist
Sec 1- Where to institute proceeding upon the death of the ward or guardian.
(Jurisdiction)
Case Doctrine: Caniza as Represented by
Minor- Family Court Amparo Evangelista vs CA
Incompetent & Minor- Family Court “Guardianship was terminated upon the death
of Caniza but the case against Sps. Estrada shall
Incompetent- RTC not be dismissed on the ground of substitution”
-Person suffering the penalty of civil interdiction -In default of parents or court appointed
guardian, the court may appoint a guardian.
-Hospitalized lepers
-Surviving grandparents
-Prodigals
-Oldest brother or sister of the minor over 21 incapable of discharging his trust or unsuitable
years of age unless fit or disqualified therefor, or has wasted or mismanaged the
estate, or failed for thirty (30) days after it is
-Actual custodian of the minor over 21 years of due to render an account or make a return, the
age court may, upon reasonable notice to the
guardian, remove him, and compel him to
-Any other person who is the sound discretion surrender the estate of the ward to the person
of the court that would serve the best interest found to be lawfully entitled thereto. A
of the minor. guardian may resign when it appears proper to
allow the same; and upon his resignation or
Section 4. Opposition to petition. — Any removal the court may appoint another in his
interested person may, by filing a written place.
opposition, contest the petition on the ground
of majority of the alleged minor, competency of Section 3. Other termination of guardianship.
the alleged incompetent, or the insuitability of — The marriage or voluntary emancipation of
the person for whom letters are prayed, and a minor ward terminates the guardianship of
may pray that the petition be dismissed, or that the person of the ward, and shall enable the
letters of guardianship issue to himself, or to minor to administer his property as though he
any suitable person named in the opposition. were of age, but he cannot borrow the money
or alienate or encumber real property without
Rule 96- General Power and Duties of the consent of his father or mother, or
Guardians guardian. He can sue and be sued in court only
with the assistance of his father, mother or
Q: What is the authority of the guardian? guardian. The guardian of any person may be
discharged by the court when it appears, upon
A: A guardian has full authority to take the application of the ward or otherwise, that
possession of the property of the ward, to pay the guardianship is no longer necessary.
the debts of the ward, to settle accounts,
CASES:
collect debts, and appear in actions for the
ward, Estate to be managed frugally, and Goyena vs Ledesma-Gustillo, Jan 13, 2003
proceeds applied to maintenance of ward,
Guardian may be authorized to join in partition Facts:
proceedings after hearing, Inventories and
-On July 8, 1996, respondent filed at the RTC of
accounts of guardians, and appraisement of
Makati a PETITION FOR LETTERS OF
estates.
GUARDIANSHIP over the person and properties
of her sister Julieta.
Rule 97- Termination
-(a)That for the most part during the year 1995
Section 2. When the guardian removed or and 1996, Julieta Ledesma has been a patient in
allowed to resign. New appointment. — When the Makati Medical Center where she is under
a guardian becomes insane or otherwise
medical attention for old age, general debility,
and a mini-stroke which she suffered in the observation by the trial court, cited in the
United States in early 1995; (b) That Julieta present petition, that Julieta was still placed
Ledesma is confined to her bed and cannot get under the care of doctors after she checked out
up from bed without outside assistance, and and was returned to the hospital when she
she has to be moved by wheel chair; (c) That suffered another stroke.
Julieta Ledesma owns real estate and personal
properties in Metro Manila and in Western - SC noted two undisputed facts in the case at
Visayas, with an aggregate estimated assessed bar, to wit: 1) Petitioner opposed the petition
and par value of P1 Million Pesos for the appointment of respondent as guardian
before the trial court because, among other
-Petitioner filed an Opposition to the petition reasons, she felt she was disliked by
for letters of guardianship. She later filed an respondent, a ground which does not render
Amended Opposition on August 15, 1996. respondent unsuitable for appointment as
-The trial court found Julieta incompetent and guardian, and 2) Petitioner concealed the
incapable of taking care of herself and her deteriorating state of mind of Julieta before the
property and appointed respondent as guardian trial court, which is reflective of a lack of good
of her person and properties. faith.
Issue: WON Amparo Gustillo is the proper Case: Neri vs Heirs of Hadji Yusop Uy, 683
guardian in this case SCRA
-On 1996, the children of Enrique filed a Held: No, as to the shares of the minor children
complaint for annulment of the said sale against because as a natural guardian, he is merely
spouses Uy, assailing the validity of the sale for clothed with powers of administration.
having been sold within the prohibited period.
And, also, for having been executed without the With respect to Rosa and Douglas who were
consent or approval of Eutropia, Victoria, Rosa minors at the time of the execution of the
and Douglas; thus, depriving the latter siblings settlement and sale, their NATURAL GUARDIAN
of their legitime. and father, Enrique, represented them in the
transaction. However, on the basis of the laws
-Uy countered that the sale took place beyond prevailing at that time, Enrique was merely
the 5 year prohibitory period from the issuance clothed with POWERS OF ADMINISTRATION and
of the homestead patents. They also denied bereft of any authority to dispose of their 2/16
that Eutropia and Victoria were excluded from shares in the estate of their mother,
the Extra-judicial settlement and sale of the Anunciacion.
subject properties, and interposed further the
defense of prescription and laches. Power of dominion, is granted by law only to a
JUDICIAL GUARDIAN of the ward’s property
RTC rendered a Decision annulling the Extra- and even then only with court’s prior approval
judicial settlement of estate with Absolute Deed secured in accordance with the proceedings
of Sale. It ruled that the sale is void because set forth by the Rules.
Eutropia and Victoria were deprived of their
hereditary rights and that Enrique had no Exception: RATIFICATION Consequently, the
judicial authority to sell the shares of his minor disputed sale entered into by Enrique in behalf
children, Rosa and Douglas. of his minor children without the proper judicial
authority, unless ratified by them upon reaching
On appeal, however, CA reserved and set aside the age of majority, is unenforceable in
RTC decision. accordance with Art. 1317 and 1403(1) of the
Civil Code.
Issue: WON Enrique, as guardian of his children Records, however, show that Rosa had ratified
and co-owner (with his children), sell their co- the extrajudicial settlement of the estate with
owned property? absolute deed of sale. The same, however, is
not true with respect to Douglas for lack of
evidence showing ratification.
THEREFORE, the extrajudicial settlement with -During the course of the trial, respondent filed
sale is invalid and not binding on Eutropia, demurrer to evidence which was granted by the
Victoria and Douglas. trial court. It was declared that petitioner failed
to provide documentary and testimonial
Case: Oropesa vs Oropesa, 671 SCRA (4/2012) evidence to establish that General Oropesa is
incompetent to run his personal affairs.
Facts:
Issue: WON respondent is considered as
-On January 23, 2004, the (petitioner) filed with incompetent person who should be placed
the Regional Trial Court of Paraaque City, a under guardianship
petition for him and a certain Ms. Louie Ginez
to be appointed as guardians over the property Held:
of his father, the (respondent) Cirilo Oropesa.
-A guardianship is a trust relation of the most
-It is alleged among others that the sacred character, in which one person, called a
(respondent) has been afflicted with several guardian acts for another called the ward whom
maladies and has been sickly for over ten (10) the law regards as incapable of managing his
years already having suffered a stroke on April own affairs. A guardianship is designed to
1, 2003 and June 1, 2003, that his judgment and further the wards well-being, not that of the
memory [were] impaired and such has been guardian. It is intended to preserve the wards
evident after his hospitalization; that even property, as well as to render any assistance
before his stroke, the (respondent) was that the ward may personally require. It has
observed to have had lapses in memory and been stated that while custody involves
judgment, showing signs of failure to manage immediate care and control, guardianship
his property properly; that due to his age and indicates not only those responsibilities, but
medical condition, he cannot, without outside those of one in loco parentis as well.
aid, manage his property wisely, and has
become an easy prey for deceit and exploitation -Persons who, though of sound mind but by
by people around him, particularly Ms. Ma. reason of age, disease, weak mind or other
Luisa Agamata, his girlfriend. similar causes, are incapable of taking care of
themselves and their property without outside
- On July 6, 2004, respondent filed his aid are considered as incompetents who may
Opposition to the petition for guardianship. properly be placed under guardianship. A
finding that a person is incompetent should be -RTC reversed the decision "action by which the
anchored on clear, positive and definite issue of defendants' possession should be
evidence. resolved is accion publiciana, the obtaining
factual and legal situation, demanding
-With the failure of petitioner to formally offer adjudication by such plenary action for recovery
his documentary evidence, his proof of his of possession cognizable in the first instance by
fathers incompetence consisted purely of the Regional Trial Court."
testimonies given by himself and his sister.
These testimonies, which did not include any Issue: WON Evangelista, as Caiza's legal
expert medical testimony, were insufficient to guardian had authority to bring said action
convince the trial court of petitioners cause of
action and instead lead it to grant the demurrer Held:
to evidence that was filed by respondent.
-Amparo Evangelista was appointed by a
Case: Caniza vs CA, G.R. No. 110427 February competent court the general guardian of both
24, 1997 the person and the estate of her aunt, Carmen
Caiza. Her Letters of Guardianship dated
Facts: December 19, 1989 clearly installed her as the
"guardian over the person and properties of the
-On November 20, 1989, being then ninety-four incompetent CARMEN CAIZA with full authority
(94) years of age, Carmen Caiza, a spinster, a to take possession of the property of said
retired pharmacist, and former professor of the incompetent in any province or provinces in
College of Chemistry and Pharmacy of the which it may be situated and to perform all
University of the Philippines, was declared other acts necessary for the management of her
incompetent by judgment of the Regional Trial properties By that appointment, it became
Court of Quezon City, Branch 107, in a Evangelista's duty to care for her aunt's person,
guardianship proceeding instituted by her to attend to her physical and spiritual needs, to
niece, Amparo A. Evangelista. assure her well-being, with right to custody of
her person in preference to relatives and
-Judgment was rendered by the MetroTC on friends.
April 13, 1992 in Caiza's favor, the Estradas
being ordered to vacate the premises and pay -Evangelista was merely discharging the duty to
Caiza P5,000.00 by way of attorney's fees. attend to "the comfortable and suitable
maintenance of the ward" explicitly imposed on letters of guardianship shall be issued only upon
her by Section 4, Rule 96 of the Rules of Court: “ the submission of the bond, conditioned on the
following provisions of the Rule 94 Section 1, of
A guardian must manage the estate of his
the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure.
ward frugally and without waste, and apply
the income and profits thereof, so far as -Abad filed an appeal to the CA. He argued that
maybe necessary, to the comfortable and the RTC erred in disqualifying him from being
suitable maintenance of the ward and his appointed as Maura’s guardian despite the fact
family, if there be any; and if such income and that he has all the qualifications stated under
the Rules. That he was not a resident of
profits be insufficient for that purpose, the
Mangaldan, Pangasinan should not be a ground
guardian may sell or encumber the real estate,
for his disqualification as he had actively and
upon being authorized by order to do so, and
efficiently managed the affairs and properties
apply to such of the proceeds as may be
of his aunt even if he is residing in Metro
necessary to such maintenance."
Manila. Court of Appeals affirmed the decision
of the Regional Trial Court.
Case: Abad vs Biazon, 687 SCRA (12/5/2012)
Issue: WON Biason is qualifed to become the
guardian of Maura
Facts:
Held:
-On March 19, 2007, petitioner Eduardo Abad
(Abad) filed a petition for guardianship over the -In his petition, Abad prayed for the nullification
person and properties of Maura B. Abad of the CA Decision dated August 28, 2009 and
(Maura) with the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Resolution dated April 19, 2010, which
Dagupan City, Branch 42. He averred that dismissed his appeal from the Decision dated
Maura, who is single, more than ninety (90) September 26, 2007 of the RTC and denied his
years old and a resident of Rizal Street, motion for reconsideration, respectively.
Poblacion, Mangaldan, Pangasinan, is in dire Basically, he was challenging Biason’s
need of a guardian who will look after her and qualifications and the procedure by which the
her business affairs. Due to her advanced age, RTC appointed him as guardian for Maura.
Maura is already sickly and can no longer However, with Biason’s demise, it has become
manage to take care of herself and her impractical and futile to proceed with resolving
properties unassisted thus becoming an easy the merits of the petition. It is a well-
prey of deceit and exploitation. established rule that the relationship of
guardian and ward is necessarily terminated
-RTC ordered and appointing Biason as Maura's
by the death of either the guardian or the
guardian. The Court hereby fixes the
ward.The supervening event of death rendered
guardianship bond at Php500,000.00 and the
it pointless to delve into the propriety of Situation: Liza, 19 years of age and earning Php
Biason’s appointment since the juridical tie 200,000 per month. She wants to adopt Little
between him and Maura has already been Mario.
dissolved. The petition, regardless of its
Q: Is Liza qualified to adopt Little Mario?
disposition, will not afford Abad, or anyone else
for that matter, any substantial relief. A: NO, Legal age is not only a requirement in
the petition for Adoption. Liza is not entitled to
adopt since Liza does not have full civil capacity.
ADOPTION AND CUSTODY OF MINORS Under the Civil Code, a person shall have the
full capacity when he/she reached the age of
Jurisdiction- Family Court
21.
Venue- The residence of the adopter
-If she obtained consent from the biological
Q: What is Adoption? parents of Little Mario, Liza is entitled or has
A: Adoption is a juridical act, a proceeding in the right to adoption.
rem which creates a relationship of two person -The prospective adoptee must be one that is
similar to that of a legitimate paternity and legally available for adoption.
filiation.
Q: When is a person legally available for
Juridical Act- It cannot be a subject of a adoption?
contract since there must be a judicial order.
A: In petition for adoption, there must be an
Proceeding in Rem- It binds the whole world indication that a person is legally available for
which creates a relationship between two adoption.
persons similar to that of a legitimate paternity
Q: What are the kinds of legally available
and filiation.
persons for adoption?
*Adoption has taken a lot of changes
A: Voluntarily committed- The Biological
throughout the years.
parents renounces their right/parental
RA 8552- Domestic Adoption Act authority.
RA 8043- Inter-Country Adoption Act Involuntary committed- The government insists
AM 02-6-02- Rules on Adoption that a person should be adopted
18 years of age (Domestic Adoption) Child Placement Agency vs Child Caring Agency
Child Placement Agency- They authorize to take Section 7. Who May Adopt. – The following
care of a child and to file an adoption may adopt:
proceeding.
(a) Any Filipino citizen of legal age, in possession
Child Caring Agency- An organization that take of full civil capacity and legal rights, of good
care of a child support but not authorize to file moral character, has not been convicted of any
crime involving moral turpitude, emotionally
adoption proceeding.
and psychologically capable of caring for
Simulation of Birth- When a party tries to children, at least sixteen (16) years older than
tamper the birth certificate towards the civil the adoptee, and who is in a position to support
and care for his/her children in keeping with the
registry to make it appear that they are the real means of the family. The requirement of sixteen
parents of a child who is his own biological (16) year difference between the age of the
adopter and adoptee may be waived when the
-Considered as Criminal Offense
adopter is the biological parent of the adoptee,
Case: In Re Petition for Adoption of Michelle or is the spouse of the adoptee's parent;
and Michael Lim
(b) Any alien possessing the same qualifications
Facts: Mr & Mrs Lim wanted to adopt Michelle as above stated for Filipino nationals: Provided,
and Michael. One day, a woman went to the That his/her country has diplomatic relations
with the Republic of the Philippines, that he/she
clinic of Mrs. Lim asking if they can adopt her 11
has been living in the Philippines for at least
day old child. Sps Lim took care of the children three (3) continuous years prior to the filing of
and even enrolled them in an exclusive school. the application for adoption and maintains such
Mrs. Lim simulated the birth certificates of residence until the adoption decree is entered,
Michelle and Michael. When Mrs. Lim filed the that he/she has been certified by his/her
diplomatic or consular office or any appropriate
petition, Michelle was already married and
government agency that he/she has the legal
Michael was of legal age. Mrs. Lim was able to capacity to adopt in his/her country, and that
get the consent of her husband, the children his/her government allows the adoptee to enter
and it was granted by the lower court. his/her country as his/her adopted
son/daughter: Provided, Further, That the
Issue: WON Mrs. Lim validly adopt Michelle and requirements on residency and certification of
Michael the alien's qualification to adopt in his/her
country may be waived for the following:
Held: NO- The Supreme Court denied the
petition on the ground that petition for (i) a former Filipino citizen who seeks to adopt a
adoption must be filed jointly by spouses even if relative within the fourth (4th) degree of
there is a prospective divorce between them. consanguinity or affinity; or
Procedure for RA 8552- Domestic Adoption Act (ii) one who seeks to adopt the legitimate
son/daughter of his/her Filipino spouse; or
(iii) one who is married to a Filipino citizen and (d) A person of legal age if, prior to the
seeks to adopt jointly with his/her spouse a adoption, said person has been consistently
relative within the fourth (4th) degree of considered and treated by the adopter(s) as
consanguinity or affinity of the Filipino spouse; his/her own child since minority;
or
(e) A child whose adoption has been previously
(c) The guardian with respect to the ward after rescinded; or
the termination of the guardianship and
clearance of his/her financial accountabilities. (f) A child whose biological or adoptive
parent(s) has died: Provided, That no
Husband and wife shall jointly adopt, except in proceedings shall be initiated within six (6)
the following cases: months from the time of death of said
parent(s).
(i) if one spouse seeks to adopt the legitimate
son/daughter of the other; or Section 9. Whose Consent is Necessary to the
Adoption. – After being properly counseled and
(ii) if one spouse seeks to adopt his/her own informed of his/her right to give or withhold
illegitimate son/daughter: Provided, However, his/her approval of the adoption, the written
that the other spouse has signified his/her consent of the following to the adoption is
consent thereto; or hereby required:
(iii) if the spouses are legally separated from (a) The adoptee, if ten (10) years of age or over;
each other.
(b) The biological parent(s) of the child, if
In case husband and wife jointly adopt, or one known, or the legal guardian, or the proper
spouse adopts the illegitimate son/daughter of government instrumentality which has legal
the other, joint parental authority shall be custody of the child;
exercised by the spouses.
(c) The legitimate and adopted sons/daughters,
Section 8. Who May Be Adopted. – The ten (10) years of age or over, of the adopter(s)
following may be adopted: and adoptee, if any;
(a) Any person below eighteen (18) years of age (d) The illegitimate sons/daughters, ten (10)
who has been administratively or judicially years of age or over, of the adopter if living with
declared available for adoption; said adopter and the latter's spouse, if any; and
(b) The legitimate son/daughter of one spouse (e) The spouse, if any, of the person adopting or
by the other spouse; to be adopted.
Q: whose consent is required in adoption *While adoption is for the best interest of
proceeding? prospective adoptee, that should not deprive
A: Adoptee must be at least 10 years of age & the biological parent of their parental authority.
Parents of the prospective adoptee, children of Case: Castro vs Gregorio 738 SCRA
the adopter (whether legitimate/illegitimate),
Facts: Atty Jose Castro of Laoag City and also a
spouses
practioner of law in Manila. He was married to
Case: Cang vs Court of Appeals, 296 SCRA 128 Mrs Castro and during their marriage they had
one child but died during the pregnancy. Atty
Facts: -Sps Cang were residents of the
Philippines, Mr Cang was found to be a Castro and Mrs Castro got separated but later
on reconciled to each other and had one Ruling: The Supreme Court held that there is no
daughter named Joanne. Mrs Castro separated reason or prohibition for the adoptee to use the
again from Atty. Castro on the ground that the middle name of her former natural parent.
latter has homosexual tendencies. Atty Castro Considering that the identity of a person is not
sought to adopt the 2 illegitimate child to whom only dependent on the paternal side but also on
he had with their housemate. The petition for the maternal side.
adoption was granted by the trial court. Mrs
Case: Petition for Change of Name of Julian Lim
Castro discovered the alleged adoption after
Carulasan Wang 588 SCRA 98
the death of Atty Castro and argued that her
consent was not secured during the adoption Facts: A petition was filed by Anna Lisa Wang
proceeding. The adoption proceeding was held for the change of name and/or
in the trial court of Batac which not the correction/cancellation of entry in the Civil
residence of Atty. Castro during his lifetime.
Registry of her son, a minor, Julian Lin Carulasan
Mrs. Castro availed of annulment of judgment
Wang before the RTC of Cebu City.
on the ground of extrinsic fraud.
Julian was the son of Anna Lisa Wang and Sing-
Issue: WON the consent of Mrs. Castro is Foe Wang. They were not yet married to each
necessary in the adoption proceeding other when Julian was born. Subsequently,
Held: YES- The two children which Atty Castro when Julian’s parents got married, the latter
sought to adopt is not his illegitimate children executed a deed of legitimation of their son so
to the house maid but to Larry her common law that the child’s name was changed from Julian
spouse. It was also ruled that Atty. Castro is Lin Carulasan to Julian Lin Carulasan Wang.
allegedly the lover of Larry. The consent of Mrs.
Castro is also necessary in order for adoption to
Reason: Since the family plans to stay in
be valid.
Singapore and, since in Singapore middle names
Case: IN Re Matter of Adoption of Stephanie or the maiden surname of the mother are not
Nathy Astorga Garcia 454 SCRA carried in a persons name, they anticipated that
Facts: Stephanie was the illegitimate child of Julian will be discriminated against because of
Mr. Catindig and he wanted to adopt her. In the his current registered name which carries a
petition for adoption, the petitioner asked that middle name. Also, the spouses’ daughter and
the child will retain Garcia as her middle which Julian might get confused if they are really
is the family name of the biological mother. This brothers and sisters because they have
petition was opposed by the OSG on the ground different surnames. Lastly, Carulasan sounds
that it should be through a separate petition
funny in Singapore’s Mandarin language since
under change of name Rule 103.
they do not have the letter “R” but if there is,
they pronounce it as “L”. It is for these reasons A PRIVILEGE AND NOT A RIGHT, so that before a
why the name of Julian Lin Carulasan Wang is person can be authorized to change his name
requested to be changed to Julian Lin Wang. given him either in his certificate of birth or civil
RTC: denied the petition. It found that the registry, he must show PROPER AND
reasons abovementioned does not fall within REASONABLE CAUSE, or ANY COMPELLING
the grounds recognized by law. It further ruled REASON which may justify such change.
that the real reason behind is only convenience. Otherwise, the request should be denied.
MR: Denied. The Singaporean practice of not
carrying a middle name does not justify the VALID GROUNDS FOR CHANGE OF NAME:
dropping of the middle name of a legitimate 1. When the name is ridiculous, dishonorable
Filipino child who intends to study there. The or extremely difficult to write or pronounce;
dropping of the middle name would be 2. When the change results as a legal
tantamount to giving due recognition to or consequence, as in legitimation;
application of the laws of Singapore instead of 3. When the change will avoid confusion;
Philippine law which is controlling. 4. When one has continuously used and been
Hence, this Appeal. SC required the OGS to known since childhood by a Filipino name,
comment on the petition. and was unaware of alien parentage;
5. A sincere desire to adopt a Filipino name to
OSG: Trial Court is correct. legitimate children erase signs of former alienage, all in good
have the right to bear the surnames of both faith and without prejudicing anybody; and
their mother and father, and such right cannot 6. When the surname causes embarrassment
be denied by the mere expedient of dropping and there is no showing that the desired
the same (Family Code). Mere convenience is change of name was for a fraudulent
not sufficient to support a petition for change of purpose or that the change of name would
name and/or cancellation of entry. prejudice public interest.
Issue: Whether the name mother’s surname IN GRANTING/DENYING:
should be dropped in the instant case because The question of proper and reasonable cause is
it is a common practice in Singapore to omit left to the sound discretion of the court. The
said surname? evidence presented need only be satisfactory to
Decision: No. Petition is denied. the court and not all the best evidence
The State has an interest in the names borne by available.
individuals and entities for purposes of
identification, and that A CHANGE OF NAME IS
What is involved is not a mere matter of Held: The Supreme Court ruled that after
allowance or disallowance of the request, but a adoption, the adopter died. Upon his death, the
JUDICIOUS evaluation of the sufficiency and biological mother took care of the deceased
propriety of the justifications advanced in son. The parental authority of the biological
support thereof, mindful of the consequent parents has returned upon the death of the
results in the event of its grant and with the adopter therefore she is not entitled to the
sole prerogative for making such determination benefits of SSS.
being lodged in the courts.
Inter-Country Adoption Law
Rescission of Adoption- The adopter can no -It can be availed of Filipino Citizens living
longer rescind adoption and the right to rescind abroad or those permanently residing abroad.
shall belong to the adoptee
-A party can file a petition for adoption in the
Q: What is the effect of the Family court in Phil or Inter-Country Adoption
rescission/termination of adoption? Board.
A: The adoptee shall go back to his biological Q: Can a foreigner avail of domestic adoption
parents along with all the legal ties that were act?
severed.
Facts: A certain seaman that is earning well Exceptions: -Seeks to adopt a relative within 4th
meet an accident that caused his death. The civil degree
biological mother filed an application with the
Compensation Act as beneficiary of his -Seeks to adopt her own illegitimate child
deceased son. This application was disapproved
by SSS on the ground that during the childhood -Seeks to adopt the legitimate child of the
of the deceased, he was adopted by his spouse
grandfather. The grandfather already died
therefore the adoption relationship was already Cases:
terminated.
Case: Vda. de Jacob vs Court of Appeals- 312 Pedro Pilapil as the legally adopted son of
Alfredo.
SCRA 772
Issue: WON Pedro Pilapil is legally adopted
son of Alfredo Jacob
-Petitioner claimed to be the surviving spouse
of deceased Dr. Alfredo E. Jacob and was Held:
appointed Special Administratix for the various NO- The factual findings of the trial court
estates of the deceased by virtue of are accorded great weight and respect by
appellate courts, because it had the
a reconstructed Marriage Contract between opportunity to observe the demeanor of
herself and the deceased. witnesses and to note telltale signs
indicating the truth or the falsity of a
testimony. The rule, however, is not
-During the proceeding for the settlement of
applicable to the present case, because it
the estate of the deceased Alfredo in Case No. was Judge Augusto O. Cledera, not
T-46 (entitled Tomasa vda. de Jacob v. Jose the ponente, who heard the testimonies of
Centenera, et al) herein defendant-appellee the two expert witnesses.
Pedro sought to intervene therein claiming his -No proof was presented that Dr. Jacob had
share of the deceaseds estate as Alfredos treated him as an adopted child. Likewise, both
adopted son and as his sole surviving the Bureau of Records Management in Manila
and the Office of the Local Civil Registrar of
heir. Pedro questioned the validity of the
Tigaon, Camarines Sur, issued Certifications
marriage between appellant Tomasa and his
that there was no record that Pedro Pilapil had
adoptive father Alfredo. been adopted by Dr. Jacob. Taken together,
these circumstances inexorably negate the
- The trial court found some irregularities alleged adoption of respondent.
in the execution of the Marriage Contract.
(a) No copy of the Marriage Contract was -The burden of proof in establishing adoption
sent to the local civil registrar by the is upon the person claiming such relationship.
solemnizing officer thus giving the
implication that there was no copy of the Case: Republic vs Hon. Jose R. Hernandez,
253 SCRA 509
marriage contract sent to, nor a record
existing in the civil registry of Manila, (b) In
signing the Marriage Contract, the late
Alfredo Jacob merely placed his Facts:
thumbmark on said contract. -On March 10, 1994, herein private
-Appellee presented the Order dated 18 respondent spouses, Van Munson y
July 1961 in Special Proceedings No. 192 Navarro and Regina Munson y Andrade,
issued by then Presiding Judge Moya filed a petition to adopt the minor Kevin
granting the petition for adoption filed by Earl Bartolome Moran.
deceased Alfredo which declared therein
-At the hearing on April 18, 1994, - The law allows the adoptee, as a matter of
petitioner opposed the inclusion of the right and obligation, to bear the surname of
relief for change of name in the same the adopter, upon issuance of the decree of
petition for adoption. In its formal adoption. It is the change of the
opposition dated May 3, 1995, petitioner adoptees surname to follow that of the
reiterated its objection to the joinder of adopter which is the natural and necessary
the petition for adoption and the petitions consequence of a grant of adoption and must
for change of name in a single proceeding, specifically be contained in the order of the
arguing that these petitions should be court, in fact, even if not prayed for by
conducted and pursued as two separate petitioner.
proceedings.
However, the given or proper name, also known
-The trial court granted the petition for
as the first or Christian name, of the adoptee
adoption filed by herein petitioners.
must remain as it was originally registered in
the civil register. The creation of an adoptive
relationship does not confer upon the adopter a
Issue: WON the court a quo erred in
license to change the adoptees registered
granting the prayer for the change of the
Christian or first name. The automatic change
registered proper or given name of the
thereof, premised solely upon the adoption
minor adoptee embodied in the petition
thus granted, is beyond the purview of a decree
for adoption
of adoption. Neither is it a mere incident in nor
Held: an adjunct of an adoption proceeding, such that
a prayer therefor furtively inserted in a petition
Art. 189 of the Family Code enumerate in no for adoption, as in this case, cannot properly be
uncertain terms the legal effects of adoption: granted.
(1) For civil purposes, the adopted shall be -The name of the adoptee as recorded in the
deemed to be a legitimate child of the adopters civil register should be used in the adoption
and both shall acquire the reciprocal rights and proceedings in order to vest the court with
obligations arising from the relationship of jurisdiction to hear and determine the
parent and child, including the right of the same and shall continue to be so used until the
adopted to use the surname of the adopters; court orders otherwise. Changing the given or
proper name of a person as recorded in the civil
(2) The parental authority of the parents by register is a substantial change in one’s official
nature over the adopted shall terminate and be or legal name and cannot be authorized without
vested in the adopters, except that if the a judicial order.
adopter is the spouse of the parent by nature of - Petition for adoption and a petition for change
the adopted, parental authority over the of name are two special proceedings which, in
adopted shall be exercised jointly by both substance and purpose, are different from each
spouses; and other. Each action is individually governed by
particular sets of laws and rules. These two
(3) The adopted shall remain an intestate heir proceedings involve disparate issues. In a
of his parents and other blood relatives. petition for adoption, the court is called upon to
(d) A copy of the commitment or cause of Section 10. Contents of return. — When the
detention of such person, if it can be procured person to be produced is imprisoned or
without impairing the efficiency of the remedy; restrained by an officer, the person who makes
or, if the imprisonment or restraint is without the return shall state therein, and in other cases
any legal authority, such fact shall appear. the person in whose custody the prisoner is
found shall state, in writing to the court or
Section 4. When writ not allowed or discharge judge before whom the writ is returnable,
authorized. — If it appears that the person plainly and unequivocally:
alleged to be restrained of his liberty is in the
custody of an officer under process issued by a (a) Whether he has or has not the party in his
court or judge or by virtue of a judgment or custody or power, or under restraint;
order of a court of record, and that the court
or judge had jurisdiction to issue the process, (b) If he has the party in his custody or power,
render the judgment, or make the order, the or under restraint, the authority and the true
writ shall not be allowed; or if the jurisdiction and whole cause thereof, set forth at large, with
appears after the writ is allowed, the person a copy of the writ, order execution, or other
shall not be discharged by reason of any process, if any, upon which the party is held;
informality or defect in the process, judgment,
or order. Not shall anything in this rule be held (c) If the party is in his custody or power or is
to authorize the discharge of a person charged restrained by him, and is not produced,
with or convicted of an offense in the particularly the nature and gravity of the
Philippines, or of a person suffering sickness or infirmity of such party by reason of
imprisonment under lawful judgment. which he cannot, without danger, be bought
before the court or judge;
order for the safekeeping of the person Country Club when he was in Baguio City. On
imprisoned or restrained as the nature of the the other hand, Erlinda lived in Antipolo City.
case requires. If the person imprisoned or
restrained is not produced because of his -On February 25, 1998, Erlinda filed with the
alleged sickness or infirmity, the court or judge Regional Trial Court, Antipolo City a petition for
must be satisfied that it is so grave that such guardianship over the person and property of
person cannot be produced without danger, Potenciano Ilusorio due to the latters advanced
before proceeding to hear and dispose of the age, frail health, poor eyesight and impaired
matter. On the hearing the court or judge shall judgment.
disregard matters of form and technicalities in
respect to any warrant or order of commitment -Erlinda filed with the Court of Appeals a
of a court or officer authorized to commit by petition for habeas corpus to have the custody
law. of lawyer Potenciano Ilusorio. She alleged that
respondents refused petitioners demands to
Section 13. When the return evidence, and see and visit her husband and prohibited
when only a plea. — If it appears that the Potenciano from returning to Antipolo City but
prisoner is in custody under a warrant of it was denied by the court of appeals.
commitment in pursuance of law, the return
shall be considered prima facie evidence of the Issue: WON Habeas Corpus shall prosper in this
cause of restraint, but if he is restrained of his case
liberty by any alleged private authority, the
return shall be considered only as a plea of the Held:
facts therein set forth, and the party claiming
the custody must prove such facts. NO- Writ of habeas corpus extends to all cases
of illegal confinement or detention, or by
Cases: Ilusorio vs Bildner, 512 SCRA 169 which the rightful custody of a person is
withheld from the one entitled thereto. It is
Facts: available where a person continues to be
unlawfully denied of one or more of his
- Potenciano Ilusorio is about 86 years of age constitutional freedoms, where there is denial
possessed of extensive property valued at of due process, where the restraints are not
millions of pesos. For many years, lawyer merely involuntary but are unnecessary, and
Potenciano Ilusorio was Chairman of the Board where a deprivation of freedom originally valid
has later become arbitrary. It is devised as a
and President of Baguio Country Club.
speedy and effectual remedy to relieve persons
from unlawful restraint, as the best and only
-Erlinda Kalaw and Potenciano Ilusorio sufficient defense of personal freedom.
contracted matrimony and lived together for a
period of thirty (30) years. In 1972, they - The essential object and purpose of the writ
separated from bed and board for undisclosed of habeas corpus is to inquire into all manner of
reasons. Potenciano lived at Urdaneta involuntary restraint, and to relieve a person
Condominium, Ayala Ave., Makati City when he therefrom if such restraint is illegal.
was in Manila and at Ilusorio Penthouse, Baguio
-The evidence shows that there was no actual injunction, mandamus, and habeas corpus (with
and effective detention or deprivation of lawyer an urgent application for the issuance of
Potenciano Ilusorios liberty that would justify temporary restraining order and/or writ of
the issuance of the writ. The fact that lawyer preliminary injunction) filed by Panfilo M.
Potenciano Ilusorio is about 86 years of age, or Lacson, Michael Ray B. Aquino, and Cezar O.
under medication does not necessarily render Mancao; (2) G.R. No. 147781
him mentally incapacitated. Soundness of mind for mandamus and/or review of the factual
does not hinge on age or medical condition but basis for the suspension of the privilege of the
on the capacity of the individual to discern his writ of habeas corpus, with prayer for a
actions. temporary restraining order filed by Miriam
Defensor-Santiago; (3) G.R. No. 147799 for
-Being of sound mind, he is thus possessed with prohibition and injunction with prayer for a writ
the capacity to make choices. In this case, the of preliminary injunction and/or restraining
crucial choices revolve on his residence and the order filed by Rolando A. Lumbao; and (4) G.R.
people he opts to see or live with. The choices No. 147810 for certiorari and prohibition filed
he made may not appeal to some of his family by the political party Laban ng Demokratikong
members but these are choices which Pilipino.”
exclusively belong to Potenciano. He made it
clear before the Court of Appeals that he was Issue: WON Habeas Corpus shall prosper in this
not prevented from leaving his house or seeing case
people.
Held:
Case: Lacson vs Perez, 357 SCRA
NO- The rule requires that a party must show a
Facts: personal stake in the outcome of the case or an
injury to himself that can be redressed by a
-On May 1, 2001, President Macapagal-Arroyo, favorable decision so as to warrant an
faced by an angry and violent mob armed with invocation of the court’s jurisdiction and to
explosives, firearms, bladed weapons, clubs, justify the exercise of the courts remedial
stones and other deadly weapons assaulting powers in his behalf.
and attempting to break into Malacaang, issued
Proclamation No. 38 declaring that there was a -At best, the instant petition may be considered
state of rebellion in the National Capital as an action for declaratory relief, petitioner
Region. She likewise issued General Order No. 1 claiming that its right to freedom of expression
directing the Armed Forces of the Philippines and freedom of assembly is affected by the
and the Philippine National Police to suppress declaration of a state of rebellion and that said
the rebellion in the National Capital proclamation is invalid for being contrary to the
Region. Warrantless arrests of several alleged Constitution.
leaders and promoters of the rebellion were
thereafter effected. Case: Sangca vs City Prosecutor of Cebu, 524
SCRA 610
-There are 4 petitions filed before the Supreme
Court:” (1) G.R. No. 147780 for prohibition, Facts:
-On July 7, 2006, at about 2:00 P.M., Yap and Issue: WON Habeas Corpus is the proper
Tuliao were able to contact the informant and remedy is already moot
inquired from him if he was really sincere with
his words and the latter replied Held:
affirmatively.Ligan immediately composed a
team and planned for an entrapment operation YES- Writ of habeas corpus extends to all cases
against respondent and her cohorts. of illegal confinement or detention in which
any person is deprived of his liberty, or in
- Yap told her no problem as long as she has the which the rightful custody of any person is
item, he will give her the money. Respondent withheld from the person entitled to it. Its
instructed Yap to go with her at the parking essential object and purpose is to inquire into
area so that she could give it to him and there, all manner of involuntary restraint and to
she got inside her car. She took the shabu inside relieve a person from it if such restraint is
the compartment of her Toyota Fortuner with illegal. The singular function of a petition for
plate number YCX 965 and handed to him one habeas corpus is to protect and secure the basic
(1) packed medium size of heat sealed freedom of physical liberty.
transparent plastic sachet filled with white
crystalline substance believed to be -In the instant case, records show that Adam
shabu. Upon receiving the said has been released upon order of the trial judge
item, Yap pressed it to determine if it was really on January 26, 2007. Therefore, the petition has
shabu or not and when he noticed that it was become moot.
shabu, he immediately miscalled the members
of the team informing them that the transaction Case: TUJANMILITANTE IN BEHALF OF THE
was consummated and subsequently held MINOR CRISELDA M. CADA vs CADA-DEAPARA,
respondent. He then introduced himself as G.R. No. 210636, July 28, 2014
PDEA 7 operative. Tuliao, who was just at the
side of the car, assisted Yap in apprehending Facts:
the suspect. They also seized her cellular phone
and the Toyota Fortuner which she used in -On March 24, 2011, respondent Raquel M.
delivering and transporting illegal drugs. Cada-Deapera filed before the RTC-Caloocan a
verified petition for writ of habeas corpus. In
-The inquest prosecutor recommended the the said petition, respondent demanded the
dismissal of the case but was disapproved by immediate issuance of the special writ,
the City Prosecutor. Consequently, an directing petitioner Ma. Hazelina Tujan-
information charging Adam with violation of Militante to produce before the court
Section 5, Article 2 of R.A. No. 9165 was filed. respondent's biological daughter, minor
Criselda M. Cada (Criselda), and to return to her
-On petition for review before the Department the custody over the child.
of Justice, Secretary Raul M. Gonzalez found no
probable cause to hold Adam liable for the - The next day, on March 25, 2011, the RTC-
offense charged. Caloocan issued a writ of habeas corpus,
ordering petitioner to bring the child to court
on March 28, 2011. Despite diligent efforts and
several attempts, however, the Sheriff was -The petition may likewise be filed with the
unsuccessful in personally serving petitioner Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, or with any
copies of the habeas corpus petition and of the of its members and, if so granted, the writ shall
writ. Instead, on March 29, 2011, the Sheriff left be enforceable anywhere in the Philippines.
copies of the court processes at petitioner’s
The writ may be made returnable to a Family
Caloocan residence, as witnessed by
respondent’s counsel and barangay officials. Court or to any regular court within the region
where the petitioner resides or where the
-Petitioner filed a Petition for Guardianship over minor may be found for hearing and decision
the person of Criselda before the RTC, Branch on the merits. Upon return of the writ, the
89 in Quezon City (RTC-Quezon City). court shall decide the issue on custody of
Respondent filed a Motion to Dismiss the
minors. The appellate court, or the member
petition for guardianship on the ground of litis
thereof, issuing the writ shall be furnished a
pendentia, among others.
copy of the decision.
- Raquel moved for the ex parte issuance of an
alias writ of habeas corpus before the RTC- -In view of the afore-quoted provision, it is
Caloocan, which was granted by the trial court indubitable that the filing of a petition for the
on August 8, 2011 but it was denied by the RTC issuance of a writ of habeas corpus before a
and it was affirmed by the Court of Appeals. family court in any of the cities enumerated is
proper as long as the writ is sought to be
Issue: WON RTC has jurisdiction over the
habeas corpus case enforced within the National Capital Judicial
Region.
Held:
Rule 103- Change of Name
Section 20. Petition for writ of habeas corpus.-
A verified petition for a writ of habeas corpus Rule 108- Cancellation/Correction of Entries in
involving custody of minors shall be filed with the Civil Registry
the Family Court. The writ shall been
enforceable within its judicial region to which RA 9048- AN ACT AUTHORIZING THE CITY OR
the Family Court belongs. However, the MUNICIPAL CIVIL REGISTRAR OR THE CONSUL
petition may be filed with the regular court in GENERAL TO CORRECT A CLERICAL OR
the absence of the presiding judge of the Family TYPOGRAPHICAL ERROR IN AN ENTRY AND/OR
Court, provided, however, that the regular CHANGE OF FIRST NAME OR NICKNAME IN THE
court shall refer the case to the Family Court as CIVIL REGISTER WITHOUT NEED OF A JUDICIAL
soon as its presiding judge returns to duty. ORDER, AMENDING FOR THIS PURPOSE
ARTICLES 376 AND 412 OF THE CIVIL CODE OF
-The petition may also be filed with the THE PHILIPPINES
appropriate regular courts in places where
there are no Family Courts. Example: In one compound, there are 2 persons
named as Juan de la Cruz. The difference that
they have is the middle name. (Juan Reyes Dela
Cruz/Juan Robles Dela Cruz). Whenever Juan Q: What is the jurisdiction under Rule 108?
Reyes Dela-Cruz receives a letter or packages, it
is intended for another. In order avoid A: RTC
confusion, Juan Reyes dela cruz filed a petion
for change of name Q: What is the venue in this petition?
-The only record that should be changed is the A: The location of the civil registrar keeping the
name in the Birth Certificate. records of the subject matter a person want to
correct/cancel an entry
Rule 103- Change of Name
Q: What are the entries that is the subject of
Q: What is the Jurisdiction? cancellation or correction of entries?
A: An error which is harmless, visible to the Section 6. Duties of the City or Municipal Civil
eyes and of understanding. Registrar or the Consul General. – The city or
municipal civil registrar or the consul general to
Example: Matio Reyes---- Matio Reyes
whom the petition is presented shall examine
Huanito Santos----- Juanito Santos the petition and its supporting documents. He
shall post the petition in a conspicuous place
July 2, 1890-------- July 2, 1990 provided for that purpose for ten (10)
consecutive days after he finds the petition and
*No Correction of Error but change of name as its supporting documents sufficient in form and
a remedy.
substance.
-If in the Birth Certificate, the sex of a party is
Q: Did RA 9048 repealed Rule 103 and 108?
not indicated. The remedy is not correction of
entries but late registration.
A: No, it only amended the rule pursuant to
case of Onde.
-File a petition/application with the office of the *If a party is a resident of Manila and the entry
civil registrar where the records are kept. sought to be cancelled/corrected is in Davao.
He/she can file his petition in Civil Registrar of
-Posting of Notice in the place of the petition Manila and not in Davao.
for 10 consecutive days.
-Posting of Notice should be in Manila and
– The city or municipal civil registrar or the Davao.
consul general to whom the petition is
presented shall examine the petition and its Q: What is the remedy if the Civil Registrar
supporting documents. He shall post the denies the petition?
petition in a conspicuous place provided for
that purpose for ten (10) consecutive days after A: A party can file an appeal towards the Civil
he finds the petition and its supporting Registrar General. If the Civil Registrar denied
documents sufficient in form and substance. the petition, a party can proceed with judicial
remedy under Rule 103/108.
- The city or municipal civil registrar or the
consul general shall act on the petition and shall Case: Eleosida vs Civil Registrar, G.R. No.
render a decision not later than five (5) working 130277. May 9, 2002
days after the completion of the posting and/or
publication requirement. Facts:
The civil registrar general shall, within ten (10) -On January 30, 1997, petitioner Ma. Lourdes
working days from receipt of the decision Eleosida filed a petition before the Regional
granting a petition, exercise the power to Trial Court of Quezon City seeking to correct the
impugn such decision by way of an objection following entries in the birth certificate of her
based on the following grounds: (1) The error is son, Charles Christian: first, the surname
not clerical or typographical; (2) The correction
"Borbon" should be changed to "Eleosida;"
of an entry or entries in the civil register is
substantial or controversial as it affects the civil second, the date of the parents' wedding
status of a person; or (3) The basis used in should be left blank; and third, the informant's
changing the first name or nickname of a name should be "Ma. Lourdes B. Eleosida,"
person does not fall under Section 4. instead of "Ma. Lourdes E. Borbon." In support
of her petition, petitioner alleged that she gave
- Where the petition is denied by the city or birth to her son out of wedlock on May 24,
municipal civil registrar or the consul general, 1992; that she and the boy's father, Carlos
the petitioner may either appeal the decision to Borbon, were never married; and that the child
the civil registrar general or file the appropriate is therefore illegitimate and should follow the
petition with the proper court. mother's surname.
-The trial court dismissed the petition for lack of where the trial court has conducted
merit. proceedings where all relevant facts have been
fully and properly developed, where opposing
Issue: WON corrections of entries in the counsel have been given opportunity to
certificate of live birth pursuant to Article 412 of demolish the opposite party's case, and where
the Civil Code, in relation to Rule 108 of the the evidence has been thoroughly weighed and
Rules of Court may be allowed even if the errors considered.
to be corrected are substantial and not merely
clerical errors of a harmless and innocuous -If all these procedural requirements have been
nature. followed, a petition for correction and/or
cancellation of entries in the record of birth
Held: even if filed and conducted under Rule 108 of
the Revised Rules of Court can no longer be
YES- Rule 108 of the Revised Rules of Court described as 'summary.'
provides the procedure for cancellation or
correction of entries in the civil registry. The Case: Republic vs Kho, G.R. No. 170340, June
proceedings under said rule may either be 29, 2007
summary or adversary in nature. If the
correction sought to be made in the civil Facts:
register is clerical, then the procedure to be
adopted is summary. If the rectification affects -On February 12, 2001, Carlito and his siblings
the civil status, citizenship or nationality of a Michael, Mercy Nona and Heddy Moira filed
party, it is deemed substantial, and the before the RTC of Butuan City a verified petition
procedure to be adopted is adversary. for correction of entries in the civil registry
of Butuan City to effect changes in their
-The persons who must be made parties to a respective birth certificates. Carlito also asked
proceeding concerning the cancellation or the court in behalf of his minor children, Kevin
correction of an entry in the civil register are-- and Kelly, to order the correction of some
(1) the civil registrar, and (2) all persons who entries in their birth certificates.
have or claim any interest which would be
affected thereby. -Carlito requested the correction in his birth
certificate of the citizenship of his mother to
-Even substantial errors in a civil registry may Filipino instead of Chinese, as well as the
be corrected and the true facts established deletion of the word married opposite the
under Rule 108 provided the parties aggrieved phrase Date of marriage of parents because his
by the error avail themselves of the parents, Juan Kho and Epifania Inchoco
appropriate adversary proceeding. An (Epifania), were allegedly not legally married.
appropriate adversary suit or proceeding is one
-Carlitos filed an amended petition that his -A petition for correction is an action in rem,
second name be deleted from his record of an action against a thing and not against a
birth and that the citizenship be corrected from person. The decision on the petition binds not
Filipino to Chinese. only the parties thereto but the whole world.
An in rem proceeding is validated essentially
-The trial court directed the local civil registrar through publication. Publication is notice to the
of Butuan City to correct the entries in the whole world that the proceeding has for its
record of birth of Carlito, as follows: (1) change object to bar indefinitely all who might be
the citizenship of his mother from Chinese to minded to make an objection of any sort
Filipino; (2) delete John from his name; and (3) against the right sought to be established. It is
delete the word married opposite the date of the publication of such notice that brings in the
marriage of his parents. The last correction was whole world as a party in the case and vests the
ordered to be effected likewise in the birth court with jurisdiction to hear and decide it.
certificates of respondents Michael, Mercy
Nona, and Heddy Moira. -The correction of the mother’s citizenship from
Chinese to Filipino as appearing in Carlitos birth
Issue: WON the case involve is substantial in record was also proper. Of note is the fact that
nature during the cross examination by the city
prosecutor of Epifania, he did not deem fit to
Held: question her citizenship. Such failure to oppose
the correction prayed for, which certainly was
If the entries in the civil register could be not respondents fault, does not in any way
corrected or changed through mere summary change the adversarial nature of the
proceedings and not through appropriate proceedings.
action wherein all parties who may be affected
by the entries are notified or represented, the Case: Republic vs Silverio, G.R. No. 174689
door to fraud or other mischief would be set October 22, 2007
open, the consequence of which might be
detrimental and far reaching. Facts:
-the obvious effect of Republic Act No. 9048 is -Petitioner Rommel Jacinto Dantes Silverio filed
to make possible the administrative correction a petition for the change of his first name and
of clerical or typographical errors or change of sex in his birth certificate in the Regional Trial
first name or nickname in entries in the civil Court of Manila, Branch 8.
register, leaving to Rule 108 the correction of
substantial changes in the civil registry in -He further alleged that he is a male
appropriate adversarial proceedings. transsexual, that is, "anatomically male but
feels, thinks and acts as a female" and that he
had always identified himself with girls since be prejudiced by the use of his true and official
childhood. Petitioner lived as a female and was name. In this case, he failed to show, or even
in fact engaged to be married. He then sought allege, any prejudice that he might suffer as a
to have his name in his birth certificate changed result of using his true and official name.
from "Rommel Jacinto" to "Mely," and his sex
from "male" to "female." -Under RA 9048, a correction in the civil
registry involving the change of sex is not a
-The trial court rendered a decision in favor of mere clerical or typographical error. It is a
the petitioner granting the change of name and substantial change for which the applicable
sex. OSG, filed a petition for certiorari in the procedure is Rule 108 of the Rules of Court.
Court of Appeals. It alleged that there is no law
allowing the change of entries in the birth -There is no special law in the Philippines
certificate by reason of sex alteration. governing sex reassignment and its effects.
-Court of Appeals reversed the decision of the Case: Republic vs Cagandahan, G.R. No.
trial court since there is no law allowing the 166676, September 12, 2008
change of either name or sex in the certificate Facts:
of birth on the ground of sex reassignment
through surgery. -Jennifer Cagandahan as born on January 13,
1981 and was registered as a female in the
Issue: WON the petitioner has a legal ground to Certificate of Live Birth but while growing up,
change its name and sex in the birth certificate. she developed secondary male characteristics
and was diagnosed to have Congenital Adrenal
Held: Hyperplasia (CAH) which is a condition where
persons thus afflicted possess both male and
NO- A change of name does not alter one’s female characteristics. She further alleged that
legal capacity or civil status. RA 9048 does not she was diagnosed to have clitoral hyperthropy
sanction a change of first name on the ground in her early years and at age six, underwent an
of sex reassignment. Rather than avoiding ultrasound where it was discovered that she has
confusion, changing petitioner’s first name for small ovaries.
his declared purpose may only create grave
complications in the civil registry and the -t age thirteen, tests revealed that her ovarian
public interest. structures had minimized, she has stopped
growing and she has no breast or menstrual
-Before a person can legally change his given development. She then alleged that for all
name, he must present proper or reasonable interests and appearances as well as in mind
cause or any compelling reason justifying such and emotion, she has become a male
change. In addition, he must show that he will person. Thus, she prayed that her birth
certificate be corrected such that her gender be with. And accordingly, he has already ordered
changed from female to male and her first his life to that of a male. Respondent could have
name be changed from Jennifer to Jeff. undergone treatment and taken steps, like
taking lifelong medication, to force his body
-RTC granted the petition filed by Cagandahan into the categorical mold of a female but he did
on the ground that he is suffering from CAH. not. He chose not to do so. Nature has instead
taken its due course in respondent’s
Issue: WON the petition for correction of entry development to reveal more fully his male
for sex should be granted characteristics.
Held:
YES- Under Rep. Act No. 9048, a correction in Case: Onde vs Civil Registrar of Las Pinas City,
the civil registry involving the change of sex is G.R. No. 197174 September 10, 2014
not a mere clerical or typographical error. It is a
substantial change for which the applicable Facts:
procedure is Rule 108 of the Rules of Court.
-Petitioner filed a petition for correction of
-Respondent undisputedly has CAH. This entries in his certificate of live birth before the
condition causes the early or inappropriate R TC and named respondent Office of the Local
appearance of male characteristics. A person, Civil Registrar of Las Pinas City as sole
like respondent, with this condition produces respondent. Petitioner alleged that he is the
too much androgen, a male hormone. A illegitimate child of his parents Guillermo A.
newborn who has XX chromosomes coupled Onde and Matilde DC Pakingan, but his birth
with CAH usually has a (1) swollen clitoris with certificate stated that his parents were
the urethral opening at the base, an ambiguous married.
genitalia often appearing more male than
female; (2) normal internal structures of the -RTC dismissed the petition for correction of
female reproductive tract such as the ovaries, entries on the ground thatit is insufficient in
uterus and fallopian tubes; as the child grows form and substance. It ruled that the
older, some features start to appear male, such proceedings must be adversarial since the first
as deepening of the voice, facial hair, correction is substantial in nature and would
and failure to menstruate at puberty. About 1 in affect petitioner’s status as a legitimate child. It
10,000 to 18,000 children are born with CAH. was further held that the correction in the first
name of petitioner and his mother can be done
-Respondent here has simply let nature take its by the city civil registrar under Republic Act
course and has not taken unnatural steps to (R.A.) No. 9048.
arrest or interfere with what he was born
Issue: WON RTC erred in its decision in the required by Section 3, Rule 108 of the Rules of
correction on the first name of the petitioner Court.
correction is clerical, then the procedure to be allowing the correction of the subject certificate
adopted is summary. If the rectification affects of marriage by cancelling the wife portion
the civil status, citizenship or nationality of a thereof, the trial court did not, in any way,
party, it is deemed substantial, and the declare the marriage void as there was no
procedure to be adopted is adversary. marriage to speak of.
petition to correct the entries in the birth contentious alterations may be allowed only in
record of Patrick in the Local Civil Register. adversarial proceedings, in which all interested
parties are impleaded and due process is
-The trial court dismissed the petition without
properly observed.
prejudice, it holding that in a special proceeding
for correction of entry, the court, which is not -Their cause of action is actually to seek the
declaration of Pablo and Lucilles marriage as
acting as a family court under the Family Code, void for being bigamous and impugn Patricks
has no jurisdiction over an action to annul the legitimacy, which causes of action are governed
marriage of Lucille and Pablo, impugn the not by Rule 108 but by A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC
which took effect on March 15, 2003, and Art.
legitimacy of Patrick, and order Patrick to be 171 of the Family Code, respectively, hence, the
subjected to a DNA test, hence, the controversy petition should be filed in a Family Court as
should be ventilated in an ordinary adversarial expressly provided in said Code.
- Validity of marriages as well as legitimacy and
action. filiation can be questioned only in a direct
action seasonably filed by the proper party,
Issue: WON the trial court has jurisdiction and not through collateral attack such as the
under Rule 108 to nullify marriages and rule on petition filed before the court a quo.
legitimacy and filiation.
Held:
-In this example, Cardinal Tagle is credible but Case Doctrine: Zulueta vs CA- “The evidence
his testimony is irrelevant. presented by might be material & relevant to
the case but they are not sanctioned by the
Definition: “Evidence is the means sanctioned rules. The constitutional rights was violated in
by the rules of ascertaining in a judicial obtaining the pieces of evidence which is the
proceeding the truth respecting as a matter of right to privacy”
fact” (R 128,Sec 1)
Example of laws/statute:
According to Wigmore: Requirement for
Admissibility of Evidence -Anti-Wiretapping law
Q: What is the meaning of relevancy or means? Facts: Ongchia a China man filed a petition
before the court for naturalization. His petition
A: It connects immediately two things: Cause & for naturalization was granted by the trial court
Effect. but the OSG appealed such decision on the
ground that some documentary evidence were
Q: What is the definition of Relevancy? not offered in court.
A: That which tends to prove. Ruling: The rules of court shall not be applicable
in a petition for naturalization therefore the
Q: How does a matter (word, object, document)
presentation of evidence shall not apply.
to prove something?
Case Doctrine: Sasan Jr vs NLRC-“ In Labor
A: It bridges the cause & effect of the evidence.
Cases, evidence not presented before the Labor
Arbiter may still be presented on appeal and it is
-Evidence must be relevant to the case
still admissible. Labor cases are not covered by
the Rules of Court.”
Example: A caliber 45 gun is material in killing a
person.
To Ascertain- To make sure that the evidence is Objects which are not identifiable
the real thing (Authentication)
Example: Blood, oil, shabu
Nature of Evidence:
-Object/Real Evidence
Case: Ong Chia vs Republic, 328 SCRA
-Documentary Evidence
Facts:
- Testimonial Evidence
Petitioner was born on January 1, 1923
Steps for Authentication in Amoy, China. In 1932, he arrived at
the port of Manila on vessel "Angking”
-Marking of Evidence
and found employment and eventually
-Identification of Evidence started his own business, married a
Filipina, with whom he had four
Rationale: To prepare the evidence during the
trial to which it will be offered. children. At the age of 66, he filed a
verified petition to be admitted as a
Documentary Evidence- It must be supported
with testimonial evidence. Filipino citizen under C.A. No. 473,
otherwise known as the Revised
Q: How do you authenticate testimonial
Naturalization Law, as amended.
evidence?
Petitioner, after stating his
A: Before a witness is allowed to testify, he
qualifications as required in and lack of
must take an OATH.
the disqualifications enumerated in of
-When a witness does not want to take an oath
the law.
during his presentation, his testimony cannot
be authenticated therefore it is inadmissible.
Q: How do you authenticate object evidence? During the hearings, petitioner testified
A: It will depend if the object evidence is easily as to his qualifications and presented
identifiable since by their very nature, they are three witnesses to corroborate his
already marked.
testimony. Prosecutor Moran remarked
Example: Gun used in a killing incident (Serial that petitioner seems to be well-versed
Number of the Gun)
with the major portion of the history of failed to support his petition with the
the Philippines and is convinced that appropriate documentary evidence.
petitioner really deserves to be Issue: WON CA erred in its decision on denying
admitted as a citizen of the Philippines. the presentation of documentary evidence
And for this, do not wish to present any
Held: NO
evidence to counteract or refute the
testimony of the witnesses for the - The contention has no merit. Petitioner failed
petitioner, as well as the petitioner to note Rule 143 of the Rules of Court which
himself. provides that “These rules shall not apply to
land registration, cadastral and election cases,
naturalization and insolvency proceedings, and
August 25, 1999, the trial court
other cases not herein provided for, except by
granted the petition and
analogy or in a suppletory character and
admitted petitioner to Philippine
whenever practicable and convenient.”
citizenship.
In the instant case, appellant raises the issue of the witnesses and observing their deportment,
credibility of witnesses, specifically assigning as conduct and attitude. Absent any showing that
error on the part of the trial court, the latter’s the trial judge overlooked, misunderstood, or
giving of much weight to the evidence misapplied some facts or circumstances of
presented by the prosecution notwithstanding weight which would affect the result of the
their doubtfulness. case, the trial judge’s assessment of credibility
deserves the appellate court’s highest
ISSUE (1) respect. Where there is nothing to show that
Whether appellant’s contentions as regards the the witnesses for the prosecution were
witnesses’ credibility are meritorious. actuated by improper motive, their testimonies
are entitled to full faith and credit.
HELD: NO.
The issue regarding the credibility of the The weight of the prosecution’s evidence must
prosecution witnesses should be resolved be appreciated in light of the well-settled rule
against appellant. This Court will not interfere which provides that an accused can be
with the judgment of the trial court in convicted even if no eyewitness is available, as
determining the credibility of witnesses unless long as sufficient circumstantial evidence is
there appears in the record some fact or presented by the prosecution to prove beyond
circumstance of weight and influence which has doubt that the accused committed the crime.
been overlooked or the significance of which
has been misinterpreted. ISSUE (2)
Sufficiency of Circumstantial Evidence
Well-entrenched is the rule that the findings of
the trial court on credibility of witnesses are HELD: Circumstantial evidence, to be sufficient
entitled to great weight on appeal unless to warrant a conviction, must form an unbroken
cogent reasons are presented necessitating a chain which leads to a fair and reasonable
reexamination if not the disturbance of the conclusion that the accused, to the exclusion of
same; the reason being that the former is in a others, is the perpetrator of the crime. To
better and unique position of hearing first hand determine whether there is sufficient
circumstantial evidence, three requisites must by mortgaging the subject property for the
concur: (1) there is more than one purpose of helping her defray her business
circumstance; (2) facts on which the inferences expenses; she later discovered that Nena did
are derived are proven; and (3) the not secure any loan nor mortgage the property;
combination of all the circumstances is such as she wants the title in the name of Nena
to produce a conviction beyond reasonable cancelled and the subject property reconveyed
doubt. to her. Daniela died on July 29, 1988 leaving her
Case: Tating vs Marcella, 519 SCRA children as her heirs.
A: A court may take judicial notice of matter pleading is deemed by the adverse party if he
which are of public knowledge, or are capable does not specifically deny it under oath and set
of unquestionable demonstration, or ought to forth what he claims to be the facts.
be known to because of their judicial functions.
-Material averment in the complaint, other than
Q: When to take judicial notice? those as to the amount of unliquidated
damages, shall be deemed admitted when not
A: During the trial, the court, on its own specifically denied.
initiative, or on request of a party, may
announce its intention to take judicial notice of -Stipulation of facts
any matter and allow the parties to be heard
-Admission in the pleadings
thereon. After the trial, and before judgment or
on appeal, the proper court, on its own Q: May a judicial admission be contradicted?
initiative or on request of a party, may take
judicial notice of any matter and allow the A: NO, except by showing that it was made
parties to be heard thereon if such matter is through palpable mistake (R129 Sec 4)
decisive of a material issue in the case. (Rule
129 Sec 3) Case: LBP vs Banal, 434 SCRA
Facts:
Q: Can a court take judicial notice of foreign
laws? - Spouses Vicente and Leonidas Banal,
A: Courts cannot take judicial notice of foreign respondents, are the registered owners of
law. The parties may however stipulate on what agricultural land situated in San Felipe, Basud,
the foreign law is which case the same are
Camarines Norte covered by Transfer Certificate
judicial admissions binding upon them and they
cannot take a contrary stance. of Title No. T-6296. A portion of the land
consisting of 6.2330 hectares (5.4730 of which
Section 4. Judicial admissions. — An admission, is planted to coconut and 0.7600 planted to
verbal or written, made by the party in the
course of the proceedings in the same case, palay) was compulsorily acquired by the
does not require proof. The admission may be Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) pursuant
contradicted only by showing that it was made
through palpable mistake or that no such to Republic Act (R.A.) No. 6657, as amended,
admission was made. otherwise known as the Comprehensive
- The genuineness and due execution of an -Spouses Vicente and Leonidas Banal rejected
actionable document copied in or attached to a
the above valuation. Thus, pursuant to Section
16(d) of R.A. 6657, as amended, a summary intention to take judicial notice of any
administrative proceeding was conducted matter and allow the parties to be heard
before the Provincial Agrarian Reform thereon.”
Adjudicator (PARAD) to determine the valuation
After the trial, and before judgment or on
of the land. Eventually, the PARAD rendered its
appeal, the proper court, on its own initiative or
Decision affirming the Land bank’s valuation.
on request of a party, may take judicial notice
Issue: WON the valuation of respondent’s of any matter and allow the parties to be heard
property take judicial notice
thereon if such matter is decisive of a material
Held: issue in the case.
same judge. They may only do so in the for ransom were filed before the RTC of
absence of objection and with the knowledge Zamboanga City against the accused. That being
of the opposing party, which are not obtaining all private individuals, conspiring and
“SEC. 3. Judicial notice, when hearing necessary. Zamboanga Del Sur, where he was detained and
During the trial, the court, on its own initiative, deprived of his liberty.
-Appellant Kulais argues that he was denied due against the appellant. Hence, the appellant was
process when the trial court took judicial notice not denied due process. His conviction was
of the testimony given in another case by one based mainly on the positive identification
Lt. Melquiades Feliciano, who was the team made by some of the kidnap victims. These
leader of the government troops that captured witnesses were subjected to meticulous cross-
them and his purported cohorts. Because he examinations conducted by appellant's counsel.
was allegedly deprived of his right to cross-
Case: Laureno vs CA, 324 SCRA
examine a material witness in the person of
Lieutenant Feliciano, he contends that the Facts:
latter's testimony should not be used against
-In 1978, Menandro Laureano was hired as a
him.
pilot by the Singapore Airlines Limited (SAL). In
ISSUE: WON the trial court erred in taking 1982 however, SAL was hit by recession and so
judicial notice of a material testimony given in it had to lay off some employees.
another case by Lt. Melquiades Feliciano.
-Laureano was one of them. Laureano asked for
-Even if the court a quo did take judicial notice -The trial court ruled in favor of Laureano. SAL
of the testimony of Lieutenant Feliciano, it did appealed the case raising the issue of lack of
not use such testimony in deciding the cases jurisdiction, non-applicability of Philippine laws,
and estoppel, among others. The Court of On 14 February 2005, an RRCG bus was plying
Appeals reversed the trial court. its usual southbound route. According to Elmer
Andales, bus conductor, two men insisted on
ISSUE: WON Singaporean Law is applicable to
getting on the bus. He then let them in. As soon
this case.
as the bus reached the stoplight at the corner of
HELD:
Ayala Avenue the two insisted on getting off the
No. -The specific Singaporean Law which holds bus. According to Andales, the bus driver
valid the dismissal of Laureano is not proved in initially did not want to let them off the bus,
court. As such, the trial court cannot make a because of an ordinance prohibiting the
determination if the termination is indeed valid unloading except at designated bus stops.
under Singaporean Law. Philippine courts do Moments after, a fire quickly engulfed the bus.
not take judicial notice of the laws of The prosecution presented documents
Singapore. SAL has the burden of proof. SAL furnished by the Department of Justice,
failed to prove such law hence Philippine law confirming that shortly before the explosion,
shall apply. However, the case must be the spokesperson of the Abu Sayyaf Group
dismissed on the ground of estoppel. Under announced over radio station that the group
our laws, all money claims arising from had a Valentine's Day "gift" for former
employer-employee relationships must be filed President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. Accused
within three years from the time the cause of Trinidad gave ABS-CBN News Network an
action accrued. Laureano’s cause of action exclusive interview some time after the
accrued in 1982 when he was terminated but incident, confessing his participation in the
he only filed the money claim in 1987 or more bombing incident. The bus conductor identified
than three years from 1982. Hence he is already Baharan and Trinidad, and confirmed that they
barred by prescription. were the two men who had entered the RRCG
busy. Members of the Abu Sayyaf Group
were then charged with multiple murder and
Case: People vs Baharan, 639 SCRA
multiple frustrated murder. On their
Facts: arraignment for the multiple murder charge,
Baharan, Trinidad, and Asali all entered a plea
of guilty. On the other hand, upon arraignment Trinidad previously pled guilty to another
for the multiple frustrated murder charge, charge - multiple murder - based on the same
accused Asali pled guilty. Accused Trinidad and act relied upon in the multiple frustrated
Baharan pled not guilty. Rohmat pled not murder charge. The Court further notes that
guilty to both charges. prior to the change of plea to one of guilt,
accused Baharan and Trinidad made two other
ISSUES: confessions of guilt - one through
WON the trial court gravely erred in accepting an extrajudicial confession (exclusive television
plea of guilt despite insufficiency of searching interviews, as stipulated by both accused during
inquiry into the voluntariness and full pretrial), and the other via judicial admission
comprehension of the consequences of the said (pretrial stipulation). Considering the foregoing
plea; and circumstances, we deem it unnecessary to rule
WON the trial court gravely erred in finding that on the sufficiency of the "searching inquiry"
the guilt of accused-appellants for the crimes in this instance. Remanding the case for re-
charged had been proven beyond reasonable arraignment is not warranted, as the accused's
doubt. plea of guilt was not the sole basis of the
condemnatory judgment under consideration.
RULING:
(B) NO. Insofar as appellants Baharan and
(A) NO. This court have reiterated in a long line Trinidad are concerned, the evidence for the
of cases that the conduct of a searching inquiry prosecution, in addition to that which can be
remains the duty of judges, as they are drawn from the stipulation of facts, primarily
mandated by the rules to satisfy themselves consisted of the testimonies of the bus
that the accused had not been under coercion conductor, who positively identified accused
or duress; mistaken impressions; or a Baharan and of the accused-turned-state-
misunderstanding of the significance, effects, witness. The guilt of the accused Baharan and
and consequences of their guilty plea. This Trinidad was sufficiently established by these
requirement is stringent and mandatory. The corroborating testimonies, coupled with their
Court observes that accused Baharan and respective judicial admissions (pretrial
- The Court of Appeals affirmed the ruling of the Object Evidence-1 section
trial court.
Q: What is object evidence?
Issue: WON Ligtas is guilty beyond reasonable
doubt for the crime of theft? A: It is which is directly addressed to the senses
of the court like tangible things exhibited or
Held:
demonstrated in open court.
NO
Documentary Evidence- (Best Evidence, Parole
-Decisions in administrative cases are not
Evidence & Electronic Evidence)
binding on criminal proceedings. This court has
ruled in a number of cases that it is indeed a
Testimonial Evidence- The rest of the sections
fundamental principle of administrative law
under Rule 130.
that administrative cases are independent from
criminal actions for the same act or omission. -The strongest kind of evidence is object
evidence, the 2nd will be documentary and the
Findings of fact of administrative agencies in
weakest is testimonial.
the exercise of their quasi-judicial powers are
entitled to respect if supported by substantial -Object and Documentary Evidence must also
evidence. This court is not tasked to weigh be testified and supported in court.
again "the evidence submitted before the
administrative body and to substitute its own Example: Presentation of Mahal & Mura to
judgment as to the sufficiency of evidence.” prove that there is dwarfism in the country.
- The landowner's share in the produce depends -In view of the presentation of Mahal & Mura, a
on the agreement between the parties. Hence, person should testify for their existence.
the harvesting done by the tenant is with the
Corpus Delicti- Fact of the crime
landowner’s consent.
Q: What do you mean of to the sense of court?
Gustatory Evidence- Pertains to Sense of Taste - On cross, he admitted that it was he alone
who conducted the search because Bolanos
Olfactory Evidence- Pertains to the Sense of
Smell was standing behind him in the living room
portion of the house and that petitioner
Tactil Evidence- Pertains to the Sense of Touch
handed to him the things to be searched,
*Frequently used in practice is Audio-Visual which included the pillow in which the two
Evidence.
sachets of shabu were kept.
Cases: People vs Malinlin 553 SCRA - On 20 June 2004 the trial court rendered
- Petitioner was charged with violation of substance be established with moral certainty,
Section 11 of Republic Act No. 9165, together with the fact that the same is not
otherwise known as The Comprehensive authorized by law. The dangerous drug itself
Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002. constitutes the very corpus delicti of the
offense and the fact of its existence is vital to illegal drug actually recovered from the
a judgment of conviction. Pagaduan. Strict compliance with the
prescribed procedure is required because of the
Case: People vs Pagaduan, 627 SCRA illegal drug’s unique characteristic rendering it
Facts: indistinct, not readily identifiable, and easily
open to tampering alteration or substitution
-Buy-bust operation was conducted by PO3 either by accident or otherwise.
Almarez, SPO1 Balido and Captain de Vera.
Ruper Pagaduan was arrested and plastic sachet Case: Salas vs Matusalem 705 SCRA
of what appears to be shabu was marked,
Facts:
request for laboratory examination was done
the same day. - On May 26, 1995, Annabelle Matusalem
(respondent) filed a complaint for
-The plastic sachet was turned over to PNP
Support/Damages against Narciso Salas
Crime Laboratory two days after. He was found
(petitioner) in the Regional Trial Court of
guilty by the court and the same was affirmed
Cabanatuan City.
by CA
- Respondent claimed that the petitioner is the
-Pagaduan contents among others that the father of her son Christian Paulo Salas who was
prosecution failed to show an unbroken chain born on December 28, 1994. Petitioner, already
of custody in the handling of the seized drug. 56 years old at the time, enticed her as she was
He claims that there was no evidence to show then only 24 years old, making her believe that
when the marking were done. he is a widower.
Issue: WON the integrity of the evidence was - Petitioner rented an apartment where
preserved respondent stayed and shouldered all expenses
in the delivery of their child, including the cost
Held:
of caesarian operation and hospital
confinement. However, when respondent
NO- The prosecution failed to show that the
refused the offer of petitioner’s family to take
illegal drug presented in the court is the same
the child from her, petitioner abandoned the the mother, doctor, registrar, or other person is
respondent and her child and left them to the incompetent evidence of paternity.
mercy of relatives and friends. Respondent
-While baptismal certificates may be considered
further alleged that she attempted suicide due
public documents, they can only serve as
to depression but still petitioner refused to
evidence of the administration of the
support her and their child.
sacraments on the dates so specified. They are
- The testimonial evidence of the owner of the not necessarily competent evidence of the
apartment where petitioner allegedly housed veracity of entries therein with respect to the
respondent when she was pregnant was one of child’s paternity.
the basis for respondent’s claim for support.
- Pictures taken of the mother and her child
- The RTC ruled in favor of respondent to which together with the alleged father are
the CA affirmed on appeal. inconclusive evidence to prove paternity. As to
the handwritten notes are not sufficient to
Issue: WON the trial and appellate court erred
establish Christian Paulo’s filiation to petitioner.
in ruling that respondent’s evidence sufficiently
Thus, even these notes were authentic; they do
proved that her son Christian Paulo is the
not qualify as competent evidence of
illegitimate child of petitioner
illegitimate filiation an admission of filiation in a
Held: private handwritten instrument signed by the
parent concerned.
certificate. Thus, if the father did not signed in - SPO1 Angeles together with PO1 Jesus Cortez
the birth certificate, the placing of his name by (PO1 Cortez), PO1 Ralph Nicart (PO1 Nicart) and
the informant were dispatched to Makabayan
St., Brgy. Obrero, Kamuning, Quezon City, and
upon arrival, the informant and SPO1 Angeles their duties in a regular manner, unless there is
proceeded to the squatter’s area. evidence to the contrary.
- SPO1 Angeles met Posing beside the - But time and again, jurisprudence is consistent
basketball court, where he was introduced by in stating that less than strict compliance with
the informant as a buyer of shabu. The former the procedural aspect of the chain of custody
asked if he could buy one hundred peso rule does not necessarily render the seized drug
(P100.00) worth of shabu for personal use. items inadmissible.
Posing then pulled out one (1) transparent
plastic sachet from his pocket and gave it to - RA 9165 and its subsequent Implementing
SPO1 Angeles in exchange for the buy-bust Rules and Regulations (IRR) do not require strict
money. Afterwards, SPO1 Angeles took out his compliance as to the chain of custody rule.
cap to alert his companions that the deal was
already concluded. PO1 Cortez and PO1 Nicart - As to the charge of illegal possession of
rushed to the scene and introduced themselves dangerous drugs, the prosecution must
as police officers. establish the following elements: (1) the
accused is in possession of an item or object,
-The trial court rendered a decision founding which is identified to be a prohibited or
Posing guilty of Sec 5 & 11 of RA 9165. CA regulated drug; (2) such possession is not
affirmed the decision of the trial court. authorized by law; and (3) the accused freely
and consciously possessed the drug.
Issue: WON accused Posing is guilty beyond
reasonable doubt for violation of RA 9165. Case: People vs Mercury Dela Cruz, G.R. No.
212171 September 7, 2016
Held:
and alibi of the accused-appellant and her live- on the seized item nor was it photographed, the
in partner. The RTC noted the the categorical court find it untenable. The alleged non-
affirmation of accused-appellant and her live-in compliance with Section 21 of R.A. 9165 was
partner that the arresting officers did not not fatal to the prosecution's case because the
demand anything from them in exchange for apprehending team properly preserved the
the accused-appellant's liberty created the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized
presumption that the arresting officers were drugs.
performing their official functions regularly. - Although ideally the prosecution should offer
a perfect chain of custody in handling of
- On intermediate appellate review, the CA evidence, "substantial compliance with the
affirmed in toto the Roc's ruling. The CA agreed legal requirements on the handling of the
with the RTC in giving weight to the testimonies seized item" is sufficient. The court ruled that
of the prosecution witnesses, and held that the even if the arresting officers failed to strictly
arresting officer's complied with the proper comply with the requirements under Section 21
procedure in the custody and disposition of the of R.A. 9165, such procedural lapse is not fatal
seized drugs. and will not render the items seized
inadmissible in evidence.
Issue: WON the confiscated dangerous drug
constitutes the corpus delicti of the crime. - To be admissible in evidence, the prosecution
must be able to present through records or
Held: testimony, the whereabouts of the dangerous
Yes. drugs from the time these were seized from
-The court considered by the courts in arriving the accused by the arresting officers; turned
at the decision despite the fact that the forensic over to the investigating officer; forwarded to
chemist who examined it did not testify in the laboratory for determination their
court. The accused-appellant's contention that composition; and up to the time these are
the drugs were marked not at the place where offered in evidence. For as long as the chain of
she was apprehended but at the police station custody remains unbroken, as in this case,
and that there was no physical inventory made even though the procedural requirements
provided for in Section 21 R.A. 9165 were not Public Record- (d) When the original is a public
record in the custody of a public officer or is
faithfully observed, the guilt of the accused will
recorded in a public office.
not be affected.
-The content of the document is the subject of
inquiry in a trial.
Section 2 Documentary Evidence- Documents
as evidence consist of writing or any material
Q: What is secondary evidence under the best
containing letters, words, numbers, figures,
evidence rule?
symbols or other modes of written expression
offered as proof of their contents.
A: Secondary evidence is that which may be
used to prove the contents of a document
Three Rules: Best Evidence Rule, Parole
where the original is lost, destroyed, or cannot
Evidence Rule & Electronic Evidence Rule
be produced or where the original is in the
custody or control of the party against whom
Best Evidence Rule
the evidence is offered and who fails to produce
if after reasonable notice.
Section 3. Original document must be
produced; exceptions. — When the subject of
Q: What does secondary evidence consist of?
inquiry is the contents of a document, no
evidence shall be admissible other than the
A: Secondary evidence consist of: (i) copy of the
original document itself, except in the following
original, (ii) a recital of its contents in an
cases:
authentic document (iii) testimony of witnesses.
Exceptions:
Q: What is the proper foundation for the
introduction of secondary evidence in the case
Custody/Control- (a) When the original has
of loss, destruction or inability to produce the
been lost or destroyed, or cannot be produced
original?
in court, without bad faith on the part of the
offeror;
A: The offeror must show: (i) proof of the
execution or existence of the document, (ii)
Lost or destroyed without bad faith-(b) When
proof of the cause of its unavailability, without
the original is in the custody or under the
bad faith on his part, (iii) proof of reasonable
control of the party against whom the evidence
diligence and good faith on the part of the
is offered, and the latter fails to produce it after
offeror in the search for or attempt.
reasonable notice;
Case: Loon vs Power Master Inc, 712 SCRA
Accounts (numerous)- (c) When the original
consists of numerous accounts or other Facts:
documents which cannot be examined in court
without great loss of time and the fact sought Respondents Power Master, Inc. and Tri-C
to be established from them is only the general General Services employed and assigned the
result of the whole; and
petitioners as janitors and leadsmen in various
When the terms of an agreement have been A: It is the rule which provides that once the
reduced to writing, it is considered as terms of an agreement have been reduced to
containing all the terms agreed upon and there writing, it is considered as containing all the
can be, between the parties and their terms agreed upon and there can be between
successors in interest, no evidence of such the parties and their successor in interest, no
terms other than the contents of the written evidence of such terms other than the contents
agreement. of the written agreement.
(b) The failure of the written agreement to Q: What is the rationale behind parole
express the true intent and agreement of the evidence?
parties thereto;
A: Under the Integration Rule, it is presumed
(c) The validity of the written agreement; or that the parties to a written contract intended it
to integrate all the terms of their agreement.
(d) The existence of other terms agreed to by
the parties or their successors in interest after Q: What are the exceptions to the parole
the execution of the written agreement. evidence rule?
from the military to wire-tap his home or arrangement, to secretly overhear, intercept,
telephone. or record such communication or spoken word
by using a device commonly known as a
CA denied the petition because (1) Tape dictaphone or dictagraph or detectaphone or
recordings are not inadmissible per se. They walkie-talkie or tape-recorder, or however
and any other variant thereof can be admitted otherwise described.”
in evidence for certain purposes, depending on
how they are presented and offered and on “Sec. 4. Any communication or spoken word, or
how the trial judge utilizes them in the interest the existence, contents, substance, purport, or
of truth and fairness and the even handed meaning of the same or any part thereof, or any
administration of justice; and (2) A petition information therein contained, obtained or
for certiorari is notoriously inappropriate to secured by any person in violation of the
rectify a supposed error in admitting evidence preceding sections of this Act shall not be
adduced during trial. The ruling on admissibility admissible in evidence in any judicial, quasi-
is interlocutory; neither does it impinge on judicial, legislative or administrative hearing or
jurisdiction. If it is erroneous, the ruling should investigation.”
be questioned in the appeal from the judgment
on the merits and not through the special civil Absent a clear showing that both parties to the
action of certiorari. The error, assuming telephone conversations allowed the recording
gratuitously exists, cannot be any more than an of the same, the inadmissibility of the subject
error of law, properly correctible by appeal and tapes is mandatory under Rep. Act No. 4200.
not by certiorari.
Petitioner then filed the present petition for
review under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court.
Case: Lapu-Lapu Foundation vs CA, 421 SCRA
In its answer to the complaint, the petitioner there was an unwritten agreement between
Foundation denied incurring indebtedness from him and the respondent Bank that he would pay
the respondent Bank alleging that the loans the loans from the proceeds of his shares of
were obtained by petitioner Tan in his personal stocks in the Lapulapu Industries Corp.
capacity. The petitioner Foundation maintained
that it never authorized petitioner Tan to co-
sign in his capacity as its President any Issue: WON petitioner Tans claim regarding the
promissory note and that the petitioner purported unwritten agreement between him
Foundation never benefited, directly or and the respondent Bank on the payment of the
indirectly, therefrom. For his part, petitioner obligation should be upheld.
Tan admitted that he contracted the loans from
the respondent Bank in his personal capacity.
The parties, however, agreed that the loans
were to be paid from the proceeds of petitioner
Tans shares of common stocks in the Lapulapu Held:
Industries Corporation, a real estate firm. The
loans were covered by promissory notes which No.
were automatically renewable (rolled-over)
-The parole evidence rule constrains this Court
every year at an amount including unpaid
to reject petitioner Tans claim regarding the
interests, until such time as petitioner Tan was
purported unwritten agreement between him
able to pay the same from the proceeds of his
and the respondent Bank on the payment of the
aforesaid shares.
obligation. Section 9, Rule 130 of the of the
According to petitioner Tan, the respondent Revised Rules of Court provides that [w]hen the
Banks employee required him to affix two terms of an agreement have been reduced to
signatures on every promissory note, assuring writing, it is to be considered as containing all
him that the loan documents would be filled the terms agreed upon and there can be,
out in accordance with their agreement. between the parties and their successors-in-
However, after he signed and delivered the loan interest, no evidence of such terms other than
documents to the respondent Bank, these were the contents of the written agreement.
filled out in a manner not in accord with their
In this case, the promissory notes are the law
agreement, such that the petitioner Foundation
between the petitioners and the respondent
was included as party thereto. Further, prior to
Bank. These promissory notes contained
its filing of the complaint, the respondent Bank
maturity dates as follows: February 5, 1978,
made no demand on him.
March 28, 1978, April 11, 1978 and May 5,
Applying the parole evidence rule, the CA 1978, respectively. That these notes were to be
likewise rejected petitioner Tans assertion that paid on these dates is clear and explicit.
Nowhere was it stated therein that they would document under Best Evidence Rule if it is a
be renewed on a year-to-year basis or rolled- printout or output readable by sight or other
over annually until paid from the proceeds of means, shown to reflect the data accurately.
petitioner Tans shares in the Lapulapu
Industries Corp. Accordingly, this purported Necessity of Authentication
unwritten agreement could not be made to vary Q: How does a party authenticate electronic
or contradict the terms and conditions in the evidence?
promissory notes.
A: To authenticate electronic evidence, it must
Evidence of a prior or contemporaneous verbal be made by someone privy to the document. A
agreement is generally not admissible to vary, party who is not privy to the document has no
contradict or defeat the operation of a valid right to authenticate such evidence.
contract. While parole evidence is admissible to
explain the meaning of written contracts, it Q: What is the exception under this rule?
cannot serve the purpose of incorporating into
A: Expert witness
the contract additional contemporaneous
conditions which are not mentioned at all in Example: Text Message- A party can present
writing, unless there has been fraud or expert witness that is working under such
mistake. No such allegation had been made by telecommunication company.
the petitioners in this case.
Situation:
Electronic Evidence (AM No. 01-7-01 SC)
Mr. X texted Mr. Y on January 1, 2017 and this is
Electronic Evidence- information or the content of the text message: “Mr Y, I will kill
representation of information, data figures, you!”
symbols or other modes of written expression
by which a right is established or an obligation -Mr A (son) of Mr Y cannot use such evidence
extinguished, or by which fact may be proved, since he is not privy to the contract.
which is received, recorded, transmitted,
-Only Mr X and Mr. Y can testify on the context
stored, processed, retrieved or produced
of the text message.
electronically.
Rule 4- Best Evidence Rule
Examples:
Sec 1- An electronic document shall be
-Email, recorded or saved text messages,
regarded as the equivalent of an original
computer generated documents, Facebook chat
document under the Best Evidence Rule if it is a
or similar.
printout or output readable by sight or other
Original of an electronic document- It shall be means.
regarded as the equivalent of an original
Electronic Message vs Electronic Document Marcos Saezs son, Adolfo Saez, the husband of
Gloria Leano Saez, about his problem. Out of
Electronic Document- it consist of electronic pity and for humanitarian consideration, Adolfo
data or message that creates RIGHTS or allowed Francisco Comorposa to occupy the
EXTINGUISHES OBLIGATION. land of Marcos Saez. Hence, his nipa hut was
carried by his neighbors and transferred to a
Electronic Signature- It shall be considered as portion of the land subject matter of this
admissible in evidence as the functional case. Such transfer was witnessed by several
equivalent of the signature of a person on a people, among them, Gloria Leano and Noel
Oboza. Francisco Comorposa occupied a portion
written document.
of Marcos Saez property without paying any
Q: How do you authenticate electronic rental.
signature? - Francisco Comorposa left for Hawaii, U.S.A. He
was succeeded in his possession by the
A: -Method or process was utilized to establish respondents who likewise did not pay any
a digital signature rental and are occupying the premises through
petitioners tolerance.
-Other means provided by law
- On 7 May 1998, a formal demand was made
-Other means satisfactory to the judge upon the respondents to vacate the premises
establishing the genuineness of electronic but the latter refused to vacate the same and
signature. claimed that they were the legitimate claimants
and the actual and lawful possessor[s] of the
premises. A complaint was filed with the
barangay office of Sta. Cruz[,] Davao del Sur,
but the parties failed to arrive at an amicable
settlement. Thus, the corresponding Certificate
Case: Heirs of Sabanpan vs Comorposa, 408 to File Action was issued by the said barangay
SCRA and an action for unlawful detainer was filed by
petitioners against respondents.
- The complaint alleged that Marcos Saez was
the lawful and actual possessor of Lot No. 845, - Respondents, in their Answer, denied the
Land 275 located at Darong, Sta. Cruz, Davao material allegations of the complaint and
del Sur with an area of 1.2 hectares. In 1960, he alleged that they entered and occupied the
died leaving all his heirs, his children and premises in their own right as true, valid and
grandchildren. lawful claimants, possessors and owners of the
said lot way back in 1960 and up to the present
- In 1965, Francisco Comorposa who was time; that they have acquired just and valid
working in the land of Oboza was terminated ownership and possession of the premises by
from his job. The termination of his ordinary or extraordinary prescription, and that
employment caused a problem in relocating his the Regional Director of the DENR, Region XI
house. Being a close family friend of Marcos has already upheld their possession over the
Saez, Francisco Comorposa approached the late land in question when it ruled that they were
wife), whom he had gotten pregnant, Irish Aurora who referred her to the police. Under
broke up with him. police supervision, Irish contacted Rustan
through the cellphone numbers he used in
Before Rustan got married, however, he got in sending the picture and his text messages. Irish
touch with Irish and tried to convince her to asked Rustan to meet her at the Lorentess
elope with him, saying that he did not love the Resort in Brgy. Ramada, Maria Aurora, and he
woman he was about to marry. Irish rejected did. He came in a motorcycle. After parking it,
the proposal and told Rustan to take on his he walked towards Irish but the waiting police
responsibility to the other woman and their officers intercepted and arrested him. They
child. Irish changed her cellphone number but searched him and seized his Sony Ericsson P900
Rustan somehow managed to get hold of it and cellphone and several SIM cards. While Rustan
sent her text messages. Rustan used two was being questioned at the police station, he
cellphone numbers for sending his messages, shouted at Irish: "Malandi ka kasi!"
namely, 0920-4769301 and 0921-8084768. Irish
replied to his text messages but it was to ask Issue: WON accused Rustan sent Irish by
him to leave her alone. cellphone message the picture with her face
pasted on the body of a nude woman, inflicting
In the early morning of June 5, 2005, Irish anguish, psychological distress, and humiliation
received through multimedia message service on her in violation of Section 5(h) of R.A. 9262.
(MMS) a picture of a naked woman with spread
legs and with Irish’s face superimposed on the Held:
figure (Exhibit A). The sender’s cellphone
Rustan argues that, since he was arrested and
number, stated in the message, was 0921-
certain items were seized from him without any
8084768, one of the numbers that Rustan used.
warrant, the evidence presented against him
Irish surmised that he copied the picture of her
should be deemed inadmissible. But the fact is
face from a shot he took when they were in
that the prosecution did not present in
Baguio in 2003 (Exhibit B).
evidence either the cellphone or the SIM cards
that the police officers seized from him at the
After she got the obscene picture, Irish got
time of his arrest. The prosecution did not need
other text messages from Rustan. He boasted
such items to prove its case. Exhibit C for the
that it would be easy for him to create similarly
prosecution was but a photograph depicting the
scandalous pictures of her. And he threatened
Sony Ericsson P900 cellphone that was used,
to spread the picture he sent through the
which cellphone Rustan admitted owning
internet. One of the messages he sent to Irish,
during the pre-trial conference.
written in text messaging shorthand, read:
"Madali lang ikalat yun, my chatrum ang tarlac
Though, the bulk of the evidence against him
rayt pwede ring send sa lahat ng chatter." Irish
consisted in Irish’s testimony that she received
sought the help of the vice mayor of Maria
the obscene picture and malicious text able to escape. The policemen became
messages that the sender’s cellphone numbers suspicious of Enojas’ involvement in the
belonged to Rustan with whom she had been robbery and monitored his mobile phone which
previously in communication. Indeed, to prove he inadvertently left in the patrol car. The police
that the cellphone numbers belonged to conducted an entrapment, posing as Enojas in
Rustan, Irish and the police used such numbers communicating with the other accused. Enojas
to summon him to come to Lorentess Resort and another accused Gomez were arrested. The
and he did. Consequently, the prosecution did prosecution presented the transcripts of the
not have to present the confiscated cellphone mobile phone text messages between Enojas
and SIM cards to prove that Rustan sent those and some of his co-accused. The accused
messages. asserted that they were entitled to an acquittal
because they were illegally arrested and the
Moreover, Rustan admitted having sent the evidence of the text messages were
malicious text messages to Irish. His defense inadmissible, not having been properly
was that he himself received those messages identified.
from an unidentified person who was harassing
Irish and he merely forwarded the same to her, Issue: WON the text messages were admissible
using his cellphone. But Rustan never presented as evidence against the accused
the cellphone number of the unidentified
Held:
person who sent the messages to him to
authenticate the same. The RTC did not give YES- Text messages are admissible according to
credence to such version and neither will this the Rules on Electronic Evidence. Text
Court. Besides, it was most unlikely for Irish to messages are to be proved by the testimony of
pin the things on Rustan if he had merely tried a person who was a party to the same or has
to help her identify the sender. personal knowledge of them. The text
messages to and from the mobile phone left at
Case: People vs Enojas, GR No. 204894, March the scene by accused Enojas provided strong
10, 2014 leads on the participation and identities of the
accused. Indeed, the police caught them in an
Facts:
entrapment using this knowledge.
-Enojas was riding a taxi parked in front of
Aguila Auto Glass shop. He was approached by
patrolling policemen who found the taxi Testimonial Evidence
suspicious. He was asked to come with them to
the police station. However, on the way to the Section 20. Witnesses; their qualifications. —
police station, they encountered robbers. Except as provided in the next succeeding
During suchencounter with robbers, Enojas was section, all persons who can perceive, and
perceiving, can make their known perception to incapable of perceiving the facts which they are
others, may be witnesses. examined and of relating the truthfully
disqualified to be a witness.
Religious or political belief, interest in the
outcome of the case, or conviction of a crime Q: Who is a child witness?
unless otherwise provided by law, shall not be
ground for disqualification. A: One who at the time of giving testimony is
below 18 years.
Requirements:
Section 21. Disqualification by reason of
-A person that can perceive- Ability to observe mental incapacity or immaturity. — The
and remember following persons cannot be witnesses:
- A person that can make known of his (a) Those whose mental condition, at the time
perception- Ability to communicate what he of their production for examination, is such that
perceived they are incapable of intelligently making
known their perception to others;
Q: Who are disqualified to testify in open court?
(b) Children whose mental maturity is such as to
A: Sec 21- Mental Incapacity or immaturity render them incapable of perceiving the facts
respecting which they are examined and of
Sec 22- Reason of Marriage relating them truthfully.
Sec 23- Reason of death or insanity of adverse -Children are presumed to be competent
party witness.
Sec 24- Privileged Communication Basis: Rule on the Examination of Child Witness
Q: May an insane person qualify as a witness? -If a party wants to assail the competency of
child witness, he shall have the burden of proof.
A: Yes, provided that he is capable or
intelligently making known his perception to Competency Test- Regular observation through
others. His insanity would affect the weight of searching question of the judge to simply
his testimony. establish whether the child is competent.
Q: Is a child qualified to be a witness? -The judge must determine if the child knows
the difference between truth and falsity. There
A: YES, every child is presumed qualified to be a is No Hard and Fast Rule.
witness. The court may conduct a competency
examination if substantial doubts exists as to -The Test must be done to the exclusion of the
the child’s competency as to the child’s public.
competency to testify. EXCEPTION- a child
whose mental capacity is such as to render him Q: What is Live-Link testimony?
A: A child witness is excluded from the general A: The rule provides that during their marriage,
public in giving his testimony. a spouse may not testify for or against the other
spouse without the latter’s consent.
Q: What are testimonial aids?
Q: What are the exceptions to the marital
A: Object/Person that will help a child disqualification rule?
(psychological/emotional) in the course of
testimony. A: A spouse may testify against the other in:
Support Persons- Natural Persons that will -Civil case by one against the other
accompany the child in the course of his
testimony. ( Mother, Guardian, Guardian Ad -Criminal case for a crime committed by one
Litem) spouse against the other or the latter’s direct
descendants or ascendants.
Q: Who is a facilitator?
Case: Marcos vs Heirs of Andres Navarro, 700
A: A facilitator is one that propounds the SCRA
question to the child given by the parties
concerned. Facts:
Q: What are the question that are barred to ask Spouses Navarro passed away and left behind
towards a child witness? several parcels of land. They were survived by
their daughters, Luisa Navarro Marcos
A: -Sexual propensity of the child (petitioner) and Lydia Navarro Grageda, and the
heirs of their only son, Andres Navarro. The
-Sexual encounters of the child heirs of Andres are the respondents in this case.
RTC granted respondents’ motion and Under Section 49 of Rule 130, PO2 Alvarez is
disqualified Alvarez as a witness, ruling that her allowed to render an expert opinion.
supposed testimony would be hearsay as she
has no personal knowledge of the alleged Although the word “may” in Sec. 49 of Rule 130
handwriting of Andres, Sr. Also, there is no need signifies that the use of the opinion of an expert
for PO2 Alvarez to be presented, if she is to be witness is permissive and not mandatory on the
presented as an expert witness, because her part of the courts, handwriting experts are
testimony is not yet needed. CA dismissed the often offered as expert witnesses considering
sisters’ petition for certiorari. the technical nature of the procedure in
ISSUE: WON PO2 Alvarez should be disqualified examining forged documents.
as a witness
RTC shouldn’t have disqualified Alvarez as a
HELD: witness. She has the qualifications and none of
the disqualifications of a witness under the
No. Section 21 disqualifies a witness by reason Rules. The analysis of the signature in the deed
of mental incapacity or immaturity. Section 22 of donation executed by the late Andres, Sr. is
disqualifies a witness by reason of marriage. crucial to the resolution of the case.
Section 23 disqualifies a witness by reason of
Case: People vs Golimlim, 427 SCRA
death or insanity of the adverse party. Section
People vs Golimlim, 427 SCRA
24 disqualifies a witness by reason of privileged
communication. Facts:
Issue: WON Evelyn Canchela, being a mental (a) The husband or the wife, during or after the
retardate, is disqualified from testifying as marriage, cannot be examined without the
witness to the case. consent of the other as to any communication
received in confidence by one from the other
Held: during the marriage except in a civil case by one
against the other, or in a criminal case for a
No. Evelyn Canchela is still qualified as witness crime committed by one against the other or
and may testify accordingly. the latter's direct descendants or ascendants.
AS TO SCOPE- The marital disqualification rule against him pursuant to Rule 130 of the Revised
is a total prohibition against any testimony by Rules of Court on marital disqualification.
one spouse for or against the other, while the
marital communication privilege applies only Respondent filed an opposition to the motion.
confidential communication between the Pending resolution of the motion, the trial court
spouses. directed the prosecution to proceed with the
presentation of the other witnesses. On
AS TO SPOUSE BEING A PARTY TO THE ACTION-
September 2, 1999, the trial court issued the
The marital disqualification rule can be invoked
only if one of the spouses is a party to the questioned Order disqualifying Esperanza
action, while the marital communication Alvarez from further testifying and deleting her
privilege may be invoked whether or not a testimony from the records. The prosecution
spouse is a party to the action. filed a motion for reconsideration but was
denied in the other assailed Order dated
Q: If a confidential communication by one
October 19, 1999. This prompted respondent
spouse to the other comes into the hands of a
to file with the Court of Appeals a petition for
third person, may a third person testify
thereon? certiorari with application for preliminary
injunction and temporary restraining order. On
A: YES, where the privileged communication May 31, 2000, the Appellate Court rendered a
comes into the hands of a third person, the Decision nullifying and setting aside the assailed
marital communications privilege does not Orders issued by the trial court. Hence, this
apply unless the aggrieved spouse shows that
petition for review on certiorari.
there was collusion between his spouse and
third person. ISSUE: WON Esperanza can testify over the
objection of her estranged husband on the
Case: Alvarez vs Ramirez, 473 SCRA
ground of marital privilege.
Doctrine: If the spouses are separated in fact,
HELD:
the marital disqualification rule shall not apply.
Yes, Esperanza may testify over the objection of
Facts:
her husband. The disqualification of a witness
Respondent Susan Ramirez was the complaining by reason of marriage under Sec. 22, Rule 130
witness in a criminal case or arson pending of the Revised Rules of Court has its exceptions
before the RTC. The accused was petitioner as where the marital relations are so strained
Maximo Alvarez, stranged husband of that there is no more harmony to be preserved.
Esperanza Alvarez, sister of respondent. On The acts of the petitioner stamp out all major
June 21, 1999, Esperanza Alvarez was called to aspects of marital life. On the other hand, the
the witness stand as the first witness against State has an interest in punishing the guilty
petitioner, her husband. Petitioner filed a and exonerating the innocent, and must have
motion to disqualify Esperanza from testifying the right to offer the testimony of Esperanza
over the objection of her husband. The Q: Will the disqualification rule extend to the
purpose of marital disqualification rule shall children in the dinner?
not apply on the reason that: commonality of
interest no longer holds, their marriage is no A: YES, since the communication was given in
trust and confidence and the children belongs
longer protected since they are already
to the family.
separated in fact.
B. Attorney-Client Relationship
Case: People vs Judge Castaneda, 88 SCRA (b) An attorney cannot, without the consent of
his client, be examined as to any
Facts: A spouse owned a parcel of land and the communication made by the client to him, or
his advice given thereon in the course of, or
husband sell the parcel of land without the
with a view to, professional employment, nor
consent of his wife. The husband forged the
can an attorney's secretary, stenographer, or
signature of the wife on the marital conformity clerk be examined, without the consent of the
of the sale of the land. During the trial for the client and his employer, concerning any fact the
case of falsification, the wife is called to take knowledge of which has been acquired in such
the witness stand to testify but the adverse capacity
party objected on the ground of marital
-The client is being protected by this privilege
disqualification and it was sustained by Judge
communication in order for him to divulge
Castaneda.
certain information without uncertainty.
Held: The marriage is still subsisting and the
Rationale: To Protect the Legal Profession
spouses are not separated in fact. Considering
that the property involved is a conjugal -The privilege communication only covers legal
property and there is falsification of the matter which is the subject matter of the
signature, the marital disqualification shall not lawyer-client relationship.
be applicable.
-The communication also extends to its
-When a father commits a crime against the secretary, stenographer or clerk.
daughter, it is in effect a crime against mother
therefore the latter can testify against the Q: May the attorney himself be the one to
father. invoke the privilege?
Marital Privilege Communication Rule- It was A: YES, either the client or his lawyer may raise
intended not to be known by a Third Person or such privilege.
other people.
-The attorney-client privilege bars only the
Example: One evening during a family dinner, attorney, secretary, stenographer or clerk from
Father X confessed to his family that he killed A. being examined but the privilege does not
extend to third persons who obtain knowledge
of the communication between the lawyer and -It is only applicable in Catholic Religion.
client.
E. Public interest privilege
C. Doctor-Client Relationship
(e) A public officer cannot be examined during
(c) A person authorized to practice medicine, his term of office or afterwards, as to
surgery or obstetrics cannot in a civil case, communications made to him in official
without the consent of the patient, be confidence, when the court finds that the public
examined as to any advice or treatment given interest would suffer by the disclosure.
by him or any information which he may have
acquired in attending such patient in a -It pertains to custodial of public records or
professional capacity, which information was communications
necessary to enable him to act in capacity, and
which would blacken the reputation of the -A public officer cannot be examined during his
patient. term of office or afterwards, as to
communication made to him in official
-A doctor cannot without the consent of the confidence and if the court finds that public
client be examined on communication or interest would be prejudiced.
information disclose in the course of medical
services. Case: Chan vs Chan, 702 SCRA
- It is applicable in civil or administrative cases Facts: Josielene filed a petition for the
declaration of nullity of her marriage to
Q: Are autopsies conducted by medico-legal respondent Johnny Chan (Johnny), the
officer covered by the privilege?
dissolution of their conjugal partnership of
gains, and the award of custody of their
A: NO, since there is patient or treatment
involved, the autopsy having been conducted children to her.
on a dead person.
During the pre-trial conference, Josielene pre-
D. PRIEST-CONFESSION RELATIONSHIP marked the Philhealth Claim Form1 that Johnny
attached to his answer as proof that he was
(d) A minister or priest cannot, without the forcibly confined at the rehabilitation unit of a
consent of the person making the confession, hospital. The form carried a physician’s
be examined as to any confession made to or handwritten note that Johnny suffered from
any advice given by him in his professional
“methamphetamine and alcohol abuse.”
character in the course of discipline enjoined by
the church to which the minister or priest Following up on this point, Josielene filed with
belongs. the RTC a request for the issuance of a
subpoena duces tecum addressed to Medical
-A minister or priest cannot, without the City, covering Johnny’s medical records when
confessant’s consent be examined as to any he was there confined. The request was
confession made to or advice.
from repeating the act of being counsel of the previous litigation in which he appeared for
record of both parties. the former client.
Q: Against whom they are prohibited to testify? Judicial- The plea of guilty of an accused
pending trial in criminal cases.
A: Executor or Administrator of the estate on
claim against the estate or ante lite motam- Extra-judicial-
before the occurrence of the event.
Requirements: -To establish voluntariness of
PAP-EAR the accused
-If the case is against the executor or -it should be within the time frame of custodial
administrator of the estate, it is not a claim interrogation.
against the estate.
*If the confession is without the assistance of
-The claim must be on matter before the death lawyer, it shall be inadmissible as evidence
of the party.
-It must be in writing
Claim against the estate- The liability must not
be personal to the executor/administrator but Extra-Judicial Judicial Admission
chargeable to the estate. Admission
Made outside of the Made in the course of
Rationale: To avoid Perjury- When death closes proceeding in the the proceeding in the
the lip of someone, the law must come to the same case same case
other and close his lip as well. Must be offered in Need not be offered in
evidence in order to evidence since they
Case Doctrine: Sunga-Chan vs Chan “The dead’s considered by the already form part of
man statute will no longer apply since the court the records.
executor on the counter-claim is the plaintiff” May be contradicted May not be
by the admitter contradicted by the
Section 25. Parental and filial privilege. — No admitter except by
person may be compelled to testify against his showing that the
parents, other direct ascendants, children or admission was made
other direct descendants. through palpable
mistake or that no
-Applicable in civil and criminal cases
Case: Constantino vs Heirs of Constantino Jr, -CA – in favor or the respondent heirs of Pedro
Jr., declaring that the “Extrajudicial Settlement
706 SCRA with Waiver” covering the 192 sq. m lot actually
belongs to Pedro Jr., hence, not part of the
Facts: estate of Pedro Sr. It is erroneous for the trial
court to declare the parties in pari delicto.
-This involves a controversy over a parcel of
land claimed to be part of an estate, which
ISSUE: WON the CA committed error by
needed to be proportionally subdivided among
disregarding the stipulations and admissions
heirs.
during the pre-trail conference on which the
-Pedro Constantino, Sr. ancestor of the application of the doctrine of in pari delicto was
petitioners and respondents, owned several based?
parcels of land one of which is an unregistered
parcel of land consisting of 240 sq. meters
situated at Sta. Monica, Hagonoy, Bulacan. HELD:
-Upon his death, he was survived by six (6) YES
children.
-On 17 June 1999, respondents Asuncion -The CA actually contradicted the admissions
Laquindanum (Asuncion) and Josefina Cailipan made no less by the respondents during the
(Josefina), great grandchildren of Pedro, Sr. in pre-trial conference where they stipulated that
representation of Pedro, Jr. filed a complaint the land belongs to Pedro Sr. The respondent’s
against petitioners: grandchildren of Pedro, Sr. admissions is an admission against the
for the nullification of a document entitled as respondent’s interest of the fact of ownership
by Pedro Sr. of the 192 sq. m lot which was
transferred to respondent’s mother, the made cash withdrawals from the municipality’s
daughter of Pedro Sr. deposit account and such withdrawal,
purportedly for salaries, wages, allowances and
mid-year bonuses of municipal officers and
-Judicial admissions are legally binding on the
employees, had not been recorded in the
party making the admissions. Pre-trial
General Fund Cashbook; (3) Doldol made
admission in civil cases is one of the instances
adjustments in the said cashbook. In a Letter,
of judicial admissions explicitly provided for
the State Auditors demanded the immediate
under Section 7, Rule 19 of the Rules of Court,
refund of the said amount, and for Doldol to
which mandates that the contents of the pre-
submit a written explanation. Doldol failed to
trial order shall control the subsequent course
respond and was, thereafter, relieved of his
of the action, thereby, defining and limiting
duties. He was directed to transfer the account
the issues to be tried. Once the the stipulations
to Assistant Municipal Treasurer.
are reduced into writing and signed by the
parties and their counsels, they become binding The State Auditors then conducted another
on the parties who made them. They become audit. They discovered that Doldol incurred an
judicial admissions of the fact or facts added cash shortage. In a Letter to Doldol, the
stipulated. Even if placed at a disadvantageous State Auditors demanded the immediate
position, a party may not be allowed to rescind restitution of the missing fund, and directed
them unilaterally; it must assume the him to submit another written explanation.
consequences of the disadvantage. Again, Doldol failed to respond. The State
Auditors submitted their Report on their
-Respondents failed to refute the earlier examinations. The State Auditors submitted
admissions/stipulation before and during the their Memorandum on the result of the audits
trial. While denying ownership by Pedro Sr. of to the Provincial Auditor. On the same day,
the 192 sq. m lot, respondent Asuncion, when Doldol wrote the Provincial Treasurer
placed on the stand, offered a vague requesting that a re-audit be conducted on his
explanation as to how such parcel of land was cash and cash account, taking exception to the
acquired by Pedro Jr. findings of the State Auditors. Instead of
pursuing his request for a re-audit, Doldol opted
Case: Doldol vs People, 470 SCRA to refund the missing funds. He remitted certain
amount to the Acting Municipal Treasurer.
FACTS: Doldol promised to pay the balance of his
shortage. However, he reneged on his promise.
A team of State Auditors conducted an audit of
the cash and cash account of Conrado C. Doldol, The Provincial Auditor transmitted the
the Municipal Treasurer of Urbiztondo, Memorandum and Consolidated Report of the
Pangasinan. The audit covered the General State Auditors to the Ombudsman, and
Fund, Special Education Fund and Trust Fund in requested that Doldol be charged for
his custody. Doldol and the Municipal malversation of public funds. Despite the
Accountant were present during the audit. The extensions given to him, Doldol failed to file his
State Auditors discovered and noted the counter-affidavit. Two information for
following: (1) Doldol had a shortage; (2) Doldol malversation of public funds were then filed
against Doldol. Doldol testified that the funds
which the State Auditors found missing were, in The defense counsel made an admission as to
fact, cash advances availed of by the municipal the authorship, authenticity, and voluntariness
employees. He insisted that not a single centavo of the execution of the counter-affidavit of
was used for his personal benefit. He averred accused Ladiana, which was subscribed and
that the charges lodged against him were sworn to before Cortez. In said counter-
premature because the same were based on an affidavit, accused Ladiana allegedly admitted to
incomplete audit. making the fatal shots on Francisco. However,
accused Ladiana allegedly did so in self-defense
In a Joint Decision, the trial court convicted the as Francisco was then purportedly attacking
accused of the crimes charged. Doldol appealed accused Ladiana and had, in fact, already
to the Court of Appeals (CA). The CA rendered inflicted a stab wound on the arm of accused
judgment affirming the appealed decision, and, Ladiana.
likewise, denied Doldol’s motion for
reconsideration thereof. However, Cortez emphasized that he was not
the one who conducted the preliminary
Issue: WON the partial restitution of the cash investigation of the complaint which led to the
shortage by Doldol can be considered as filing of the subject case. Additionally, Cortez
implied admission of misappropriation of the testified that he would not be able to anymore
missing funds recognize the face of the affiant in the said
Held: counter-affidavit, but maintained that there
was a person who appeared and identified
Yes. Except for his bare testimony, the Doldol himself as Josue Ladiana before he affixed his
offered no competent and credible evidence to signature on the counter-affidavit.
prove that the missing funds were actually cash
advances of employees in the municipality. The Sandiganbayan ruled that the prosecution
had been able to establish the guilt of petitioner
The Doldol could have offered in evidence the beyond reasonable doubt. The court a quo held
documents evidencing the names of the that his Counter-Affidavit, in which he had
recipients and amounts of the cash advances, admitted to having fired the fatal shots that
but failed to do so. Moreover, the petitioner caused the victim’s death, may be used as
wrote the Provincial Auditor and offered to evidence against him.
refund the missing funds. He was able to pay
only for certain amount, and failed to remit the Issue: WON the Counter-Affidavit he executed
balance of his shortage. Such partial restitution during the preliminary investigation of this case
of the cash shortage is an implied admission of is admissible proof showing his complicity in the
misappropriation of the missing funds. crime
Held:
YES.
Case: Ladiana vs People, 393 SCRA
-It is well-settled that the foregoing legal
Facts: formalities required by the fundamental law of
the land apply only to extra-judicial confessions
or admissions obtained during custodial
investigations. Indeed, the rights enumerated in Before the Court on automatic review is the
the constitutional provision “exist only in Decision dated December 17, 1997 of the
custodial interrogations, or in-custody Regional Trial Court of Makati City, Branch 62,
interrogation of accused persons.” in Criminal Cases Nos. 97-385 to 97-388 finding
In the present case, petitioner admits that the appellant Feliciano Ulit y Tampoy guilty beyond
questioned statements were made during the reasonable doubt of two counts of qualified
preliminary investigation, not during the rape. During the hearing on October 20, 1997,
custodial investigation. Evidently, a person the prosecution presented Lucelle anew to
undergoing preliminary investigation before the
continue with her testimony on direct
public prosecutor cannot be considered as
being under custodial investigation. In fact, this examination.
Court has unequivocally declared that a She declared that the appellant raped her in
defendant on trial or under preliminary November 1996 and many other times
investigation is not under custodial
thereafter in her residence at No. 7104 San
interrogation.
Maximo Street, Makati City. Instead of asking
There is no question that even in the absence of questions to elicit the facts and circumstances
counsel, the admissions made by petitioner in before and during the commission of the
his Counter-Affidavit are not violative of his
crimes, the prosecutor asked Lucelle to identify
constitutional rights. It is clear from the
her signature in her sworn statement and to
undisputed facts that it was not exacted by the
police while he was under custody or affirm the truth of its contents. She did so. The
interrogation. Hence, the constitutional rights public prosecutor then marked the sworn
of a person under custodial investigation as statement in evidence as Exhibit H, and then
embodied in Article III, Section 12 of the 1987 manifested to the court that he had no more
Constitution, are not at issue in this case. questions for the witness on direct
In a confession, there is an acknowledgment of examination.
guilt; in an admission, there is merely a -On cross-examination, Lucelle testified that the
statement of fact not directly involving an appellant was her mother’s older brother. In
acknowledgment of guilt or of the criminal November 1996, she was not enrolled in any
intent to commit the offense with which one is school. Her father was working at a
charged. Thus, in the case at bar, a statement construction firm, the appellant was employed
by the accused admitting the commission of the at the Department of Environment and
act charged against him but denying that it was Sanitation in Makati City, while her
done with criminal intent is an admission, not a grandmother, who lived with her, worked as a
confession. maid in Bel Air Subdivison. Her mother worked
for one of her father’s cousins. On re-direct
Case: People vs Ulit, 423 SCRA
examination, the prosecution elicited from
Facts: Lucelle that the appellant raped her in
November 1996 at 11:00 p.m. inside the room
of her aunt Marina in her grandmother’s house shall enjoy the right to confront and cross-
at No. 7104 San Maximo Street, Olympia, examine the witness testifying against
Makati City, and that her aunt, Marina, and her him. Generally, the affidavits of persons who
Ate Sharon were inside the room. When asked are not presented to testify on the truth of the
where her aunt and Ate Sharon were when she contents thereof are hearsay evidence. Such
was being raped in her aunts room, Lucelle did affidavit must be formally offered in evidence
not respond. When asked why she did not and accepted by the court; otherwise, it shall
respond to the questions propounded to her not be considered by the court for the simple
during the previous hearings and why she had reason that the court shall consider such
been crying in open court, Lucelle replied that evidence formally offered and accepted.
she was afraid of her uncle, the appellant.
In this case, Lucelle testified on and affirmed
Issue: WON the testimony given is admissible the truth of the contents of her sworn
statement which she herself had given. As
Held: gleaned from the said statement, she narrated
NO- Supreme Court do not agree with the ruling how and when the appellant raped and
of the trial court that the contents of the sworn subjected her to lascivious acts. She was cross-
statement of Lucelle are hearsay, simply examined by the appellants counsel and
because she did not testify thereon and merely answered the trial courts clarificatory
identified her signatures therein. By hearsay questions. The prosecution offered her sworn
evidence is meant that kind of evidence which statement as part of her testimony and the
does not derive its value solely from the court admitted the same for the said purpose
credence to be attributed to the witness herself without objection on the part of the appellant.
but rests solely in part on the veracity and
Case: Carlos L. Tanenggee vs People of the
competence of some persons from whom the Philippines GR No. 179448, June 26, 2013
witness has received the information. It signifies
all evidence which is not founded upon the Facts:
personal knowledge of the witness from whom
it is elicited, and which, consequently, is not -There were five separate information for estafa
subject to cross-examination. The basis for the through falsification of commercial documents
exclusion appears to lie in the fact that such were filed against petitioner. The said
testimony is not subject to the test which can information portray the same mode of
ordinarily be applied for the ascertainment of commission of the crime as in Criminal case No.
truth of testimony, since the declarant is not 98-163806 but differ with respect to the
present and available for cross-examination. In numbers of the checks and promissory notes
criminal cases, the admission of hearsay involved and the dates and amounts.
evidence would be a violation of the -In January 1998, two Metrobank auditors
constitutional provision while the accused conducted an audit of the Commercio Branch
-After the said meeting, appellant wanted to -It is settled that a confession or admission is
see Tan but was unable to find the latter and he presumed voluntarily until the contrary is
cannot even contact him. He asserts that the proved and the confessant bears the burden of
said written statement was taken in violation of proving the contrary.
his rights under Section 12, Article III of the
Constitution, particularly of his right to remain -Petitioner’s failed to overcome this
silent, right to counsel, and the right to be presumption. His written statement was found
informed of the first two rights. to have been executed freely and consciously.
The pertinent details he narrated in his
-Hence, the same should not have been statement were of such nature and quality that
admitted in evidence against him. only a perpetrator of the crime could finish.
Issue: WON the written statement executed by Case: People vs Santos, 221 SCRA 715
the appellant is admissible in evidence?
Facts:
Held:
application of the respondent was approved by considered as null and void ab initio. However,
the District Land Officer of Roxas City and was the Court of Appeals reversed the ruling of the
issued a Free Patent. Thereafter, an Original RTC, which the latter failed to prove its
Certificate of Title was issued to the respondent allegation that respondents had obtained the
by the Register of Deeds. free patent and the Certificate of Title through
fraud and misrepresentation.
The heirs of Ignacio Arrobang, through counsel
in a letter-complaint requested the Director of Issue: WON the respondents have acquired a
Lands, Manila, for an investigation of the vested right over the parcel of land.
District Land Officer, Roxas City and the
Regional Office of Iloilo City, for irregularities in Held:
the issuance of the title of a foreshore land in NO.
favor of respondent. Isagani Cartagena, the -The claim of the respondents that an actual
Supervising Special Investigator, Legal Division investigation was conducted is not sustained by
of the Land Management Bureau submitted his the Verification and Investigation Report itself,
Report. The Chief of the Legal Division of the which bears no signature of Efren Recio. Their
Land Management Bureau (formerly Bureau of reliance on the presumption of regularity in the
Lands) recommended to the Director of Lands performance of official duty is thus misplaced.
appropriate civil proceeding for the cancellation Therefore, there can be no presumption that an
of Free Patent and the corresponding Original investigation and verification of the parcel of
Certificate of Title in the name of the land was actually conducted. Strangely,
respondent. respondents do not proffer any explanation
why the Verification and Investigation Reports
In the meantime, respondent obtained was not signed by Efren Recio. Even more
a NACIDA loan under the Cottage Industry important and as will later on be explained, this
Guarantee and Loan Fund by the defendant alleged presumption of regularity – assuming it
PNB executed in Cebu City in the amount of ever existed – is overcome by the evidence
P10,000.00. The loan was secured by a real presented by petitioner.
estate mortgage in favor of defendant PNB.
The government through the Solicitor HEARSAY RULE AND ITS EXCEPTIONS
General instituted an action for
Annulment/Cancellation of Patent and Title and -Hearsay is an out of court statement offered
Reversion against respondent, the PNB of Roxas for the truth of the matter asserted.
City and defendant Register of Deeds of Roxas -Hearsay is evidence of a fact which the witness
City. While the case is pending hearing, the does not know of his personal knowledge, that
respondent died. He was substituted by his wife is, something not derived from his own
Roqueta Alejaga and his seven (7) children. perception.
Sec 39- Act or Declaration about pedigree A: The purpose of X of his testimony is to
Sec 40- Family Reputation ascertain that B is alive.
Sec 41- Common Reputation -The statement of X is not hearsay therefore it
Sec 42- Part of the Res gestae is admissible.
Sec 43- Entries in the course of business
Sec 44-Entries in official records
Sec 45- Commercial list and like Independently relevant statement- It is an out
Sec 46- Learned Treaties of court statement which is relevant not for the
Sec 47- Testimony or deposition at a former truth of a matter asserted but for something
proceeding else.
-There must be a consciousness of impending or -24hrs interval from time of the commission of
a person is aware that he will actually die NOW. the crime and reporting to police authorities is
not anymore considered part of the res gestae.
-The basis should be the nature & gravity of the
wound. Verbal Acts Doctrine
-The counsel must establish relevance and Example: Juan saw Mr. Katol giving an envelope
competency of such testimony. to Mr. Balot with a statement, “Pare eto na
yung utang ko sa iyo na Php 100,000”. If Juan
-The subject matter of the case must be the will be called to the witness stand testifying
death of the declarant. such event, will it be admissible as evidence?
-It is applicable in criminal and civil cases. Answer: Yes, under the doctrine of verbal acts
docrtrine it shall form part of the res gestae.
Section 42. Part of res gestae. — Statements
made by a person while a starting occurrence is
Section 38. Declaration against interest. — The
taking place or immediately prior or subsequent
declaration made by a person deceased, or
thereto with respect to the circumstances
unable to testify, against the interest of the
thereof, may be given in evidence as part of res
declarant, if the fact is asserted in the
gestae. So, also, statements accompanying an
declaration was at the time it was made so far
equivocal act material to the issue, and giving it
contrary to declarant's own interest, that a
a legal significance, may be received as part of
reasonable man in his position would not have
the res gestae.
made the declaration unless he believed it to be
true, may be received in evidence against
Res Gestae= Things Done
himself or his successors in interest and against
third persons.
Excited utterances- Statement made by a
person while a starling occurrence is taking
Requirements:
place or immediately prior or subsequent
thereto regarding the circumstances. -The declarant must be dead or unable to testify
-Acts or Statements which are uttered in a very -The declaration must be against the interest of
dire situation. the declarant
-Statements made by a person while a -Fact asserted in the declaration was at the time
STARLING OCCURRENCE is taking place or it was made far contrary to declarant’s own
immediately or prior or subsequent thereto interest.
with respect to the circumstances.
-It covers all kinds of interest.
-There is NO HARD AND FAST RULE for the time
period in order to appreciate Res Gestae. Section 39. Act or declaration about pedigree.
— The act or declaration of a person deceased,
or unable to testify, in respect to the pedigree Hearsay but Not hearsay and this
of another person related to him by birth or admissible as an admissible
marriage, may be received in evidence where it exception to the
occurred before the controversy, and the hearsay rule
relationship between the two persons is shown
by evidence other than such act or declaration. The declarant must be No requirement that
The word "pedigree" includes relationship, dead or unable to the admitter is dead
family genealogy, birth, marriage, death, the testify or unable to testify
dates when and the places where these fast
occurred, and the names of the relatives. It Admissible against Admissible only
embraces also facts of family history intimately declarant and third against the admitter
connected with pedigree. persons
Requirements:
-The declarant is dead or unable to testify Section 40. Family reputation or tradition
regarding pedigree. — The reputation or
-The act or declaration is about pedigree of tradition existing in a family previous to the
another person related to the declarant by birth controversy, in respect to the pedigree of any
one of its members, may be received in
or marriage.
evidence if the witness testifying thereon be
also a member of the family, either by
-The relationship between the relative and the
consanguinity or affinity. Entries in family bibles
declarant is shown by evidence other than such
or other family books or charts, engravings on
act or declaration. rings, family portraits and the like, may be
received as evidence of pedigree.
-The act or declaration occurred before the
controversy (ante lite motam) -The reputation or tradition existing in a family
previous to the controversy regarding the
Q: What does pedigree?
pedigree of any one of its members, may be
A: The word pedigree includes relationship, received in evidence if the witness testifying
family genealogy, birth, marriage, death, the thereon be also a member of the family either
date when and the places were these facts by consanguity or affinity.
occurred and the names of the relatives.
Section 41. Common reputation. — Common
Declaration Against Party Admission reputation existing previous to the controversy,
Interest respecting facts of public or general interest
more than thirty years old, or respecting
Made by a non-party Made by a party marriage or moral character, may be given in
evidence. Monuments and inscriptions in public
Must be against the Need not be against
places may be received as evidence of common
declarant’s interest the admitter’s interest
reputation.
Q: IS a statement regarding common reputation Business- It extends to all case were the entries
admissible as a hearsay exception? were made in a professional capacity or in the
performance of a duty.
A: YES, provided that: (i) existed previous to the
controversy or ante litem motam and (ii) facts Examples: Book of account, invoices, statement
of public or general interest more than 30 years of account, bill of lading, log-book of security
or about marriage or moral character. guard, medical charts
-The entries must be made at or near the time -It is the regular practice to keep electronic
of the transaction to which they refer. business records.
-The entrant must be dead or unable to testify Section 44. Entries in official records. — Entries
in official records made in the performance of
-The entrant was in a position to know the facts his duty by a public officer of the Philippines, or
stated therein by a person in the performance of a duty
specially enjoined by law, are prima
-The entrant must have made the entries in his facie evidence of the facts therein stated.
professional capacity or in the performance of a
duty. Requirements:
-The entries must have been made in the - The entries must have been made in official
ordinary or regular course of business or duty. records.
Section 45. Commercial lists and the like. — -The writer of the statement in the treatise,
Evidence of statements of matters of interest to periodical or pamphlet is recognized in his
persons engaged in an occupation contained in profession or calling as expert in the subject.
a list, register, periodical, or other published
compilation is admissible as tending to prove Section 47. Testimony or deposition at a
the truth of any relevant matter so stated if that former proceeding. — The testimony or
compilation is published for use by persons deposition of a witness deceased or unable to
engaged in that occupation and is generally testify, given in a former case or proceeding,
used and relied upon by them therein. judicial or administrative, involving the same
parties and subject matter, may be given in
Requirements: evidence against the adverse party who had the
opportunity to cross-examine him.
-There is a list, register, periodical or other
published compilation Requirements:
General Rule: The opinion of a witness is not -The witness may also testify on his impression
admissible of the condition, appearance, behaviors or
emotions of a person.
Exception:
Q: When is the opinion of an ordinary witness Evidence of the moral character of a party in
admissible in evidence? civil case is admissible only when pertinent to
the issue of character involved in the case.
A: -The identity of a person about whom he has
adequate knowledge. In the case provided for in Rule 132, Section 14.
-The mental sanity of a person with whom he is A: Character is what you are, reputation what
sufficiently acquainted. the community knows you are. Reputation may
be used to prove character.
GR: Character evidence is not admissible Burden of Proof- The duty of a party to present
evidence on the facts in issue necessary to
Exceptions: establish his claim or defense by the amount of
evidence required by law.
Criminal Cases
-The burden of proof rests upon a party
-The accused may prove his good moral asserting the affirmative of an issue.
character which is pertinent to the moral trait
involved in the offense charged. Burden of evidence- The duty of a party to go
forward with the evidence and which duty if
-Unless in rebuttal, the prosecution may not
fulfilled by the party shifts the burden of
prove his bad moral character which is
pertinent to the moral trait involved in the evidence to the adverse party.
offense charged.
Equipoise doctrine- It is where the evidence on
-The good or bad moral character of the a particular issue is in equipoise or level or
offended party may be proved if it tends to where the party not having the burden of proof
establish in any reasonable degree the has produced countervailing evidence, the
probability or improbability of the offense result is that the party with the burden of proof
charged. will lose out on that particular issue.
Reputation Evidence- it is a mode to prove -Under the ROC, there are only 2 kinds of
moral character. presumption: Disputable/Conclusive
-The modern view is that reputation among a Q: How many are the disputable presumptions
person’s associate is also admissible to prove provided by law?
his character.
A: 37 disputable presumptions Sec 3 (A to KK)
Rule 131- Burden of Proof and Presumptions
Q: How many are the conclusive presumptions
Burden of Proof vs Burden of Evidence provided by law?
(a) Whenever a party has, by his own Answer: NO, Since there is a conclusive
declaration, act, or omission, intentionally and presumption that when he entered into a
deliberately led to another to believe a contract of lease with A, he acknowledges the
particular thing true, and to act upon such fact that A has the right to lease such property
belief, he cannot, in any litigation arising out of unto him.
such declaration, act or omission, be permitted
to falsify it: (Estoppel in Pais) Disputable Presumption- The quantum of
evidence should be clear and convincing.
(b) The tenant is not permitted to deny the title
of his landlord at the time of commencement of Exception: Presumption of Innocence
the relation of landlord and tenant between
them. (Estoppel of a Tenant) (e) That evidence willfully suppressed would be
adverse if produced.
Q: What is a conclusive presumption?
Requirements:
A: It is a term that cannot be controverted and
the court has no other choice but to accept it. -The suppression must be willful
to medical negligence. The son of Benny died The following shall be considered dead for all
due to medical complication on the ground of purposes including the division of the estate
medical negligence. During the trial of the case, among the heirs:
when the counsel for the plaintiff asked for the
(1) A person on board a vessel lost during a sea
hospital records and upon discovery of such
voyage, or an aircraft with is missing, who has
records, the documents pertaining to 42 to 44 th not been heard of for four years since the loss
day of records are not available. The court of the vessel or aircraft;
ordered the defendant to release such
document but they failed to do so. (2) A member of the armed forces who has
taken part in armed hostilities, and has been
Effect of Suppression of Evidence: Those that missing for four years;
the plaintiff wants to establish are deemed
established. (3) A person who has been in danger of death
under other circumstances and whose existence
has not been known for four years;
(m) That official duty has been regularly
performed.
(4) If a married person has been absent for four
consecutive years, the spouse present may
-When a police officer conducts a buy-busy
contract a subsequent marriage if he or she has
operation and the accused was killed. There is a
well-founded belief that the absent spouse is
presumption that the police officer performed
already death. In case of disappearance, where
his duty based on the rules & regulation.
there is a danger of death the circumstances
hereinabove provided, an absence of only two
Q: For this presumption to be applicable, what
years shall be sufficient for the purpose of
should be the rule?
contracting a subsequent marriage. However, in
any case, before marrying again, the spouse
A: If there are guidelines to be followed and one
present must institute a summary proceedings
of which is not followed, the disputable
as provided in the Family Code and in the rules
presumption of regularity in the performance of
for declaration of presumptive death of the
duty shall not be applicable.
absentee, without prejudice to the effect of
reappearance of the absent spouse.
(w) That after an absence of seven years, it
being unknown whether or not the absentee
4 years- A person on board a vessel lost during
still lives, he is considered dead for all purposes,
a sea voyage or an aircraft which is missing.
except for those of succession.
4 years- Member of the army who has taken
The absentee shall not be considered dead for
part in armed hostilities.
the purpose of opening his succession till after
an absence of ten years. If he disappeared after
4 years- A person who has been in danger of
the age of seventy-five years, an absence of five
death under other circumstances.
years shall be sufficient in order that his
succession may be opened.
4 years- The spouse present may contract a (cc) That in cases of cohabitation by a man and
subsequent marriage if he/she has well founded a woman who are not capacitated to marry
belief of the absent spouse. each other and who have acquire properly
through their actual joint contribution of
2 years- In case of disappearance, when there is money, property or industry, such contributions
danger of death. and their corresponding shares including joint
deposits of money and evidences of credit are
GR: Any person that is absent for 7 consecutive equal.
years without news being alive is presumed
dead for all intents & purposes. (jj) That except for purposes of succession,
when two persons perish in the same calamity,
Exception: For purpose of succession- 10 years such as wreck, battle, or conflagration, and it is
absences not shown who died first, and there are no
particular circumstances from which it can be
Exception to Exception: Person disappeared inferred, the survivorship is determined from
was 75 years of age- 5 consecutive years to the probabilities resulting from the strength and
open succession. the age of the sexes, according to the following
rules:
Effects of Absence to Marriage
1. If both were under the age of fifteen years,
-2 years of presumptive death shall suffice the older is deemed to have survived;
-In the case of Santos vs Santos, for the purpose 2. If both were above the age sixty, the younger
of re-marriage there is a need for judicial is deemed to have survived;
declaration of absences.
3. If one is under fifteen and the other above
Factual Death- It is evidenced by the Corpus sixty, the former is deemed to have survived;
delicti (Fact of Death)
4. If both be over fifteen and under sixty, and
Presumptive Death- There is a necessity to the sex be different, the male is deemed to
apply for judicial declaration of absences. have survived, if the sex be the same, the older;
(aa) That a man and woman deporting 5. If one be under fifteen or over sixty, and the
themselves as husband and wife have entered other between those ages, the latter is deemed
into a lawful contract of marriage; to have survived.
-Under the Constitution, a party has the right to -Cases covered by the Judicial Affidavit Rule
public, impartial and speedy trial.
-Matters regarding the admissibility and
Q: What do you mean of public? evidentiary weight of electronic documents may
be proved by affidavits to cross by adverse
A: It means it should be in open court the party.
presentation of evidence.
Section 3. Rights and obligations of a witness.
Q: What is open court? — A witness must answer questions, although
his answer may tend to establish a claim against
A: It should be accessible to the public. him. However, it is the right of a witness:
Q: What is the opposite of trial in open court? (1) To be protected from irrelevant, improper,
or insulting questions, and from harsh or
A: Trial in chambers insulting demeanor;
-All trials must be recorded and all of the courts (2) Not to be detained longer than the interests
right now are Courts of Record. of justice require;
Stenographer- The person assigned to record all (3) Not to be examined except only as to
the proceeding during the trial. matters pertinent to the issue;
(4) Not to give an answer which will tend to ahead the direct, cross, re-direct & re-cross
subject him to a penalty for an offense unless questions.
otherwise provided by law; or
Section 5. Direct examination. — Direct
(5) Not to give an answer which will tend to examination is the examination-in-chief of a
degrade his reputation, unless it to be the very witness by the party presenting him on the facts
fact at issue or to a fact from which the fact in relevant to the issue.
issue would be presumed. But a witness must
answer to the fact of his previous final Q: What are the prohibited forms of question in
conviction for an offense. a direct examination?
-In Criminal Cases, the accused and the witness Q: What is a misleading question?
are protected by the Constitutional Right
against Self-Incrimination. A: One which assumes as true as fact not yet
testified to by the witness or contrary to the
Order of Trial vs Order of Presentation of previously stated.
Evidence
-Misleading questions are not allowed in the
Order of Trial proceeding/trial.
Section 6. Cross-examination; its purpose and -Additional Direct & Re-Direct Examination
extent. — Upon the termination of the direct
examination, the witness may be cross- Section 11. Impeachment of adverse party's
examined by the adverse party as to many witness. — A witness may be impeached by the
matters stated in the direct examination, or party against whom he was called, by
connected therewith, with sufficient fullness contradictory evidence, by evidence that his
and freedom to test his accuracy and general reputation for truth, honestly, or
truthfulness and freedom from interest or bias, integrity is bad, or by evidence that he has
or the reverse, and to elicit all important facts made at other times statements inconsistent
bearing upon the issue. with his present, testimony, but not by
evidence of particular wrongful acts, except
Section 7. Re-direct examination; its purpose that it may be shown by the examination of the
and extent. — After the cross-examination of witness, or the record of the judgment, that he
the witness has been concluded, he may be re- has been convicted of an offense.
examined by the party calling him, to explain or
supplement his answers given during the cross- GR: A party cannot impeach his own witness.
examination. On re-direct-examination,
questions on matters not dealt with during the Exception: Hostile Witness
cross-examination, may be allowed by the court
in its discretion. (3) Three Ways to Impeach a Witness in
Cross-Examination
-A witness testified that he saw the accused Section 16. When witness may refer to
stabbed the deceased and he described the memorandum. — A witness may be allowed to
physical feature of the accused. refresh his memory respecting a fact, by
anything written or recorded by himself or
-In order to impeach such witness, a counsel under his direction at the time when the fact
occurred, or immediately thereafter, or at any
should rely on the sinumpaang salaysay and
other time when the fact was fresh in his
present it in the trial. memory and knew that the same was correctly
written or recorded; but in such case the
- Before a witness is impeached by evidence of
writing or record must be produced and may be
an inconsistent statement, the predicate must inspected by the adverse party, who may, if he
first be laid. chooses, cross examine the witness upon it, and
may read it in evidence. So, also, a witness may
Q: How is the predicate laid? testify from such writing or record, though he
retain no recollection of the particular facts, if
A: - It must be in writing, it must first be shown
he is able to swear that the writing or record
to the witness before any question is asked of correctly stated the transaction when made;
him concerning the statement. but such evidence must be received with
caution.
-The statement must be related to him, with the
circumstances of the time and place and the Principles: -Present Memory Revive
persons present.
-Past Recollection Recorded
=He must be asked whether he made such
statement. -When a witness is called to the witness stand,
he is not allowed to use as documentary paper
-If so, he must be asked to explain the as the basis.
inconsistency.
Present Memory Revive- With leave of court, a
Judicial-Affidavit Rule counsel can ask the trial court to allow his
witness to revive the memory.
GR: It shall be applicable in all courts
Example: On June 1, 2010 while on his way
Exception: Supreme Court
home. A saw a stabbing incident happened in
the corner of Espana Avenue. When A arrived examination be continued on the next hearing
home, he writes what transpired in his daily schedule and it was granted by the court. On
diary. If A will be called to the witness stand, A the day set for cross-examination, the witness
can ask the court to allow him to use the daily died.
diary.
-The Incomplete testimony made by the witness
Limitation: The documentary evidence help will shall be admitted as evidence since the cause is
not form part as annexes. the defendant.
-It cannot be used as corroborative evidence. Example 2: After the counsel for the plaintiff
conducted its direct examination. The counsel
Past Recollection Recorded- The witness has no for the defendant will start the cross-
recollection about what transpired and he can examination but the former manifested before
only testify based on the memorandum or the court that he has an urgent hearing in
record. another place. On the day of the supposed
-The memorandum can be marked as evidence. cross-examination, the witness died.
Example: Dr. Arizala of NBI Forensics lab and his -The direct examination conducted by the
job is to conduct autopsy of dead bodies. If Dr. counsel of the plaintiff shall not form part as
Arizala will be called in the witness stand, he evidence since the cause of the incompleteness
can use a memorandum un order to identify the is the plaintiff.
dead body and his cause of death. B. Authentication and Proof of Documents
Q: How is testimonial evidence completed?
Q: What is authentication?
A: It is completed when all the parties are given A: Authentication is the process of establiing
opportunity as provided in the rules. that evidence is what is purports to be, in other
words, that it is genuine.
-Other evidence showing its reliability and Q: How is a public record of a private document
integrity to the satisfaction of the judge. is proved?
Q: May a judicial record be impeached? Testimonial Evidence- At the time the witness
is called to testify. The offer shall be made
A: Yes, a judicial record may be impeached by orally.
evidence of: (i) want of jurisdiction in the court
or judicial officer, (ii) collusion between the -Under Judicial Affidavit Rule, the party
parties or (iii) fraud in the party offering the presenting the judicial affidavit of his witness in
place of direct testimony shall state the purpose
record, in respect of the proceeding
of such testimony at the start of the
Q: When will an alteration affect the presentation of witness.
admissibility of a document?
Documentary Evidence- After the presentation
A: An alteration will affect the admissibility of a of a party’s testimonial evidence and before he
rests his case. The offer shall be done orally
document if :
unless allowed by the court to be done in
(1) The document is being offered as writing.
genuine
Object Evidence- Same as documentary
(2) The alteration was made after the evidence, unless it cannot be submitted to the
execution of the document. court in which case at the time it is presented to
(3) The alteration is in a part material to the court’s senses.
the question in dispute.
Q: May evidence offered for one purpose be
considered for another?
Section 34. Offer of evidence. — The court shall Formal Offer of Evidence
consider no evidence which has not been
formally offered. The purpose for which the GR: A formal offer of evidence must be done
evidence is offered must be specified. orally.
Section 35. When to make offer. — As regards Exception: In writing (Evidence consists of
the testimony of a witness, the offer must be voluminous documents)
made at the time the witness is called to testify.
Section 36. Objection. — Objection to evidence
Documentary and object evidence shall be offered orally must be made immediately after
offered after the presentation of a party's the offer is made.
testimonial evidence. Such offer shall be done
orally unless allowed by the court to be done in Objection to a question propounded in the
writing. course of the oral examination of a witness shall
be made as soon as the grounds therefor shall
become reasonably apparent.
In any case, the grounds for the objections must A: Where a witness answered the question
be specified. before the adverse party had the opportunity to
voice fully its objection, and such objection is
Q: How can a party interpose an objection? found to be meritorious, the court shall sustain
the objection and order the answer given to be
A: A party can interpose an objection at the stricken off the record.
time of the offer of evidence.
-Where the answer is incompetent, irrelevant
Q: Why does a party object in the course of the or otherwise improper.
trial?
Q: When must the court give its ruling upon the
A: It is allowed by the rules as oral objection objection?
which must be ruled upon immediately by the
court. A: The ruling of the court must be given
immediately after the objection is made, unless
Q: What are the kinds of objection? the court desires to take a reasonable time to
inform itself on the question presented; but the
A: (a) formal objection, (b) substantial
ruling shall always be made during the trial and
objection, (c) formal & substantial objection.
at such time as will give the party against whom
Formal Objection- it only pertains to the form it is made an opportunity to meet the situation
presented by the ruling. (Rule 132, Sec 38)
Example: Leading Questions
Section 40. Tender of excluded evidence. — If
Substantial Objection- It violates the Best documents or things offered in evidence are
Evidence and Parole Evidence Rule excluded by the court, the offeror may have the
same attached to or made part of the record. If
Broad Side Objection- It is grounded on the evidence excluded is oral, the offeror may
irrelevancy and competency. state for the record the name and other
personal circumstances of the witness and the
Continuing Evidence-When a party has substance of the proposed testimony.
previously objected to a question and
succeeding questions are of the same class as Q: What is the remedy of the offeror if the
those previously objected. evidence is excluded?
General Objection- It is submitted that they are A: it will depend on what kind of evidence:
not prohibited where the evidence is orally
offered.
Documentary/Object Evidence- The offeror may 3. Clear and Convincing Evidence (HK
have the same attached to or made part of the Government vs Olalia)
record.
-The quantum of evidence which is lower than
Oral Evidence- The offeror may state for the proof beyond reasonable doubt but higher than
record the name or other personal preponderance of evidence.
circumstance of the witness.
-In Labor Cases, it is clear and convincing
Q: What is the purpose of the tender of evidence
excluded evidence?
-Applicable to establish fraud and forgery cases.
A: To allow the appellate court to assess
whether the trial court’s exclusion of the -If a party want to overturn a disputable
evidence is proper. presumption.
-The quantum of evidence consisting of several -It never shifts and always with the claimant.
facts and circumstance known to the person to
arrive at a probability that a person charged is Burden of Evidence- It is the duty to persuade
guilty of an offense. the court through evidence that he has a claim
over the case.
-It is used in Preliminary Examination and
Investigation. -It follows the burden of proof.
Requirements: